OT and long. OSHA coming to a small farm ?

[Chris English]

This is in my local paper, more NYS government
intetervention
On Sept. 29, Craig Schenk was killed on a small,
organic dairy farm in Lansing. This is the most
recent fatality in a surge of dairy deaths in
central New York in the last 21 months.

Dairy farm workers and their advocates believe that
these deaths could have been prevented by attainable
changes in farm machine technology, training and
personal protective equipment. Health and safety
conditions on dairy farms have been deteriorating
for years as the workforce becomes larger and as the
dairy farmers race to ramp up production to meet the
needs of a booming industry.

To address this situation, dairy farm workers and
safety activists in 2013 advocated that the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
initiate a local emphasis program (LEP) to increase
its oversight over New York dairy farms. LEPs
combine comprehensive education outreach to farm
owners with enforcement of current OSHA regulations.
LEPs are used by OSHA to carry out random, surprise
inspections in a high-risk industry where
disproportionate numbers of accidents and fatalities
are occurring. Over the last year, OSHA carried out
this program successfully. As a result, dairy
farmers increased their attentiveness to training,
personal protective equipment and hazard
communication. And farm workers are learning that
they have a right to a safe and healthy workplace
free from hazards.

More must be done, however, to prevent the deaths of
dairy farm workers. Small farms in the United States
(those with fewer than 10 employees) are excluded
from OSHA rules and regulations. Thus, the LEP is
only utilized on dairy farms with 10 or more
employees. This means that these employers are not
subject to any government oversight or
responsibility to provide a workplace that is safe.
This is analogous to asking drivers to abide by the
speed limit on certain roads by their own free will,
freeing drivers from any form of enforcement with a
law that applies elsewhere. Agriculture is one of
the most dangerous industries in the United States,
with fatality rates higher than either mining or
construction, and small farms should not be freed of
this oversight and accountability.

The New York State May 1st Farmworkers Organizing
Committee — along with advocates from the Worker
Justice Center of New York, the Workers Center of
Central New York and the Midstate Council for
Occupational Safety and Health — are working to
reduce the dangers to dairy farm workers. We urge
OSHA to continue its local emphasis program into a
second or even third year as it did in New York's
sister dairy-production state of Wisconsin.

We also ask our congressional representatives to
take into consideration the human right to work free
of the fear of serious injury and death and
eliminate the appropriations rider that exempts
small farms from health and safety standards. The
dangers on small farms are no different than large
farms, and they should not be exempt from safety and
health enforcement.

Joyce, an Ithaca resident, is the president of the
Midstate Council for Occupational Safety and Health.

Ithaca is the home of Cornell University and a
abundant hotbed !!!

 

[David G]

Here is my view, OSHA should be involved if there are non family employees, PERIOD. Believing that an employer will do the right thing without guidance is fooling yourself, the dollar wins.

 

[Two Dogs]

According to OSHA, they seem to think a farm that has less than ten employees, those ten are expendable and not worthy of safety. TDF

 

[Mike M]

10 documented workers and how many more undocumented ? If you try and tell them do not stick your hand in there ! do they really know what you said ?

 

[Russ from MN]

When I saw this heading I thought right away about the young boy in ND that lost his hands in an auger on their family farm a few years ago. There is need for more safety everywhere! I worked construction before there was an OSHA and we don't want to go back there!

 

[LAA]

can.

 

[Bret4207]

(quoted from post at 12:48:40 11/13/14) This is in my local paper, more NYS government
intetervention
On Sept. 29, Craig Schenk was killed on a small,
organic dairy farm in Lansing. This is the most
recent fatality in a surge of dairy deaths in
central New York in the last 21 months.

Dairy farm workers and their advocates believe that
these deaths could have been prevented by attainable
changes in farm machine technology, training and
personal protective equipment. Health and safety
conditions on dairy farms have been deteriorating
for years as the workforce becomes larger and as the
dairy farmers race to ramp up production to meet the
needs of a booming industry.

