The Question That Stops People from Calling
A construction worker falls from a scaffold. He is seriously injured. He has a clear Labor Law 240 claim. He is also undocumented.
He does not call a lawyer. He is afraid. He has been told — by a supervisor, by a coworker, by general fear — that seeking legal help will expose him to immigration enforcement. That pursuing his rights will get him deported. That the law does not apply to people like him.
Every part of that fear is legally incorrect. And the failure to act costs him full compensation he was entitled to under one of the strongest worker-protection statutes in the country.
This guide explains exactly what the law says about undocumented workers' rights in New York construction accident cases, what the New York Court of Appeals has ruled, and what concerns are real versus unfounded.
Balbuena v. IDR Realty: The Controlling Case
In Balbuena v. IDR Realty LLC (6 N.Y.3d 338, 2006), the New York Court of Appeals — the state's highest court — directly addressed whether undocumented workers are entitled to recover under Labor Law 240(1). The case involved two workers injured at a Manhattan construction site. Both were undocumented immigrants. Both had claims under Labor Law 240. The defendants argued that immigration status should bar recovery or limit the damages available.
The Court of Appeals held that undocumented workers have full rights under Labor Law 240(1). The Court's reasoning was direct and grounded in the text and purpose of the statute: Labor Law 240 protects "persons" performing covered construction work. It does not contain any citizenship or immigration status requirement. The legislature did not limit the statute to citizens, permanent residents, or authorized workers. Courts have no authority to add limitations that the legislature chose not to include.
The Court further held that the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which makes it unlawful for employers to hire undocumented workers, does not preempt or limit state tort claims. IRCA addresses employment — it does not address tort liability for construction injuries. Federal immigration law and New York tort law operate in separate domains.
The practical significance of Balbuena cannot be overstated. It established, definitively and at the highest level of New York courts, that no employer, property owner, or general contractor can escape Labor Law 240 liability by pointing to the immigration status of the injured worker. The defense simply does not exist.
The Lost Wages Question: What You Can Actually Recover
The area where immigration status does create genuine legal complexity is in the calculation of past and future lost wages. This is more nuanced than the liability question.
Lost wages in a personal injury case are calculated based on what the worker would have earned but for the injury. For documented workers, this calculation is straightforward: base it on actual earnings, project forward based on career trajectory, and present an economic expert's report.
For undocumented workers, defendants often argue that:
New York courts have not uniformly resolved this question, and the law continues to develop. Some courts have permitted full economic loss calculations without immigration status adjustment. Others have addressed the issue through jury instructions. In cases where lost wages are a large component of damages — which is common in serious construction injuries — this argument deserves careful attention and experienced litigation strategy.
What is clear: the immigration status defense as to liability fails entirely under Balbuena. The immigration status issue as to damages is contested and jurisdiction-dependent. An experienced construction accident attorney will develop a damages strategy that accounts for this landscape.
Workers' Compensation: The Same Rules Apply
Undocumented workers are entitled to workers' compensation benefits in New York under the same rules that apply to documented workers. Workers' Compensation Law § 2 defines "employee" broadly and does not exclude undocumented workers. The New York Workers' Compensation Board has consistently held that undocumented workers are covered.
This means an undocumented construction worker who is injured has the same access to workers' comp medical benefits and wage replacement as any other worker. The employer cannot avoid workers' comp liability by pointing to the worker's immigration status.
Workers' comp claims do not require the worker to reveal their immigration status. The claim is about the work-related injury, not the worker's background.
What Your Employer May Do — and What the Law Says About It
Some employers, when approached by an injured undocumented worker, use immigration status as leverage. They may suggest that pursuing a legal claim will result in notification to immigration authorities. They may threaten deportation. They may suggest that the worker has no rights.
These threats violate federal law. Under OSHA's anti-retaliation provisions (Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act), retaliation against a worker for exercising rights related to workplace safety is unlawful. Courts have held that threatening an undocumented worker with immigration reporting in response to a workers' comp claim or a personal injury claim constitutes unlawful retaliation.
New York has its own anti-retaliation provisions in the Workers' Compensation Law and in New York Labor Law. An employer who retaliates against an injured worker by threatening immigration enforcement is exposing itself to additional legal claims.
Does this mean retaliation never happens? No. It happens. But the legal framework gives workers legal tools to address it, and the fear of immigration enforcement being used against them does not eliminate their legal rights.
