In slightly over two months, the agency has fined seven USPS facilities all over the country almost $2.3 million for various safety violations.

April 30: A Providence, R.I., facility is hit for $558,000, primarily for electrical and lockout/tagout hazards. Employee complaints precipitated the investigation.

May 10: A Bedford Park, Ill., processing center is assessed $210,000 for electrical and protective equipment hazards. Again, employee complaints led to the inquiry.

May 10: A Denver distribution center is fined $217,000. OSHA said employees were testing live electrical equipment and without adequate training or PPE.

June 8: A Pittsburgh processing facility is billed $299,500 for electrical hazards, inadequate training, failure to protect employees from arc-flash hazards and electrical current, and failure to use appropriate safety signs and symbols.

June 8: On the other side of the state, two Philadelphia facilities are fined $497,000. OSHA found inadequately trained employees working without PPE.

June 21: In Portland, Ore., a processing and distribution center is fined $77,500 for electrical hazards, lockout/tagout violations and inadequate PPE.  Employee complaints led to the investigation.

June 28:  A Scarborough, Me., facility is fined a whopping $430,000 for exposing workers to electrical hazards, arc flashes and arc blasts.

With the U.S. Postal Service already having trouble making ends meet, this new trend can’t be helping.

But OSHA’s message seems clear: No matter how tight money is, scrimping on safety is never acceptable.

The woman faces 50 felony counts of grand theft, burglary, diversion of labor funds and theft by false pretenses.

During the past six months, police in Clovis, CA, say the woman was suspected of bilking seven companies and conducting fake training classes for a fee to clear up alleged Cal-OSHA violations.

One company called police after the woman allegedly collected $35,000 as a fine for alleged safety violations.

OSHA inspectors never collect money for citations on site.

A real OSHA inspector visiting a company would:

• Present credentials which include a photo and serial number
• Explain why OSHA selected the workplace for inspection and describe the scope of the inspection during an opening conference
• Conduct the walkaround inspection, and
• Hold a closing conference to discuss findings, but certainly not ask for immediate payment.

You can read more about OSHA inspections here.

(Corrects error regarding accused woman in previous form.)

The question is more important these days because OSHA is cracking down on underreporting of occupational injuries.

A report issued in November by the Government Accountability Office showed some employers underreport injuries to reduce insurance premiums and workers fail to report injuries because they fear being fired.

In the wake of that report, OSHA unleashed a National Emphasis Program on recordkeeping. The targets: companies in high-injury industries that report much lower than average injury rates.

An article in Business Week highlights this current situation.

Example: AK Steel reduced its annual injuries by 96% from 1994 to 2009.

It’s that type of injury improvement that raises the eyebrows of some workplace safety experts. “It is extremely unlikely that injury rates would plummet like this,” said Susan Baker, a scholar of workplace injuries at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

AK Steel had good cause to improve its safety practices: 10 workers died at company plants from 1993 to 1996, leading to a $1.9 million OSHA fine.

But some former AK Steel workers tell Business Week that injuries appear to be down because workers who report them are penalized with time off without pay.

An AK Steel spokesman says, “We make no apologies for our safety program and all of its components, including discipline.” At the same time, the company considers not reporting an injury an “extraordinarily serious offense.”

How do you hold employees responsible for safety rules through discipline, yet make sure you don’t discourage reporting of workplace injuries? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.

Of the 541 Congressional offices, 154 (64 Senators, 90 House members) were found to be 100% in compliance with OSHA regulations, according to a report in The Hill.

Congress has improved the workplace safety of its offices since last year when only 37 (7%) were in total compliance.

The number of violations per office has fallen as well, from 8.15 last year to 1.75 this year.

Another change: The violations used to be more serious, such as blocked sprinkler heads, stacks of paper on heaters, blocked fire doors and electrical outlets with exposed live wires.

Now the infractions are more likely to be too many extension cords or blocked electrical outlets.

Why the improvements? The Hill reports part of the reason is that members of Congress want to be perceived favorably by voters in their districts.

“They also want to send a message to employers and employees in their states and districts that Congress will live by the laws that apply to employers in the private sector,” said Peter Eveleth with the Congressional Office of Compliance (OC).

The OC’s goal: All offices will have zero violations.

