Complainant vs. E.C. Concrete Inc.
ECC is a commercial constructions contractor within the Florida region. The company has been conducting business in the Florida regions since 1992. The company employs a small group of approximately 40 employees. Its primary competitive advantage is its expertise within the multi-story commercial concrete work. ECC is the only company in the northeast Florida region that provides concrete work on multi-story buildings.
On January 15, 2012 ECC was hired to expand the Omni Amelia Island Plantation Resort within Fernandina Beach, Florida. The primary role of ECC was to provide concrete forming, pumping, placing, and finishing of 5 buildings. The project was scheduled to be take a year to complete, and in February 2013, work was concluded.
Prior to completion, an incident involving ECC staff occurred on August 1, 2012. According to records, an ECC staff member, with the assistance of a crane, placed approximately 12; 17-foot long shoring beams on the top of a scaffold. The beams rested on the 7th floor, with each weighting approximately 60 pounds. During the lift, the crane became entangled with the scaffold causing aluminum beams to fall, injuring two ECC employees on the first floor.
Due to the accident, an OSHA representative conducted an inspection of the accident site on August 1, 2012. The representative arrived at approximately 10AM to conduct his investigation. As a result of his investigations, OSHA issued numerous citations were issued to ECC for violations of working standards....
Citations were issued for failing to protect employees exposed to a fall hazard with a fall protection system. In addition, citations were given for exposing employees to falls hazards throughout the working environment. Citations totaled $14,280.00
The ECC contented that many of the OSHA violations did not occur. ECC also argued that many of the proposed solutions desired to make the work environment safer, would actually hinder safety performance. Presented below is the reasoning and applicable laws argued by both parties regarding the incident. Each compliant concludes with the court's decision and comments regarding the matter.
According to OSHA guidelines and applicable laws, the ECC was required to protect employees from tripping in or stepping into or through holes. Upon his investigation, the OSHA representative found on the 7th floor 12 inches wide, 20 inches and 8 inches deep. The hole according to ECC was used to place items into. The ECC also contended that the hole was within an area marked off with yellow warning tape. As a result of this contention, a violation was not established.
The OSHA representative also cited the ECC with failing to protect employees exposed to falling objects. The applicable law states that barricades should be in use in areas in which objects could potentially fall. In addition, contractors are required to keep objects far away from an edge in which they may fall. ECC stated that the beams in question did not merely fall over the edge but was propelled over the 7th floor onto the 1st…
Adoption of this practice will ensure that accidental energization of power lines from back feed electrical energy from generator. Hence this will help in safeguarding utility line workers from possible electrocution. The generators need to be turn off and allow them to cool prior to refuelling. (Occupation Safety and Health Administration, n. d.) (ii) Power lines: Safety measure are required to be adopted from overhead and underground power lines as
OSHA VPP Star Program This instruction defines and applies a revised OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health (OSPP) and defines Agency measures for executing this type of program. Also, this strategy will be used to benefit the company. This directive explains and utilizes a revised OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health (OSPP) with the company and sets forth events to instrument this program. This strategy
Once the amendment procedure has been implemented, the standard is published. At this stage legal challenges can again be mounted which can further delay the enactment of the proposed standard. As evidenced by the explanation of the process that OSHA must use in order to place a standard in place it is easy to understand the problem that OSHA has in affecting any expedient change in the workplace. The extended
Worker right-to-know laws protect workers by legally obliging employers to divulge information about workplace hazards. Hazard communication standards require employers to "comprehensively" teach employees about hazardous materials in the workplace via such methods as "container labeling and other forms of warning, material safety data sheets and employee training," ("Hazard Communication"). Workers' Compensation is, like OSHA, covered by the United States Department of Labor. However, the Department of Labor's Office of Worker's
OSHA According to the General Guidelines regarding Employee Heath and Safety, every employer "shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees." (OSHA, 2005) In this particular case the employer General Dynamics did technically follow these guidelines as set forth by OSHA, even though the
The hand-held grinders used in finishing could lead to massive injuries. Four Written Programs 1910.95: Occupational noise exposure. The written program outlining the guidelines to be posted and distributed is necessary to apprise the employees not only of the laws and regulations, but also of the potential risks to their hearing. 1910.104: Oxygen. The written program for oxygen use, such as the oxy-acetylene torch, requires proper placarding and operating instructions be posted