Safe Workplace and Safety News
This is the safety news blog for the Safe Workplace web site. We cover workplace safety related news with a focus on how safety, or a lack of safety, impacts employers, employees and their families. We also cover topics such as safety training, safety tools, and legal issues related to safety. For regular safety news and information enter your email address in the box above the Subscribe button to the right (then click on the button).
Thursday, February 04, 2010
US Business Opposes Work Safety Proposal
This report comes from the financial times in London (U.K.) It summarizes what might be developing into a major fight between business and OSHA concerning recording repetitive motion injury information. The article states:
"An arcane-sounding proposal by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) related to repetitive-strain injuries is expected to revive a 10-year-old battle that began during the Clinton administration, pitting labour unions against business advocates such as the US Chamber of Commerce over how the government should define ergonomic injuries in the workplace."
"There are a lot of scientific questions on whether ergonomic injuries are caused by the workplace or outside the workplace, including lifestyle and genetics," says Marc Freedman at the US chamber. "Unlike every other hazard for which OSHA regulates, ergonomics is not limited to the workplace. That makes it extremely problematic."
Read the entire article here.
"An arcane-sounding proposal by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) related to repetitive-strain injuries is expected to revive a 10-year-old battle that began during the Clinton administration, pitting labour unions against business advocates such as the US Chamber of Commerce over how the government should define ergonomic injuries in the workplace."
"There are a lot of scientific questions on whether ergonomic injuries are caused by the workplace or outside the workplace, including lifestyle and genetics," says Marc Freedman at the US chamber. "Unlike every other hazard for which OSHA regulates, ergonomics is not limited to the workplace. That makes it extremely problematic."
Read the entire article here.
Labels: OSHA, workplace injuries
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=1761399470647190125;0 comments |
links to this post
Third-Party Sale Puts Product Maker In Court For Accident Liability
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the manufacturer of a machine, that was involved in an industrial accident, can be held liable even though that manufacturer is in the United Kingdom and has no presence in New Jersey or the U.S.
An article on the LAW.COM web site states:
"Justice Barry Albin, writing for the 5-2 majority, said that given the nature of modern international commerce and New Jersey's long-arm rule, there is no reason why a foreign manufacturer cannot be held liable, even if it has barely any contact here."
The accident happened in 2001 and involved the loss of four fingers in a recycling machine.
There were two dissenting judges in the 5-2 decision. The articles reports:
"In her dissent, Hoens said there needs to be more of a nexus to New Jersey than a product just ending up here. 'Repeated quotations and soaring language about the realities of the global marketplace might compel the casual reader to follow what appears to be the majority's relentless logic,' she said. 'But those rhetorical techniques cannot mask the fact that the majority today embarks on a path that stretches our notions about due process, and about what is fundamentally fair, beyond the breaking point.'"
Read the entire article here.
An article on the LAW.COM web site states:
"Justice Barry Albin, writing for the 5-2 majority, said that given the nature of modern international commerce and New Jersey's long-arm rule, there is no reason why a foreign manufacturer cannot be held liable, even if it has barely any contact here."
The accident happened in 2001 and involved the loss of four fingers in a recycling machine.
There were two dissenting judges in the 5-2 decision. The articles reports:
"In her dissent, Hoens said there needs to be more of a nexus to New Jersey than a product just ending up here. 'Repeated quotations and soaring language about the realities of the global marketplace might compel the casual reader to follow what appears to be the majority's relentless logic,' she said. 'But those rhetorical techniques cannot mask the fact that the majority today embarks on a path that stretches our notions about due process, and about what is fundamentally fair, beyond the breaking point.'"
Read the entire article here.
Labels: Industrial Safety, safety regulations, workplace injuries
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=7944454936545590563;0 comments |
links to this post
Monday, February 01, 2010
OSHA Proposes Recordkeeping Change To Improve Illness Data
OSHA is proposing to revise its Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting (recordkeeping) regulation by restoring a column on the OSHA Form 300 to better identify work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). The rule does not change existing requirements for when and under what circumstances employers must record musculoskeletal disorders on their injury and illness logs.
Many employers are currently required to keep a record of workplace injuries and illnesses, including work-related MSDs, on the OSHA Form 300 (Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses). The proposed rule would require employers to place a check mark in a column for all MSDs they have recorded.
