Archive for October, 2009

President Obama nominated David Michaels to head OSHA back in July. Although he hasn’t yet been confirmed, there are many signs on the horizon that OSHA will step up efforts to ensure compliance, including:

·         Increasing OSHA’s budget by over 10%, or $50.6 million, in part allowing them to hire more than 200 new employees.

·         Increase in construction enforcement. With economic stimulus incentives, including the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, OSHA will increase inspections to ensure compliance.

·         OSHA issued a proposed rule change here in September, to modify the HazCom (Hazard Communication Standard (HCS)) standard to align with the U.N.’s Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). The intent is to standardize chemical labelling due to shipments between countries.

·         On September 30, OSHA issued a Directive here to increase inspections and address the issue of under-recorded injuries and illnesses. This affects OSHA Form 300 reporting for companies of a certain size and in targeted industries.

·         Higher penalties to provide incentives for increased compliance. In addition, the appeal process is being reviewed to address the perception that the current process allows employers to unfairly reduce or eliminate incurred penalties.

·         There may once again be a push on passing an ergonomic standard to address repetitive motion injuries. This has been floating around for years, but may finally come to pass.

Many changes are on the way from OSHA and Cal/OSHA. Manufacturers are challenged by running their businesses in an already lean environment, and at the same time, make sure that they’re in compliance with all existing and new safety requirements. However, with increasing pressure due to serious injuries incurred on the job, OSHA is determined to step up their game to address the issue.

Is your Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) up to date? Didn’t know you needed one? If you need help getting your safety or training programs up to speed, give us a call or send us an email. We’re here to help you succeed.

Didn’t know that you needed to have a Lockout/Blockout program? Every California employer is required to have one under Cal/OSHA, the purpose of the program being to prevent worker injuries from equipment being energized while working on it.

In 2008, 404 employees were killed in California on the job and 5,071 were killed in the U.S. Although not all of these are the result of equipment being inadvertently energized, this is considered a major cause of fatal accidents by OSHA and Cal/OSHA and is entirely preventable. Despite this, many employers don’t have any lockout/blockout procedures in place, and for many that do, it’s not effectively being utilized.

Last week in Springfield Missouri, an operator was crushed to death while performing preventive maintenance on an injection molding press when another employee turned on the press while the operator was still in the machine. The employee thought, tragically, that the operator had walked away from the press and that the machine was clear.

In an article I read here, there were apparently some general issues about employee safety concerns at this particular plant. However, regardless of any other safety related concerns or complaints, the root cause of the accident in this case was not following a lockout/blockout procedure.

Having a procedure in place is one thing, but following it is an entirely different matter. There are many excuses used  by both employees and employers alike as to why a lockout/blockout program isn’t being used. Most of the reasons I’ve heard center around convenience and/or productivity issues.

The reality is that there may be a learning curve when a lockout/blockout procedure is being implemented, but once mastered, most equipment can be locked out with a negligible impact on productivity. Unfortunately, it often takes serious accidents like this one to get people to focus on working safely.

Do you have an lockout/blockout program and is it being utilized? If not, give us a call or send us an email. We’re here to help you succeed.

Texting while driving or “distracted driving” is getting a lot of press lately. California’s had its share of serious texting incidents, including last year’s Metrolink commuter train crash, and several recent car crashes attributed to distracted drivers.

As a result of impairment that’s shown by some studies to be worse than DUI, 10 states, including California, have banned texting while driving, while another 8 have laws that will be enacted between now and January 1st. Further, there is a movement in process to pass federal legislation banning texting while driving. Over the last 2 days, there was a Distracted Driver Summit in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the U.S. D.O.T. (Department of Transportation), featuring several U.S. Senators, including Senator Charles Schumer of NY, an outspoken advocate on the subject.

So, while all of this is going on, you may be thinking that texting while driving isn’t relevant to business, but that would not be correct. What would happen if a salesperson or another employee is involved in a texting accident while driving on company business? Would you be liable if company policies and procedures didn’t ban texting while driving? It’s already cost companies tens of millions of dollars (read here) and with today’s rapidly evolving and ever-changing technology, it’s important that policies and procedures are up to date with these changes in order to mitigate company risk.

Are your policies are procedures up to date? Need help getting your process documentation or company policies in place or aligned? If you do or you’re not sure where to start, give us a call or send us an email. We’re here to help you succeed.