To address this situation, dairy farm workers and
safety activists in 2013 advocated that the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
initiate a local emphasis program (LEP) to increase
its oversight over New York dairy farms. LEPs
combine comprehensive education outreach to farm
owners with enforcement of current OSHA regulations.
LEPs are used by OSHA to carry out random, surprise
inspections in a high-risk industry where
disproportionate numbers of accidents and fatalities
are occurring. Over the last year, OSHA carried out
this program successfully. As a result, dairy
farmers increased their attentiveness to training,
personal protective equipment and hazard
communication. And farm workers are learning that
they have a right to a safe and healthy workplace
free from hazards.

More must be done, however, to prevent the deaths of
dairy farm workers. Small farms in the United States
(those with fewer than 10 employees) are excluded
from OSHA rules and regulations. Thus, the LEP is
only utilized on dairy farms with 10 or more
employees. This means that these employers are not
subject to any government oversight or
responsibility to provide a workplace that is safe.
This is analogous to asking drivers to abide by the
speed limit on certain roads by their own free will,
freeing drivers from any form of enforcement with a
law that applies elsewhere. Agriculture is one of
the most dangerous industries in the United States,
with fatality rates higher than either mining or
construction, and small farms should not be freed of
this oversight and accountability.

The New York State May 1st Farmworkers Organizing
Committee — along with advocates from the Worker
Justice Center of New York, the Workers Center of
Central New York and the Midstate Council for
Occupational Safety and Health — are working to
reduce the dangers to dairy farm workers. We urge
OSHA to continue its local emphasis program into a
second or even third year as it did in New York's
sister dairy-production state of Wisconsin.

We also ask our congressional representatives to
take into consideration the human right to work free
of the fear of serious injury and death and
eliminate the appropriations rider that exempts
small farms from health and safety standards. The
dangers on small farms are no different than large
farms, and they should not be exempt from safety and
health enforcement.

Joyce, an Ithaca resident, is the president of the
Midstate Council for Occupational Safety and Health.

Ithaca is the home of Cornell University and a
abundant hotbed !!!

I saw the same outfits named on our local public radio ina story they did last year. they are all socialist/Marxist organizers as far as I could tell. Worker safety is one thing, "social justice" is something else again.

 

[David G]

The minimum employee count is so that OSHA can staff it, handling every employer regardless of size would be impossible.

 

[bill mart]

Great, more government oversight. Bill

 

[Dick L]

The government hires enough people to protect each and every worker every where and you now have a police state.

You have then given up your liberty for a false sense security. People will still do the unthinkable to loose limbs and life.

 

[casenut1]

I am all for working safe. Some of the OSHA rules are cumbersome and not cost effective. This is why I do not have employees anymore.

 

[tomturkey]

What are the numbers? A SURGE in Dairy Farm Deaths??? What are the percapita numbers for fatalities/injury per hours worked. Of the SURGE how many could be DIRECTLY linked to lack of training, lack of appropriate guards/safety restraints. How many could be attributed to a "moment of stupidity". We've all had those, knew better but did not do better. I'm all for worker safety, I too worked in the dangerous construction business before OSHA and after, we do not want to return to those days. The worker MUST agree to work safely also, it cannot ALL be on the employer. Over regulation stifles
small business, we lose possible employers(jobs) choice in the market place,(gotta go to Wally World) and overall local finacial contributions(taxes). ther has to be a place in the middle ground somewhere so we can keep busineses/jobs AND work in a safety conscience enviorment. It could happen. I'm not holding my breath though. I do smell a poof coming though. gobble

 

[buickanddeere]

Given the number of people injured, maimed, crippled and dead with the casualties often being women and children.
It's a wonder that OSHA has stayed away this long given the number of times workers have come to grief saving two minutes or five dollars. Or just plain not knowing any better and crawling into a toxic confined space.

