Posts
OSHA's regulatory plan contains a statement of the Department's regulatory priorities and regulatory actions. It can be viewed at www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=FEDERAL_REGISTER&p_id=21872
Among other things, OSHA will be continuing its review of the Bloodborne Pathogen standard. It will also be looking at exposure to Crystalline Silica, Confined Spaces in Construction, Electric Power Transmission and Distribution; Cranes and Derricks, and Methylene Chloride.
Click the hot-link above to get the details and time schedules for various actions.
Showing posts with label OSHA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OSHA. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
OSHA Appoints New Head of the Construction Directorate
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, has appointed Jim Maddux as the new director of the agency's Directorate of Construction, effective 20 December 2010. Maddux most recently served in OSHA's Directorate of Standards adn Guidance as teh Director of the Office of Physical Hazards adn Acting Director of the Office of Engineering Safety. Maddux has held several leadership positions at OSHA, including Director of the Office of Maritime and Acting Deputy Director for the Directorate of Standards and Guidance.
He began his career with OSHA in 1990 as a statistician in the Office of Statistics, and joined the Directorate of Standards and Guidance in 1998. Maddux has been a project director, author and contributor to numerous OSHA standards and guidance projects, including the payment for personal protective equipment standard, injury and illness recordkeeping regulations, ergonomics guidelines, and several maritime standards and guidance products. He has a bachelor's degree in economics from the University of Maryland, University College, an associate's degree in computer information systems from Laramie County Community College, and an associate's degree in chemistry from Northern Wyoming Community College.
"Jim has been a valuable member of the OSHA team for over 20 years," said Michaels. "I congratulate him on his new position, and I am confident that he will be an effective leader in construction safety working to accomplish the agency's mission of protecting America's workers."
I will withold judgement on his appointment until I see how he performs, but I don't see any field experience listed in his credentials. Although field experience may not be necessary, it certainly gives an individual a different perspective.
He began his career with OSHA in 1990 as a statistician in the Office of Statistics, and joined the Directorate of Standards and Guidance in 1998. Maddux has been a project director, author and contributor to numerous OSHA standards and guidance projects, including the payment for personal protective equipment standard, injury and illness recordkeeping regulations, ergonomics guidelines, and several maritime standards and guidance products. He has a bachelor's degree in economics from the University of Maryland, University College, an associate's degree in computer information systems from Laramie County Community College, and an associate's degree in chemistry from Northern Wyoming Community College.
"Jim has been a valuable member of the OSHA team for over 20 years," said Michaels. "I congratulate him on his new position, and I am confident that he will be an effective leader in construction safety working to accomplish the agency's mission of protecting America's workers."
I will withold judgement on his appointment until I see how he performs, but I don't see any field experience listed in his credentials. Although field experience may not be necessary, it certainly gives an individual a different perspective.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Free Crane Standard Webinar
The new OSHA crane standard for cranes being used in construction takes effect on 8 November 2010. The OTI at UTA is offering a free webinar to help you understand the new law. It's on 21 September 2010 from 9 am to 11 am (presumably in the Central Time Zone). I don’t know how detailed this will be, but it is free. Click the link below to sign-up:
https://www.uta.edu/wconnect/CourseStatus.awp1?~~oshawebcrane
https://www.uta.edu/wconnect/CourseStatus.awp1?~~oshawebcrane
Monday, April 19, 2010
Training-Training-Training
I have been pontificating for years about the critical need for training of workers. In my opinion, the lack of adequate training is the single biggest cause of jobsite injuries and fatalities. Well, if you didn't "get it" before, you had better start paying attention because OSHA has finally caught up.
Last week, during a speech to the National Action Summit for Latino Worker Health and Safety, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis addressed worker training. She stressed the need for training in a form that can be understood by our Hispanic workforce - nothing new there. But she also stated that, effective on Workers Memorial Day (April 28th), "OSHA will also assure that its Compliance Officers check and verify not only that the training has been provided, but that it was provided in a format that the workers being trained can understand."
WARNING: you subcontractors that think that you are not responsible for the training of those "independent contractors" to which you "subcontract" the work (you know - piece workers), you had better rethink that idea. It is up to you to assure that every one of the workers in your workforce has adequate safety training. You might even want to review you subcontracts - you may find language in there that says you will assure that the workers for whom you are responsible, will be adequately trained in jobsite safety.
Don't know what training is required, Click here for assistance.
Last week, during a speech to the National Action Summit for Latino Worker Health and Safety, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis addressed worker training. She stressed the need for training in a form that can be understood by our Hispanic workforce - nothing new there. But she also stated that, effective on Workers Memorial Day (April 28th), "OSHA will also assure that its Compliance Officers check and verify not only that the training has been provided, but that it was provided in a format that the workers being trained can understand."
WARNING: you subcontractors that think that you are not responsible for the training of those "independent contractors" to which you "subcontract" the work (you know - piece workers), you had better rethink that idea. It is up to you to assure that every one of the workers in your workforce has adequate safety training. You might even want to review you subcontracts - you may find language in there that says you will assure that the workers for whom you are responsible, will be adequately trained in jobsite safety.
Don't know what training is required, Click here for assistance.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
NOTW? OSHA Plays Hardball
This story from OSHA could come under the heading of NOTW – without the photo. Forget the monetary penalties imposed and take a look at the sanctions. How would you like to be required to tell OSHA where you’ll be working. I don’t think that I would want this guy as a sub on my job – you know that OSHA will be showing up regularly.
