Describe OSHA and the provisions of this statute in your own words.
A division of the US Labor Department is the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). In the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the national congress established OSHA to establish standards, education, assistance, outreach, and training to ensure safe and healthy working conditions for all American workers (DeNisi, & Griffin, 268). The OSHA administrator, who also happens to be a member of the president's cabinet, is the assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health.
The OSHA law
seeks to ensure that businesses give workers a working environment that is free from known work dangers like exposure to excess noise levels, toxic chemicals unsanitary conditions, heat or cold stress, and mechanical hazards. The law requires that the employer makes sure that drinking water is available which is safe and healthy (DeNisi & Griffin, 269). The nozzles of drinking fountains should be such that, water leaving the nozzle does not come back and the nozzle made in such a way that it does not come into contact with a person’s nose or mouth. Firefighting equipment should be availed and well maintained.
In this particular case was Belcher Manufacturing guilty or innocent of safety violations that resulted in the death of William Carlson? You must discuss two reasons in the support of your response. (4pts)
The Company was not guilty. To begin with, the company was compliant with the OSHA standards and was doing everything in their reach to make sure that all employees were safe. This means they were providing trainings, establishing partnerships, outreaches and encouraged safety and health of workers in their working efforts. This means that, Carlson was ignorant of the trainings and did not take the efforts to make sure he was safe seriously (DeNisi & Griffin, 272). The company therefore does not refute the prosecutor’s argument of the companies, responsibility to provide trainings, periodically reinforcing proper procedures which it actually did.
The company did come up with a standard for testing the compressors, the same standards that Carlson ignored. The standards were tested before they could be implemented to make sure that they were safe and healthy for implementation in a work setup. The company was responsible for monitoring practices as argued by the prosecutor, but it is important to understand that the trainings were aimed to improve the levels of monitoring to self-monitoring for a safer and healthier work environment.
Irrespective of the jury’s decision in this case, discuss three things the company should do now to avoid a similar incident in the future? (3pts)
Specific to this case, the company should make regular and impromptu spot checks to ensure that the set standards are properly adhered to. If Carlson was aware that an inspector could appear any time to check on whether he is properly testing the compressor, maybe he would have followed the right procedures.
The company should make it clear of professional actions that will be taken in the case that one is found not following the set procedures to accomplishing a given task. Job security is one of the key factors that promote discipline at work places (DeNisi & Griffin, 275). Failure to adhere to the set safety rules should be countered with severe professional consequences including contract termination.
The company should also increase the frequency of trainings as a way of increasing the emphasis placed on safety at work places. Monitoring is important in making sure that all employees adhere to the set safety and healthy rules. Increasing number of trainings means place more emphasis on self-monitoring which if it works would be more effective than monitoring by a supervisor or any other superior person.
Work Cited
DeNisi, Angelo., & Griffin, Ricky. HR3. New York, NY: Cengage Learning, 2016.