 

[Ron Anderson]

When you hire people that don't speak English and are unwilling to learn this can be the result. Same as giving a drivers license to someone who doesn't understand English. They often cause accidents and don't have insurance.

 

[pat sublett]

The problem, everything the government is involved with is costly, ineffective and without logic. The government needs to take care of national defense and get out of our life. We are not far from having a government bureaucrat assigned to every citizen. I had a satellite installed not long ago. The guy doing the installation was a private contractor worked by the job and provided his on tools. He had a 4 ft. stepladder, was standing on top of it. A 20 year old woman drove up, got out of her car and said What does the sign under your feet say and he said I can't see it for my shoes. She said $200 and you will remember next time. I was tempted to get my 12 ga. and escort her off my place.

 

[kansas45]

Accident's happen. What I want to know is, what ever happend to common sense?

 

[Billy Shafer]

It died a long time ago.

 

[buickanddeere]

I don't have any sympathy for somebody standing on the top of a ladder .

 

[ss55]

You can't expect new or inexperienced employees to know everything about a farm or any other business. Employee training is part of running any business more efficiently.

 

[Texasmark1]

A guy on a boating forum said that "common sense isn't very
common" and I whole heartedly agree.

Mark

 

[ss55]

Why would you let someone stand on top of a step ladder on your property without saying something about it or at least go over and stabilize the ladder for them until they were done? If you caught one of your kids or grandchildren doing that wouldn't you stop them right there and give them a (safety?) lecture?

A $200 file is cheap compared to a trip to the emergency room or time off from work for an injury. If your installer took risks and shortcuts like that I think I would double check his work, he probably took so shortcuts there too.

 

[dr sportster]

If you read the reports on construction accidents most just happen and are not related to any common sense. If a steel company places 1 inch thick steel spacers between I beams for shipping and one adheres with rust to a beam being hoisted 100 feet in the air then the crane happens to shake the piece loose and it comes down and kills a man , how was common sense involved? Nobody noticed the piece stuck . Never happened before. You could be the smartest guy in the world but if it is your head it lands on your still dead.It is the laws of physics not common sense. Common sense would be to go into a confined space without a sniffer but that is learned through proper training.

 

[dpendzic]

whatever has become to personal choice and taking responsibility for your own actions? I do some high risk activity's and am well aware of the consequences and am ready to deal with them on my own

 

[pat sublett]

It was only 4 ft. tall. Heavy double sided, standing on level concrete and he was holding t a 4 inch steel pipe

 

[buickanddeere]

Such incidents are rare. Most involve somebody not cleaning up a mess, taking a shortcut or in a hurry.

 

[mkirsch]

(quoted from post at 14:02:20 11/13/14) It was only 4 ft. tall. Heavy double sided, standing on level concrete and he was holding t a 4 inch steel pipe

That's great. He was pretty much ok in this one corner case. If any one of those factors were changed, he could be in a heap of hurt.

If the ladder were 8 ft tall, he could get very badly hurt by falling.
If there were no 4 inch steel pipe to steady himself on, he could lose balance much more easily.
If the ladder were some light-duty piece of junk, it is much more likely to collapse.
If the surface under the ladder were uneven, it stands a much better chance of falling over if he loses his balance at all.

You think the regulations are bad when they just say "No standing on the ladder above the "No standing" label?" Imagine if EVERY possible case were defined out in excruciating detail.

 

[Greg K]

I'm guilty of standing on top of a ladder probably every week. It isn't a shortcut so much as being comfortable with your work and surroundings, which is not saying it is safe. No different than a rolling stop at a stop sign, distracted driving(talking to passengers, cell phone, changing radio stations, daydreaming), or not testing the GFCI's in your house monthly like you are supposed to do. We should try and be safe but cannot walk around in a bubble either. A jerk I used to work with would criticize people for doing things he thought were unsafe, this coming from a guy who used to put a 12' stepladder on top of sawhorses to get high enough to work, he was also the one who fell from a poorly constructed ceiling and cracked his head on the concrete when he should not have been up there to begin with.