Contempt orders issued against St. Louis employer for ignoring OSHA citations
"Companies that expose employees to hazards, and then blatantly ignore citations requiring correction of those hazards, will not be overlooked," said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA regional administrator in
The cases stem from numerous citations OSHA issued to AT&B and its successor, AS&MW, for willful, repeat and serious violations related to fall hazards, scaffolding erection deficiencies, power tool guarding and other hazards in connection with multiple projects in the
When the companies failed to comply with the court's order enforcing OSHRC's final order, the secretary of labor filed petitions for contempt. As a result, a special master of the Court of Appeals concluded that Brian Andre, AS&MW and Regina Shaw were in contempt of the order, and recommended various sanctions. The Eighth Circuit substantially accepted the master's recommendations, found all three parties in contempt, and imposed sanctions, including: Brian Andre, AS&MW and Regina Shaw must pay outstanding monetary penalties, which continue to accrue interest, and other miscellaneous fees, in the current amount of $258,582.08; AS&MW and Regina Shaw must pay a $100 daily penalty, calculated from the time of default, in early 2008, on the OSHRC final order; AS&MW must provide OSHA weekly notification of all current jobs, and known future jobs, at least 72 hours prior to commencement of work for a period of three years; and, AS&MW must provide "competent person" training to all people currently and subsequently designated as jobsite "competent persons," prior to beginning any work, and provide the secretary records of such training.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Silica Hazards
OSHA has proposed a total of $38,100 in fines against Sealcoating Inc. of Hingham, Mass., chiefly for silica-related hazards identified during restoration work on bridge M-12-28 on the southbound side of I-93 in Melrose, Mass.
The contractor was cited for 11 alleged repeat and serious violations of workplace health and safety standards following a nighttime inspection conducted in July of this year as part of OSHA's Boston North Area Office's efforts to target inspections to construction worksites - such as road resurfacing and bridge repair - where silica is generated.
"Employers should not assume that OSHA will not conduct inspections because much of this work is done at night," said Paul Mangiafico, OSHA's area director for Middlesex and Essex counties. "We will conduct inspections where and when we must to ensure that employers implement and maintain effective controls to minimize this hazard to their workers."
Crystalline silica, a basic component of soil, sand, granite and many other minerals, can be inhaled when workers chip, cut, drill or grind objects that contain the substance. It has been classified as a human lung carcinogen, and breathing crystalline silica dust can cause silicosis, a disabling or even fatal lung condition.
OSHA found employees at the jobsite exposed to excess silica levels while jack hammering concrete, no controls to lower exposure levels, failure to evaluate employees' exposure levels, an inadequate respiratory protection program and training, and no fit-testing of respirators. These conditions resulted in the issuance of seven serious citations, with $20,100 in proposed fines. Serious citations are issued when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known.
In addition, four repeat citations, with $18,000 in fines, were issued for conditions similar to those cited by OSHA following an April 2009 inspection of a Sealcoating Inc. jobsite in Springfield, Mass. These include lack of a site-specific respiratory protection program, employees wearing respirators without having first obtained medical clearance, ineffective hazard communication training and lack of an effective hearing conservation program.
Most construction sites have a silica exposure, but on many of them it is usually small, in well ventilated areas, and probably presents only a small, brief exposure to the workers. However, for many others, there is the potential for significant exposure when grinding concrete, cutting/sawing masonry products, etc. If you have silica exposures on your site, this is a good time to review your company's response to that exposure. If you need to know more, take a look at "A Guide to Working Safely with Silica." Did you know that there is an OSHA National Emphasis Program (NEP) on silica exposure?
The contractor was cited for 11 alleged repeat and serious violations of workplace health and safety standards following a nighttime inspection conducted in July of this year as part of OSHA's Boston North Area Office's efforts to target inspections to construction worksites - such as road resurfacing and bridge repair - where silica is generated.
"Employers should not assume that OSHA will not conduct inspections because much of this work is done at night," said Paul Mangiafico, OSHA's area director for Middlesex and Essex counties. "We will conduct inspections where and when we must to ensure that employers implement and maintain effective controls to minimize this hazard to their workers."
Crystalline silica, a basic component of soil, sand, granite and many other minerals, can be inhaled when workers chip, cut, drill or grind objects that contain the substance. It has been classified as a human lung carcinogen, and breathing crystalline silica dust can cause silicosis, a disabling or even fatal lung condition.
OSHA found employees at the jobsite exposed to excess silica levels while jack hammering concrete, no controls to lower exposure levels, failure to evaluate employees' exposure levels, an inadequate respiratory protection program and training, and no fit-testing of respirators. These conditions resulted in the issuance of seven serious citations, with $20,100 in proposed fines. Serious citations are issued when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known.
In addition, four repeat citations, with $18,000 in fines, were issued for conditions similar to those cited by OSHA following an April 2009 inspection of a Sealcoating Inc. jobsite in Springfield, Mass. These include lack of a site-specific respiratory protection program, employees wearing respirators without having first obtained medical clearance, ineffective hazard communication training and lack of an effective hearing conservation program.
