FEBRUARY 13, 2006:

You don't want to tick off an OSHA inspector. Trust me on this one.

We don't expect you employers out there to be our friend. But we expect cooperation and respect. I'm not talking just about how you deal with us when we show up at your site. I'm also talking about your attitude toward OSHA standards.

Every once in a while some smart aleck will tell me that he-or she-doesn't have to follow an OSHA standard because it's not "realistic" or because "it's not how we do things in our industry." Nothing burns Ol' Nick's bacon more than hearing something like this. That's just what happened today. And if I sound upset, it's because I am.

10:28 A.M.

I didn't start the day in a bad mood. Just the opposite. It's the day before Valentine's Day and I got my roses for Mrs. O ordered nice and early. So I'm feeling kind and gentle.

That should be good news for U.R.D. Pitts Generating Corp. - the employer I'm on my way to see. Pitts is one of the good guys in our area. Quiet. No incidents. No complaints. A few years ago, I inspected the place. But it was a programmed inspection. [Editor's Note: A programmed inspection is one that's scheduled, as opposed to one in response to a complaint or referral from an agency.] The place was squeaky clean.

So I was surprised to hear that we got a complaint about Pitts. It was from a supervisor. Check that, a former supervisor who got laid off. It's pretty common for employees to report problems with their ex-companies once they get the pink slip.

But I talked to this guy and I don't think he was just blowing smoke. He was sharp. An engineer. And he knows the OSHA standards, at least the lockout/tagout (LOTO) standard. He claims that Pitts is taking shortcuts with LOTO. I'm taking a ride to the Pitts plant to check it out.

11:51 A.M.

Turns out the engineer was right. It's a group LOTO situation.

The standard says that devices must be attached to machines locked out during service or maintenance. This alerts people that the machine is being worked on and shouldn't be energized. Group lockout is okay as long as each employee authorized to work with the machine attaches a personal lockout or tagout device when work begins and removes it when the work is over. Or they can all sign off on one master tag.

Pitts isn't doing this. Instead of having each employee attach a personal device or sign off on a master tag, they're keeping a master list of all workers covered by the work. Then they're having one supervisor go around and tell each worker when the lockout or tagout device has been attached and when it's been removed. The supervisor then checks off each name on the list after he delivers the message to the worker.

I suspect that the supervisor who blew the whistle was keeping the master list while he was working for Pitts. That's how he knew what was going on.

12:20 P.M.

Taking shortcuts with OSHA standards is never a good thing, especially when it involves LOTO. I've seen too many machine accidents in my time.

But while I can't condone it, what Pitts is doing isn't the worst thing I've ever seen. It's pretty easy to abate [Editor's note: Abate is OSHA-speak for correct.] Knowing Pitts, it's probably just an honest mistake. And since nobody's gotten hurt, thank God, I'm not necessarily going to issue a citation. All I want is to get it fixed before somebody does get hurt.

At least this is what I'm thinking when I step into the office of Lou Sitania, the Pitts plant manager, for the closing conference. I explain the problem and ask him to make sure it's abated within 15 days. Sitania just sits there at his desk staring into space. Then he takes off his glasses and starts rubbing the bridge of his nose. Finally, he speaks.

"Mr. O'Shay, have you ever worked for a power company?"

"No," I say.

"I didn't think so. You see, if you had, you'd know that our lockout procedure is totally in line with industry practice."

I'm trying to stay calm. "I don't care if it's industry practice, the OSHA standard says that each employee has to affix a personal device or sign a master tag."

"With all due respect, Mr. O'Shay, that's completely inefficient and unnecessary. That's why nobody in our industry does it that way."

"I didn't come here to debate, Mr. Sitania. I'm issuing you a citation for violating the OSHA lockout standard. You will receive a notice by certified mail informing you of the fine amount and abatement requirements."

Sitania's expression doesn't change. "You might as well cite every power company in America, Mr. O'Shay."

"Goodbye, Mr. Sitania. I will show myself out."

The Moral

OSHA is not an ivory tower. We make the effort to consult and cooperate with industry. That's why a lot of the OSHA standards incorporate industry practices. Or they leave room for employers to use discretion when it comes to implementing the standard.

But doggone it, if an OSHA standard does specify a method and you don't follow it, you're breaking the law. The fact that the OSHA method isn't the industry standard is no defense. If you think the industry way is better, lobby to have the OSHA standard changed. But never, never debate it with an OSHA inspector. That's one argument you can't win. All you're going to do is tick off the inspector.

And you don't want to tick off an OSHA inspector. Trust me on this one.

* * * * *

Happy Valentine's Day, and remember. I'll be watching you.

Nick O'Shay
OSHA Inspector

* * * * *

GOT A CASE FOR NICK?

Have you or anybody you know had a real-life encounter with an OSHA or OHS inspector that might work for a Nick O'Shay story? Send it to glennd@bongarde.com.

The Canadian Perspective

The Canadian system works the same way: If an industry standard contradicts an OHS regulation, the latter prevails. Nick's angry reaction is just what a Canadian employer can expect if it tries to debate the merits of an OHS standard with an inspector.

One part of the story that doesn't necessarily apply to Canadian companies: The group lockout rules. They differ from province to province.

Story Tools:  E-mail this to a friend  Print This Post Top