 

[Wile E]

I see both sides of the fence. I cannot stand big gubbermint telling business owners what to do. But on the other hand when you have A-holes that run small businesses that do not provide basic needs for employees such as: Safety glasses, ear plugs, gloves when the conditions warrant these items then the employer needs fines to keep them in line.

I worked at a hell-hole shop when I was 18 and not 1 guy wore safety glasses or ear plugs...not one. The employer thought of the employees as a loaf of bread, oh well get another one if he falls down and dies. I could not imagine owning a small farm and having my son or a neighbor kid be seriously injured or killed because I did not train them, or provide safety items like safety glasses.

 

[Charlie M]

I've dealt with OSHA a few times while working with a large company and working with a privately owned small company. If you have deep pockets they will nit pick you to death. They know they can't do that to a small business as it eventually means no business. We had a situation a while back where an employee purposely (stupidly) stuck his hand inside a machine with a proper guard (had to make an effort to do it) and OSHA's attitude was we should have thought of that possibility. You can't predict every stupid thing someone can do. You're only real defense is to have a good safety program so they don't get the idea of making a return trip anytime soon. You also better hope you don't have a disgruntled employee that will use agencies like OSHA for harassment purposes. OSHA is like most government agencies - they started with a good cause and grew to be more concerned with fines and fees than what they were originally intended to do.

 

[Greg K]

My story above about the guy using sawhorses to make a stepladder tall enough had a good ending. The company owner came out to a job one day and saw him doing that, he turned around and bought a brand new 16' stepladder that day so that bs would stop. Business owners come in all types.

 

[Fatamus]

Al I can say is read the poem "Out, Out-- by Robert Frost"

 

[NCWayne]

I've had to deal with both OSHA and MSHA both over the years. Given that I am self employed, have no other employees, and have never had a serious accident I don't really fall under OSHA,or MSHA directly, but anyone on a construction or mine site falls under their rules to some degree regardless of the size of the company, simply because your working around so many other people who you could injure by doing something stupid and unsafe.

That said, if either body came to me and tried to tell me how to do my job 'safer' I'd tell them exactly what I told the 'safety' guy at one of the quarries I work at on occasion. He had commented that MSHA (and OSHA too on other sites) regs stated that I needed to be tied off when I was working on the top of one of their machines as it was over 4 feet high. I looked up, saw nothing overhead to tie off to. So told him as plainly as I possibly could that unless he came up with a sky hook of some type, I couldn't tie off safely to anything. Further that I WOULD NOT tie myself off to the side of the machine as doing so would have insured I swung into and hit something metal (the side of the machine) if I ever fell, vs just hitting the ground. I told him that if he tried to force me to 'follow' some regulation, that some idiot behind a desk, that had never done my job, came up with, I'd load my tools and carry my butt back home (and leave them with their crane sitting in a million pieces)before I ever did anything that I knew was going to get me hurt than hitting the ground, if I should happen to fall.

Needless to say he didn't want the machine left sitting, so he left me alone and let me do my job safely, LIKE I KNEW HOW, not like some idiot wanted me to.

Taken to another level, the regs in the book don't really mean anything as they are all open to the 'discretion of the inspector'. By that I mean the book says you can do something, but if the inspector says you can't then you get fined even though you are doing things by the book. I went through this whole deal while attending a MSHA course. He had told me that when we got through with the course I wouldn't need to load up my stuff, and leave the minute MSHA walked on side (usually what the quarry operator/owner wants you do do anyways.) As the course went on, the instructor would say you couldn't do something, but the book said you could. After calling him on things three different times, and being told each time that ultimately it was "up to the discression of the inspector"....I told him that was the very reason that I will always load up my stuff and leave, as I wasn't going to be forced to argue with some idiot that wanted to enforce their own will/thoughts on the issues, over what their own guidelines stated.