Most construction sites have a silica exposure, but on many of them it is usually small, in well ventilated areas, and probably presents only a small, brief exposure to the workers. However, for many others, there is the potential for significant exposure when grinding concrete, cutting/sawing masonry products, etc. If you have silica exposures on your site, this is a good time to review your company's response to that exposure. If you need to know more, take a look at "A Guide to Working Safely with Silica."
Did you know that there is an OSHA National Emphasis Program (NEP) on silica exposure?
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
OSHA 10-Hour Safety Course Now Mandatory in 7 States
Recently, PRNewswire reported from Arlington, Texas that "seven states now have laws on the books that require construction workers to complete the OSHA 10-hour safety training course before they can work on certain construction projects. The states with an OSHA law already in effect are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New York, and most recently Missouri. The state of Nevada OSHA training law becomes effective January 1st, 2010."
According to the news release, "most of the state laws restrict the required training to workers on publicly funded construction sites, such as public roads and bridge construction projects and public school buildings. However, the state of Nevada, whose law takes effect January 1st of 2010, requires all construction workers to complete the course. The state laws also vary on exactly which "workers" need the training, according to Curtis Chambers, Vice President of OSHA Pro's, Inc., an OSHA training company with national coverage. 'While all seven state laws require the same 10-hour training class, there are slight nuances from state to state. A particular state law may require all labor[er]s and supervisor to complete the class, wheras another state may require the class for just laborers,' says Mr. Chambers. 'There are also vary thresholds for the dollar amounts of the contracts that dictate when the states' laws become effective. However,' he warns, 'each of these state laws contain a provision that say failure to comply with their rule can result in fines and penalties being assessed, typically to the employer of the non-compliant workers. So affected workers are required to obtain the OSHA 10-hour construction training wallet card to prove they completed the course.'"
Personally, I think these laws are long overdue! And, not just for certain public works projects over a $ threshold, but for every construction project! Why not? These classes typically run about $150 per person and take only 10 hours to complete (hence the name "OSHA 10-hour Class"). My company has required this of all of their field personnel since 2004. The classes are typically broken up into two 5-hour sessions, held on back-to-back Fridays from Noon to 5 pm. And, even though the OSHA 10-hour cards don't expire, we require that they take the class every three years. Since there is always room for more in the classes, we always invite our subcontractors to send someone - they rarely do so. Over the past 5 years, only a few subcontractors have chosen to take advantage of this opportunity - usually the ones who are already very attentive to worker safety on the jobsite.
The 7 states noted above are on the right track - but why not include all construction workers? Can your state be far behind? Could OSHA step in and require this training? Even if they don't, wouldn't every contractor be better off if they started to invest in safety training NOW? This training doesn't cost the contractor money, it actually saves on insurance costs, lost time, worker retention, etc. One accident could cost far more than the investment they would have made in worker safety training. And the icing on the cake is that the contractor who invests in safety training becomes more competitive in this tight construction market.
Something to think about, isn't it?
According to the news release, "most of the state laws restrict the required training to workers on publicly funded construction sites, such as public roads and bridge construction projects and public school buildings. However, the state of Nevada, whose law takes effect January 1st of 2010, requires all construction workers to complete the course. The state laws also vary on exactly which "workers" need the training, according to Curtis Chambers, Vice President of OSHA Pro's, Inc., an OSHA training company with national coverage. 'While all seven state laws require the same 10-hour training class, there are slight nuances from state to state. A particular state law may require all labor[er]s and supervisor to complete the class, wheras another state may require the class for just laborers,' says Mr. Chambers. 'There are also vary thresholds for the dollar amounts of the contracts that dictate when the states' laws become effective. However,' he warns, 'each of these state laws contain a provision that say failure to comply with their rule can result in fines and penalties being assessed, typically to the employer of the non-compliant workers. So affected workers are required to obtain the OSHA 10-hour construction training wallet card to prove they completed the course.'"
Personally, I think these laws are long overdue! And, not just for certain public works projects over a $ threshold, but for every construction project! Why not? These classes typically run about $150 per person and take only 10 hours to complete (hence the name "OSHA 10-hour Class"). My company has required this of all of their field personnel since 2004. The classes are typically broken up into two 5-hour sessions, held on back-to-back Fridays from Noon to 5 pm. And, even though the OSHA 10-hour cards don't expire, we require that they take the class every three years. Since there is always room for more in the classes, we always invite our subcontractors to send someone - they rarely do so. Over the past 5 years, only a few subcontractors have chosen to take advantage of this opportunity - usually the ones who are already very attentive to worker safety on the jobsite.
The 7 states noted above are on the right track - but why not include all construction workers? Can your state be far behind? Could OSHA step in and require this training? Even if they don't, wouldn't every contractor be better off if they started to invest in safety training NOW? This training doesn't cost the contractor money, it actually saves on insurance costs, lost time, worker retention, etc. One accident could cost far more than the investment they would have made in worker safety training. And the icing on the cake is that the contractor who invests in safety training becomes more competitive in this tight construction market.
Something to think about, isn't it?
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
OSHA Activity Intensifying
ISHN posted an editorial about recent activity by OSHA. According to the article, "the past month or two has seen more activity from OSHA than was seen in several previous years combined."
Having spent the past several years in Florida's construction industry, I'm not sure how much more "aggressive" they could be. Florida saw several years of "blitzes" or "enhanced enforcement" in the construction industry. And now, that same approach is occurring in Texas.