The proposed requirements are identical to those contained in the OSHA recordkeeping regulation that was issued in 2001. Prior to 2001, OSHA's injury and illness logs contained a column for repetitive trauma disorders that included noise and MSDs. In 2001, OSHA separated noise and MSDs into two separate columns, but the MSD column was deleted in 2003 before the provision became effective. OSHA is now proposing to restore the MSD column to the OSHA Form 300 log.
"Restoring the MSD column will improve the ability of workers and employers to identify and prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders by providing simple and easily accessible information," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "It will also improve the accuracy and completeness of national work-related injury and illness data."
For more information, view OSHA's proposal at: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=FEDERAL_REGISTER&p_id=21314. This notice will be published in the Jan. 29 edition of the Federal Register.
Interested parties may submit comments on the proposed rule electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, the federal e-rulemaking portal; or by mailing three copies to the OSHA Docket Office, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20210; or by fax at 202-693-1648 if the comments and attachments do not exceed 10 pages.
Comments must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking (Docket Number OSHA-2009-0044). The deadline for submitting comments is March 15. OSHA will hold a public meeting on the proposed rule March 9.
Many employers are currently required to keep a record of workplace injuries and illnesses, including work-related MSDs, on the OSHA Form 300 (Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses). The proposed rule would require employers to place a check mark in a column for all MSDs they have recorded.
The proposed requirements are identical to those contained in the OSHA recordkeeping regulation that was issued in 2001. Prior to 2001, OSHA's injury and illness logs contained a column for repetitive trauma disorders that included noise and MSDs. In 2001, OSHA separated noise and MSDs into two separate columns, but the MSD column was deleted in 2003 before the provision became effective. OSHA is now proposing to restore the MSD column to the OSHA Form 300 log.
"Restoring the MSD column will improve the ability of workers and employers to identify and prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders by providing simple and easily accessible information," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "It will also improve the accuracy and completeness of national work-related injury and illness data."
For more information, view OSHA's proposal at: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=FEDERAL_REGISTER&p_id=21314. This notice will be published in the Jan. 29 edition of the Federal Register.
Interested parties may submit comments on the proposed rule electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, the federal e-rulemaking portal; or by mailing three copies to the OSHA Docket Office, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20210; or by fax at 202-693-1648 if the comments and attachments do not exceed 10 pages.
Comments must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking (Docket Number OSHA-2009-0044). The deadline for submitting comments is March 15. OSHA will hold a public meeting on the proposed rule March 9.
Labels: Industrial Health, OSHA
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=8644889526679504646;0 comments |
links to this post
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
OSHA Cites Mueller Industries Subsidiaries in Fulton, Miss. - Proposed $683,000 In Penalties
OSHA has issued three Mueller Industries Inc. subsidiaries in Fulton 128 citations for allegedly exposing workers to safety and health hazards. The privately-held corporation headquartered in Memphis, Tenn., owns and operates 20 facilities located in eight states and two foreign countries.
OSHA began its investigation in July 2009 after a maintenance worker employed by Mueller Copper Tube Co. Inc., a subsidiary of Mueller Industries, was killed, and two other workers were injured when naphtha, a flammable liquid of hydrocarbon mixtures, leaked from an electric pump and ignited.
"Mueller Industries subsidiaries' dangerous practices exposed workers at their facilities to a variety of hazards that ultimately took one worker's life," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "The significant fines of $683,000 cannot replace this worker's life or bring peace to the family, but they will go a long way in letting this employer know disregarding worker safety and health will not be tolerated."
Mueller Copper Tube has been issued willful, repeat and serious citations. A willful citation with a penalty of $40,000 alleges the failure to repair a corroded live electrical disconnect, which exposed workers to electrical shock. Ten repeat citations with penalties of $150,000 allege failure to guard machinery; unsafe electrical equipment and practices; and failure to label hazardous chemicals. Sixty-nine serious citations, with proposed penalties of $223,500, allege unsafe cranes; fall hazards; unsafe ladders; blocked and inadequate exits; unsafe flammable liquid and compressed gas use and storage; locking out hazardous energy sources during maintenance and service; a lack of machine guards; unsafe electrical equipment and practices; and failure to establish a respiratory protection program.