Practical Reality: What Pursuing a Claim Actually Looks Like
Lawyers who represent undocumented construction workers in Labor Law 240 cases do not report clients to immigration authorities. They have no such obligation and no such incentive — their client is their client, and their job is to recover compensation for that client.
Defense lawyers in these cases may attempt to inquire about immigration status during depositions. Courts have substantial power to limit these inquiries. In many jurisdictions, courts issue protective orders preventing inquiry into immigration status when the information is not relevant to the claims at issue. Whether a worker is documented is not relevant to whether the scaffold was defective.
The case proceeds in civil court. It does not involve immigration agencies. There is no cross-referencing with immigration databases as part of normal civil litigation. The worker's presence in the country is a separate matter entirely from their legal rights as a person injured on a New York construction site.
ITIN, Taxes, and Work Authorization: Common Questions
Workers who file personal injury claims through attorneys typically provide only information relevant to the legal case. They do not need to provide social security numbers or visa documentation to pursue a civil lawsuit. Any communication with the court or opposing counsel is handled by the attorney, and the attorney is ethically bound to protect client confidences.
For workers who have filed taxes using an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), tax records may actually be useful in establishing earned income for wage loss calculations — particularly for workers who have documented several years of earnings. This can support the damages case without creating immigration exposure.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: I am undocumented and I was seriously hurt on a construction site. Can I actually sue?
Yes. Under Balbuena v. IDR Realty (6 N.Y.3d 338, 2006), you have full rights to bring a Labor Law 240(1) claim regardless of your immigration status. The statute protects all workers performing covered construction tasks. No property owner or general contractor can use your immigration status as a defense to strict liability under Labor Law 240. You should consult with a construction accident lawyer as soon as possible — the legal deadline still applies to your case just as it does to any other construction worker's claim.
Q: Will filing a lawsuit expose me to immigration enforcement?
Civil personal injury cases are handled in state civil courts. They do not involve immigration agencies. Defense lawyers may attempt to ask about immigration status in depositions, but courts regularly issue protective orders limiting these inquiries when immigration status is not legally relevant. Plaintiff lawyers handling these cases have no obligation to disclose immigration information. The case is about whether the scaffold was defective — not about where you were born or what visa you hold.
Q: My employer is threatening to call immigration if I file a workers' comp claim. What can I do?
That threat may be unlawful retaliation. Under OSHA's anti-retaliation provisions and New York's own labor laws, retaliation against an injured worker for exercising legal rights is prohibited. Document the threat — write down exactly what was said, by whom, when, and who witnessed it. Then consult with a lawyer who handles both workers' comp and employment retaliation claims. You may have independent claims against the employer for the retaliation itself, separate from your injury claims.
Q: I worked under a false name for the employer. Does that affect my Labor Law 240 claim?
Working under a false name is related to the employment relationship — it is an IRCA issue between you and your employer, and between your employer and the government. It does not bear on your Labor Law 240 claim against the property owner and general contractor, who are not your employer. The 240 claim runs against these third parties based on their status as the owner and GC of the project, not based on your employment documents. Your attorney can address the damages calculation issues that may arise from the false identity issue.
Q: Can undocumented workers get full lost wages, or is the award reduced because of immigration status?
This is genuinely contested in New York. The liability question is settled — immigration status is no defense under Balbuena. The damages question is less clear. Some courts have allowed full economic loss calculations. Others have allowed defendants to raise immigration status arguments on the wage calculation. Experienced construction accident attorneys who regularly handle cases for undocumented workers have developed strategies for maximizing the damages calculation in these circumstances. The outcome will depend on the specific court, the specific facts, and the quality of the economic and vocational expert presentation.
Q: My coworker who was also injured is documented and I am not. Will we get different recoveries?
Liability under Labor Law 240 is the same for both of you — the owner and GC are strictly liable to both. The damages calculation may differ if the immigration status issue affects future lost wage calculations. But all non-wage damages — pain and suffering, past medical bills, future medical bills, loss of consortium — are available in full regardless of immigration status. Pain and suffering damages, which are often the largest component of a serious construction injury award, are not reduced by immigration status arguments. Your case is not worthless because you are undocumented.
Call (888) 702-1581 for a free case review. There is no fee unless we recover.
