Tag Archives: citations

General Safety Issues

WHEN IT COMES TO ETHICS, IT PAYS TO TELL THE TRUTH!

Twice each month I receive a  newsletter, called OSHA QuickTakes, that reports, among many other things, a list of citations and fines, explaining how companies have violated certain acts.  The fine amounts in the releases just seemed to grow, so I picked this one:

OSHA has ordered Clean Diesel Technologies Inc. to pay $1.9 million to its former chief financial officer who was fired for reporting conduct the CFO believed to be damaging to the company’s shareholders. In late March 2010, the former CFO provided information to the company’s board of directors based on a reasonable belief there was a conflict of interest involving the chair of CDTI’s board of directors. The former CFO believed that a proposed merger was detrimental to the company, critical financial information had been withheld from board members, and the conflict of interest violated internal company controls mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission as well as the company’s own corporate code of ethics.

OSHA’s investigation found that the company violated the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act when it wrongfully terminated the former CFO for warning the board of directors about ethical and financial concerns raised by a proposed merger.  

“OSHA plays a key role in protecting the integrity of the financial markets and the economy,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. “We protect those who are courageous enough to speak out, even internally, about violations of securities rules and regulations.”

 After being terminated from employment in April 2010, the former CFO filed a whistleblower complaint with OSHA one week later. OSHA’s investigation found merit to the complaint.  “This order should send a clear message to publicly traded companies that silencing those who try to do the right thing is unacceptable,” Dr. Michaels added.

As a result, OSHA has ordered CDTI,  a manufacturer and distributor of emission control systems based in Ventura, Calif., formerly headquartered in Stamford, Conn., to pay the complainant more than $486,000 in lost wages, bonuses, stock options and severance pay. In addition, the company must also pay the complainant over $1.4 million in compensatory damages for pain and suffering, damage to career and professional reputation and lost 401(k) employer matches and expenses.

The order also directs the company to post OSHA’s findings in an 8-K submission to the SEC since previous filings about the complainant’s termination and whistleblower activity had also been posted to the SEC.

The company must also expunge all files and computerized data systems of disciplinary actions related to the complainant’s termination, pay reasonable attorney’s fees and post the order and a notice to workers at all company locations and on its internal website. In addition, OSHA will inform the SEC of its findings so that it can pursue any other appropriate action. CDTI and the complainant each have 30 days from receipt of the findings to file an appeal with the department’s Office of Administrative Law Judges.

OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley and 21 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various securities laws, trucking, airline, nuclear power, pipeline, environmental, rail, public transportation, workplace safety and health, and consumer protection laws.

Employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees who raise various protected concerns or provide protected information to the employer or the government. Employees who believe that they have been retaliated against for engaging in protected conduct may file a complaint with the secretary of labor for an investigation by OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program. More information is available online at http://www.whistleblowers.gov/.

Source: OSHA QuickTakes

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to ensure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.

Editor’s note: The U.S. Department of Labor does not release names of employees involved in whistle-blower complaints.

NOTE:  This news release shows that even those at the top of the company, such as a Chief Financial Offiver, or a new employee at every company, has the right to report violations of any kind, without retaliation.  It does pay to tell the truth. pb

General Safety Issues

REPORT YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY AT WORK

This is the story of a whistleblower.  First, here’s the definition:

Noun 1. whistleblower – an informant who exposes wrongdoing within an organization in the hope of stopping it; “the law gives little protection to whistleblowers who feel the public has a right to know what is going on”; “the whistleblower was fired for exposing the conditions in mental hospitals”

informant, source – a person who supplies information
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.
 
A worker for an Idaho sawmill company waits to see if he will receive a  settlement from Clearwater Paper Corporation because he raised workplace safety concerns to OSHA.  The Department of Labor is seeking $300,000 for this employee who was first suspended and later fired after OSHA conducted an inspection.  It was alleged that workers were exposed to excessive amounts of red cedar dust in one of their sawmills. That facility was closed in 2011.

The department is also seeking reinstatement of the employee (at one of the other facilities),  as well as payment of more than $300,000 in damages and fees, including back pay, compensatory damages, emotional distress damages and punitive damages.

Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act prohibits employers from discharging or in any manner retaliating or discriminating against any worker for exercising their rights under the Act. These rights include filing an OSHA complaint, participating in an inspection, raising a safety and health issue with the employer or the government, or any other right afforded by the OSHA law. Of the whistleblower complaints that OSHA receives every year, 11c complaints comprise the majority. For more information on 11c and the 21 other whistleblower statutes under OSHA’s jurisdiction, visit www.whistleblowers.gov.

