Leviton is passing bad information regarding OSHA! If this is the kind of OSHA compliance insight they are spreading at their compliance seminars then they have no business teaching. Tell them I (OSHA Professor)said that and be sure to give them my contact information. Anyone know who the president of Leviton is, and his or her e-mail. It won't be the first time that I've straightened out a president or CEO for spreading BS. Thatâ€™s the kind of crap that gives a bad name to the Agency whose mission is â€śprotecting Americas most valuable resourceâ€ť, the worker! Hey gang, thatâ€™s you and I.
Leviton began that article with. â€śOffering safety related products and services to your customers is a good idea for three reasonsâ€ť. And listed them. Then they began to talk OSHA. Well OSHA does not have jurisdiction over customers or the general public, only jurisdiction over employer / employee relationships. We donâ€™t regulate what an EC does to itâ€™s retail customers only what the EC does to his / her employees regarding safety and health.
OSHA does NOT fine or peanalize electrical contractors for cordsets brought on site and used by other trades. OSHA does NOT fine or penalize any trade or contractor for equipment brought on site by other trades, as long as there is no hazard created which exposes other trades. For example if an electrical contractor installed a temporary panel with outlets which were NOT GFCI protected and this was installed for the use of the various trades then the lack of GFCIâ€™s would be a hazard whereby exposing the trades using those outlets. In that case the electrical contractor could also be cited in addition to the trades using those unprotected outlets. On the other hand if the outlets installed by the electrical contractor were properly grounded and GFCI protected, and some other contractor plugged HIS defective cordset (damaged insulation, improper splices, missing ground, etc) into that outlet then only the owner and users of that cordset would be citeable.
Although OSHA accepts either GFCIâ€™s or an assured equipment grounding program (we adopted from earlier NEC Article 305), OSHA compliance investigators are seeing very little assured equipment grounding programs being used any more, only GFCIâ€™s. This is because the current NECâ€™s do not allow assured equipment grounding programs for 120 volt branch circuits any more, so the other AHJâ€™s enforcing the current NEC requirements are driving the trends. Leviton is out of touch with whatâ€™s currently happening out there in the industry.
â€śAll portable electric tools and equipment at the site should be grounded or double insulated. If they are not, it's a violation.â€ť Yes but first of all, as you electrical specialists know, Itâ€™s A SERIOUS ELECTROCUTION HAZARD.
As for who gets the citation, the contractor providing the tool, and if other employees (other than his) are using those defective tools then their employer is also subject to citation. If a contractor provides that defective tool and only his employees are using that tool then only he will receive a citation.
Itâ€™s all part of OSHAâ€™s â€śmulti employer policyâ€ť. OSHA can cite the creating employer (who created the hazard), the exposing employer (whoâ€™s employees were exposed to the hazard), and the controlling employer (who controls the site) this is usually the GC.
OSHA has a requirement in our construction standards which requires employers to train their employees to all the hazards they are likely to encounter and to avoid those hazards. So if a carpenter removes a guard railing for fall protection and the EC's employees are exposed to the fall hazard (walking right by the edge instead of avoiding the hazard by staying away) then both employers could be cited. If, on the other hand the exposed employees avoid the hazard and notify their employer and their employer notifies the controlling and creating employers of the hazard they created then you are covering yourselves against cations under the multi employer policy. Understand this is an abbreviated description / explanation and more information on this can be obtained from the OSHA web site at www.osha.gov
As for â€śratting outâ€ť other trades to OSHA and â€śde facto OSHA representativeâ€ś. You are obviously too young to remember what the trades were like in terms of hazards and death to your brothers and sisters before there was an OSHA. Do you allow friends to drive while impaired or do you take their keys away or drive them instead? Donâ€™t do anything like that with fellow brothers and sisters in the trades, you might save their lives, heck better to let them continue to be exposed to the serious hazards typically found on construction sites. Sooner or later the odds will catch up and someone will get hurt or killed. Then you might get to see that OSHA investigator.
â€śI see that OSHA flatly prohibits the socket-in-a-handy box kluge just like Joe Tedesco mentionedâ€ť
If thatâ€™s the box (either handy or 4 square) with prepunched knockouts being used on the end of a flexible cord then the answer is Yes. BTW OSHA adopted that from the NEC many years ago and until it got renotified in 2002 it was prohibited in article 370 - 23 and continues to be an NAPA (NEC) prohibition.. You make it sound like both a bad thing and a uniquely OSHA concept. Remember OSHA has very little electrical requirements that havenâ€™ t been adopted from NFPA standards. Primarily NFPA 70 (NEC) and NAPA 70 E.
I see and hear stuff like this frequently on this forum. Here is a real news flash regarding electrical hazards and compliance. If you are in compliance with current NFPA 70 (the NEC) and NFPA 70 E, you are in full compliance with OSHA and will not get any (electrically related) fines. So the real question is, how closely do the ECâ€™s follow these NFPA standards ?? Their bibles so to speak.
Hey gang, quit raggin on OSHA and go ragg on Leviton for BSâ€™n you guys and passing out crap information. It kinda makes me wonder about the accuracy in their product advertising.
BTW in most cases by the time we hear about a residential job itâ€™s over with. Itâ€™s definitely a problem in the way we have to randomly obtain and select sites to visit. By your own admissions sometimes permits aren't even obtained.
Perhaps our scheduling process will change someday to be able to get to more of these smaller residential projects.
I previously posted something on how OSHA schedules inspections on 12/8/02 on another thread. http://electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum14/HTML/000333.html
Thanks for lending me your ears ladies and gentlemen. I wish you all a very safe and prosperous 2003.
[This message has been edited by OSHA Professor (edited 01-04-2003).]