What’s your reaction to these statistics about workplace safety in Congressional offices? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

In the first year of the Obama administration, OSHA was busy handing out fines the likes of which hadn’t been seen for eight years. Here’s our rundown of 10 significant fines from the last 12 months, and what they mean for businesses:

1. OSHA issues largest fine ever: $87.4 million to BP. This fine demonstrates OSHA’s intent to check up on companies once they’ve made serious safety mistakes. The agency evaluated BP’s progress after the 2005 fire and explosion that killed 15 people and injured 170 more at its Texas City, TX refinery. OSHA issued 270 “notifications of failure to abate” and identified 439 new willful violations at the plant.
2. Two executives face prison time and huge fines in deaths of five workers. Phillipe Goutagny and James Thompson, executives with RPI Coating, each face 2.5 years in prison and a fine up to $1.25 million if convicted. On Oct. 2, 2007, vapor from a solvent ignited inside a tunnel at a hydroelectric plant in Colorado. Workers survived the blast but were overcome by smoke and fumes and died of asphyxiation. OSHA says it will work more closely with the Justice Department in cases like these to bring criminal charges against executives with penalties that include prison time.
3. OSHA wastes no time in using new per-employee citations, issues $1.2 million fine. G.S. Robbins & Co. of St. Louis, MO, was hit with 21 egregious willful citations for hazardous chemical handling. Each citation was on a per-instance basis. Even during this period of difficult economic recovery, OSHA won’t hesitate to use per-instance, per-employee fines to hike total fine amounts. This wasn’t the only instance in which OSHA used per-instance citations in 2009 (see item #7 below).
4. Company hit with $1.14 million fine following employee complaint. Are the big fines relegated only to incidents involving deaths or multiple serious injuries? Hardly. OSHA began a December 2008 inspection at Milk Specialties in Whitehall, WI, in response to an employee complaint. Willful citations were issued for the employer’s failure to comply with OSHA’s confined space and lockout/tagout regulations. OSHA is taking employee complaints seriously.
5. After two similar incidents, owner and manager go to jail. ANC Roofing of Santa Rosa, CA, owner Kenneth Alton pleaded no contest to failing to protect employees from a hazard. He was sentenced to nine months in jail and a $248,000 fine. Supervisor Robert McAfee pleaded no contest to one misdemeanor violation and was sentenced to 30 days in jail. On May 11, 2006, an ANC employee backed into an unguarded skylight and fell 21 feet to his death. Four months later, another ANC employee suffered major head trauma when he fell 19 feet from an unprotected skylight.
6. OSHA fines Wal-Mart $7,000 for worker trampling incident. A Wal-Mart worker was trampled to death by a crowd of 2,000 shoppers on the day after Thanksgiving in 2008. OSHA said Wal-Mart should have recognized that its employees were exposed to being crushed by the crowd based on previous experience. Wal-Mart fought the fine. OSHA used the General Duty Clause to issue the fine and has said it will use the GDC in similar situations where safety was compromised but a specific regulation wasn’t violated.
7. Company faces $1.09 million OSHA fine for 202 willful violations. OSHA didn’t really need anyone’s permission to start issuing per-instance fines (see item #3 above), but it got the go-ahead in the form of a decision from the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC). The appeals panel ruled OSHA properly cited Smalis Painting Co. on a per-employee basis for violations of the lead-in-construction regulations, in connection with a project near Pittsburgh, PA. OSHA monitored six Smalis employees for lead exposure. Based on that data, OSHA issued violations for all employees who would have been exposed to the same hazards.
8. OSHA is getting companies to agree to implement safety and health improvements above what’s required by regulations. A-1 Excavating of Bloomer, WI, agreed to make numerous changes in its work processes in exchange for lowering fines from almost $900,000 to $470,000. A-1 has to hire a full-time safety director, develop and implement site-specific safety and health plans for all major projects, identify all job sites to OSHA before work begins for the next three years, reduce the salary of job superintendents and project managers who fail to comply with OSHA requirements, and retain a third-party safety consultant.
9. Cintas agrees to pay $3 million in fines and to comply with other conditions. In some cases, it hasn’t been an either-or situation between fines and strict safety improvements. After a worker was killed when he fell onto an unguarded conveyor and was dragged into a 300-degree industrial dryer, Cintas agreed to the huge fine and to retain a team of independent experts to develop permanent fixes and review interim controls. Cintas also agreed to hire additional safety staff, conduct more frequent internal safety inspections, and establish new systems to examine employee complaints.
10. A construction company agrees to pay $750,000 in fines and cut the pay of unsafe supervisors. Broadway Concrete of New York, NY, agreed to reduce the salaries of senior job superintendents who failed to comply with job safety practices. Broadway also agreed to hire a full-time corporate safety director, develop a new corporate safety plan, and provide OSHA with information on major projects and access to all job sites for the next four years.

What do you think of OSHA’s recent enforcement tactics? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

That’s the warning from the new head of OSHA, David Michaels.