Source: OSHA QuickTakes Newletter

Note: Many workers are very intimidated about reporting safety and health concerns, because of the fear of losing their job, and/or retaliation.  They are protected under the Whistleblower Act.  However, if the hazards of the job are not addressed and someone gets hurt or killed, those workers who were afraid to report safety violations may regret having not told someone.  Do not take that chance: report any suspicions to your supervisor, and if it is not addressed, then call an OSHA office in your area.  pb

General Safety Issues

COUNT THE VIOLATIONS!

For the past few weeks, we have been covering the Top Ten OSHA violations and penalties assessed for fiscal year 2010.  Violation of (29 CFR 1910.272), Grain Handling Facilities, was listed as #9 on the top ten highest penalties assessed list.  The following is an article released by OSHA, March 16, 2011, regarding the death of a young worker who lost his life working in a grain bin.  Please note the numerous other violations (in italics) the company received.  These are many of the violations that have been mentioned as we have counted down the list. 

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited a grain company in Morral, Ohio, following the September 2010 death of a 20-year-old worker who was caught in a discharge auger while cleaning out a grain bin.  “This tragic death could have been prevented had the grain bin owner and operators followed occupational safety standards and learned from the tragedies that have occurred at other grain bins,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “Grain elevator owners and operators must implement well-known safety practices to prevent workers from being hurt or killed in a grain bin.”   At least 25 U.S. workers were killed in grain entrapments last year, and the numbers of entrapments are increasing, according to researchers at Purdue University. There were more grain entrapments in 2010 than in any year since the university started collecting data on entrapments in 1978.

Following inspections at the company’s three bin facilities, 46 safety and health violations have been cited, with penalties totaling $465,500.  One location was issued a total of eight safety citations with proposed penalties of $175,000, including two willful citations for failing to lock out the discharge and sweep auger, and to provide an appropriate grain bin entry permit to perform work. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

Five serious citations were issued for failing to train employees in safety precautions and bin entry procedures, not having an observer during bin entry, failing to have rescue equipment, failing to test the atmosphere in the space to be entered and failing to have deflagration controls for combustible dust. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.  One other-than-serious citation (one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably wouldn’t cause death or serious harm) was issued for not having combustible dust warning signs in place.

As a result of violations discovered at the first facility, OSHA initiated inspections at the company’s two other facilities.  One facility was fined $171,000 and cited with a total of 22 health and safety violations, including two repeat safety violations for allowing employees to walk working surfaces without proper guarding in place and failing to safeguard employees from electrical hazards such as broken electrical conduits. A repeat violation exists when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years.

Thirteen serious safety citations were issued for allowing employees to walk working surfaces without ladderway gates and mid-rails, and exposing workers to electrical and machine guarding hazards. Four serious health citations were issued for a lack of safe grain handling and electrical procedures. Three other-than-serious health citations were issued for lack of signage and hazard communication procedures.

The company’s third facility was fined $119,500 and cited with a total of 16 safety violations, including one willful violation for failing to evaluate work spaces to determine if any required confined space entry permits. Fourteen serious citations were issued for failing to implement a confined space program, not having a non-entry retrieval system, a lack of personal protective equipment for employees, a lack of electrical training, a lack of combustible dust controls and failing to train employees in combustible grain dust hazards. One other-than-serious citation was issued for a lack of combustible dust warning signs.

Since 2009, OSHA has fined grain operators in Illinois, Colorado, South Dakota and Wisconsin following similar preventable fatalities and injuries.  In addition to enforcement actions and training, OSHA sent a notification letter in August, 2010 to grain elevator operators warning them not to allow workers to enter grain storage facilities without proper equipment.    OSHA’s Region V, which includes Illinois, Ohio and Wisconsin, initiated a Grain Safety Local Emphasis Program in August 2010, and has since conducted 61 inspections and issued 163 citations to grain operators/facilities. The violations cover hazards associated with grain engulfment, machine guarding, lockout/tagout of dangerous equipment to prevent accidental energization start-up, electricity, falls, employee training and combustible dust hazards.

OSHA’s Severe Violators Enforcement Program began in the spring of 2010, and is meant to focus on employers that endanger workers by committing willful, repeat, or failure-to-abate violations in one or more of the following circumstances: a fatality or catastrophe; industry operations or processes that expose workers to severe occupational hazards; exposure to hazards related to the potential releases of highly hazardous chemicals; and all per-instance citation enforcement actions. 

