Gilman Cheese Could Face $126700 Fine From OSHA

Gilman Cheese Corp. could have to pay $126,700 after OSHA cited them for 10 safety violations.

One of the violations involved an unguarded cheese packing and labeling machine, resulting in an employee having two fingers amputated. OSHA found that another worker suffered a similar amputation in January 2012.

“This tragedy could have been prevented if Gilman Cheese Corp. ensured adequate machine guarding and lockout/tagout procedures,” said Mark Hysell, OSHA’s area director in Eau Claire. “Too often, compromised safety procedures have tragic consequences. OSHA is committed to protecting workers on the job.”

Additionally, six serious violations involve inadequate guarding on a bench grinder and a portable grinder; lack of adequate emergency eyewash stations for workers handling corrosives; operating powered industrial vehicles without adequate training and inspections; using a flexible cord as permanent wiring; lack of an electrical safety program; and failing to provide training on bloodborne pathogens to those who cleaned equipment following the amputation. 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.

Two other-than-serious violations include obstructing a means of egress and using compressed air greater than 30 pounds per square inch for cleaning. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

Because of the hazards and the willful violations cited, Gilman Cheese Corp. has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law.

OSHA Cites Lumadue Excavating for Allegedly Exposing Workers to Trenching …

OSHA cited Lumadue Excavating LLC for 12 alleged safety violations involving trenching hazards and placed the company in the Severe Violator Enforcement Program.

OSHA initiated two inspections under a special emphasis program on trenching and excavation when inspectors found unprotected trenches at two different work sites. One of the trenches was 7 feet deep and the other more than 5 feet deep, according to the agency. Proposed penalties total $178,860.

“This company continues to take unnecessary safety risks by not utilizing the safeguards needed to protect workers from trenching hazards,” said Mark Stelmack, director of OSHA’s Wilkes-Barre office. Detailed information on safeguards for excavation and trenching can be found on OSHA’s Web site.

Two alleged willful violations, with $92,400 in penalties, involve failing to provide a protective system to prevent a trench cave-in. 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 repeat violations, with $73,920 in penalties, involve failing to instruct workers in the recognition and avoidance of hazardous conditions, provide a safe means of egress from trenches and ensure excavations are inspected daily by a competent person. A repeat violation is issued 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 5 years. Similar violations were cited in 2008 and 2009.

Because of the nature of the hazards and the violations cited, Lumadue has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP), which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law. OSHA’s SVEP focuses on recalcitrant employers that endanger workers by committing willful, repeat or failure-to-abate violations. Under the program, OSHA may inspect any of the employer’s facilities if it has reasonable grounds to believe there are similar violations.

Additionally, three serious violations, which carry $12,540 in penalties, were cited for the lack of reflective vests for workers exposed to vehicular traffic and excavated material not farther than 2 feet from the edge of the trench. A serious citation is issued 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.

Two other-than-serious violations, carrying no penalties, involve the lack of a written hazard communication program and material safety data sheets. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

Lumadue has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with Stelmack or contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Tom Ricker: Welcome to ND, the most dangerous state to work

BISMARCK — As of 2011, North Dakota became the most dangerous state in the country to work, holding the dubious honor of being No. 1 in deaths on the job.

According to the most recent statistics, fatalities in North Dakota workplaces are more than three times the national average.

With a total of eight federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration inspectors for the entire state, it would take OSHA nearly 93 years to inspect every work site.

And considering that oil and gas industry fatalities are some seven times higher than the rate for all industries, we shouldn’t be surprised that the oil boom has come with a hefty price-tag of an increase in death on the job.

Last year, right here in North Dakota, at least 34 of our hardworking sisters and brothers left for work one day and didn’t come home to their families. That’s 34 people whose deaths could have been prevented if their employers followed job safety requirements and put needed safeguards and protections in place.

Every day, people are suffering on the job due to workplace injuries from combustible dust explosions or exposure to well-known hazards such as asbestos and benzene. Then there are those who watch our children and take care of our homes, but who too often are mistreated by uncaring employers.

These occurrences are all too common, leaving workers powerless and affecting thousands of families.