That said, you can never completely protect idiots from themselves, but the two bodies go out of their way to try. The bad thing is that no matter how hard companies try, no matter how much training they give, people get complacent, they get stupid, and ultimately preventable injuries occur. Heck, accidents occur that would have happened no matter how safe someone tried to be. In the end though all it does really is take the personal responsibility to be safe away form the individual and force it on the business owner, and that's not right.

Now that's not to say that I believe people should be forced to do unsafe things in order to keep their jobs (what OSHA was formed for origionally). However I believe a safe work place, and the individual safety of the worker, is a product of the workers themselves, NOT the ultimate responsibility of the employer as our illustrious leaders would like people to believe.

I could go on about this, but I think I get my point across.

 

[MSM]

Try as they may to make things idiot proof..the schools keep cranking out better idiots.

 

[casenut1]

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Pair-a-dice farm]

I'm not totally against some safety regulations but on the other hand the government has a poor track record of implementing regulations and an even poorer record of enforcing them in a fair way. Now days everyone who has employees has to have insurance, if there are too many claims it becomes cheaper to fix hazards than to pay premiums and deductibles. Also you could wrap some people in bubble wrap and they would get hurt and some could walk through a storm dropping sharp knives and never get a scratch. Like someone has already said there is no way to idiot proof everything as long as we keep coddling the idiots and allow them to breed.

 

[Brad Buchanan]

You don't have any sympathy for anybody!



Brad

 

[wisbaker]

OSHA, the one thing I truly hold against Tricky Dicky
OSHA is a lot like USDA FSIS inspection. With the USDA the regulations are written vague enough that the inspector can shut you down about any day they don't feel like working and even if they're wrong there is no recourse (so much for due process protections guaranteed in the constitution) OSHA has extremely complex and detailed rules and regulations but then throws in some "general duty" clauses that means they can write you up for about anything they don't like, support the wrong political candidate? they can fine you! Manufacture a legal product or service they feel is wrong they can fine you. The rules are so complex they can pretty much walk in and fine you anytime they want, even if something happened solely because of you following their stupid law. In either case you're at the mercy of some power hungry bureaucrat. The other thing that sucks is you can tell the employee to follow the rules, you can document training him on the rulesand the job and supply the PPE and if the employee doesn't follow the rules you can be fined. If he won't follow the rules and you fire him in many states you'll have to pay unemployment so either way you pay.

I'd be much happier if when OSHA comes in and finds noncompliance but the employer can prove they trained the employee and provided the proper PPE and tools and the non-compliance is solely because the employee refused to act in the appropriate manner then the employee should pay the fine. If they get fined for the same thing again they should pay the kicker on the fine too. Of course that'll never happen because to many potential dumbacrat voters would have to pay fines, heck they might decide to go back to Mexico.

 

[Greg1959]

NCWayne- Read and watch this video that just happened today in an area close to me.

29 miners died and the CEO and other execs are in trouble.
Poke here

 

[Donald Lehman]

No, it simply means that OSHA comsiders a farm with ten employees large enough to make substantial revenues from fines off of. Anything under ten employees isn't worth the effort to fine cause they can't make any real money off the small farms.

 

[PJH]

A picture of my dad, about 1925, long before government intervention. Yes, he lived dangerously, but he died of old age.

 

[RalphWD45]

I think a job, as an OSHA inspector could be a great way to make a living! However it could get a person hurt! Booby traps , for one thing, skins and bruises, from an irate employer, would be another. Just saying.

 

[Broke Plowboy]

I am a former OSHA investigator and I now teach Safety and Health law at universities and do expert witnessing for legal cases throughout the United States.

I agree that the fewer than 10 employee farms are getting overlooked on a lot of levels. Being a rancher/farmer myself all my life, I am apprehensive to regulate the family employee on this, however when the farm is incorporated, the corporation legally is the employer and the family issue is actually a moot point.

