By Ellie Gabel at www.revolutionized.com

As human-robot working environments diversify their capabilities and become more deeply integrated, they open opportunities to scale productivity and profits. However, safety hazards specific to these hybrid workforces may be introduced. Experts have been wondering who should be held responsible when someone is injured by a robot. Should it be the worker, the employer or the company that made the machine?

Who is responsible when a robot causes injury or damage?

Manufacturers and their stakeholders must know the answer before they invest in robotic automation, even though only 77 robot-related injuries were reported to OSHA between 2015 and 2022. Otherwise, the workforce and the business’s financial stability could be at risk. However, there is significant debate surrounding this issue. There are at least five potential parties who may be assigned liability, and the parties may differ each time an injury occurs.

Manufacturer

The product could have a design defect that happened before installation. However, it can be difficult to discern whether it is a manufacturing anomaly or oversight versus wear and tear from extended usage.

Installer

This could be a contracting organization, employees from the manufacturer or internal staff. Improper configuration and calibration can pose extensive risks, such as a robot ignoring emergency stop triggers or similar safety guards.

Employees

The robot could pose a danger to the workforce due to compliance failures with regulatory frameworks such as OSHA. If the facility fails to provide a safe working environment, it could be their fault for failing to fulfill their responsibilities.

Staff

Staff members could be mishandling machinery, leading to catastrophic incidents. Failure to use safety protocols taught in training, such as lockout or tagout for maintenance, could be their own doing. The company could have provided the tools and materials to instill a safety-first culture, but it is also the employee’s responsibility to make it a reality.

Developers

Software developers are an unlikely, hidden party. Robotics receive continuing service, such as patches and security updates. However, faulty robotics programs can upset workplace safety. For example, failure to defend against novel threats from hackers could cause a machine to fail to respond to safety actions and lead to accidents.

Are there precedents for incidents?

With over 2.1 million manufacturing job vacancies, supplementing with robotics is almost essential for any business wanting to stay afloat. Some incidents are bound to occur.

In 2023, a man was crushed by a robotic arm in South Korea. The report states its vision capabilities could not distinguish the worker from the food boxes it was preparing when he was doing maintenance. The incident leaves liability in question, as a sensor test was delayed, potentially past a safe point. It malfunctioned during these checks, prompting people to question whether it was the employer’s fault or a failure due to the manufacturer’s lack of fail-safe mechanisms.

Another person died in Wisconsin due to a robot in 2025. It crushed a 45-year-old who worked in sanitation, though reports from the scene leave the cause of the incident intentionally vague. Statements called the situation an accident, making it difficult for the sector at large to learn anything from this factory. Determining liability in this circumstance is challenging, especially when there is room for interpretation. Circumstances like these make it even more important that liability be clearly defined in human-robot working environments.

What safety standards are necessary for automated facilities?

Manufacturers have many options for designing their workflows to improve robotic safety and make it easier to determine which party is liable if an injury occurs. For example, preventing collisions on the floor can be achieved by using cranes in certain applications, and smart cable management can reduce the number of tripping hazards.

Regulatory agencies are constantly working on updating their standards to reflect technological advances and the needs of modern facilities, so staying informed is the best way to keep workplaces secure. These are the most crucial safety protocols that organizations must follow:

  • ANSI/RIA R15.06 describes safety measures based on a robot’s assigned class and related safety control mechanisms.
  • ISO 10218 outlines a global standard for generalized robot safety for industrial settings, including construction and operational modes.
  • OSHA has comprehensive guidance for manufacturers without specifications to robots, including risk assessment instructions, training systems and enforcement strategies.

Other regulating bodies include Underwriters Laboratories, the European Standards and the Association for Advancing Automation. Every organization provides guidance to make workplaces safer to prevent questions of liability.

Forging a path for responsible robotic integration

Human-robot working relationships will only flourish if manufacturers keep workzones safe. This includes paying special attention to machinery, ensuring they are well-made, installed appropriately, serviced well and used properly. Every step plays a role in how productive, safe and lucrative the robot is for the workforce. Proactive measures are the best way to avoid liability in the first place.