bricklayer and mason tender injuries
Bricklayers and Mason Tenders Face Falls, Struck-By, and Silica Hazards
Bricklayers and mason tenders work on scaffolds during exterior masonry, build interior block walls, handle heavy brick and block, and are exposed to silica dust from cutting and grinding.
The trade combines elevation hazards with heavy material handling and respiratory exposure.
Labor Law § 240, Labor Law § 241(6), and Labor Law § 200 give injured bricklayers and mason tenders rights that go well beyond workers’ compensation.
Recent Results
$26,500,000
For an operating engineer seriously injured in a car wreck
$24,750,000
For a union laborer who suffered a double leg amputation
$9,500,000
for an elevator apprentice struck by the cab
Connect with our Team
Protect Your Future
How Bricklayers and Mason Tenders Get Hurt on New York Construction Sites
Falls from collapsing scaffolds. Here’s a real example: a BAC bricklayer was standing on a scaffold when it collapsed, sending him three to four stories down. The court held the collapse itself was the statutory violation, proper safety equipment had clearly not been provided. (Frierson)
Struck-by falling block and brick from above. Here’s a real example: a mason tender placing cinder blocks onto a 4-foot sawhorse scaffold was struck when the scaffold collapsed under the bricklayer above, sending blocks and the worker down onto him. The court applied § 240 to the mason tender plaintiff. (Thompson)
Crush injuries from heavy block and brick. Cinder blocks weigh 30-40 pounds each. Brick weighs 4-5 pounds each. Pre-cast and structural masonry units can weigh hundreds of pounds. Material handling produces crush injuries when units are dropped, pallets shift, hoists fail, or workers are pinned.
Mortar mixer and material hoist injuries. Power mortar mixers produce caught-in injuries when guards are inadequate or removed. Material hoists carrying brick and mortar to upper scaffold levels produce struck-by and crush injuries when loads shift or cables fail. Industrial Code 12 NYCRR 23-9 and 23-6 govern.
Silica exposure from cutting and grinding. Cutting brick, block, and concrete masonry produces respirable crystalline silica. Long-term exposure produces silicosis, lung cancer, and COPD. OSHA’s silica standard at 29 CFR 1926.1153 requires controls. Tuck pointing carries particularly high exposure.
Wet concrete and mortar burns. Prolonged skin contact with wet mortar produces chemical burns from high alkalinity. Severe cases produce third-degree burns requiring skin grafts.
Tuck pointing and restoration work hazards. Tuck pointing places bricklayers on suspended scaffolds at significant heights for extended periods. Restoration work also increases silica exposure, and older buildings often carry lead-paint contamination on adjacent surfaces.
Important Information
These are the steps you should take:
See Your Own Doctor, ER, or CityMD
30 Days to Report an Injury
Do Not Give Any Statements
File Workers' Comp to Cover Immediate Bills
The Scaffold Collapse Doctrine and the Misseritti Question
Falls from scaffolds are strict § 240 cases — a scaffold collapse establishes a prima facie statutory violation without further analysis. Struck-by-falling-material cases require proving the elevation differential and weight created a gravity-related risk. Both are strong claims, but the legal path to summary judgment differs.
The critical defense in scaffold cases is “recalcitrant worker.” Defendants argue the bricklayer was told to use fall protection or a different scaffold access point and refused. The defense rarely succeeds when the foreman directed the work from that position, when the scaffold configuration made the safety equipment impractical, or when the employer’s own safety plan did not address the hazard. The factual investigation focuses on what instructions were given, what equipment was available at the working position, and whether the worker had any realistic alternative.
Scaffold ownership creates a separate liability path. Most exterior masonry scaffolds are provided by scaffold rental companies, not the bricklayer’s employer. The rental company is liable for design and maintenance defects. The GC is liable for site conditions that affect scaffold stability. The property owner faces strict § 240 liability regardless of who owned the scaffold. Identifying every responsible party is part of the case strategy.
For § 241(6) claims, the case strategy turns on identifying the right Industrial Code provision:
A bricklayer who fell from a scaffold cites 23-5 (scaffolding requirements).
A bricklayer struck by block or material from above cites 23-1.7(a) (overhead hazards).
A mason tender injured by an unguarded hoisting operation cites 23-6 (material hoisting).
A bricklayer injured by a defective saw or grinder cites 23-1.12 (guarding of saws).
