<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SafetyNewsAlert.com &#187; lockout/tagout</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.safetynewsalert.com/tag/lockouttagout/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.safetynewsalert.com</link>
	<description>Occupational safety and health news for workplace safety professionals.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 17:29:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Rain, sleet and snow are no match for OSHA</title>
		<link>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/rain-sleet-and-snow-are-no-match-for-osha/</link>
		<comments>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/rain-sleet-and-snow-are-no-match-for-osha/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim Burger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Electrical safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In this week's e-newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest News & Views]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPE (protective equipment)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Who Got Fined and Why?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cost of safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inspections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lockout/tagout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA fines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPE]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?p=7365</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OSHA is going postal. No, not like that. 
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 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OSHA is going postal. No, not like that. <span id="more-7365"></span></p>
<p>In slightly over two months, the agency has fined seven USPS facilities all over the country almost $2.3 million for various safety violations.</p>
<p><strong>April 30</strong>: A Providence, R.I., facility is hit for $558,000, primarily for electrical and lockout/tagout hazards. Employee  complaints precipitated the investigation.</p>
<p><strong>May 10</strong>: A Bedford Park, Ill., processing center is assessed $210,000 for electrical and protective  equipment hazards. Again, employee  complaints led to the inquiry.</p>
<p><strong>May 10</strong>: A Denver distribution center is fined  $217,000. OSHA said employees were testing live  electrical equipment and without adequate training or PPE.</p>
<p><strong>June 8</strong>: 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.</p>
<p><strong>June 8</strong>: On the other side of the state, two Philadelphia facilities are fined $497,000.  OSHA found inadequately trained employees working without PPE.</p>
<p><strong>June 21</strong>: 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.</p>
<p><strong>June 28</strong>:  A Scarborough, Me., facility is fined a whopping $430,000 for exposing workers to electrical hazards, arc flashes and  arc blasts.</p>
<p>With the U.S. Postal Service already having trouble making ends  meet, this new trend can&#8217;t be helping.</p>
<p>But OSHA&#8217;s message seems clear: No matter how tight money is, scrimping on safety is never acceptable.</p>
<img src="http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=7365&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/rain-sleet-and-snow-are-no-match-for-osha/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Company fined $116,000 for fatality; employee crushed</title>
		<link>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/company-fined-116000-for-fatality-employee-crushed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/company-fined-116000-for-fatality-employee-crushed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fred Hosier</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fatality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In this week's e-newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest News & Views]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Who Got Fined and Why?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lockout/tagout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employee crushed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maintenance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?p=6573</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a story you can share with employees and supervisors about why lockout/tagout is so important: 
It&#8217;s too often a matter of life or death.
OSHA has fined Buckhorn, Inc. $116,000 in connection with a Oct. 7, 2009 fatality at its Springfield, MO, plant.
Tobby Hall, a 31-year-old father of four, was inside a plastic injection molding [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a story you can share with employees and supervisors about why lockout/tagout is so important: <span id="more-6573"></span></p>
<p>It&#8217;s too often a matter of life or death.</p>
<p>OSHA has <a title="News-Leader.com" href="http://www.news-leader.com/article/20100415/BREAKING01/100415036/-1/rss" target="_blank">fined Buckhorn, Inc. $116,000</a> in connection with a Oct. 7, 2009 fatality at its Springfield, MO, plant.</p>
<p>Tobby Hall, a 31-year-old father of four, was inside a plastic injection molding machine. However, a co-worker thought Hall had gone to get a tool.</p>
<p>The co-worker started the machine, and Hall was crushed to death.</p>
<p>OSHA says the workers shouldn&#8217;t have been allowed to work on the machine without it being locked and tagged out.</p>
<p>Buckhorn has been cited for one willful and 15 serious violations.</p>
<p>The willful violation is for failure to ensure the plastic injection molding machine was locked out when employees were performing maintenance inside the machine.</p>
<p>OSHA also found a variety of serious violations involving obstructed emergency exits, confined spaces and a lack of training.</p>
<img src="http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=6573&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/company-fined-116000-for-fatality-employee-crushed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fired for safety violation or racial discrimination?</title>
		<link>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/fired-for-safety-violation-or-racial-discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/fired-for-safety-violation-or-racial-discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fred Hosier</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Electrical safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In this week's e-newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest News & Views]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lockout/tagout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new court decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[racial discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[safety violation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?p=3637</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you ever fired someone for violating a company safety rule? In this case, a company did just that and then found itself in court on a charge of racial discrimination. 
