BUILT TO MAIM

On November 6, 2018, Dustin Clover was doing his job. Seated on the back of a “drip tape lifter” pulled by a tractor moving at five miles per hour, he was monitoring irrigation tape in a seed field owned by Crookham Company. When the tape broke, he yelled for the driver to stop. The machine halted, but the momentum threw Clover forward. His arm was caught by the machine’s still-moving rollers, which then pulled in his arm, his upper torso, and finally his head, pinning it against the equipment that was crushing him.

The machine that did this was not a standard piece of equipment. It was a custom job, designed and built by Crookham employees a decade earlier. According to court documents, Crookham took photos of a similar machine on another farm and decided to build their own. They did not hire any consultants. They did not conduct any research. They were, according to the legal record, “allegedly unaware” of OSHA regulations during the design process. They saw other machines with a seat on the side, away from the moving parts. They chose to put theirs on the back, directly in the danger zone.

THE NON-FINANCIAL LEDGER

Dustin Clover survived. The ledger of what he lost is not measured in dollars, but in flesh and bone. His medical chart from that day lists a crush injury to the left side of his chest and his left upper arm. It includes a left scapula fracture, a left-sided AC joint injury, acute left-sided facial abrasions, and an acute closed head injury. This is the physical cost of a company deciding to build its own machinery without professional guidance.

Crookham Company’s own employee manual states it “regards its employees as its most valuable assets and is committed to providing a safe and healthy workplace for all.” For Dustin Clover, those are just words on paper. The company’s commitment to safety was so profound that after a different employee, [REDACTED – Not in Source], was killed by another piece of custom, unguarded machinery in 2016, they hired a safety manager. That same safety manager then made the decision not to report Clover’s life-altering injuries to OSHA. The system worked exactly as designed: to protect the company.

“His arm was pulled inside by the rollers, followed by his upper left torso until his head was against the rollers.”

A HISTORY OF DISREGARD

Clover’s injuries were not a freak accident; they were the predictable outcome of a corporate culture. The 2016 death of an employee, detailed in the court case Gomez v. Crookham Co., happened because an exposed drive shaft on a seed sorting table caught her hair and pulled her into the machine. In that case, OSHA found Crookham had “serious” violations for the unguarded machinery. The company had been previously cited by OSHA for violating machine guard safety standards.

Crookham knew, or should have known, that unguarded, moving machine parts were a grave risk. They had been warned. They had been cited. One of their workers had already died. Yet, the drip tape lifter that mangled Dustin Clover was allowed to operate for nine seasons. The court used this fact, “nine seasons without injuries,” as evidence the company wasn’t aware of the danger. This is corporate accountability in reverse: a company is rewarded for getting lucky, until the day someone’s luck runs out.

LEGAL RECEIPTS

Dustin Clover tried to hold Crookham accountable in a court of law. He was blocked by a legal shield called the “exclusive remedy rule.” Under Idaho’s Worker’s Compensation Act, you generally cannot sue your employer for getting hurt on the job. Your only recourse is a worker’s comp claim. There is a tiny exception for injuries caused by “willful or unprovoked physical aggression.” To qualify, an employee has to meet an impossibly high standard.

An employee must show the employer either (1) specifically intended to harm the employee or (2) engaged in conduct knowing employee injury would result.

Idaho Supreme Court, citing Marek v. Hecla, Ltd.

The court ruled Clover failed to prove this. It decided that since there were no prior injuries on this specific machine and no evidence Crookham was explicitly told *this machine* required guarding under OSHA, the company did not “consciously disregard” the risk. The company’s history of violations and a previous death on other unguarded equipment was not enough to matter. The court gave Crookham a pass.

SOCIETAL IMPACT MAPPING

PUBLIC HEALTH

Worker safety is a public health issue. Laws like the Occupational Safety and Health Act exist because, without them, a segment of the population is systematically exposed to maiming and death for profit. When courts create legal loopholes that neuter these protections, they declare that a worker’s body is a disposable component in the machine of commerce. The message is clear: companies can gamble with worker safety, and the price of losing that bet is just a statutorily limited insurance claim, not a public trial for negligence.

ECONOMIC INEQUALITY

The “exclusive remedy” rule creates a separate, unequal system of justice. If an individual injures you through negligence, you can take them to court and a jury of your peers decides the cost. If your employer does the same, their liability is capped and controlled by a bureaucratic system designed to limit payouts. This protects corporate assets at the direct expense of the injured worker, who is denied their day in court and the possibility of compensation that truly reflects a lifetime of pain, suffering, and lost potential.

WHAT NOW?

The system that failed Dustin Clover is not broken; it is operating as intended. It shields corporations from the true cost of their negligence. Justice will not come from the courts that uphold these laws, but from the people who demand they be changed.

• CORPORATE WATCHLIST: The executive leadership, board of directors, and Safety Manager of Crookham Company. Their decisions created the conditions for this disaster.
• REGULATORY WATCHLIST: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Their prior citations were not enough to prevent this. Their authority must be strengthened and their enforcement must be feared.
• LEGISLATIVE ACTION: The Idaho Legislature is responsible for the “exclusive remedy” law that provides this corporate shield. This law must be amended to create a meaningful path to justice for workers injured by gross negligence.
• GRASSROOTS RESISTANCE: Support local worker advocacy groups, unions, and mutual aid networks. They are the frontline defense for workers abandoned by corporations and the legal system. Organize, educate, and demand that no company is above the law.