The initial safety inspection at Mueller Cooper Tube was expanded to include Mueller Fittings LLC and Mueller Packaging LLC, two additional subsidiaries of Mueller Industries. Mueller Fittings has been issued 22 serious citations, with penalties of $64,000, alleging the failure to lock out energy sources, unsafe propane storage and handling, overexposure to noise, unsafe material storage, and the likelihood of exposure to bloodborne pathogens. Eight repeat citations also have been issued, with penalties of $102,500, alleging a lack of machine guarding, electrical hazards and the inadequate labeling of hazardous chemicals.
Mueller Packaging has been issued 12 serious citations, with penalties of $28,000, alleging unsafe crane operation, failing to lock out sources of hazardous energy, hazardous chemical exposures, and overexposure to noise; five repeat citations, with penalties of $75,000, alleging an unsafe forklift modification, electrical hazards and inadequate labeling under the hazard communication standard; and one other-than-serious violation, with no penalty, for an electrical deficiency.
The companies have 15 business days from receipt of the citations and penalties to comply or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The sites were inspected by staff from OSHA's Jackson Area Office, 3780 I-55 North, Suite 210; telephone 601-965-4606.
OSHA began its investigation in July 2009 after a maintenance worker employed by Mueller Copper Tube Co. Inc., a subsidiary of Mueller Industries, was killed, and two other workers were injured when naphtha, a flammable liquid of hydrocarbon mixtures, leaked from an electric pump and ignited.
"Mueller Industries subsidiaries' dangerous practices exposed workers at their facilities to a variety of hazards that ultimately took one worker's life," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "The significant fines of $683,000 cannot replace this worker's life or bring peace to the family, but they will go a long way in letting this employer know disregarding worker safety and health will not be tolerated."
Mueller Copper Tube has been issued willful, repeat and serious citations. A willful citation with a penalty of $40,000 alleges the failure to repair a corroded live electrical disconnect, which exposed workers to electrical shock. Ten repeat citations with penalties of $150,000 allege failure to guard machinery; unsafe electrical equipment and practices; and failure to label hazardous chemicals. Sixty-nine serious citations, with proposed penalties of $223,500, allege unsafe cranes; fall hazards; unsafe ladders; blocked and inadequate exits; unsafe flammable liquid and compressed gas use and storage; locking out hazardous energy sources during maintenance and service; a lack of machine guards; unsafe electrical equipment and practices; and failure to establish a respiratory protection program.
The initial safety inspection at Mueller Cooper Tube was expanded to include Mueller Fittings LLC and Mueller Packaging LLC, two additional subsidiaries of Mueller Industries. Mueller Fittings has been issued 22 serious citations, with penalties of $64,000, alleging the failure to lock out energy sources, unsafe propane storage and handling, overexposure to noise, unsafe material storage, and the likelihood of exposure to bloodborne pathogens. Eight repeat citations also have been issued, with penalties of $102,500, alleging a lack of machine guarding, electrical hazards and the inadequate labeling of hazardous chemicals.
Mueller Packaging has been issued 12 serious citations, with penalties of $28,000, alleging unsafe crane operation, failing to lock out sources of hazardous energy, hazardous chemical exposures, and overexposure to noise; five repeat citations, with penalties of $75,000, alleging an unsafe forklift modification, electrical hazards and inadequate labeling under the hazard communication standard; and one other-than-serious violation, with no penalty, for an electrical deficiency.
The companies have 15 business days from receipt of the citations and penalties to comply or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The sites were inspected by staff from OSHA's Jackson Area Office, 3780 I-55 North, Suite 210; telephone 601-965-4606.
Labels: LOTO, OSHA Citations
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=6797746185115872173;0 comments |
links to this post
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
OSHA Proposes $236,500 In Fines Against CITGO Refining and Chemicals in Corpus Christi, Texas
OSHA has cited CITGO Refining and Chemicals LP in Corpus Christi for workplace safety violations resulting from a release of hydrocarbon and hydrofluoric acid from the alkylation unit at this facility. Proposed penalties total $236,500.
"CITGO did not ensure adequate maintenance and oversight of its process safety equipment, exposing workers to the release of toxic chemicals and posing a danger to not only the company's employees but to the community, as well," said Dean McDaniel, OSHA's regional administrator in Dallas, Texas.