With farm machinery getting larger and with larger capacities, we are seeing farming go round the clock even more than before and this resulting in an increase of towing and retrieval incidents resulting in fatalities and injuries when working in all weather conditions. This was a noticeable oversight by the government when not enacting standards for these types of tasks when they created the Rollover Protection (ROPS) Standards at OSHA.

My learners at the University did a research study on the increase in these types of incidents and over 50% of them result in fatalities which is greater than fall fatality incidence rates. Addressing it now will ensure the most farmer related input and keep common sense in the proposed regulations.

If anyone want more information, they can contact me!

 

[farmer boy]

Likely one of the worst arguments ever. Because one stands on the top of a step ladder, the work they do is sub par. Are you a government employee? Because you have the logic of one.

 

[jlewis457]

I know that OSHA can be a large pain. Now think of this if OSHA was to start going around farms more would that not stop alot of the farms from bringing in illeagle workers, with the fear of those workers getting caught most farmers would have to have leagle workers on the farms at all times. This might stop some of them from bringing in illeagles because I would assume it would be a big (maybe door closing) fine if OSHA would uncover a farm full of untrained illeagles than it would be to find a farm full of untrained leagles
Just a Thought
John

 

[Hay hay hay]

In the 1940's, 2000 miners were killed EACH YEAR in mining accidents. The last 10 years it was less than 50 deaths per year.

Forty years ago roughly 50,000 Americans died each year on the roads. Today, with regulated safety devices in vehicles, that number is now about 30,000 each year even with twice as vehicles on the roads and double the miles driven.

About 3000 people died in the 9-11 attacks.

It is a big question...

How and where do you think America should focus its resources and efforts to save it's citizens lives?

 

[Fatamus]

Ooo starting to get heated in here.

 

[Bret4207]

(quoted from post at 00:22:06 11/14/14) I am a former OSHA investigator and I now teach Safety and Health law at universities and do expert witnessing for legal cases throughout the United States.

I agree that the fewer than 10 employee farms are getting overlooked on a lot of levels. Being a rancher/farmer myself all my life, I am apprehensive to regulate the family employee on this, however when the farm is incorporated, the corporation legally is the employer and the family issue is actually a moot point.

With farm machinery getting larger and with larger capacities, we are seeing farming go round the clock even more than before and this resulting in an increase of towing and retrieval incidents resulting in fatalities and injuries when working in all weather conditions. This was a noticeable oversight by the government when not enacting standards for these types of tasks when they created the Rollover Protection (ROPS) Standards at OSHA.

My learners at the University did a research study on the increase in these types of incidents and over 50% of them result in fatalities which is greater than fall fatality incidence rates. Addressing it now will ensure the most farmer related input and keep common sense in the proposed regulations.
comes under that
If anyone want more information, they can contact me!

My understanding was that OSHA has no authority over employers with 10 or fewer employees and several other qualifiers were involved. So I don't know why these farms would be "overlooked". I also have worked with OSHA and still cannot figure out how a Federal agency has authority if no Interstate Commerce is involved. The OSHA people I worked with were without doubt the most power mad, big gov't cheerleader types I've run across outside of a few enviro-whackos. Arguing an LLC is somehow no longer a family comes under that heading.

 

[Bret4207]

(quoted from post at 01:26:58 11/14/14) I know that OSHA can be a large pain. Now think of this if OSHA was to start going around farms more would that not stop alot of the farms from bringing in illeagle workers, with the fear of those workers getting caught most farmers would have to have leagle workers on the farms at all times. This might stop some of them from bringing in illeagles because I would assume it would be a big (maybe door closing) fine if OSHA would uncover a farm full of untrained illeagles than it would be to find a farm full of untrained leagles
Just a Thought
John

No, it wouldn't. There are policies blocking the reporting of illegals by various levels of gov't employees. In fact, the USBP is blocked from even thinking about going to any farm up here to look for illegals even if they are in plain view or to act on complaints that a farm is housing illegals. Cool, huh?