Georgia-Pacific fired supervisor Ezra Brady for instructing an employee to use an improper lockout procedure. The plant manager claimed the result was that an [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have you ever fired someone for violating a company safety rule? In this case, a company did just that and then found itself in court on a charge of racial discrimination. <span id="more-3637"></span></p>
<p>Georgia-Pacific fired supervisor Ezra Brady for instructing an employee to use an improper lockout procedure. The plant manager claimed the result was that an energy source wasn&#8217;t isolated and employees were at risk. The company said Brady willfully violated company policy.</p>
<p>The company had safety rules in its employee handbook that spelled out lockout requirements.</p>
<p>Brady filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging that he&#8217;d been fired as a result of racial discrimination. Brady says he was fired for a first offense, while two white employees were only suspended for three days for the same offense.</p>
<p>When the EEOC found reasonable cause that Georgia-Pacific had racially discriminated against him, Brady filed a lawsuit against the company. G-P asked to have the case thrown out.</p>
<p>The court agreed to throw out Brady&#8217;s lawsuit because he didn&#8217;t prove that his employer gave preferential treatment to another employee under nearly identical circumstances.</p>
<p>In one situation in which a white employee was suspended, the worker was making repairs on a conveyor and reached far enough into it to have required a lock-out. The plant manager said this employee was only suspended for three days because he didn&#8217;t put any other employees in danger. The court found this didn&#8217;t qualify as a nearly identical circumstance.</p>
<p>In the second case, a manager and two other employees were conducting an inspection. One employee turned off a breaker to a machine. None of the three had a lock for the breaker, and the manager decided one wasn&#8217;t needed because he was supervising the situation. That manager also received a three-day suspension. Management said this case was not a willful violation of company policy because the manager thought he was doing the right thing. Once again, the court said this didn&#8217;t qualify as a nearly identical circumstance.</p>
<p>The take-home: Companies can enforce policies that call for firing employees for certain safety infractions. They just need to be careful that disciplinary measures are applied equally.</p>
<p>What does your company policy say about penalties for safety violations? Has your company ever fired someone for safety reasons? Let us know in the Comments Box below.</p>
<img src="http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=3637&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/fired-for-safety-violation-or-racial-discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Worker&#8217;s hand caught in meat grinder</title>
		<link>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/employees-hand-caught-in-meat-grinder/</link>
		<comments>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/employees-hand-caught-in-meat-grinder/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fred Hosier</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[In this week's e-newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Injuries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest News & Views]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lockout/tagout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand caught in meat grinder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maintenance on machinery]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?p=1979</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When it&#8217;s time to clean or perform maintenance on machinery, are your workers sure they know the proper lockout/tagout procedures to prevent serious injury? How about your newest workers? 
A Kroger grocery store employee is recovering after getting her hand caught in a meat grinder as she cleaned it.
The incident happened at the chain&#8217;s store [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When it&#8217;s time to clean or perform maintenance on machinery, are your workers sure they know the proper lockout/tagout procedures to prevent serious injury? How about your newest workers? <span id="more-1979"></span></p>
<p>A Kroger grocery store employee is recovering after getting her hand caught in a meat grinder as she cleaned it.</p>
<p>The incident happened at the chain&#8217;s store in Wabash, IN.</p>
<p>A Kroger spokesman told <a href="http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/local_wane_wabash_meat_grinder_sends_woman_to_hospital_200904091612_rev1">WANE-TV</a> that the pharmacist who was on duty and an off-duty EMT who was shopping were able to give the employee immediate care until paramedics arrived.</p>
<p>The injured woman was flown to a nearby hospital for emergency care.</p>
<p>A hospital spokesman says the woman is in fair condition.</p>
<p>Kroger said the employee was relatively new to the company and had completed the training program on the equipment in the meat department.</p>
<img src="http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=1979&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/employees-hand-caught-in-meat-grinder/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Company settles cases, including fatality, with OSHA: Huge fine</title>
		<link>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/company-settles-cases-including-fatality-with-osha-huge-fine/</link>
		<comments>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/company-settles-cases-including-fatality-with-osha-huge-fine/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fred Hosier</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fatality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In this week's e-newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest News & Views]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Who Got Fined and Why?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lockout/tagout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cintas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA fine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settlement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?p=796</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Laundry company Cintas Corp. has reached a settlement with OSHA to resolve six safety-related cases, including one that resulted in a worker fatality. 
Cintas will pay nearly $3 million to OSHA. All of the cases involve citations OSHA issued to Cintas for failing to lock out hazardous energy on industrial laundry equipment while employees were [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laundry company Cintas Corp. has reached a settlement with OSHA to resolve six safety-related cases, including one that resulted in a worker fatality. <span id="more-796"></span></p>
<p>Cintas will pay nearly $3 million to OSHA. All of the cases involve citations OSHA issued to Cintas for failing to lock out hazardous energy on industrial laundry equipment while employees were servicing the machines.</p>
<p>On March 6, 2007, Eleazar Torres-Gomez was killed at an Oklahoma Cintas plant when he fell onto an unguarded conveyor and was dragged into a 300-degree industrial dryer. He was already dead from burns when another employee found him 20 minutes later.</p>
<p>Besides paying the fine, Cintas has agreed to a number of other measures under the settlement, including:</p>
<ul>
<li>retaining a team of independent experts who will ensure interim safety measures are in place</li>
<li>hiring additional safety professionals</li>
<li>conducting more frequent internal safety inspections, and</li>
<li>providing increased safety training to management and employees.</li>
</ul>
<p>The union UNITE HERE and two Democratic members of Congress have criticized the settlement for being too lenient on Cintas.</p>
<p>UNITE HERE opposes downgrading the severity of 43 willful violations and the length of time Cintas has to properly guard the kind of machines which caused the death of Torres-Gomez.</p>
<p>Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Congressman Phil Hare (D-IL) say the settlement amounts to a last-minute pardon of Cintas by OSHA under President Bush&#8217;s Republican administration.</p>
<img src="http://www.safetynewsalert.com/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=796&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.safetynewsalert.com/company-settles-cases-including-fatality-with-osha-huge-fine/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- This site's performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Dramatically improve the speed and reliability of your blog!

Learn more about our WordPress Plugins: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (user agent is rejected)
Database Caching 12/18 queries in 0.012 seconds using disk

Served from: lamp06.pbp.com @ 2010-09-03 13:33:26 -->