Measure targets rules on worker safety

Monday, May 1, 2000 | 11:30 a.m.

A group of roofing contractors is pushing for changes to Nevada's Occupational Safety and Health standards to limit fines and change the rules providing for protections against falls.

Two of three companies identified as supporters of the measure have had workers die in construction falls in the past six months.

State Sen. Maurice Washington, R-Sparks, has drafted the recommendations and held two public hearings in Carson City. The state Legislature could act on them when it goes back in session in January 2001.

Industry representatives and Washington stress that their aim isn't to do away with safety measures on construction sites or to have state standards fall below the minimum federal requirements.

However, union representatives say that is exactly their aim, and the consequences, besides more worker injuries and deaths, could be more federal oversight.

The state's on-the-job safety plan received full federal approval last month after a 28-year effort, making Nevada one of 16 states able to enforce labor rules because its standards have been found to follow federal guidelines.

States with approved plans historically do not enact worker safety legislation that conflicts with the federal minimum standards, said Maria Barcos, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration liaison for state programs. That's because if the state standards fall below federal minimums, OSHA steps in to enforce the rules.

Washington said the point of his recommendations is not to go below the federal standard.

"The idea is not to get rid of regulations, (but) to look at them to see which ones make good sense," he said. "We're not trying to go after the unions or after OSHA. We're just trying to make some sense of the regulations."

Although the chief targets of his effort are the rules governing fall protection, Washington's recommendations would apply broadly to many worker safety rules. Among his proposals:

Some of the rules already seem to be in place. Repeat violations of safety rules generally lead to increased fines. Employers also tend to have fines reduced if they can prove they have working safety programs.

Union officials sharply criticized Washington's proposals as an attempt to undermine worker safety. The recommendations, they said, would get construction contractors off the hook for safety violations and accidents.

Falls are the single leading cause of worker fatalities in the state and nationally, they agreed. Of about 60 fatalities on the job last year, eight were from falls at construction sites.

In 1997, the last year for which complete federal records are available, Nevada construction workers were 30 percent more likely to be injured than the national average.

Two of the companies pushing for the rule changes, in fact, have had fatalities on the job.

A Martin Ironworks worker died in a fall in February and a Cedar Roofing worker died in a fall last November. Both were honored at a Las Vegas ceremony Thursday for state workers who died on the job in the past year. The other company behind the rules change is Scott Roofing, Washington said.

OSHA records also show that Cedar Roofing has a history of 41 violations and thousands of dollars in fines imposed by the state since 1985.

Union officials argue that limiting fines and the ability of inspectors to levy higher penalties when situations warrant would give companies the ability to ignore the rules.

John Martini, executive vice president and organizing director of the United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers, said he was shocked by the industry proposals.

"If they're dying there and they want to get rid of the regs, they're going to kill more people," Martini said. Some contractors don't seem to have a problem with the regulations, especially a troublesome one requiring workers to be tethered to a safety line for high construction work.

Martini promised a fight if the proposals make it to the state Legislature.

"This isn't unique," said John Barnhard, the union's safety and health director in Washington, D.C. "There've been efforts over the OSHA act in various ways. This is just another effort to do the same thing."

OSHA would not allow the standards to go below federal minimums, Barcos said. If legislation passed that didn't meet the federal requirement, the "federal OSHA would assert jurisdiction," she said. The agency could take immediate action -- bringing in federal worksite inspectors -- if such legislation passed.

The federal agency would more likely review any legislation and head off a law that wouldn't pass muster, she said.

However, OSHA is seeking industry input on the economic impact of safety rules and the usefulness of those rules in a rewrite of fall protection standards, Barcos said.

Mark Donahue, a general manager of Cedar Roofing, one of three companies pushing the recommendations, said the idea behind the proposals is partly to make an impact on that rewrite. He admits he doesn't think the recommendations will become law.

Donahue, based in the company's Reno office, said the problem the company has with the safety rules isn't the law itself, but the application of the law.

A big problem is that workers take themselves off tethers or otherwise ignore instructions and training from the company, Donahue said. He said the death at Cedar in November was an example of a worker ignoring management instructions.

"We're really trying to follow the rules but at some point we feel an employee has to take personal responsibility for his own actions," Donahue said.

The problem is that workers don't get in trouble for breaking the rules, just the company, Donahue said.

Cedar Roofing's policy is to issue three written warnings, then fire a worker for violating safety rules. But, he said, the scarcity of trained workers means they won't respond to threats of termination, since they can easily find work with another company.

"I have lost good people because they hear that 'You don't want to go to Cedar Roofing because they make you tie off,' " he said.

Another problem is the lack of consistency between inspectors, he said. One state safety inspector might give a safety plan or work site a clean bill of health, while another might impose thousands in fines.

A "serious" or "willful" violation can carry a $10,000 or $15,000 fine, Donahue said.

The money could be used for additional safety training or equipment and the fines can take any profit out of a job, he said.

"We are committed to safety and we really believe in safety," he said. "We just want some common sense entered into it."

Launce Rake covers growth issues for the Sun. He can be reached at (702) 259-4127 or by e-mail at lrake@lasvegassun.com.