In a speech to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Michaels said, while creating green jobs is great, he’s concerned that “employers who race into this green economy without paying attention to worker safety will blunder into many preventable injuries and deaths.”

Michaels warns that when he hears:

• weatherization and renovation, OSHA sees exposure to lead and asbestos
• insulation, OSHA thinks exposure to toxic materials like isocyanates
• rooftop solar power, OSHA sees fall hazards, and
• wind energy, OSHA worries about lockout hazards.

For advice on keeping green jobs safe, click here.

Last week, OSHA announced a National Emphasis Program (NEP) on recordkeeping.

The agency wants to find out whether the nation’s workplace injury rate is really at its lowest point ever as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

BLS uses reports issued by employers to tabulate the injury rate.

OSHA’s targets in this NEP: Facilities in high-injury industries that have much lower-than-average injuries. The theory: Some of these employers are under-reporting injuries.

OSHA told it’s inspectors on this NEP to ask employees about their company’s safety incentive programs, specifically if they may discourage reporting of injuries. The inspectors will interview a minimum of 10 employees, more if the facility has over 100 workers.

Inspectors have been told to obtain copies of these incentive programs and note their existence in their reports.

While the guidelines say most recordkeeping violations uncovered through this NEP will be classified as “other-than-serious” violations, the citations may also be raised to the willful level when inspectors can document deliberate under-reporting.

Existence of incentive programs may be used to back up raising a recordkeeping violation to the willful level.

What’s your theory on safety incentive programs? How can a company develop an incentive program that reduces injuries yet doesn’t discourage reporting of incidents? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.

Our current Quick Poll asks about safety incentive programs. You can take our Quick Poll on our home page.

The report comes from the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE). The latest incident occurred earlier this month at a market in San Francisco.

What happened: A man represented himself as a DLSE investigator and sought cash in lieu of issuing citations.

An investigator will never request payment in lieu of citations or ask for money onsite, according to California state officials. If an investigator requests payment, employers should call the Division of Labor Standards at 415-703-4810. The Division will then contact local authorities.

Before an inspection, a real Labor Standards investigator will:

• identify him or herself using state ID and a business card
• discuss the employer’s rights and responsibilities during the inspection, and
• explain what happens during the inspection.

A federal OSHA factsheet on what to expect during an inspection can be downloaded here (PDF).

Starting this week, a group of 10 inspectors will be monitored. By the end of this month, all 379 will be tracked, according to The New York Times.

The tracking program is partially due to the case of former inspector Edward Marquette. He was charged last year with faking a report that he inspected a tower crane in response to a complaint. Authorities said he never visited the site, and 11 days later, the crane fell, killing seven people.

Officials have said it was unlikely the missed inspection had any relation to the incident.

Marquette has pleaded not guilty to charges. He also allegedly filed false inspection reports for cranes at two other sites.

A Buildings Department official said the agency doesn’t believe there are widespread reporting problems by inspectors. The monitoring system will also allow supervisors to dispatch the closest inspector to a building-related emergency and locate inspectors who lose contact with the department during hazardous inspections.

The union representing most inspectors doesn’t like the plan.

However, one inspector quoted by the Times said, “If you are where you’re supposed to be, you’ve got nothing to fear.” Inspectors will only be monitored while they’re on duty. When an inspector’s shift ends, the tracker will be turned off.

So, what do you think? Do safety inspectors need to be monitored? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

OSHA has issued a directive that cancels focused inspections for general industry for now. Focused inspections will continue in the construction and maritime industries.

The agency is in the process of considering a new Annual Operating Plan that will change the General Industry Inspection protocol.

OSHA developed guidelines for its inspectors to conduct focused inspections in the construction and maritime industries in 1994 and 1998, respectively. The agency says focused inspections allow it to use its resources more efficiently.

Focused inspections primarily address the predominant hazards of the industry. Comprehensive inspections look at a wide range of potential hazards.

In 2008, focused inspections were extended to general industry.

Information on focused inspections for the construction industry is here. Click here for information about the maritime program.

OSHA’s intent, announced recently as part of a release about a new national emphasis program, is to spend the next year hitting as many facilities as possible. OSHA calls it a new approach for compliance officers: Ask a series of tough questions and quickly move on to the next facility.

But don’t mistake “quick” for “easy.”  The goal is to verify that written and implemented PSM programs are consistent.

And acting OSHA head Jordan Barab has made it clear that compliance with PSM standards is a top priority.

A recent Newsweek article, written by a small-business owner, addresses the proposed “Employee Free Choice Act” and the self-described paranoia he feels at the thought of having his company become unionized.

