On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 22:02:11 -0500, Leuf
wrote:

On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 07:45:32 -0500, Frank Boettcher
wrote:

On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 00:39:16 -0500, Leuf
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:20:48 -0500, Frank Boettcher
wrote:

So how many people should it take to get hurt using an ill advised
"safety" device before either OSHA or the manufacturer would be moved
to specify or make something that works?

Well ideally there would be enough pressure for your company to be
going straight to the manufacturer saying your latch doesn't work for
us, on one side of me I've got my guys bitching they get hurt if they
use it and on the other I've got OSHA bitching if I don't use it. Do
something. But yes in reality it's just easier to pay the fine and
nothing changes until somebody gets killed.

With your last sentence, you must be assumming that there is an
inherent danger without the latches, and that somebody is more likely
to get killed with them removed. Certainly, my opinion would not be
the same. Maybe I don't share your confidence that the bureaucrat who
wrote the regulation was competent to do so.

No the last sentence I was talking more in general, that the status
quo gets maintained until something terrible happens and then everyone
wonders why no one did anything about it.

But you can imagine a situation where the latches were removed and an
accident happened that had nothing to do with the latches not being
there, but the media would get a hold of OSHA citing you for not
having them and be all over it but have lost interest in the story by
the time anyone actually figured out what really happened.

But my point is just that if the regulation says you gotta have the
latch but there are no serious repurcussions for ignoring the
regulation then there is no reason for anyone to either fix the
regulation or the device.


Valid points.

Frank

-Leuf