For § 200 claims, the question is whether the GC controlled scaffold placement, sequencing, and site conditions. On exterior masonry jobs, the GC typically controls hoist schedules, material delivery to working floors, and scaffold inspection — that operational control is where § 200 liability attaches.
Silica exposure cases follow a different legal timeline. Cutting and grinding masonry produces respirable crystalline silica. The disease (silicosis, lung cancer) may not manifest for years. Under CPLR § 214-c, the statute of limitations runs from discovery of the injury, not from the date of exposure. These cases proceed as toxic tort or products liability claims rather than Labor Law claims, and they often involve multiple job sites and multiple defendants.
The Two-Track Recovery for Bricklayers and Mason Tenders
A serious bricklayer injury triggers two separate legal claims that run in parallel.
You cannot sue your employer in New York. So the recovery is against the general contractor, property owners, or responsible sub-contractors.
Major construction projects in New York carry significant insurance coverage. Owner-controlled insurance programs (OCIP) and contractor-controlled insurance programs (CCIP) wrap up many trades into a single coverage program with substantial limits, often $25 million layered or more. Identifying every responsible party (owner, GC, masonry contractor, scaffold rental company, equipment manufacturer) and every available insurance layer is part of the work the firm does on every bricklayer case.
This is how to recover what you would have earned over a working life had you not been injured. Future medical care like surgeries, injections, physical therapy, pain management, durable medical equipment. Pain and suffering — the physical and emotional consequences of the injury. For a career-ending injury to a union bricklayer with strong pension contributions and supplemental benefits, the third-party recovery is where the lifetime cost is captured.
The workers’ compensation claim is filed against the carrier through your direct employer. Workers’ comp covers two-thirds of your average weekly wage, capped at the statutory maximum ($1,222.42 per week for accidents in the 2025-2026 benefit year). All necessary medical treatment is covered. An eventual Schedule Loss of Use award or Classification award is available at the end of treatment if permanency results.
BAC Local 1 bricklayers in NYC have substantial pre-accident earnings that produce strong AWW calculations, but the statutory cap limits the weekly comp benefit regardless.
We’ve represented members of ...
How Schwartzapfel Holbrook Handles Bricklayer Accidents Cases
Our job is to make a difficult situation as easy as possible.
Clients entrust us to secure their future, and that starts immediately.
We begin the investigation the moment we are retained. Evidence preservation is time-critical. Site photos, witness identification, equipment preservation where applicable, and OSHA records all need to be secured before the construction project moves on.
Every case the firm accepts is prepared as if it will go to trial. That level of investigation, record collection, legal analysis, and trial strategy has yielded consistent record results for over 45 years.
Frequently Asked Questions About Bricklayer Injuries
A bricklayer injury case is a legal claim arising from injuries to a worker engaged in brick or block masonry, tuck pointing, masonry restoration, or related bricklayer trade activities. Mason tenders are covered on the same terms. Claims involve workers’ comp and a third-party lawsuit against the property owner, GC, scaffold rental company, and equipment manufacturers.
Scaffold collapses produce strong § 240 cases, and the falling-block doctrine extends the same protection to mason tenders struck by materials from above.
Any worker performing brick or block masonry, mortar mixing, masonry support, tuck pointing, or restoration on a New York construction site is generally covered by Labor Law §§ 240, 241(6), and 200. BAC Local 1 members are the typical organized workforce, but protections apply regardless of union membership.
Mason tenders — whether organized through BAC, LiUNA, or non-union — are covered on the same terms.
You can file a lawsuit if a party other than your direct employer is responsible. Property owners, general contractors, scaffold rental companies, equipment manufacturers can all be sued.
The lawsuit and workers’ comp run together, not as alternatives.
Yes. They are separate claims. The comp carrier acquires a lien under WCL § 29. The lien is negotiable.
Attorney-fee apportionment typically reduces the carrier’s net recovery substantially.
Protections apply equally to all BAC locals. The firm represents BAC Local 1 and other BAC locals across New York.
Local affiliation matters operationally because specializations (commercial brick, structural masonry, tuck pointing, restoration) carry different hazards.
The Scaffold Law imposes absolute liability for gravity-related injuries when safety equipment was not provided.
For bricklayers, § 240 covers falls from collapsing scaffolds, struck-by falling block and brick, falls from elevated surfaces during exterior masonry, and falls from suspended platforms during tuck pointing.
Scaffold falls during exterior brick work are among the strongest § 240 cases. A scaffold collapse establishes a prima facie statutory violation — the scaffold is a safety device the statute identifies, and a collapse demonstrates inadequacy.