Worse still are debilitating lung conditions such as silicosis, caused from exposure to silica dust.

Despite the fact we know how to prevent this and can easily implement straightforward protections, a new OSHA standard to protect workers from this harmful chemical is being blocked by industry opponents and continues to languish.

This is the reality in the United States today. And it’s our job to prevent these deaths and injuries by fighting for stronger standards, more oversight and stronger policies in North Dakota’s workplaces.

But these efforts to make the workplace safer have come under widespread attack by corporations that want to curb workers’ rights to speak out.

With false claims from business groups and those on the right that regulations kill jobs, enforcement has been weakened, budgets slashed and fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters here in North Dakota continue to be at risk.

We know the truth. We know that when working people in North Dakota fight back and voice our concerns for health and safety by demanding adequate regulations and policies, lives will be saved and everyone’s jobs will be safer.

Think about North Dakota’s teachers, nurses, firefighters and police officers: They can’t do their jobs if their budgets are at risk.

We also must take the time to remember our Latino and immigrant sisters and brothers, who disproportionately hold riskier jobs and continue to be at an increased risk of job fatalities. In 2010, the job fatality rate for Latino workers was 3.9 per 100,000 workers, compared with the overall rate of 3.5 per 100,000. Some 729 Latino workers lost their lives on the job.

Most of these deaths — 500 out of 729 — were among immigrant workers.

Employers continue to take advantage of immigrant workers, many of whom lack documents or are unable to speak up because of limited English proficiency or because they remain unaware of their rights as individuals working in the United States.

As we work to raise health and safety standards for all workers, comprehensive immigration reform remains a priority — because it is only through ensuring their equal rights that raising the standard of worker protections even is a possibility.

As we remember our fallen brothers and sisters in North Dakota, we call on our elected officials to do more and do better. All workers should be able to go to work and return home safe and sound to their loved ones, and no worker should have to sacrifice life, limbs or health to earn an honest day’s pay.

Ricker is president of the North Dakota AFL-CIO.

Tags:
op-ed column, north dakota, columns, opinion, updates, work, danger, death

More from around the web

Federal worker safety regulations should be enforced at small farms

To the Editor:

Too many of our nation’s workplaces are still hazardous to the health and safety of workers. Farming is the most hazardous of them all. On Feb. 5, an Ithaca man died from injuries he sustained when he became entangled in an auger-type device while working on a Tompkins County dairy farm.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that in 2011, there were 24 fatal work-related injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting. This was the highest fatality rate for any industry.

Despite this high fatality rate, agriculture is like the “wild west” when it comes to safety regulation because Congress has imposed special restrictions that exempt small- and medium-sized farms that employ 10 or fewer workers from enforcement of most federal health and safety rules.

So while almost any private sector worker in the United States knows that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is there with regulations, inspectors, penalties for violations and training requirements that it will enforce as needed, farm workers on small farms have no such guaranteed protections.

Though there are many responsible farm owners out there, how many of you would not drive faster on our nation’s highways if you knew no police-manned radar guns were lurking in the distance?

We need to get OSHA back into farm safety to ensure that all farm workers are fully protected. Tell your congressional representative to work to ensure that OSHA is enabled to enforce its regulations at all our nation’s workplaces, including small farms.

Carl Feuer
Ithaca

Goshen Fire Department fights OSHA

<!–

[component:byline]

–>

Goshen may appear to be a drowsy community. It currently has no supermarket, no gas station—indeed, few businesses at all in its center. With the exception of cars whizzing along busy Route 63 and Sharon Turnpike (Route 4), there is little sign of activity in Goshen. But the little town’s volunteer fire department has found itself at the center of a struggle that could affect the future of volunteer emergency services for communities across the state.

The Goshen Fire Department two years ago won a court battle with the Connecticut Department of Labor over whether Connecticut OSHA could inspect its operations. The state is now attempting to remedy that defeat by instituting legislation that would make volunteer fire departments “employers” and would make them subject to CONN-OSHA. It is an action not welcomed by first responders, who see the state agency as being heavy-handed.