Anyway, ISHN's editorial indicates that OSHA is just getting started and that we can expect OSHA to continue to accelerate until it reaches "cruising speed" in a year or two.
If you want to read the entire article, click here.
Having spent the past several years in Florida's construction industry, I'm not sure how much more "aggressive" they could be. Florida saw several years of "blitzes" or "enhanced enforcement" in the construction industry. And now, that same approach is occurring in Texas.
Anyway, ISHN's editorial indicates that OSHA is just getting started and that we can expect OSHA to continue to accelerate until it reaches "cruising speed" in a year or two.
If you want to read the entire article, click here.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Fall Protection & Residential Construction
For many of us, the term "residential" has to do with the type of occupancy of a structure. However, for OSHA, residential has to do with the type of construction. To wit, an apartment building constructed of wood framing materials is considered "residential," but that same apartment building constructed of concrete or concrete block would be considered by OSHA to be "commercial." Even a block single family home is considered to be "commercial" pursuant to OSHA. I'm not sure why OSHA can't use terminology consistent with everyone else's definition, but that's another issue.
At any rate, pursuant to OSHA's definition, in late 1995, OSHA published an "interim residential fall protection standard" that "relaxed" many of the fall protection rules enforced in the "commercial" construction marketplace. I had a great deal of difficulty with these differences as I made the transition from condo construction in Florida ("commercial") to apartment building construction in Texas ("residential"). I met great resistance from framing subcontractors as I tried to enforce the same fall protection rules under which I worked in Florida. NOTE: since almost every building in Florida is constructed of masonry materials, there are virtually no residential projects in that state.
At every turn, that "interim rule" was pushed under my nose as I was told "we don't have to tie off under those conditions. I've had a difficult time trying to understand why you can be exposed to a 6'+ fall from a wood-frame building but not from a masonry building. And the use of "safety monitors" is just plain silly. Although allowed by OSHA in some circumstances, I just don't see how that protects a worker from a fall.
Well, after 13 years of "interim rule," it seems that OSHA is reconsidering that rule. OSHA's Advisory Committee on Construction, Safety and Health has recommended that OSHA rescind the interim fall protection standard for "residential" construction. And, it seems likely that OSHA will accept that recommendation prior to the end of this year. Hallelujah!
Although this is likely to be a shock to residential contractors, and they will probably comply with a great wailing and gnashing of teeth, rescinding that rule is in the best interest of jobsite safety. If a worker can find an anchor point for tie-off on a concrete deck, there shouldn't be a problem finding an anchor point on a wooden deck. There are products designed for that purpose that are reasonably priced and easy to use.
So, if you are in the "residential" construction business and fall hazards are a part of your everyday concerns, be prepared.
At any rate, pursuant to OSHA's definition, in late 1995, OSHA published an "interim residential fall protection standard" that "relaxed" many of the fall protection rules enforced in the "commercial" construction marketplace. I had a great deal of difficulty with these differences as I made the transition from condo construction in Florida ("commercial") to apartment building construction in Texas ("residential"). I met great resistance from framing subcontractors as I tried to enforce the same fall protection rules under which I worked in Florida. NOTE: since almost every building in Florida is constructed of masonry materials, there are virtually no residential projects in that state.
At every turn, that "interim rule" was pushed under my nose as I was told "we don't have to tie off under those conditions. I've had a difficult time trying to understand why you can be exposed to a 6'+ fall from a wood-frame building but not from a masonry building. And the use of "safety monitors" is just plain silly. Although allowed by OSHA in some circumstances, I just don't see how that protects a worker from a fall.
Well, after 13 years of "interim rule," it seems that OSHA is reconsidering that rule. OSHA's Advisory Committee on Construction, Safety and Health has recommended that OSHA rescind the interim fall protection standard for "residential" construction. And, it seems likely that OSHA will accept that recommendation prior to the end of this year. Hallelujah!
Although this is likely to be a shock to residential contractors, and they will probably comply with a great wailing and gnashing of teeth, rescinding that rule is in the best interest of jobsite safety. If a worker can find an anchor point for tie-off on a concrete deck, there shouldn't be a problem finding an anchor point on a wooden deck. There are products designed for that purpose that are reasonably priced and easy to use.
So, if you are in the "residential" construction business and fall hazards are a part of your everyday concerns, be prepared.
Monday, August 24, 2009
142 Citations? $576,00 in penalties? Holy.....!
OSHA hit this company hard! It's almost hard to believe that one company could perform this poorly. Admittedly, it involves 4 plants in 3 states, but WOW!
According to OSHA's Region 4 office, one plant in Alabama received 20 citations ($94,400); another plant in Alabama received 59 citations ($260,900); a plant in Georgia received 49 citations ($142,350); and a plant in Mississippi received 14 violations ($79,100). Some citations were willful and some were serious.
Citations were for caught ins, struck bys, falls, lack of training, electrical hazards, noise, and there was even an other-than-serious for recordkeeping violations.
If you don't think OSHA is "back in the enforcement business" as stated by Jordan Barab in San Antonio, think again. 142 citations! It seems that a half-million in fines can't be enough. It's almost hard to believe that any company could be that bad without trying to be bad. Either that or they really pissed someone off.
Want more info? Click Here.