 

[Bret4207]

(quoted from post at 02:23:42 11/14/14) In the 1940's, 2000 miners were killed EACH YEAR in mining accidents. The last 10 years it was less than 50 deaths per year.

Forty years ago roughly 50,000 Americans died each year on the roads. Today, with regulated safety devices in vehicles, that number is now about 30,000 each year even with twice as vehicles on the roads and double the miles driven.

About 3000 people died in the 9-11 attacks.

It is a big question...

How and where do you think America should focus its resources and efforts to save it's citizens lives?

You look for a balance point Edd. Gov't has a long track record of doing something good and then totally going overboard in the attempt to maintain their bureaucracy or grow it. Whats worse is when gov't obviously only goes after those violators that can't afford to fight back or ignores it's owns misdeeds and issues.

 

[Hay hay hay]

But Bret, I spent my life in the auto business, big business, and there was never a regulation proposed that we did not fight with every tool we could muster. Public relations, political contributions, threats of job losses, wild stories about how it would ruin the products, all were part of our industries arsenal. I fought the fight too, and we all truly believed the regulations would hurt the company to the detriment of "me" and the nation.

I look back now, 30-40 years later and realize that these regulations greatly improved our American way of life....and did not kill the company.

Auto safety regulations save at least 30,000 lives a year.

Emissions regulations have removed 90+% of the bad pollutants and the vehicles start and run great. I can't imagine how we could breath if the cars polluted like they used to.

The most contentious was the fuel standards, they still look impossible to achieve, but my new pickup gets 20 MPG at 75MPH. Same truck would of gotten 7 or 8 MPG 40 years ago. That and fracking
have made America much less dependent on the Arabs, and Venezualans. Good for America.

Certainly some regulations go overboard and some bureaucrats are fools, but no business man (and farmers are business men) will ever accept regulation without a fight and howls of protest.
Right or wrong.

 

[Bret4207]

(quoted from post at 12:27:49 11/14/14) But Bret, I spent my life in the auto business, big business, and there was never a regulation proposed that we did not fight with every tool we could muster. Public relations, political contributions, threats of job losses, wild stories about how it would ruin the products, all were part of our industries arsenal. I fought the fight too, and we all truly believed the regulations would hurt the company to the detriment of "me" and the nation.

I look back now, 30-40 years later and realize that these regulations greatly improved our American way of life....and did not kill the company.

Auto safety regulations save at least 30,000 lives a year.

Emissions regulations have removed 90+% of the bad pollutants and the vehicles start and run great. I can't imagine how we could breath if the cars polluted like they used to.

The most contentious was the fuel standards, they still look impossible to achieve, but my new pickup gets 20 MPG at 75MPH. Same truck would of gotten 7 or 8 MPG 40 years ago. That and fracking
have made America much less dependent on the Arabs, and Venezualans. Good for America.

Certainly some regulations go overboard and some bureaucrats are fools, but no business man (and farmers are business men) will ever accept regulation without a fight and howls of protest.
Right or wrong.

Edd, most of us don't have a problem with regulations that are "common sense", like laws that say you don't shoot over a highway or that young children must be in car seats. the problem is when you have rules, laws, regulation that are strictly political or an obvious stretch of authority, like NYs SAFE Act for instance. That was a political response to make a White House hopeful look tough on crime in response to something that wasn't a problem in our state, that did nothing about crime and turned a lot of law abiding citizens into criminals over night. Having OSHA come to my little money pit of a farm here a tell me how to do things would be a stretch too. As you know I spent over 20 years in law enforcement and it's become apparent to me that gov't just doesn't just know when to say enough.

 

[NCWayne]

The situation here is a double indemnity case as far as I am concerned. In other words the miners are just as accountable for their deaths as the mine owner.