The author raises some interesting points about wages and benefits. And he expresses concern that OSHA is a lot more likely to come calling on companies where unions have either waged successful campaigns, or are hoping to.

But what about safety? Do unions make it easier or harder to keep employees safe? Do they fulfill the promise of promoting safer working conditions, or do they promote a counterproductive us-vs.-them attitude and make it tougher to get rid of unsafe employees?

Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.

For the last eight years, OSHA has de-emphasized recordkeeping inspections. That’s about to change.

OSHA is preparing a National Emphasis Program (NEP) on recordkeeping. Its targets:

• Companies in high-injury industries with low injury rates. OSHA will check to see that records match reality.
• Incentive programs that encourage employees not to report injuries. Example: The unit with the lowest injury rate for the quarter will win prizes or get a special financial reward.
• Disincentives to report injuries. Example: Workers who report injuries are disciplined or fired.

Speaking at the American Society of Safety Engineers’ (ASSE) Safety 2009 conference in San Antonio, acting OSHA administrator Jordan Barab said the agency isn’t opposed to incentive programs, as long as the incentives are for proactive measures.

Barab said he’s somewhat skeptical of behavioral programs that always blame workers for incidents and injuries.

In an interview with SafetyNewsAlert.com after his speech, Barab pointed to the 2005 BP Texas City, TX, disaster in which 15 employees were killed and 170 were injured in an explosion. Barab said the first thing BP did was to fire a bunch of workers “when that was only the tip of the iceberg,” according to an investigation by the U.S. Chemical Safety Board.

On another topic, Barab said OSHA isn’t eliminating the Voluntary Protection Program (VPP). However, he added that the days of OSHA forming alliances with various industry groups instead of enacting new or revising existing standards are over.

When will OSHA have a permanent administrator? Barab said at this point, it looks like it will be fall at the earliest. However, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has told Barab not to wait. When Barab took the position as interim head of OSHA, Solis told him to go full speed ahead on her workplace safety agenda, which includes vigorous enforcement and enactment of new standards. Barab will assume the No. 2 position at OSHA once a permanent administrator is confirmed.

Barab said OSHA will react quickly to injury trends, such as moving inspectors to Texas, starting in July, to counter the high number of construction fatalities in the state (see our earlier story here). “A SWAT team of OSHA inspectors will fan out over Texas,” Barab said, to visit sites in locales where construction fatalities and injuries have been a particular problem.

Check back with SafetyNewsAlert.com often this week for updates from the ASSE Safety 2009 conference.

“Make no mistake about it: The Department of Labor (DOL) is back in the enforcement business,” Solis told an audience of safety professionals in San Antonio, TX, attending Safety 2009.

She acknowledges that in these difficult economic times it’s more difficult for safety professionals to sell employee safety and health to their companies. For that reason, Solis said the agency wants to work with more companies to help them provide safer workplaces so that mothers and fathers can return home, uninjured, to their children each day.

But the current recession isn’t stopping OSHA and its parent department, DOL, from stepping up enforcement.

Solis noted that OSHA’s 2010 budget request calls for 130 more inspectors. In comments to reporters after her speech, Solis said, “I’d like to have more [inspectors], but we’re not in that position,” due to the economy.

The Secretary was asked about the lack of a permanent administrator for OSHA. Jordan Barab is the acting administrator and will assume the No. 2 position at the agency once a permanent head is confirmed. Solis expressed frustration with the U.S. Senate confirmation process. She noted that there are other nominees to DOL positions who have been in the pipeline for four months without being confirmed. She said it was important to have a new leader of OSHA, and that’s why Barab was appointed interim administrator, which doesn’t require Senate confirmation.

Solis said she hasn’t yet read the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that found deficiencies with OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program. She said she agrees with the concerns expressed by the GAO and by members of the House and Senate regarding OSHA’s enforcement capabilities.

The Secretary also took the opportunity during her speech in front of thousands of safety professionals in San Antonio to announce a new initiative to decrease construction fatalities and injuries in Texas. Since 2007, there have been 145 construction fatalities in Texas, a number Solis called “intolerable.”

Beginning in July, OSHA will increase the number of inspectors in Texas for a concentrated effort aimed at construction sites. If an inspector sees scaffold, fall, trenching or other hazards, they’re empowered to launch an immediate investigation.

Check back with SafetyNewsAlert.com often this week for updates from the ASSE Safety 2009 conference.

The just released Field Operations Manual (FOM) says to issue a citation classified as serious, OSHA must show that an employer knew about the existence of a hazard.