OSHA has alleged two willful, 15 serious and one repeat violation following an investigation that began July 20, 2009. The willful violations include failing to adequately repair and maintain process equipment, and to update changes in operating procedures. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law's requirements, or with plain indifference to employee safety and health.
Serious violations include failing to maintain floor holes to prevent employees from tripping, to properly label electrical equipment, to prevent exposure to electrical parts, to update piping and instrumentation diagrams, and to address process hazard analysis deficiencies. A serious violation is one that could cause death or physical harm that can result from a hazard an employer knew or should have known exists.
The repeat violation addresses failing to train workers regarding modified procedures. A repeat violation is issued when an employer previously was cited for the same or similar violation of any standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facilities in federal enforcement states within the last three years.
The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA's area director in Corpus Christi, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
"CITGO did not ensure adequate maintenance and oversight of its process safety equipment, exposing workers to the release of toxic chemicals and posing a danger to not only the company's employees but to the community, as well," said Dean McDaniel, OSHA's regional administrator in Dallas, Texas.
OSHA has alleged two willful, 15 serious and one repeat violation following an investigation that began July 20, 2009. The willful violations include failing to adequately repair and maintain process equipment, and to update changes in operating procedures. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law's requirements, or with plain indifference to employee safety and health.
Serious violations include failing to maintain floor holes to prevent employees from tripping, to properly label electrical equipment, to prevent exposure to electrical parts, to update piping and instrumentation diagrams, and to address process hazard analysis deficiencies. A serious violation is one that could cause death or physical harm that can result from a hazard an employer knew or should have known exists.
The repeat violation addresses failing to train workers regarding modified procedures. A repeat violation is issued when an employer previously was cited for the same or similar violation of any standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facilities in federal enforcement states within the last three years.
The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA's area director in Corpus Christi, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=4219598414620852034;0 comments |
links to this post
Textile Groups Urge OSHA To Avoid Unnecessary Regulations
An article in Textile World magazine reports that the textile industry has responded to OSHA's advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on combustible dust by asking that OSHA not impose rules on industries for which they don't apply. The article states:
"While supporting OSHA's overall efforts to improve safety in the workplace, NCC (National Cotton Council) cautions OSHA to focus its efforts in this case to areas that have experienced problems with combustible dust and not attempt to regulate industries such as textiles that have 'no demonstrated history of combustible dust incidents.'"
You can read the complete article here.
"While supporting OSHA's overall efforts to improve safety in the workplace, NCC (National Cotton Council) cautions OSHA to focus its efforts in this case to areas that have experienced problems with combustible dust and not attempt to regulate industries such as textiles that have 'no demonstrated history of combustible dust incidents.'"
You can read the complete article here.
Labels: combustible dust, OSHA, safety regulations
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=958929813611904525;0 comments |
links to this post
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Oregon OSHA Fines Americold Logistics $740,400
The Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services, Occupational Safety and
Health Division (Oregon OSHA) has fined Americold Logistics a total of $740,400 for extensive safety and health violations found during a Sept. 16, 2009 inspection at the company’s Milwaukie facility. By not having proper safeguards in place to contain ammonia, the company was putting workers in serious danger of injury or death due to a major chemical release or explosion, Oregon OSHA found.
"Ammonia carries significant risks to workers, particularly in large quantities," said Michael Wood, Oregon OSHA administrator. "Due to the size of this facility, there is the potential for a large-scale release."
Oregon OSHA cited Americold Logistics, a national refrigerated warehouse operation, for 10 willful violations, four serious repeat violations, and 22 other serious violations of the Oregon Safe Employment Act. The bulk of the violations are related to the company’s system for handling the hazardous chemical anhydrous ammonia, which is common in commercial warehouses and can be explosive. Ammonia can also cause severe alkaline chemical burns to skin, eyes, and the respiratory system. If a chemical leak occurs, ammonia released from such a system will expand rapidly, making it difficult to contain.
Among other issues, the inspection identified excessive ice build up, creating the potential for system damage and in some cases encasing valves, making it difficult, if not impossible, to close them in the event of an emergency. The inspection also identified significant corrosion of pipes and missing drain valve plugs, making ammonia release more likely.
