What recourse do you provide to a subcontractor who has shown a consistent pattern of unsafe behavior and actions in regard to keeping their workers safe while working at heights

Source excerpt

- 3. An exposing employer must exercise reasonable care to discover a hazard by demonstrating is has regularly and diligently inspected the worksite. - 4. If the exposing employer has the authority to correct or remove the hazard, it must correct or remove the hazard with reasonable diligence. If the exposing employer lacks such authority, it may still be cited if it fails to do each of the following: - a. Make a good effort to ask the creating and/or controlling employer to correct the hazard; - b. Inform its employees of the hazard; and - c. Take reasonable alternative measures, consistent with its authority on the worksite, to protect its employees. - 5. EXAMPLE 3: Employer Sub S is responsible for inspecting and cleaning a work area in Plant P around a large, permanent hole at the end of each day. An OSHA standard requires guardrails. There are no guardrails around the hole and Sub S employees do not use personal fall protection, although it would be feasible to do so. Sub S has no authority to install guardrails. However, it did ask Employer P, which operates the plant, to install them. P refused to install guardrails. Analysis: Step 1: Sub S is an exposing employer because its employees are exposed to the fall hazard. - Step 2: While Sub S has no authority to install guardrails, it is required to comply with UOSH requirements to the extent feasible. It must take steps to protect its employees and ask the employer that controls the hazard - Employer P - to correct it. Although Sub S asked for guardrails, since the hazard was not corrected, Sub S was responsible for taking reasonable alternative protective steps, such as providing personal fall protection. Because that was not done, Sub S is citable for the violation. - 6. EXAMPLE 4: Unprotected rebar on either side of an access ramp presents an impalement hazard. Sub E, an electrical subcontractor, does not have the authority to cover the rebar. However, several times Sub E asked the general contra…

Source excerpt

- 3. If the creating employer does not have the ability or authority to correct or remove the hazard, it may be cited if it did not notify the controlling or correcting employer of the hazard. - 4. EXAMPLE 1: Employer Host operates a factory. It contracts with Company S to service machinery. Host fails to cover drums of a chemical despite S's repeated requests that it do so. This results in airborne levels of the chemical that exceed the Permissible Exposure Limit. Analysis: Step 1: Host is a creating employer because it caused employees of S to be exposed to the air contaminant above the PEL. - Step 2: Host failed to implement measures to prevent the accumulation of the air contaminant. It could have met its obligation by implementing the simple engineering control of covering the drums. Having failed to implement a feasible engineering control to meet the PEL, Host is citable for the hazard. - 5. EXAMPLE 2: Employer M hoists materials onto Floor 8, damaging perimeter guardrails. Neither its own employees nor employees of other employers are exposed to the hazard. It takes effective steps to keep all employees, including those of other employers, away from the unprotected edge and informs the controlling employer of the problem. Employer M lacks authority to fix the guardrails itself. Analysis: - Step 1: Employer M is a creating employer because it caused a hazardous condition by damaging the guardrails. - Step 2: While it lacked the authority to fix the guardrails, it took immediate and effective steps to keep all employees away from the hazard and notified the controlling employer of the hazard. Employer M is not citable since it took effective measures to prevent employee exposure to the fall hazard. ## C. Exposing Employer - 1. Step 1: Definition: An exposing employer is one that exposed its own employees to a hazard. If the exposing employer created the hazard, it is citable as the creating employer, not the exposing employer. - 2. Step 2: A…

Source excerpt

- Step 2: GH has taken reasonable steps to try to make sure that S meets safety and health requirements. Its inspection frequency is appropriate in light of the low number of workers at the site, lack of significant changes in the nature of the work and types of hazards involved, GH's knowledge of S's history of compliance and its effective safety and health efforts on this job. GH has exercised reasonable care and is not citable for this condition. - ii. EXAMPLE 7: Employer GC contracts with Employer P to do painting work. GC has the same contract authority over P as Employer GH had in Example 6. GC has never before worked with P. GC conducts inspections that are sufficiently frequent in light of the factors listed above in (G)(3). Further, during a number of its inspections, GC finds P has violated fall protection requirements. It points the violations out to P during each inspection but takes no further actions. Analysis: - Step 1: GC is a controlling employer since it has general supervisory authority over the site, including a contractual right of control over P. - Step 2: GC took adequate steps to meet its obligation to discover violations. However, it failed to take reasonable steps to require P to correct hazards since it lacked a graduated system of enforcement. A citation to GC for the fall protection violations is appropriate. - iii. EXAMPLE 8: Employer GC contracts with Sub E, an electrical subcontractor. GC has full contract authority over Sub E, as in Example 6. Sub E installs an electric panel box exposed to the weather and implements an assured equipment grounding conductor program, as required under the contract. It fails to connect a grounding wire inside the box to one of the outlets. This incomplete ground is not apparent from a visual inspection. Further, GC inspects the site with a frequency appropriate for the site in light of the factors discussed above in (G)(3). It saw the panel box but did not test the outlets to determine if th…