According to OSHA's Region 4 office, one plant in Alabama received 20 citations ($94,400); another plant in Alabama received 59 citations ($260,900); a plant in Georgia received 49 citations ($142,350); and a plant in Mississippi received 14 violations ($79,100). Some citations were willful and some were serious.
Citations were for caught ins, struck bys, falls, lack of training, electrical hazards, noise, and there was even an other-than-serious for recordkeeping violations.
If you don't think OSHA is "back in the enforcement business" as stated by Jordan Barab in San Antonio, think again. 142 citations! It seems that a half-million in fines can't be enough. It's almost hard to believe that any company could be that bad without trying to be bad. Either that or they really pissed someone off.
Want more info? Click Here.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
OSHA's "Enhanced Enforcement" in Texas
When I arrived at work this morning, I found an article torn from a newspaper or newspaper-type publication on my desk. I have no idea who provided the piece, nor the name of the publication (other than the fact that it appeared on page 9 of that publication). The article was entitled "OSHA's enhanced enforcement effort in Texas" and was written by Joann Natarajan, compliance assistance specialist OSHA in Austin, Texas.
I found it interesting how the district office people soften the "SWAT Team" language fomented by Hilda Solis, but whatever it's called, those of us in Texas can expect some of that so-called "enhanced enforcement." This is no surprise. If you follow this blog, or even read any safety publications, announcements, etc., you already know that part of the article.
The article states that "more workers die in Texas than in any other state." Remember how they said the same thing about Florida last year? Since Florida isn't doing much work right now, nobody would think that they might remain at the top of the list. What's more interesting is that the author notes a 125% increase in Hispanic fatalities between 1992 and 2005 in southeastern states. Duh!! If you've visited any construction sites since 1992, you'll find that the vast majority of the construction workforce is Hispanic. Isn't it interesting how we can make statistics say what we want? Remember the old saying? "There are liars, damn liars, and statistics? More appropriate data should compare the percentage of Hispanic fatalities based upon the number of Hispanic workers or Hispanic "manhours" vs. the same percentage among the non-Hispanic workforce.
But, the above is not the most interesting part of the article. At the end of Ms. Natarajan's article, she lists "The top twenty construction violations OSHA is looking for," presumably when they conduct their "enhanced enforcement" in Texas. The title of the list implies not that the list is an historical perspective, but that the list represents what we should expect as an inspection focus when a compliance officer visits a construction site in Texas.
Here is the list as presented by Ms. Natarjan:
1. General Safety requirements for scaffolds - 1926.451
2. General Duty to provide fall protection - 1926.501
3. Ladders - 1926.1053
4. Worker Training on Fall Protection - 1926.502
5. Hazard Communication - 1910.1200
6. Aerial Lifts - 1926.453
7. Written safety and health programs - 1926.20
8. Specific requirements for excavations - 1926.651
9. Providing and ensuring workers wear hard hats - 1926.100
10. Worker training on scaffold hazards - 1926.454
11. Electrical wiring design and protection - 1926.404
12. Electrical Wiring methods, components, and equipment for general use, including extension cords - 1926.405
13. Protection for employees in excavations - 1926.652
14. General worker training requirements on workplace hazards - 1926.21
15. Requiring and using eye and face protection - 1926.102
16. Fall protection systems criteria and practices - 1926.502
17. Stairways - 1926.1052
18. Additional requirements applicable to specific types of scaffolds - 1926.452
19. Respiratory protection - 1926.134
20. General electrical requirements - 1926.403
Isn't it interesting that three of the top 20 include training requirements. My own experience indicates that if contractors properly trained their workers, many of the safety violations on the jobsites would disappear. And, one would assume that it would have a similar effect on the number of injuries and fatalities.
I found it interesting how the district office people soften the "SWAT Team" language fomented by Hilda Solis, but whatever it's called, those of us in Texas can expect some of that so-called "enhanced enforcement." This is no surprise. If you follow this blog, or even read any safety publications, announcements, etc., you already know that part of the article.
The article states that "more workers die in Texas than in any other state." Remember how they said the same thing about Florida last year? Since Florida isn't doing much work right now, nobody would think that they might remain at the top of the list. What's more interesting is that the author notes a 125% increase in Hispanic fatalities between 1992 and 2005 in southeastern states. Duh!! If you've visited any construction sites since 1992, you'll find that the vast majority of the construction workforce is Hispanic. Isn't it interesting how we can make statistics say what we want? Remember the old saying? "There are liars, damn liars, and statistics? More appropriate data should compare the percentage of Hispanic fatalities based upon the number of Hispanic workers or Hispanic "manhours" vs. the same percentage among the non-Hispanic workforce.
But, the above is not the most interesting part of the article. At the end of Ms. Natarajan's article, she lists "The top twenty construction violations OSHA is looking for," presumably when they conduct their "enhanced enforcement" in Texas. The title of the list implies not that the list is an historical perspective, but that the list represents what we should expect as an inspection focus when a compliance officer visits a construction site in Texas.