The FOM says an employer knew about a hazard if:

• the employer saw the condition
• an employee reported it
• an employee was previously injured by the hazard and the company knew about the injury
• the employer could have known about it if it had exercised reasonable diligence, or
• a supervisor knew about the hazard.

A serious violation must also have the substantial possibility for death or serious injury.

A link to download the FOM can be found here (free Adobe Acrobat Reader required).

The new Field Operations Manual replaces the Field Inspection Reference Manual published in 1994.

The most important section for companies is Chapter 3, Inspection Procedures.

The chapter includes:

• information on how inspectors choose their target companies
• the difference between comprehensive and partial inspections
• expectations at the pre-inspection conference
• review of a company’s own safety records (such as documentation of required training)
• the walk-around inspection itself
• the closing conference, and
• potential penalties.

You can download the manual for free here (document is a pdf, free Adobe Acrobat Reader required).

That’s the case with Phenix Lumber Co. in Phenix City, AL. OSHA has proposed $293,700 in penalties for 36 safety and health violations there.

For failing to correct five violations identified during a previous inspection, OSHA issued fines totaling $202,500. Those citations include failure to obtain audiograms for employees exposed to noise hazards, not implementing specific lockout/tagout procedures and lack of machine guards.

The other fines totaling $91,200 in penalties are for six repeat, seven serious and one other-than-serious violation. These include poor housekeeping of combustible dust, lack of safety signs, and using incorrect electrical and forklift equipment.

The company has 15 days to decide if it wants to contest any of the citations.

Since we started SafetyNewsAlert.com several months ago, we’ve heard from many readers that OSHA needs to hold employees as well as employers accountable for safety to reduce injuries and fatalities. Now, OSHA has taken steps with one company to do just that.

OSHA has fined 160 Broadway Corp., dba Broadway Concrete, $750,000 as part of a settlement agreement for 13 repeat violations involving fall hazards.

The amount of the fine is enough to get any company’s attention. But that’s not all Broadway agreed to.

Broadway has also agreed to reduce the salary of senior job superintendents who fail to comply with applicable OSHA and job safety practices.

So if these supervisors don’t enforce safety rules, their pay will get docked.

More costs than just a fine

Broadway will have to spend even more money as a result of this settlement. It’s also agreed to:

• Employ a full-time chief of construction operations and a corporate safety director to have authority over senior job superintendents in safety and health issues.
• Employ a full-time site safety director on each large project and have a safety director inspect smaller projects at least once a week.
• Provide safety and health management training to superintendents and supervisory personnel working on each site, and train company and subcontractor employees on each site’s safety and health plan.

Is this a good first step to make supervisors accountable for the safety of the people they manage? Should OSHA go further to dock rank-and-file workers’ pay for safety infractions? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

O.C.E. Warehouse and Distribution Center in Edison, NJ, was the recipient of one such inspection. Now the company faces $123,100 in OSHA fines.

OSHA received a referral from the Edison Department of Public Safety,  Division of Fire, alleging O.C.E.’s fire exits and aisles were blocked and that unsecured merchandise was being stored on racks.

O.C.E. was fined $100,000 for two willful violations and $23,100 for 12 serious violations.

The willful violations include failure to continuously maintain exit routes free of obstruction or impediments and for storing materials in damaged racks.

The serious violations include failure to:

• properly identify exit doors
• supply employees with personal protective equipment
• remove defective forklifts from service
• provide adequate training
• give adequate evaluations and procedures to forklift operators, and
• provide proper storage in workspace areas around electrical equipment.

You can read more about the case involving O.C.E. here.

A former OSHA inspector has told a TV station in Houston that he had to “game the numbers” when the agency came under Congressional pressure for not conducting enough inspections.

Ronnie Benavides, who worked for OSHA for more than a decade, told KHOU-TV that he felt pressured to be more aggressive, to do more inspections and write more citations, even if they had to be fabricated.

Benavides detailed one inspection in particular. A construction worker fell 29 floors to his death.

He said he and other OSHA inspectors who went to the site to investigate went overboard. He said they cited contractors for things that weren’t violations.

OSHA in the Houston area may have been under particular pressure to boost inspections.

In 2005, an explosion at the nearby Texas City BP refinery killed 15 workers.

Critics said OSHA wasn’t aggressive enough in enforcing safety at the plant.

OSHA denied any allegation that citations were manufactured.

The agency said more inspections were conducted in the Houston area in response to a building boom there.

The United Steelworkers Union told KHOU that it welcomed OSHA getting more aggressive, saying it’s long overdue.