Think about it like t his. Based on the article the mine owner knew there were problems with the air quality, etc, but chose to do nothing. In this case, I agree, he has a hand in sharing the responsibility of the deaths of the miners by not providing a safe workplace for his employees. Thing is though, all he is actually responsible for is not repairing problems reported to him my MSHA, and I believe he should be at least fined for doing so.

Now here's the kicker. Under the rules of both OSHA, as well as MSHA, workers can refuse to do their jobs when faced with what they feel are unsafe conditions, and they can not be legally fired for doing so. This is supposed to keep an owner from just constantly cycling through people to keep the doors open and turning a profit, without taking care of the unsafe conditions.

In this case the conditions were known, and had been reported by MSHA to be unsafe. In other words the miners, as individuals, knew that what they were doing, the conditions they were working under, were unsafe. Now I ask, since the mine owner couldn't legally fire them for not working, who is at fault? Is he at fault for not correcting the problems, or are they at fault for continuing to work even when they knew it was unsafe?

Like I said, the owner should be liable for fines, etc for not doing his part, and if it shut him down, that's OK. On the other hand, the men that continued to work when they knew it was unsafe, even though they had the protection of MSHA's regulations behind them. In my opinion this makes them responsible for their own deaths, NOT the mine's owner.

Ultimately this is what OSHA and MSHA were designed to do. They were designed to make the owner accountable for offering a safe workplace, but not to take away the responsibility of the worker for also being safe. As a result they offer the safety to the worker that they can't be fired for doing something unsafe. That basically gives them a two pronged spear to use against unsafe employers as it allows the workers to provide their own level of safety and protection, when the regulatory inspectors aren't around, without fear for their jobs. Ultimately the owner can either be fined out of existence for not following the rules, or the workers can simply refuse to work, or quit, and put him out of business.

So, why didn't the miners simply tell him where to go, and either quit and go to work in another mine, strike, or simply refuse to work and call MSHA once again? Ultimately they chose, as individuals, to go to work, unsafe conditions or not.

So, is the employer responsible for the miners deaths? The answer is yes, but only in the sense that a gun manufacturer is responsible for their product being used to shoot someone. In other words he may have created a situation where the conditions for something bad to happen existed, but he didn't whip and beat them into going down into the mine to work anymore than a gun manufacturer points their product at someone and pulls the trigger.

Ultimately it's all about personal responsibility. Unfortunately that's something people in this country have been taught doesn't really matter anymore. Regardless of what happens, there is always something, somewhere to tell you the problem belongs to someone else. By the time the fingers all get done pointing, NO ONE is responsible for anything because for each one it's always the others fault. Sounds to me like that's the same thing happening here, except that the agencies have to point their finger somewhere in order to make money off of fines, and in this case take away a mans freedom because 10 other guys decided that taking a chance and doing something unsafe was OK with them, as anything that happened wasn't their fault.

To put this all in a really simple situation that all can understand. God made the world and provided nice, flat, green meadows that you can lounge around in. He also provided mountains and sheer cliff faces. So, here we have it, He provided the nice, safe meadow, and he also provided the wildly unsafe cliff. However YOU decided to climb the cliff face -vs- kicking back and watching the clouds in the meadow.so again, who is responsible? In the end, take out all the regulations, the inspectors, and all the other BS, and it's just that simple.

Unfortunately our illustrious leaders have put way many regulations, etc into place in an attempt to take the human factor out of everything, but in the end, to quote Ron White, "You can't fix stupid". Sadly, from what I have seen, they have managed to regulate it, so instead of having a species where survival of the fittest actually works, they have protected the idiots from themselves, and allowed they have been allowed to carry on living. So, in essence, "stupid" has been allowed to breed.......and the employer is now responsible for the lives of all the idiots working for him....instead of them being responsible for themselves.

 

[dr sportster]

These incidents are not rare in high rise construction. There was a post on here last week about a guy killed in Jersey City by a falling tape measure. A high rise structure takes on a life of its own . Even the noise from the site will scare yuppies away on the street below.