Last November, OSHA issued a final rule that would finally allow them to enforce language, which has been in their standards since 2010, requiring construction crane operators to be formally qualified to operate the equipment. The first day of enforcement for that rule had been set for November 10, 2018, but the agency has recently proposed a new rule that would pull back some of the initial requirements.
On May 18, 2018, OSHA announced that it was proposing a change to the crane operator qualification requirements that they hoped would allow more operators to meet the requirements.
According to the Federal Register notice, the proposed rule removes the provision that “requires different levels of certification based on rated lifting capacity of equipment.” Testing organizations will still be allowed to certify workers based upon rated capacity, but they will no longer be required to do so. The proposal also establishes clearer minimum requirements for determining an operator’s competency.
Full text of the Crane Operator Qualification Proposal can be found on the Federal Register. Section III gives a detailed summary and explanation of the proposed changes, which will be helpful for anyone that will be affected by the rules.
If you would like to comment on the proposal, you can do so electronically by visiting http://www.regulations.gov. The Federal Register notice provides detailed instructions for doing so:
“This docket may include several Federal Register notices for active rulemakings; therefore it is necessary to select the correct notice, or its ID number, to submit comments for this rulemaking. After accessing the docket (OSHA-2007-0066), check the “proposed rule” box in the column headed “Document Type,” find the document posted on the date of publication of this document, and click the “Submit a Comment” link.”
Multi-employer worksites are extremely common in the construction industry, but they can still make work extremely complicated. One of those complications results when a subcontractor receives a governmental violation, such as an OSHA violation. As a controlling employer on the site, can a general contractor be held responsible for safety hazards of a subcontractor? One court says yes.
After an abundance of delays on rule that would require crane operators to be formally qualified to operate, OSHA finally landed on an effective date of February 7, 2019. After receiving feedback from industry partners, OSHA has decided to delay enforcement for 60 days for contractors who make a “good faith effort” to comply.
As has been expected for a few months now, OSHA has officially removed the requirement for large companies with 250 or more employees to submit OSHA Forms 300 and 301. The administration cited privacy concerns as the reason for the change.
Be careful - owners and contractors are now being held criminally liable for their carelessness and disregard of safety protocols.
Since the 2016 Federal budget was passed, OSHA has increased their maximum citation penalty amount to adjust for inflation on a yearly basis. The 2019 increase has recently been announced.
Last November, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. announced felonious assault charges against a contractor’s superintendent and a manufacturer’s branch manager after two men suffered horrific injuries on a New York jobsite. Last week, OSHA formally announced citations against the St. Louis, Missouri based contractor.
After an uptick in construction industry fatalities in 2016, a recent Bureau of Labor Statistics report shows that both the amount of construction worker deaths and the rate of fatality dropped in 2017.
At the National Safety Council Congress & Expo on October 23, 2018, OSHA’s deputy director of Directorate of Enforcement Programs, Patrick Kapust, announced their 10 most frequesntly cited safety violations for their fiscal year 2018.
On March 15, 2018, 6 people were killed and 8 others were injured when an under construction pedestrian bridge collapsed in Florida. Several months later, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released their preliminary report while conducting an official investigation. The NTSB later issued an “Investigative Update” to their preliminary report in August. In Mid-November, the NTSB released a 2nd investigative update, narrowing their root cause theories.