If companies do not mind paying fines, it seems they would be disturbed by the loss of life of an employee, and the fact that they are not providing for the safety of their workers.  This is an example of the various violations we have been describing.

Source: OSHA

General Safety Issues

WE’RE STILL COUNTING DOWN OSHA’S TOP TEN VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES LIST!

Continuing with OSHA’s Top Ten Violations List, (fiscal year 2010),  coming in at #6 is Control of Hazardous Energy (lockout/tagout), general industry, (29 CFR 1910.147).  The same standard was #4 in highest penalties assessed by OSHA in fiscal year 2010.  OSHA feels that compliance with this standard  prevents an estimated 120 fatalities and 50,000 injuries annually, as there are about three million workers in the United States that have jobs to repair or service equipment or machinery, which must be isolated from energy sources before they can begin their work.  Almost 95 per cent of all lockout/tagout citations involved are from not having a formal Energy Control Program in place.  There are three core components to an energy control program:

  1. Energy Control Procedures. These procedures must detail and document the specific information that an authorized employee must know to accomplish lockout/tagout, namely, the scope, purpose, authorization rules and techniques to be utilized for the control of hazardous energy.
  2. Periodic inspections of the energy control procedures to ensure that the procedures and requirements of the standard are being followed.
  3. Employee training and retraining, along with additional training under a tagout system, to assure that the purpose and function of the energy control programs are understood by the employer. 

Employers are expected to develop programs and procedures, training and inspections, that meet the needs of their particular workplace and the particular types of machines and equipment they use and service, as long as they meet the requirements of the standard.  They must ensure that prior to an employee servicing the equipment where the potential exists for unexpected energization or start-up of equipment or the release of stored energy, the machine or equipment is isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative.  Sources of stored energy include electricity, mechanical motion, motion due to gravity, pressure, springs under tension or compression, and/or thermal (high or low temperatures.) 

Here are other significant requirements of a Lockout/Tagout procedure required under this type of program:

  • Only authorized employees may lockout or tagout machines or equipment in order to perform service or maintenance.
  • Lockout and tagout devices shall not be used for any other purposes and must be used only for controlling energy.
  • The devices (locks and tags) must identify the name of the worker applying the device.
  • All energy sources to equipment must be identified and isolated.
  • After the energy is isolated from the machine or equipment, the isolating device must be locked out or tagged out in safe or off position only by authorized employees.
  • Following the application of these devices to the energy isolating devices, the stored or residual energy must be safely discharged or relieved.
  • Prior to starting work on the equipment, the authorized employee shall verify that the equipment is isolated from the energy source, for example, by operating the on/off switch on the machine or equipment.
  • The lock and tag must remain on the machine until work is completed.
  • Only the authorized employee who placed the lock and tag must remove his/her lock or tag,  unless the employer has a specific procedure as outlined in OSHA’s Lockout/Tagout standard.

An accident can best be avoided by preventing an unexpected startup of equipment or machinery while it is being serviced or repaired.  One can never be too careful!

Source: OSHA

Fall Safety

COUNTING DOWN FOR SAFETY!

Yesterday, we began a series about OSHA’s Top Ten List for violations and citations for fiscal year October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010.  Number One on the violations list was Scaffolding, Construction (29 CFR 1926.451).  Topping the list for citations and coming in second for violations is Fall Protection, Construction (29 CFR 1926.501).  Because construction is often done at elevated heights, the risk of injury and death from falling is greater than almost any industry in the United States.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that in a 7-year period, more than 4,500 American workers died as a result of falls.  Many workers  fall through existing openings in roofs, floors, skylights, temporary staircases, and off edges of roofs.

pplcantfly

There are many examples of persons losing their lives because they were not using the proper safety equipment.  One man was thrown from the bucket of a cherry picker when it was hit by a delivery truck.  Two other men were in the bucket with him, but were wearing harnesses.  Witnesses said he wasn’t even wearing a hardhat, let alone a harness.  Another worker fell from the 10th floor of a hotel that was under construction.  He was not wearing a harness, and climbed on the outside of a rail, despite being warned not to do so.

Contractors must identify all potential fall hazards in the workplace before work is to begin.  Any time a worker is at a height of six feet or more, he is at risk and needs protection from falling.  Some of the precautions to be taken are:

  • Proper training of employees in the use of the safety system.
  • Proper supervision of workers.
  • Compliance with safe work procedures at all times.
  • Selection of proper fall protection systems appropriate for each building site.
  • Proper construction and installation of safety system.
  • Being sure that everyone understands.  Language barriers have been known to be at the root of many accidents.

