Business owner says employees not concerned about safe place to work
January 13, 2012 by Fred HosierPosted in: Analysis/Commentary, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, OSHA news, Safety training, Who Got Fined and Why?
PDF Here’s a statement that caught our eye: The owner of a small manufacturing business in New Jersey told a local newspaper that his employees are “not concerned about having a safe place to work, they’re concerned about having a place to work.”
What prompted the statement by Mike O’Shea, owner of Schneider & Marquard in Newton, NJ? It was in reaction to being fined by OSHA for $48,840.
O’Shea says he’s appealing the fine because it would put his company that manufactures tools, dies and stampings out of business.
Despite O’Shea’s claim about what his employees care about, OSHA says the reason it inspected the facility is that it received a complaint alleging several workplace hazards there.
OSHA’s inspection turned up 21 violations: 3 repeat, 12 serious and 6 other-than-serious.
The repeat violations were for:
- obstructed exit routes
- lack of proper machine guarding, and
- deficient recordkeeping for power press inspections.
The serious violations included failure to:
- implement a hearing conservation program
- properly mount and identify portable fire extinguishers
- provide powered industrial truck training, and
- implement a hazard communication program that includes training.
The other-than-serious violations involve failure to record injuries.
Schneider & Marquard employs about 24 workers.
O’Shea says his employees came to him and “asked me if they could contest this and what they can do to help.” O’Shea says he plans to talk to his lawyer.
This sums up the debate about OSHA regulations: Are there too many of them, and are they putting companies out of business?
On the other hand, should employees have to work at a facility where lack of machine guarding, for example, could cause a serious injury or death?
Apparently, at least one of O’Shea’s employees didn’t think that was right.
What do you make of O’Shea’s statement? Let us know what you think in the comments below.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: employees not concerned about safety, machine guarding, OSHA regulations, out of business
Loading ...
January 15th, 2012 at 10:27 am
This guy makes $ 20,000000 a year and he would rather sacrafice his employees safety than invest in a safe workplace. A $ 48,000 fine is a drop in the bucket for this guy compared to having a major accident or fatality. This asinine, ignorant, and careless mentality is just the sort of thing I’m out there fighting every freakin week.
January 17th, 2012 at 7:10 am
None of the things the company was cited for, other than machine safeguarding, would cost much to implement. It’s cheap really. I think the employer is out of touch with reality. Whether regulated or not, an employer has a duty to provide a safe workplace. I would rather be unemployed and alive with all my parts.
January 17th, 2012 at 10:19 am
A workers right to work and a place of work free from recognized hazards is the basis of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. In as much as it is the employer’s business and place of business it is the employer’s responsibility. Neither the worker nor employer have the ability to wave that right for themselves or others. At 40+ years since the OSH Act was enacted there is little reason to have serious, repeat or willful violations besides greed and pride on the part of the owner(s), manager(s) and supervisor(s).
Following OSHA Standards will in fact save lives, materials and equipment which leads to lower insurance payouts which leads to lower rates, increased profit and a happier, healthier more loyal workforce.
January 17th, 2012 at 11:22 am
Mr. O’Shea is correct. Most employees today are extremely happy to have a job, but every one of them will tell you that they want to make it home at the end of their shift every day as well. What Mr. O’Shea fails to realize is that OSHA LAW requires all business owners to provide a safe, health, and well being environment to work in. It is his job to see that this happens and to have the proper leaders in place to ensure and enforce this - everyday. Every one of the citations he received is preventable and just requires him to put a best practice model in place that stresses workplace safety and the companies goals and objectives with regard to minimizing accidents/injuries. Once it is place, the costs will be far less than the issues he will continue to have with OSHA, BWC, and potential lawsuits. Shame on him for taking the attitude of “they should just be happy to have a job” rather than “I want them to come to work for me everyday and know that I am providing them a safe environment to work in.”
January 17th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Wow! This guy has some balls to tell a local newspaper his workers do not care about safety. My guess is the statement could be somewhat true only in the sense that the owner has spun the OSHA violations to look like its pay the OSHA fine or go out of business. Someone needs to open this guy’s eyes to see that safety is an investment not a burden put on companies.
January 17th, 2012 at 3:51 pm
If this guy doesn’t want to accept the responsibility of owning and operating a company that is safe and doesn’t understand that his employees are his #1 asset he needs to sell out and get out of the business.
February 23rd, 2012 at 2:56 pm
It is true that many EE’s view safety as a nuisance, are willing to bypass processes, procedures, PPE, machine guarding etc. if such a culture is allowed to exist. I am currently trying to upgrade an entire facility which has had such neglect.
Whether it is safety, quality or productivity, a manager, supervisor, superintendant, owner, must not allow the EE to tell YOU what they will or will not do. Bypassing safety requirements, like not wearing hearing protection is not their CHOICE to make, and the consequences must be dealt with immediately. Implementing and sustaining safety programs is tedious, time consuming and incurs cost. Most of the items he was dinged for fall under this category, Hazmat, forklift training, egress.
The owner was just being lazy, just as an EE who left his eye protection in the car but went to work anyway is.