Oregon OSHA previously conducted an accident investigation at the Milwaukie location in 2007, after two employees were sent to the hospital following an ammonia compressor explosion. As a result of that inspection, which was limited in scope, 18 violations were issued.
"Protecting workers from highly hazardous chemicals should be the result of a credible program of inspections, hazard identification, and preventive maintenance to ensure the system's integrity," Wood said. "The safety of the facility’s workers must not be left to chance."
Are you reviewing the safety in your facility? Get the Graphic Products Ammonia Pipe Marking Guide to help ensure your facility is safe and fully code compliant. Need to get your labeling updated? No other label and sign printer comes close to delivering the quality results you get from a DuraLabel PRO 300. With the DuraLabel PRO 300 you get the job done, and get it done right... efficiently, with quality durable labels & signs, and economically. Call 1-888-326-9244 today.
Health Division (Oregon OSHA) has fined Americold Logistics a total of $740,400 for extensive safety and health violations found during a Sept. 16, 2009 inspection at the company’s Milwaukie facility. By not having proper safeguards in place to contain ammonia, the company was putting workers in serious danger of injury or death due to a major chemical release or explosion, Oregon OSHA found.
"Ammonia carries significant risks to workers, particularly in large quantities," said Michael Wood, Oregon OSHA administrator. "Due to the size of this facility, there is the potential for a large-scale release."
Oregon OSHA cited Americold Logistics, a national refrigerated warehouse operation, for 10 willful violations, four serious repeat violations, and 22 other serious violations of the Oregon Safe Employment Act. The bulk of the violations are related to the company’s system for handling the hazardous chemical anhydrous ammonia, which is common in commercial warehouses and can be explosive. Ammonia can also cause severe alkaline chemical burns to skin, eyes, and the respiratory system. If a chemical leak occurs, ammonia released from such a system will expand rapidly, making it difficult to contain.
Among other issues, the inspection identified excessive ice build up, creating the potential for system damage and in some cases encasing valves, making it difficult, if not impossible, to close them in the event of an emergency. The inspection also identified significant corrosion of pipes and missing drain valve plugs, making ammonia release more likely.
Oregon OSHA previously conducted an accident investigation at the Milwaukie location in 2007, after two employees were sent to the hospital following an ammonia compressor explosion. As a result of that inspection, which was limited in scope, 18 violations were issued.
"Protecting workers from highly hazardous chemicals should be the result of a credible program of inspections, hazard identification, and preventive maintenance to ensure the system's integrity," Wood said. "The safety of the facility’s workers must not be left to chance."
Are you reviewing the safety in your facility? Get the Graphic Products Ammonia Pipe Marking Guide to help ensure your facility is safe and fully code compliant. Need to get your labeling updated? No other label and sign printer comes close to delivering the quality results you get from a DuraLabel PRO 300. With the DuraLabel PRO 300 you get the job done, and get it done right... efficiently, with quality durable labels & signs, and economically. Call 1-888-326-9244 today.
Labels: OSHA Fines, safety
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=4187559459995990331;0 comments |
links to this post
OSHA Proposes $233,500 In Fines Against Long Island Store
OSHA has cited Home Goods (Commack, Long Island, NY) for 16 alleged violations of workplace safety standards. The retailer faces a total of $233,500 in proposed fines, chiefly for exit access, fire and crushing hazards.
Responding to an employee complaint, OSHA found exit routes obstructed by stock and equipment, an exit route too narrow for passage, stacked material that prevented employees from identifying the nearest exit, blocked access to fire extinguishers, workers not trained in fire extinguisher use and boxes stored in unstable 8-foot high tiers.
OSHA had cited Home Goods in 2006 and 2007 for similar conditions at the company's Mount Olive, N.J., and Somers, N.Y., locations. As a result of these recurring conditions, OSHA issued the company five repeat citations, with $200,000 in proposed fines, for the hazards at the Commack store.
"It's been 99 years since the fire at The Triangle Shirtwaist Co. in New York City took the lives of nearly 150 workers and almost 19 years since two workers were killed when they were unable to exit the McCrory's store in Huntington Station, N.Y., during a fire," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "Blocked fire exits can be deadly. It is that simple."