As with any job, each worker is responsible for his own safety.  Set an example by taking a few extra minutes to be sure that your safety equipment is going to work correctly.  Wear your harnesses or other fall protection equipment!  Others will follow suit, when they see that you are serious about safety.

Many persons are hurt by falling off ladders.  It is important to choose the right ladder for the job.  The ladder should extend three feet above the surface, and for every four feet in height of the ladder, the base should be one foot away from the wall.  There are three types of ladders:

1)      Type 1, which supports 250 lbs.

2)      Type 1A, which supports 300 lbs.

3)      Type 1AA, which supports 375 lbs.

Be sure to tie the ladder to fixed points – this will take about 5 minutes total for you to do at the beginning and end of the day, and could keep you safe.  One other thing, when working on a ladder, don’t carry materials or tools while climbing the ladder.  Use a tool belt, or install a rope and pulley system, or tie a rope around materials and pull them up when you reach the work surface.

Anyone who works in high places has my greatest admiration – I can’t even climb three feet off the ground!  It is obvious that when the same violations occur year after year, it’s an indication that employers and employees are making the same mistakes every year about compliance with OSHA standards.  This is a very serious threat to the safety and lives of thousands of construction workers.   So, we are repeating for all those who are involved in working in high places: Fall Protection, Construction, (29CFR 1926.501) was #1 in highest penalties assessed by OSHA for fiscal year 2010, and #2 in Top Ten Violations, fiscal year 2010.

Source: OSHA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Fall Safety, General Safety Issues

STAY OFF THE “TOP TEN” LIST!

The Number 1 most frequently violated standard on OSHA’s list for fiscal year October 1, 2009, through September 30, 2010 was: Scaffolding, general requirements, construction (29 CFR 1926.451).  Working with heavy equipment and building materials on the limited space of a scaffold is difficult.  Without fall protection or safe access, it becomes hazardous.  Falls from such improperly constructed scaffolds can result in injuries ranging from sprains to death. 

Scaffolds must be constructed according to the manufacturer’s instructions.  Guardrail systems should be installed along all open sides and ends of platforms.  If workers on a construction site are exposed to vertical drops of 6 feet or more, OSHA requires that employers provide fall protection in one of three ways before work begins: 

  • Placing guardrails around the hazard area.
  • Deploying safety nets.
  • Providing personal fall arrest systems for each employee. 

Most times the nature and location of the work will dictate the form that fall protection takes.  There are several types of scaffolding: 

  • Suspended scaffolds – Those that are suspended with ropes or other non-rigid means from overhead structures equipped with methods to permit platform to be raised and lowered.
  • Supported scaffolds – Those with one or more platforms that are supported by beams, brackets, poles, legs, frames, or similar rigid supports.  Frame scaffolds are the most common type.
  • Other scaffolds such as hydraulic scaffolds on bucket trucks. 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has strict provisions in place for scaffolding use, but when construction companies are more concerned with producing quick results than ensuring the safety of their workers all too often they try to work around these regulations.  Depending on the size of the scaffolding, OSHA requires that:

• Scaffolding be moved, constructed, and altered by a competent person who has had significant training in the erection of scaffolding.
• A frame must be able to support four times its weight.
• Guard rails be used to block access to areas where the plank extension over the end support is less than 12 inches.
• Horizontal security and vertical tie-ins be placed every 20 feet.
•  The space between scaffolding planks not go beyond one inch.   The use of ties, bracers, and outriggers.  

When the safety requirements put in place by OSHA are not followed, injuries can easily occur.   The most common causes of scaffolding accidents are:

• Improper construction of the scaffolding.
• Improper inspection of the scaffolding.
• Inadequate securing of the scaffolding deck.
• Inadequate guard rails, toe boards, screens, and safety netting. 

These oversights can lead to injuries from being hit by falling objects, to slipping and falling off the scaffolding,  to planking or support giving away.   According to a Bureau of Labor Statistics study, 72 per cent of workers were hurt  in scaffolding accidents in one of these ways.  The study also reports that an average of 88 deaths occur each year as a result of scaffolding accidents.  Regretably, these injuries and deaths could have been avoided if only proper safety regulations had been followed. 

Tomorrow’s “Top Ten List to Avoid” subject is the #2 violation and #1 highest penalties assessed: Fall protection, construction (29 CFR 1926.501).  In the meantime, stay safe! 

Source: OSHA