Scaffold rental companies, erection contractors, GC, and owner are all potential defendants. Industrial Code 23-5 governs scaffold requirements.
Struck-by-falling-block cases proceed under § 240. You do not need to prove the exact mechanism by which the material fell. The relevant facts are weight, elevation differential, and absence of adequate safety devices.
Industrial Code 23-1.7(a) requires falling-object protection. Violations support § 241(6) claims.
Mason tenders are covered by the same protections as bricklayers. The leading case specifically addressed a mason tender struck by blocks from a collapsing scaffold above — § 240 applied because the falling materials created the gravity-related risk.
Whether organized through BAC, LiUNA, or non-union, protections apply equally.
Defendants raise a 1995 decision where a wall fell sideways and the Court held it was NOT a § 240 case. The reach of that decision is now narrow — since 2011, falling-object cases with short falls and small elevation differentials are covered.
Most bricklayer injuries involve true gravity-driven falls well within the modern framework.
Crush injuries proceed under § 241(6) through Industrial Code violations for inadequate hoisting or material handling. 12 NYCRR 23-6 and 23-2.1 are relevant.
Defective hoisting equipment supports product liability claims against the manufacturer.
Power mortar mixers produce caught-in injuries when guards are inadequate or removed. Cases proceed under § 241(6) through 12 NYCRR 23-9 and under § 200 for control.
Product liability claims apply when defective guards or controls contributed. The equipment must be preserved.
Silica from masonry cutting produces silicosis, lung cancer, and COPD. The disease develops over years. OSHA’s silica standard (29 CFR 1926.1153) requires controls.
Discovery rule (CPLR § 214-c) applies to latent disease claims. Tuck pointing carries particularly high exposure.
Prolonged skin contact with wet mortar produces chemical burns from high alkalinity. Severe cases require skin grafts.
Product liability claims against mortar manufacturers apply when warnings were inadequate. Claims against PPE manufacturers apply when defective gear contributed.
Tuck pointing and restoration place bricklayers on suspended scaffolds at significant heights. Falls during this work are strong § 240 cases.
Restoration also increases silica exposure and older buildings carry lead-paint contamination on adjacent surfaces.
§ 240 covers "repair" but not "routine maintenance." Tuck pointing as part of a restoration project is generally covered. Routine masonry inspection generally is not.
The Court of Appeals’ four-factor test controls line cases.
Yes, depending on facts. Scaffold rental companies face liability when defective components contributed, when they erected or inspected negligently, or when components didn’t match specifications.
Defective components also support product liability claims against the manufacturer.
Yes, when defective equipment contributed. Common cases include defective scaffold components, mortar mixer guards, masonry saws, hoisting equipment, and PPE.
The manufacturer is a separate defendant with separate insurance.
Workers’ comp is the exclusive remedy against your direct employer. The property owner, GC, and other parties can be sued separately.
The lawsuit names parties at the top of the contractual chain.
Protections apply regardless of union membership. BAC Local 1 membership is not required.
Many bricklayers and mason tenders work for non-union contractors and the protections apply equally.
The comp carrier acquires a lien under WCL § 29. It must be satisfied or negotiated at settlement.
The lien is negotiable. Attorney-fee apportionment typically reduces it substantially.
Cases vary widely. A career-ending scaffold collapse producing TBI or paraplegia can produce a seven or eight-figure recovery.
Union bricklayers have substantial earnings. Major projects carry $25M+ coverage. § 240 cases are stronger than § 200 cases.
The interaction varies by CBA and fund rules. Comp benefits generally don’t count as pension-credited hours.
The firm reviews union benefits as part of the integrated case strategy.
A bricklayer or mason tender killed on the job leaves a family that can file under EPTL § 5-4.1. Labor Law claims also apply to fatal cases.
Pecuniary damages include lost financial support, lost services, and conscious pain and suffering.
OCIP and CCIP are wrap-up programs on major projects. Commonly carry $25M or more layered.
Identifying the program and limits is one of the first steps in evaluating recovery potential.
Three years under CPLR § 214. Two years for wrongful death. 90 days for municipal Notice of Claim. 30 days to report under WCL § 18. Two years for C-3.
Get medical attention. Report in writing. Preserve evidence (scaffold, materials, equipment, scene). Do not give recorded statements without legal advice. The first 48-72 hours matter most.