Here is the list as presented by Ms. Natarjan:
1. General Safety requirements for scaffolds - 1926.451
2. General Duty to provide fall protection - 1926.501
3. Ladders - 1926.1053
4. Worker Training on Fall Protection - 1926.502
5. Hazard Communication - 1910.1200
6. Aerial Lifts - 1926.453
7. Written safety and health programs - 1926.20
8. Specific requirements for excavations - 1926.651
9. Providing and ensuring workers wear hard hats - 1926.100
10. Worker training on scaffold hazards - 1926.454
11. Electrical wiring design and protection - 1926.404
12. Electrical Wiring methods, components, and equipment for general use, including extension cords - 1926.405
13. Protection for employees in excavations - 1926.652
14. General worker training requirements on workplace hazards - 1926.21
15. Requiring and using eye and face protection - 1926.102
16. Fall protection systems criteria and practices - 1926.502
17. Stairways - 1926.1052
18. Additional requirements applicable to specific types of scaffolds - 1926.452
19. Respiratory protection - 1926.134
20. General electrical requirements - 1926.403
Isn't it interesting that three of the top 20 include training requirements. My own experience indicates that if contractors properly trained their workers, many of the safety violations on the jobsites would disappear. And, one would assume that it would have a similar effect on the number of injuries and fatalities.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Heat-Related Construction Death in Austin
Kvue in Austin, Texas has reported on "the first heat-related death in Travis County for 2009." It also notes that the employer failed to notify OSHA of the fatality, so I expect we'll hear more on this issue before too long.
This might be a good time for employers to review their training records. When was the last time that you updated workers on heat-related illnesses - how to avoid them, how to recognize the symptoms, and what action to take if it occurs?
Protecting workers from heat-related illnesses is not difficult. Fortunately, most responsible employers provide adequate shade, adequate work-breaks and an ample supply of drinking water in high-heat/high-humidity situations.
To read more, click here.
This might be a good time for employers to review their training records. When was the last time that you updated workers on heat-related illnesses - how to avoid them, how to recognize the symptoms, and what action to take if it occurs?
Protecting workers from heat-related illnesses is not difficult. Fortunately, most responsible employers provide adequate shade, adequate work-breaks and an ample supply of drinking water in high-heat/high-humidity situations.
To read more, click here.
23-Story Fall Kills Dallas Worker
Dallas NBC affiliate reported that a worker installing metal louvers on a downtown high-rise building fell 23 stories when his scaffold collapsed and his "safety harness failed somehow."
The article also points out that Texas has taken the lead in construction fatalities and that OSHA (as previously discussed in this blog) has reported its intention to send teams of compliance officers into Texas to "fix things."
My own analysis indicates that the biggest problem is the lack of training. This is exacerbated by the use of "independent contractors" as a means to avoid high workers compensation costs. Since the "independent contractors" are not (technically) employees, no training is provided. And, these "independent contractors" are also expected to provide their own PPE, because they aren't employees of that contractor.
To read more, click here.
The article also points out that Texas has taken the lead in construction fatalities and that OSHA (as previously discussed in this blog) has reported its intention to send teams of compliance officers into Texas to "fix things."
My own analysis indicates that the biggest problem is the lack of training. This is exacerbated by the use of "independent contractors" as a means to avoid high workers compensation costs. Since the "independent contractors" are not (technically) employees, no training is provided. And, these "independent contractors" are also expected to provide their own PPE, because they aren't employees of that contractor.
To read more, click here.
More Bogus 30-hour cards turn up
The New York Daily News reports that more of those bogus 30-hour construction safety training cards have shown up in New York City. Apparently, after more than a year, the hunt for dishonest trainers continues.
To date, OSHA has revoked only 4 "licenses" - 3 in NY and 1 in Nevada - they are investigating 25 others. One trainer is under investigation on Long Island, but the article doesn't say where the others are located.
To read the entire article, click here.
To date, OSHA has revoked only 4 "licenses" - 3 in NY and 1 in Nevada - they are investigating 25 others. One trainer is under investigation on Long Island, but the article doesn't say where the others are located.
To read the entire article, click here.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
OSHA Focus
I was on vacation last week, so I was unable to attend the AGC Safety & Health Committee meeting in Washington, DC. But, a friend and fellow committee member gave me a brief update on some of the more interesting points.
On the 23rd, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor Jordan Barab (apparently soon to be replaced by Dr. Michaels), addressed the group. Barab indicated that OSHA will be making a major effort on enforcement (no surprises there). Then, Noah Connell, Deputy Director of Construction for OSHA reiterated OSHA's belief in the importance of the Focus Four and the Focus Four training efforts that most of us have been putting forth over the past several years.
My colleague reported that his interpretation of the remarks indicate that OSHA will be taking a "Zero Tolerance" approach to Fall Protection violations. So, if you haven't gotten the message yet, you had better get on board soon. Falls protection is one of the most serious concerns with which we deal in the construction industry. And, fall hazards will be cited as heavily as they are able.
There was also talk of increasing the penalties within the current cap; and, talk of raising the cap. Sounds like OSHA will be much less tolerant of poor players in the construction industry. Although that sounds ominous, it will give those of us who do comply a competitive edge over the slackers who give the construction industry a bad name in the safety arena.
He also reported that there was specific mention of Texas and Housing Construction and more, as Hilda Solis referred to them, SWAT Teams - or, as we referred to them in Florida - "Blitzes."
On the 23rd, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor Jordan Barab (apparently soon to be replaced by Dr. Michaels), addressed the group. Barab indicated that OSHA will be making a major effort on enforcement (no surprises there). Then, Noah Connell, Deputy Director of Construction for OSHA reiterated OSHA's belief in the importance of the Focus Four and the Focus Four training efforts that most of us have been putting forth over the past several years.
