OSHA, PPE Hazard Assessment, Injuries, Feasibility, greater hazard, and Industry Practices (OSHRC Decision)
We see this argument from time to time, hence I am sharing this OSHRC decision from last week as a discussion "starter" at facilities, especially food facilities where safety glasses are not used for whatever reason(s). This case involved a chicken processing facility that chose to NOT use safety glasses on a "chicken deboning line". The facility had one previous eye injury on the line and the second eye injury is what brought OSHA in as it was a hospitalization. The company used several arguments to justify the lack of eye protection: infeasible, they fog up, not needed, safety glasses would create a greater hazard, safety glasses create a food safety hazard, and "employee misconduct". The ALG was NOT impressed, to say the least, with any of the defenses and sided with OSHA. Of course, this case may go before the full OSHRC and get reversed. Here are the details... Employees working on the debone line wear protective equipment. Each wears a gown over street clothes, cut-resistant gloves and sleeves, hearing protection, a hair net (and beard net where applicable), an apron, and rubber boots. Although used in other parts of the facility, employees on the debone line do NOT wear eye protection. According to unrebutted statements made by employees to the CSHO, employees are provided safety glasses by the temporary employment staffing agency but are prohibited from wearing them on the debone line by the host company. |
Partner Organizations I am proud to announce that The Chlorine Institute and SAFTENG have extended our"Partners in Safety" agreement for another year (2024) CI Members, send me an e-mail to request your FREE SAFTENG membership
Member Associations
|