OSHA's Commack inspection identified additional hazards, including a defective fire alarm box, a missing exit sign, electrical hazards and inadequate chemical hazard communication. These conditions resulted in nine serious citations, with $32,500 in fines. OSHA issues serious citations when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known. Finally, the store was issued one other-than-serious citation, with a $1,000 fine, for not providing injury and illness logs.
"There can be no delay in exiting a workplace during a fire or other emergency when the difference between escape and injury or death can be measured in seconds," said Michaels. "Employers must ensure that exit routes are unobstructed at all locations."
"One means of preventing recurring hazards is for employers to establish an effective comprehensive workplace safety and health program through which involve their employees in proactively evaluating, identifying and eliminating hazards," said Robert Kulick, OSHA's regional administrator in New York.
A fact sheet covering emergency exit routes is available at http://www.safe-workplace.com/osha-safety/emergency-exit-routes-osha-factsheet.pdf.
Responding to an employee complaint, OSHA found exit routes obstructed by stock and equipment, an exit route too narrow for passage, stacked material that prevented employees from identifying the nearest exit, blocked access to fire extinguishers, workers not trained in fire extinguisher use and boxes stored in unstable 8-foot high tiers.
OSHA had cited Home Goods in 2006 and 2007 for similar conditions at the company's Mount Olive, N.J., and Somers, N.Y., locations. As a result of these recurring conditions, OSHA issued the company five repeat citations, with $200,000 in proposed fines, for the hazards at the Commack store.
"It's been 99 years since the fire at The Triangle Shirtwaist Co. in New York City took the lives of nearly 150 workers and almost 19 years since two workers were killed when they were unable to exit the McCrory's store in Huntington Station, N.Y., during a fire," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "Blocked fire exits can be deadly. It is that simple."
OSHA's Commack inspection identified additional hazards, including a defective fire alarm box, a missing exit sign, electrical hazards and inadequate chemical hazard communication. These conditions resulted in nine serious citations, with $32,500 in fines. OSHA issues serious citations when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known. Finally, the store was issued one other-than-serious citation, with a $1,000 fine, for not providing injury and illness logs.
"There can be no delay in exiting a workplace during a fire or other emergency when the difference between escape and injury or death can be measured in seconds," said Michaels. "Employers must ensure that exit routes are unobstructed at all locations."
"One means of preventing recurring hazards is for employers to establish an effective comprehensive workplace safety and health program through which involve their employees in proactively evaluating, identifying and eliminating hazards," said Robert Kulick, OSHA's regional administrator in New York.
A fact sheet covering emergency exit routes is available at http://www.safe-workplace.com/osha-safety/emergency-exit-routes-osha-factsheet.pdf.
Labels: OSHA Citations, OSHA Fines, OSHA Inspections
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=3822845512587362080;0 comments |
links to this post
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Respirator Safety - Using Respirators
This is a second new OSHA video. It provides basic training on the use of respirators. This video is also available on YouTube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzpz5fko-fg. It is available in English and Spanish.
Labels: PPE, Safety Training, safety videos
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=7507615501815283670;0 comments |
links to this post
The Difference Between Respirators and Surgical Masks
A new training video from OSHA shows the difference between respirators and face masks. It also discusses how a face mask is used to prevent the spread of flu. This video is available on YouTube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovSLAuY8ib8
Labels: hospital safety, Industrial Health, PPE, Safety Training, safety videos
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=5780005626399731892;0 comments |
links to this post
Friday, January 08, 2010
National Safety Council Invites Applicants for 2010 Robert W. Campbell Award
The National Safety Council invites businesses around the world to apply for the 2010 Robert W. Campbell Award, the world's pre-eminent award recognizing excellence in business performance, employee safety and health, and environmental stewardship. The 2010 winners will be announced at NSC's Congress & Expo, Oct. 3-8 in San Diego.
"The Campbell Award recognizes companies that demonstrate that environmental, health and safety (EHS) management is an essential element in achieving operational excellence and financial success," said Janet Froetscher, president & CEO of NSC. "Campbell Award winners prove that integrated EHS systems reduce workplace injuries and deaths, improve the bottom line, and motivate and inspire others."
Awards are presented in two categories: Businesses with more than 1,000 employees and businesses with less than 1,000 employees. Winners are selected by an international panel of experts in academia, government, labor and management. These experts provide each applicant with a written evaluation report for further improvement. Winning Campbell case studies also are discussed in boardrooms and classrooms worldwide.