My colleague reported that his interpretation of the remarks indicate that OSHA will be taking a "Zero Tolerance" approach to Fall Protection violations. So, if you haven't gotten the message yet, you had better get on board soon. Falls protection is one of the most serious concerns with which we deal in the construction industry. And, fall hazards will be cited as heavily as they are able.
There was also talk of increasing the penalties within the current cap; and, talk of raising the cap. Sounds like OSHA will be much less tolerant of poor players in the construction industry. Although that sounds ominous, it will give those of us who do comply a competitive edge over the slackers who give the construction industry a bad name in the safety arena.
He also reported that there was specific mention of Texas and Housing Construction and more, as Hilda Solis referred to them, SWAT Teams - or, as we referred to them in Florida - "Blitzes."
Obama's Pick for New OSHA Leader
According to the NY Times, President Obama has nominated epidemiologist David Michaels to take the top spot at OSHA (Assistant Secretary of Labor). Dr. Michaels is a professor at the School of Public Health at George Washington University and has served in the Clinton White House.
The appointment won't be official until confirmed by the Senate.
The appointment won't be official until confirmed by the Senate.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Construction Safety Training Requirements
One of the most difficult problems that I run into on a construction site is the lack of adequate training on the part of the subcontractors. Every day, I see workers tied off, but not properly. In a few minutes, it becomes obvious that those workers had received little or no training. Often, the subcontractor is oblivious to the fact that he has to provide training.And it's not just fall protection. It's scaffold erection, forklift use, excavation and trenching, etc. So, in an effort to "educate" our subcontractors, I pulled out all of the references to training that appear in OSHA's 29 CFR 1926 and put them into one 78 page booklet. My intention is to get this booklet into the hands of our subcontractors. I'll keep a copy handy for myself too - it'll serve as a great reference tool.
If you would like to get one (or more) for yourself, click here for information. It's available in print format for $10, or for download for $6.25.
And, if you own a SONY e-reader or an Amazon Kindle, you can get it in e-book format for $6.00 - just click here.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
New OSHA Focus on Enforcement
I was privileged to attend Safety 2009 - this year's ASSE PDC - in San Antonio. As always, a great event. In a previous blog entry, you may have watched a portion of the new Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis' speech delivered at that event. I was there. What you didn't hear was Solis tell us that Texas has taken the lead from Florida in construction workplace fatalities. What you didn't hear was Solis tell the crowded room of safety professionals her intention to send OSHA "SWAT Teams" into Texas beginning this month to correct the problem.
I spent twelve years dealing with the construction workplace safety issues in Florida when OSHA denied the use of "Blitz teams" in that state - they called it "saturation" then. But, they were "Blitz teams." Groups of OSHA compliance officers from outside the state descended upon a county with the charge of driving by as many construction sites as possible and stopping to inspect should they find something that was not safe. If your site was easily visible (like on a major roadway, or with a tower crane high in the air), your site was at risk of a visit. One year, a "saturation" team hit five of my projects in five days.
The interesting thing about those visits, is that the teams drove by many small projects with many more uncorrected hazards, to get to our larger sites. I know about the smaller projects because I drove by them too. Interestingly, we received only one citation in those five visits, and that was vacated. The "Blitz teams" left a very bad taste in our mouths. The OSHA compliance officers from our area office were not allowed to visit our "touristy" area during the season because accomodations were too expensive. But a five person "blitz team" could spend a week there during the season.
Interestingly, Florida's fatality numbers in construction were largely due to the fact that a huge amount of construction work occurred in Florida. Since the bottom fell out of that market, Texas has a larger amount of work than Florida. Instead of looking at the raw numbers, OSHA should look at the numbers in comparison to the number of manhours worked. They might see that the death/injury rate is not that different in Texas (and in Florida before) than in many other parts of the country.
Anyway, in Texas, OSHA is not dancing around the issue this time and calls this new initiative "SWAT Teams." Fortunately for me (yeah, I'm now in Texas) my company has good superintendents who pay close attention to jobsite safety and are backed by management commitment to safety. For those who haven't yet found that safety is important - watch out! You're in for an education.
I spent twelve years dealing with the construction workplace safety issues in Florida when OSHA denied the use of "Blitz teams" in that state - they called it "saturation" then. But, they were "Blitz teams." Groups of OSHA compliance officers from outside the state descended upon a county with the charge of driving by as many construction sites as possible and stopping to inspect should they find something that was not safe. If your site was easily visible (like on a major roadway, or with a tower crane high in the air), your site was at risk of a visit. One year, a "saturation" team hit five of my projects in five days.
The interesting thing about those visits, is that the teams drove by many small projects with many more uncorrected hazards, to get to our larger sites. I know about the smaller projects because I drove by them too. Interestingly, we received only one citation in those five visits, and that was vacated. The "Blitz teams" left a very bad taste in our mouths. The OSHA compliance officers from our area office were not allowed to visit our "touristy" area during the season because accomodations were too expensive. But a five person "blitz team" could spend a week there during the season.