Last Friday, Peter Grusauskas of the Goshen Fire Department attended a meeting of the Litchfield Hills Council of Elected Officials asking that agency to send a letter opposing the raised bill, which has been referred to the General Assembly’s Committee on Labor and Employees. Similar actions have been taken by a number of other agencies in the state, including the Volunteer Committee of the Department of Health, which represents all volunteers in the state, the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities and the Council of Small Towns.

“There is a grassroots uprising of opposition from the Saybrook area and that COG [council of governments] is looking at it. We’re hoping that the legislative body will be responsive,” Mr. Grusauskas said.

Mr. Grusauskas said he believes the worst consequences of the proposed legislation will be an additional layer of “unfriendly” bureaucracy that volunteer emergency services will have to deal with. “To begin with, we have to understand that the legislation empowers the state to have oversight over private entity companies,” he said in a phone interview. “We already answer to other agencies that have oversight, such as the Department of Health. We’re not out there on our own. This is just one more layer—redundant in many cases.”

He refers to the “huge cost” of the legislation in terms of the stress it places on volunteer fire and ambulance services. “We’ve seen that in Morris, New Hartford and Kent [which all were subject to CONN-OSHA inspections]. It tears services apart when they fall under the scrutiny of the state. The state is not the friendly place it should be. I understand they are the police—how friendly can they be? But aren’t we on the same side?”

In Kent, assistant chief Gary Hock recalled CONN-OSHA’s visit two years ago after someone made an anonymous complaint. “It was done very rudely, I guess you could say,” Mr. Hock said. “They probably could have worked with us better. We’re all volunteers, after all. It was basically record keeping, which we cleaned up.”

Mr. Hock explained that in some cases the fire department was making required inspections but had only informal policies in place. “There was medical clearance stuff, fitness testing,” he recalled. “We do fitness testing, but we didn’t have a policy on it. We got our hands slapped for that. Everyone had done air pack tests, but we didn’t have a book showing we did it every month. There were five things—at one point we were up to $6,000 in fines.”

Even though the fire department quickly remedied its shortcomings and asked that the fines be waived, it was, in the end, fined something under $2,000.

Despite the experience, Mr. Hock said he is not totally opposed to CONN-OSHA inspections. “We’ve had OSHA come back since and went over training issues,” he said. “We were OK, but we want to make sure we do everything right. If you call them voluntarily, you have to do what they say but they can’t fine you.” Continued…

• 1
• 2
• 3
• See Full Story

Is Goshen a ‘Mouse That Roared’ in Fight Over OSHA and Fire Departments?

<!–

[component:byline]

–>

Goshen may appear to be a drowsy community. It currently has no supermarket, no gas station—indeed, few businesses at all in its center. With the exception of cars whizzing along busy Route 63 and Sharon Turnpike (Route 4), there is little sign of activity in Goshen. But the little town’s volunteer fire department has found itself at the center of a struggle that could affect the future of volunteer emergency services for communities across the state.

The Goshen Fire Department two years ago won a court battle with the Connecticut Department of Labor over whether Connecticut OSHA could inspect its operations. The state is now attempting to remedy that defeat by instituting legislation that would make volunteer fire departments “employers” and would make them subject to CONN-OSHA. It is an action not welcomed by first responders, who see the state agency as being heavy-handed.

Last Friday, Peter Grusauskas of the Goshen Fire Department attended a meeting of the Litchfield Hills Council of Elected Officials asking that agency to send a letter opposing the raised bill, which has been referred to the General Assembly’s Committee on Labor and Employees. Similar actions have been taken by a number of other agencies in the state, including the Volunteer Committee of the Department of Health, which represents all volunteers in the state, the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities and the Council of Small Towns.

“There is a grassroots uprising of opposition from the Saybrook area and that COG [council of governments] is looking at it. We’re hoping that the legislative body will be responsive,” Mr. Grusauskas said.

Mr. Grusauskas said he believes the worst consequences of the proposed legislation will be an additional layer of “unfriendly” bureaucracy that volunteer emergency services will have to deal with.

