For On The Floor: OSHA at 45 — Room to Improve, But On the Right Track

Last year, I wrote a column about the owner of a small East Coast manufacturing operation who was having trouble with the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). It involved a false claim an employee had made about his plant’s safety that, in turn, escalated into a series of confrontations between the agency and the owner. The story was disturbing because the owner felt persecuted, which is far removed from OSHA’s mission. The situation does, however, reflect a perception problem—sometimes fact-based, sometimes not—that some business owners have had with this federal agency since its inception in 1970.

As OSHA begins its 45th year of operation, where does it stand? New this year are revised reporting requirements for U.S. businesses that require more detailed reporting of injury types and lost work time (see Efficient Plant December News or osha.gov for details). The move is expected to help businesses sharpen their focus on workplace safety and improve workplace-injury data. Importantly, the agency is already in a position to take credit for its contribution to 2014’s continuation of a multi-year decline in serious workplace injuries, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Asked for their perception of OSHA today, most of our Efficient Plant Reader Panel respondents say they understand and agree with its mission. Most also have first-hand familiarity with OSHA’S mission and on-site procedures, having experienced one or more inspections in their careers. Some respondents say the agency could do better, but, encouragingly, none report having encountered a situation like the one we covered in 2014. Most also consider their operations’ safety level average or above average. Here are their views:

What do you think of the job OSHA does overall in its efforts to improve workplace safety?

“I believe OSHA is trying to help organizations, but most of them are fearful of working together with OSHA.”

Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor (Upper Midwest)

“I think OSHA does a good job identifying the areas that companies need to focus on due to past violations. But I also believe they are over-safe in some areas where their rules may actually put the worker in an unsafe position. We have had OSHA inspections and violations. Our main violation in the past has been guarding issues. We still struggle with that at times.”

Production Support Manager, Midwest 

“OSHA, with all things considered, is doing the best possible job. My site is a VPP [Voluntary Protection Program] Site and has just gotten our renewal, so we have had an OSHA visit, and in OSHA’s opinion we have proved to be a very responsive organization on all things safety.”

Maintenance Coordinator, Mid-Atlantic

“We invite OSHA staff to come and visit our operations at any time. Their input on our safety programs and their new concepts have been an excellent experience.”

Former Chief Maintenance Engineer (now instructor), West

“I feel OSHA, being a federal agency, is too big to be really effective at handling specific issues, and the concept of a safety and health administration could be better managed at the state level. I also have the impression that OSHA’s biggest influence is through fines and penalties rather than through accident prevention. I think it should be the other way around.”

Maintenance Engineer, West

“Companies must use [OSHA] guidelines to have a safe and effective workplace. Most employees do not know what to do in an emergency. I believe all plants have discrepancies that, if left alone could potentially kill employees. Companies must also have a knowledgeable person inspect the electrical status of their buildings and prioritize needed repairs.”

Consulting Electrical Engineer, South

What, if anything, about the new OSHA requirements will impact your job or your site’s operation?

“Nothing will impact my job with the new requirements. It just means when things happen, we will need to report the situation sooner.”

Production Support Manager, Midwest 

“There will be virtually no impact to our operation, as we already go by the new standards and meet all the requirements. We do this not because they are new, but because it is the right thing. The average injury costs a company approximately $ 37,000 no matter how you count the beans. We value all of our employees and have a good amount of training dollars in each.”

Maintenance Coordinator, Mid-Atlantic

“OSHA’s new requirements pertaining to our operations have been an improvement on our present systems.  We keep everyone informed of the new rules through posters, meetings and our safety newsletter.”

Former Chief Maintenance Engineer (now instructor), West

“We have been using the new requirements since before they were in effect, but I can’t say I have noticed any difference.”

Maintenance Leader, Midwest

How would you describe the safety level of your operation? How has it changed over the past five years?

“I consider us average, based upon our benchmarking of others in our industry, and our status hasn’t changed much in the past five years.”

Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor (Upper Midwest)

“Our safety level is average. We put a lot of effort in getting out the rules and having positive safety engagements, but we fail in being consistent when the rules are broken. In the past five years our level of safety has stayed about the same.”

Production Support Manager, Midwest 

“Our program is running above average. This level of safety has had a tremendous change in the last five years because of our commitment to a strong safety program. This includes weekly discussions of the OSHA 1910.12 and especially the OSHA 1926 Subpart A thru Subpart CC. Our short meetings have kept the subject of safety highly visible. We also require all our staff to have an OSHA 10-hour card and a Red Cross First Aid (CPR) card.”

Former Chief Maintenance Engineer (now instructor), West

“Safety is our number-one priority, followed by quality. We have many safety awards that have come from the national level. A lot of our safety standards are actually above OSHA and [our state] standards, and we are inspected by state and national personal. Every year we also have a joint company and union audit. We also have a monthly joint inspection which checks out a different area of the plant. Each department has a Safety Champion that requires special training.”

Maintenance Leader, Midwest

“We’re about average for the industry we are in, and above average if you compare us to all industries. But our level of safety has suffered over the past few years due to changes in culture and the amount of new personnel we have brought in. The learning curve has been higher than our original estimates.”

Maintenance Coordinator, Mid-Atlantic

“We are above average for our industry, which already has a pretty low accident rate. This is because our employees generally don’t feel pressured to take chances to get a job done quicker, and they are provided everything they need to do any job safely. This level of safety/accident rate has held fairly steady over a long period of time.”

Maintenance Engineer, West

About the EP Reader Panel

The Efficient Plant Reader Panel includes approximately 100 working industrial maintenance practitioners and consultants who have volunteered to answer bi-monthly questions prepared by our editorial staff. Panelist identities are not revealed, and their responses are not necessarily projectable. The Panel welcomes new members: Have your comments and observations included in this column by joining the EP Reader Panel. To be considered, e-mail your name and contact information to rcarter@efficientplantmag.com with “Reader Panel” in the subject line. All Panelists are automatically included in an annual cash-prize drawing after one year of active participation.