Now I've seen it all

[tkb]

Today on a job I saw 2 drywall tapers on stilts with joint compound buckets screwed to the bottom of the stilts for added height.

Also found at least 20 cords with broken ground pins and 16 gauge. Most plugged in backwards.

Debris everywhere. very hazardous to walk.

No handrails or toeboards at the elevator opening at the basement level. 4' drop.

Hardhats required. Only the electricians wear them.

Shorts and sneakers worn by a lot of the other trades.

The GC doesn't enforce safety very good.
Production is more important I guess.

If the INS showed up most would probably run.

The EC said that he has told the GC about the safety violations.

Wouldn't OSHA also hold the EC responsible for the cord violations since they are the electrical experts on the job. None of the cords belong to or were being used by the electricians, but were plugged into the temp GFCI outlets on the job.

What a mess.

 

[sparky_magoo]

Re: Now I've seen it all

In CA, Cal-OSHA will cite other contractors on a job site for overlooking gross violations. Here, you could be cited for the drywallers cord violations if youe the EC or even the painter.

 

[tkb]

Re: Now I've seen it all

I believe here in MA it is the same.
I think that stilts are illegal also.

I have passed this concern along to the EC. I am just helping them on this job. The EC is a safe company it's all the others around this job that are unsafe.

While I agree about the cords, I don't think that is the electricians place to cut cords to stop the violations. I could lead to violence and retaliation.

I just hope that this EC follows through and notifys the GC in writing about these violations to at least CYA.

 

[rbalex]

Re: Now I've seen it all

Section 6400 California Labor Code:

6400. (a) Every employer shall furnish employment and a place of employment that is safe and healthful for the employees therein.
(b) On multiemployer worksites , both construction and non-construction, citations may be issued only to the following categories of employers when the division has evidence that an employee was exposed to a hazard in violation of any requirement enforceable by the division:
(1) The employer whose employees were exposed to the hazard (the exposing employer).
(2) The employer who actually created the hazard (the creating employer).
(3) The employer who was responsible, by contract or through actual practice, for safety and health conditions on the worksite, which is the employer who had the authority for ensuring that the hazardous condition is corrected (the controlling employer).
(4) The employer who had the responsibility for actually correcting the hazard (the correcting employer).
The employers listed in paragraphs (2) to (4), inclusive, of this subdivision may be cited regardless of whether their own employees were exposed to the hazard.
(c) It is the intent of the Legislature, in adding subdivision (b) to this section, to codify existing regulations with respect to the responsibility of employers at multiemployer worksites. Subdivision (b) of this section is declaratory of existing law and shall not be construed or interpreted as creating a new law or as modifying or changing an existing law.
[RBA note: bold italics mine]

A similar statement is in most State's equivalent labor codes. FedOSHA also has similar verbiage. I just had quick access to this one because I was very recently (as in last week) showing my employer that they had liability whether they were the "creating employer" or not. Thankfully, they used it as the basis for forcing another employer to correct some items, most of which are now complete.

 

[charlie tuna]

Re: Now I've seen it all

i recently found a drywall finisher standing on two buckets of drywall mud to get the correct hieghth on his mixing drill! but he was out on the pourch area 14 stories high, which was wet from a recent rain shower. most of the guard rail was down because of loading in drywall products. his 1/2 ragid old drill was directly wired to a cat-05 cable!!
one end had a male non-grounding plug made up using two pair for each of the neutral and hot. the other end was wired directly to the drill motor cord!!!

 

[petersonra]

Re: Now I've seen it all

Is someone exaggerating just a bit?

 

[hbiss]

Re: Now I've seen it all

his 1/2 ragid old drill was directly wired to a cat-05 cable!!

I absolutely believe that. Told ya that stuff is dangerous!

-Hal

 

[sparky_magoo]

Re: Now I've seen it all

On my job today, I witnessed the lathers plugging in a cord with raw conductors into one of the temporary receceptacles. They had raw 14/s NMB conductors stuffed into the GFCI receptacle. The other end of this cable was wrapped around the exposed conductors of a DeWalt job-site radio. At this splice, the "workers" wrapped the conductors of a 16 AWG around the splice. This extension cord fed another radio 100' away. There is no Super on the job I am working. It is just me and six, other-than-my-race people, working on the job. The super hasn't been around since I started the project. How should I proceed without getting my butt kicked? I kow if CAL-OSHA showed up, I would be considered the responsible person on site, as I am the only foreman available.
If I were to have cut their cords, I would not be available tonight to whine about this ongoing situation.
I hope I don't sound racist, but what should I do.
The owner of my company only wants me to finish.
BTW I have seen people in my position receive large fines from CAL-OSHA for simmilar circumstances.

 

[H.L.]

Re: Now I've seen it all

The Fed OSHA's #1 inspection priority is cases of imminent danger. It sounds to me like some of the things sited would qualify. Also, I was at a seminar a couple of weeks ago and one of the presenters was an OSHA inspector trainer and he said one of the things that he teaches OSHA field inspectors to look for and cite is extension cord violations.

HALE

 

[petersonra]

Re: Now I've seen it all

Supposedly they get brownie points for these kind of violations because the fines are typically not reduced like for many other violations.

Don't know if that is the case or not.

 

[ryan_618]

Re: Now I've seen it all

Originally posted by sparky_magoo:
In CA, Cal-OSHA will cite other contractors on a job site for overlooking gross violations. Here, you could be cited for the drywallers cord violations if youe the EC or even the painter.

The painter could get cited?

 

[charlie tuna]

Re: Now I've seen it all

just gotta have that radio,
we came in on monday morning after the drywall finishers had worked over the weekend. we found the charred remains of a boom box radio in an office hard wired to the 277 volt light switch!

and my post above was fact! i personally was suprised that a 1/2 inch drill motor would run and mix drywall mud on two pair 24, especially since the cable was over 150 long!

 

[maryl]

Re: Now I've seen it all

Our electricians are instructed that when they are working with other trades who are creating a hazard our Foreman should notify the General and make a note in his Foreman's log. He also needs to a. leave the area of the hazard, b. correct the hazard, c. or avoid the hazard.

From what I'm understanding from your discussion thus far. If a violation is electrical related, such as others using bad extension cords, we can be cited because the violations are electrically related, and we are electricians, even though we have done all the above with respect to the Multi-Employer Citation Policy?