“To begin with, we have to understand that the legislation empowers the state to have oversight over private entity companies,” he said in a phone interview. “We already answer to other agencies that have oversight, such as the Department of Health. We’re not out there on our own. This is just one more layer—redundant in many cases.”

He refers to the “huge cost” of the legislation in terms of the stress it places on volunteer fire and ambulance services. “We’ve seen that in Morris, New Hartford and Kent [which all were subject to CONN-OSHA inspections]. It tears services apart when they fall under the scrutiny of the state. The state is not the friendly place it should be. I understand they are the police—how friendly can they be? But aren’t we on the same side?”

In Kent, assistant chief Gary Hock recalled CONN-OSHA’s visit two years ago after someone made an anonymous complaint. “It was done very rudely, I guess you could say,” Mr. Hock said. “They probably could have worked with us better. We’re all volunteers, after all. It was basically record keeping, which we cleaned up.”

Mr. Hock explained that in some cases the fire department was making required inspections but had only informal policies in place. “There was medical clearance stuff, fitness testing,” he recalled. “We do fitness testing, but we didn’t have a policy on it. We got our hands slapped for that. Everyone had done air pack tests, but we didn’t have a book showing we did it every month. There were five things—at one point we were up to $6,000 in fines.”

Even though the fire department quickly remedied its shortcomings and asked that the fines be waived, it was, in the end, fined something under $2,000. Continued…

• 1
• 2
• 3
• See Full Story

Call for employers to adhere to safety regulations at work places

Employers in the country have been urged to adhere to security and safety regulations at work places.
The call was made by the Occupational Health and Safety Authority (OSHA) executive director Dr Akwalina Kayumba, during a meeting with employers from health, industry and agricultural sectors.

According to Mr Kayumba, many employees have been suffering from various diseases which are mainly caused by working in difficult conditions.

He called for employers to improve working conditions as well as observe safety regulations at their work places.
“This isn’t only about the employers but is also about employees; they should know their rights so as to demand them,” said Dr Kayumba.

Speaking during the meeting Ms Upendo Mbingu, challenged OSHA to provide civic education to employees and employers so as to improve safety at work places. (Peter Saramba)

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

Louisiana beats national injury rate

The bureau reported there were an estimated 32,500 private-industry nonfatal work-related injuries in 2011, a decrease from the 34,800 injuries in 2010. Compared to the national average of 105.2 cases per 10,000 full-time workers requiring days away from work, Louisiana stood at 83.5 incidents.

“A lot of the credit is owed to the employers,” said Wes Hataway, director of the state Office of Workers’ Compensation Administration. “They have just placed a high importance on safety. Not to say that no one else around the nation does. Louisiana has just done a great job.”

The department collects workplace safety data in partnership with the bureau and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to try to ensure the safety of employees around the state. It sends out surveys and follow-up surveys to all employers. It also gathers the information it receives from consultations by the other organizations to dissect and pinpoint ways to improve the workforce.

There is also a Worker’s Compensation Advisory Council that works to help the state avoid injuries and illnesses.

“The council itself is a group of interested parties and stake holders who work mostly in a collaborative way to improve the state’s ability to effectively manage worker’s compensation in the interest of all parties concern,” said council member Ray Peters. “Our job is to make sure we have the right policies in place to make sure that if workers do get injured, we can return them back to work.”

Peters, vice president of human resources and marketing for lumber company RoyOMartin in Alexandria, is one of 17 members on the council.

Consultation supervisor B.K. Tomlin of OSHA said the main thing they look for are which positions or job descriptions most people get hurt in and what types of injuries they sustain.

“We are looking at what people are doing when they get hurt and exactly what types of activities are involved. We like to look for things that will point us in the right direction to help us reduce the number of injuries,” Tomlin said.

In the bureau’s reports, it shows sprains, strains and tears were the most common injuries in Louisiana, and Hataway said this is true. It’s not unique to any particular industry but common among all industries.

The top three private-sector industries with the highest incidences in the state include building material, garden equipment and supplies dealers at 6.2, hospitals and nursing at 5.8 and residential care facilities at 5.5. Both Hataway and Tomlin said sprains, strains and tears are very common in nursing and residential-care facilities.

