The ALJ granted the Employer's appeal from a section 3314(a) violation because the Employer established the Independent Employee Action Defense. The Board overruled the ALJ's decision. The safety plan that left the de-energization of machinery during servicing to the discretion of employees was not well devised. Given that discretion, there was no basis for finding that the employee who chose not to de-energize the machine knew that he was violating a safety rule. The employer failed to establish elements 2 and 5 of the Independent Employee Action Defense.

September 13, 2000