Interestingly, Florida's fatality numbers in construction were largely due to the fact that a huge amount of construction work occurred in Florida. Since the bottom fell out of that market, Texas has a larger amount of work than Florida. Instead of looking at the raw numbers, OSHA should look at the numbers in comparison to the number of manhours worked. They might see that the death/injury rate is not that different in Texas (and in Florida before) than in many other parts of the country.
Anyway, in Texas, OSHA is not dancing around the issue this time and calls this new initiative "SWAT Teams." Fortunately for me (yeah, I'm now in Texas) my company has good superintendents who pay close attention to jobsite safety and are backed by management commitment to safety. For those who haven't yet found that safety is important - watch out! You're in for an education.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
2 Contractors Cited in Mississippi - $175,000
Yesterday, OSHA reported that it had cited two contractors in Mississippi following the collapse of a wood shoring system. Significantly, OSHA has proposed two willful and five serious violations to the general contractor. The willful violations were the result of the contractor failing to adequately brace the structure. And, as you know, willful means that the contractor knew better. Plain indifference on the part of a contractor is nothing new to any of us.
More importantly, however, concrete subcontractor was cited for three serious violations, "for failure to provide a written hazard communication program, a safety and health program, and fall protection training." The proposed penalty was a mere $2,000. Is that penalty enough to get the contractor's attention? Perhaps - perhaps not. But it brings up a very important point that most of we safety professionals already know; large numbers of subcontractors (most in the residential marketplace) don't know that they must follow safety rules - or don't care. Training? Not they!
Yesterday, I was on a jobsite where painters were using aerial lifts to paint 2nd and 3rd levels on the exterior of a building. Surprisingly, they were all wearing harnesses. Upon closer inspection, however, none of them had lanyards. There employer had been told that workers using aerial lifts must have harnesses, so he gave them harnesses. NO TRAINING!
There are two things that employers can do to significantly reduce accidents on the job: (1) Train workers in hazard recognition, and avoidance; (2) make sure that all workers understand that they will not be penalized for telling their employer about safety hazards and asking for corrective action before they are exposed to the hazard. Yes, I know, it's a cultural change!
Over the years, I have come to realize that the single most important function of a safety professional is the education and training of workers. Not just in the classroom, but in the field - one-on-one explaining why you just told that guy to get off the top step of a step ladder, or why tying off to a guardrail is hazardous.
More importantly, however, concrete subcontractor was cited for three serious violations, "for failure to provide a written hazard communication program, a safety and health program, and fall protection training." The proposed penalty was a mere $2,000. Is that penalty enough to get the contractor's attention? Perhaps - perhaps not. But it brings up a very important point that most of we safety professionals already know; large numbers of subcontractors (most in the residential marketplace) don't know that they must follow safety rules - or don't care. Training? Not they!
Yesterday, I was on a jobsite where painters were using aerial lifts to paint 2nd and 3rd levels on the exterior of a building. Surprisingly, they were all wearing harnesses. Upon closer inspection, however, none of them had lanyards. There employer had been told that workers using aerial lifts must have harnesses, so he gave them harnesses. NO TRAINING!
There are two things that employers can do to significantly reduce accidents on the job: (1) Train workers in hazard recognition, and avoidance; (2) make sure that all workers understand that they will not be penalized for telling their employer about safety hazards and asking for corrective action before they are exposed to the hazard. Yes, I know, it's a cultural change!
Over the years, I have come to realize that the single most important function of a safety professional is the education and training of workers. Not just in the classroom, but in the field - one-on-one explaining why you just told that guy to get off the top step of a step ladder, or why tying off to a guardrail is hazardous.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
"Congress Turns Up The Heat" [on safety]
An article in "Human Resource Executive Online" reports that "the potential for criminal convictions and increased financial penalties for OSHA violations -- coupled with an increased funding for enforcement activities -- mean that companies need to refocus on their health-and-safety policies and procedures. An emphasis on recordkeeping is also a necessity."
If you have been in the safety field for some time (spanning Presidential administrations), you should have seen this coming. We all know that there is a shift when a new party is in the White House. Democrats are generally pro-labor and Republicans are generally pro-business. I know that this is a simplification, but we usually see a fortified focus on inspections when the Democrats are in the majority.
I was delighted to see a comment from Jason Schwartz, an attorney in Washington, that is very pro-safety professional. He said that "It is important to hire health and safety professionals who 'really understand the regulations.' This stuff is not easy; the OSHA regs are very dense."
Schwartz also suggests that you make sure that OSHA recordkeeping functions are conducted by someone who understands them. The new proposals of increased criminal penalties may make this a critical function.
Bottom Line? Be Prepared! If you would like to read the whole article, click here.
If you have been in the safety field for some time (spanning Presidential administrations), you should have seen this coming. We all know that there is a shift when a new party is in the White House. Democrats are generally pro-labor and Republicans are generally pro-business. I know that this is a simplification, but we usually see a fortified focus on inspections when the Democrats are in the majority.
I was delighted to see a comment from Jason Schwartz, an attorney in Washington, that is very pro-safety professional. He said that "It is important to hire health and safety professionals who 'really understand the regulations.' This stuff is not easy; the OSHA regs are very dense."
Schwartz also suggests that you make sure that OSHA recordkeeping functions are conducted by someone who understands them. The new proposals of increased criminal penalties may make this a critical function.
Bottom Line? Be Prepared! If you would like to read the whole article, click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