“I know on our side, it’s nursing homes, and it’s because workers are handing residents. They have to pick them up, bring them to the dinner table. They have to bath them. Injuries there are most common nationwide,” Tomlin said.

Injuries and illnesses can come about a number of ways. It can be because of an employer not making sure the work environment is safe enough, an unexpected malfunction or because employees are not behaving in the manner they have been taught. An illness in this case is described as something that results from an exposure. That includes hearing loss, respiratory problems, skin rashes, coming into contact with something poisonous and other illnesses that might occur and do not fit in to the other categories.

“We can do a very good job of engineering out hazards in the workplace,” Peters said. “We do a lot of work on the behavioral aspect of what workers do. A lot of work has been done to help workers choose their attitude and behavior. They have the accountability to man themselves.”

If someone is not properly trained or behaves poorly, an injury or illness can occur. Peters suggested most workers should ask themselves, “What is it about what I am about to do that can hurt me?” and have them think about that.

Corporate Safety Manager Terrell Brooks of Morris P. Hebert Inc. in Houma said OSHA has been a vital source for helping to improve Hebert’s workplace safety.

Morris P. Hebert has been chosen to participate in OSHA’s SHARP program since 2005. SHARP stands for safety and health achievements and recognition. It’s a voluntary initiative that some companies participate in to improve workplace safety and health. OSHA sets the guidelines and criteria.

“It’s helped improve our injury rates, helped us become more proactive in dealing with workplace safety initiatives or incident prevention programs and helped us get employers more involved,” Brooks said.

Some of the things the company does to drive down its incident rate are conducting job safety analysis, issuing work permits before an employee goes to work in certain environments, hosting daily safety meetings with employees, training employees, conducting inspections of the workplace, correcting any hazards and giving employees a chance to voice their opinions or concerns.

“I would say our rates just as a whole have been on a decrease probably in the last seven years. It’s been contributed to our efforts,” Brooks said. “One goal that we have is to continually improve.”

Brooks said a company can never say it’s the best it can be. Employers have to constantly work to improve their workplace safety.

Staff Writer Sable LeFrere can be reached at 985-857-2204 or at sable.lefrere@houmatoday.com.

Home Depot Violates Electrical Safety Regulations

Home Depot Violates Electrical Safety Regulations

The hardware chain is facing a $69,300 penalty for violating safety standards in a Chicago location.

• Oct 01, 2012

If someplace would have its electrical wiring down, it should be The Home Depot. Not so fast. The hardware megastore was fined by OSHA for lacking in the electrical safety department.

Resulting in a violation worth $69,300, Home Depot is facing repercussions for exposing employees to electrical hazards at a location in Chicago.

A complaint was filed against the company for blocked electrical equipment, in violation of OSHA’s requirement that all electrical equipment must be marked with explanations of voltage and purpose. Additionally, the equipment should not be obstructed.

This is not the first time that Home Depot has faced this kind of citation. Similar violations were cited in 2009 and 2010 in other locations.

“The Home Depot has a responsibility to protect the safety of its employees by minimizing exposure to hazards, such as by clearly marking electrical boxes,” said Diane Turek, director of OSHA’s Chicago North Area Office in Des Plaines,in a statement on the agency’s website.

Cintas plant awarded for outstanding safety record

Cintas Corporation’s Macomb facility received the CET Silver Award from Michigan OSHA (MIOSHA). The plant was recognized for working a year without a lost time accident. Among other achievements, the Macomb plant:

• Developed and implemented a comprehensive safety and health management system;
• Established a health and safety committee with employee and management participation;
• Developed an employee training system; and
• Worked diligently to change workplace culture to reflect the importance of job safety.

The Macomb site employs 118 workers. Cintas provides employee uniforms, restroom supplies, safety products, and other services to some 700,000 businesses. The award is given by the state’s Consultation, Education, and Training (CET) Division.

MIOSHA Deputy Director Bart Pickelman noted, “Companies that establish an integrated safety and health system reap the benefits of significantly reducing their injury and illness rates. Reducing these rates not only protects employees—it has a healthy impact on a company’s bottom line.”