Past winners include Noble Corp., Johnson & Johnson, Alcan Inc., DynMcDermott Petroleum Operations Co., The Bahrain Petroleum Co., Fluor Hanford, Gulf Petrochemical Industries Co. and Schneider Electric North America.
The Campbell Award is named for Robert W. Campbell, an early safety advocate and the first president of NSC. The award is sponsored by NSC and underwritten by ExxonMobil Foundation.
To download an application packet, please visit www.CampbellAward.org. Final submissions must be postmarked by May 31, 2010.
"The Campbell Award recognizes companies that demonstrate that environmental, health and safety (EHS) management is an essential element in achieving operational excellence and financial success," said Janet Froetscher, president & CEO of NSC. "Campbell Award winners prove that integrated EHS systems reduce workplace injuries and deaths, improve the bottom line, and motivate and inspire others."
Awards are presented in two categories: Businesses with more than 1,000 employees and businesses with less than 1,000 employees. Winners are selected by an international panel of experts in academia, government, labor and management. These experts provide each applicant with a written evaluation report for further improvement. Winning Campbell case studies also are discussed in boardrooms and classrooms worldwide.
Past winners include Noble Corp., Johnson & Johnson, Alcan Inc., DynMcDermott Petroleum Operations Co., The Bahrain Petroleum Co., Fluor Hanford, Gulf Petrochemical Industries Co. and Schneider Electric North America.
The Campbell Award is named for Robert W. Campbell, an early safety advocate and the first president of NSC. The award is sponsored by NSC and underwritten by ExxonMobil Foundation.
To download an application packet, please visit www.CampbellAward.org. Final submissions must be postmarked by May 31, 2010.
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=5224071070095494166;0 comments |
links to this post
National Association of Chemical Distributors Comments On GHS
The following is a press release from NACD:
At the end of last month the National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD) provided formal comments on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) to OSHA. NACD supports the overall goals of the GHS, which would not only improve hazard communications for employers and employees, but would also improve efficiencies throughout the entire chemical distribution industry. However, NACD does have concerns regarding the limited time chemical distribution companies have to make the transition towards the GHS.
Specifically, NACD has requested that OSHA grant chemical distributors an additional 18 months after the three year phase-in period to allow for the most efficient GHS implementation.
"There are many long-term benefits for employers, employees and the chemical distribution industry under OSHA's proposed GHS," said NACD President Chris Jahn. "But requiring small chemical distributors to make the transition at the same time as chemical suppliers could create problems, like a bottleneck in the supply chain. Small chemical distributors in particular just might not have the resources that larger suppliers have to complete the transition in time."
"If there is to be a real benefit for employers and employees, we need to make sure we get this transition right. An additional 18 months for chemical distribution companies to comply is in the interest of everyone who wants to see the GHS work effectively."
To view NACD's full comments to OSHA, visit www.nacd.com/advocacy/comments.aspx.
At the end of last month the National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD) provided formal comments on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) to OSHA. NACD supports the overall goals of the GHS, which would not only improve hazard communications for employers and employees, but would also improve efficiencies throughout the entire chemical distribution industry. However, NACD does have concerns regarding the limited time chemical distribution companies have to make the transition towards the GHS.
Specifically, NACD has requested that OSHA grant chemical distributors an additional 18 months after the three year phase-in period to allow for the most efficient GHS implementation.
"There are many long-term benefits for employers, employees and the chemical distribution industry under OSHA's proposed GHS," said NACD President Chris Jahn. "But requiring small chemical distributors to make the transition at the same time as chemical suppliers could create problems, like a bottleneck in the supply chain. Small chemical distributors in particular just might not have the resources that larger suppliers have to complete the transition in time."
"If there is to be a real benefit for employers and employees, we need to make sure we get this transition right. An additional 18 months for chemical distribution companies to comply is in the interest of everyone who wants to see the GHS work effectively."
To view NACD's full comments to OSHA, visit www.nacd.com/advocacy/comments.aspx.
Labels: GHS, global hazmat classification
posted by Steve Hudgik - Go to this Workplace Safety Post |
location.href=https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=30702648&postID=9149087225114853997;0 comments |
links to this post
