From: Jeff Adrian (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Sep 14 1998 - 12:07:44 CDT
Re: Questions for OSHA 9/14/98
Wayne: These are all good questions, to which I would like to add but one emminently practical question based upon my personal experience(s):
1. Why doesn't hold accountable the manufacturers of equipment to design and build in safety devices (guards, etc.) that take into account HOW THE EQUIPMENT IS ACTUALLY USED? What I mean by this is, it is NOT sufficient for a manufacturer to design, for
example, a guard that just meets the manufacturer's liability concerns but ignores how the equipment is used and that fails to take into account human nature. This last failure "sets up" the equipment user (the printer) for OSHA violations because given
Hope this gets some people thinking.
The John Roberts Company
Wayne Pferdehirt wrote:
>Following are some suggested questions provided by GATF. Any >feedback re. which of these or others proposed so far (or others you >suggest) are the 5 most important to ask OSHA? Speak up to be >counted.
>------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
>Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:42:57 EDT
>Subject: Questions for OSHA
>Here are some questions Gary and I have put together.
>1. Is cleaning a moving blanket a violation of any OSHA standard? IF
>so which ones?
>2. Why doesn't OSHA take any action against the suppliers and/or
>manufacturers which provide data sheets for the poor information they
>3. How can a printer know if they are meeting the machine guarding
>4. How does OSHA expect a small printer (20 or less) to comply with
>all these regulations? Why not develop a short form for compliance?
>5. With the injury and illness rates coming down, why is OSHA
>pursuing an ergonomics standard?
>6. When is OSHA going to introduce their simplified injury and
>7. How does OSHA expect non-safety officials to train on the various
>standards (Lo/To, HazCom, PPE)? Hiring a consultant is not the answer
>for most of the smaller printers with limited financial resources.
>8. Is OSHA looking at developing industry specific regulations?
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1306355015 ; 14 SEP 98 10:04:41 >UT
>Received: from SUPERIOR.GREAT-LAKES.NET by mail.johnroberts.com
> with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.0.3); 14 SEP 98 10:04:39 UT
>Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by superior.great-lakes.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA16423
> for printech-and-printreg-outgoing; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:49:30 -0400 (EDT)
>X-Authentication-Warning: superior.great-lakes.net: majordom set sender to >firstname.lastname@example.org using -f
>Received: from cae.wisc.edu (galaga.cae.wisc.edu [184.108.40.206])
> by superior.great-lakes.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16419
> for <email@example.com>; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:49:28 -0400 >(EDT)
>Received: from epd.engr.wisc.edu (epd.engr.wisc.edu [220.127.116.11])
> by cae.wisc.edu (8.9.1/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA07480
> for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:48:42 -0500 >(CDT)
>Received: from EPD/SpoolDir by epd.engr.wisc.edu (Mercury 1.32);
> 14 Sep 98 09:48:42 CDT6CST
>Received: from SpoolDir by EPD (Mercury 1.32); 14 Sep 98 09:48:30 CDT6CST
>Received: from wayne by epd.engr.wisc.edu (Mercury 1.31);
> 14 Sep 98 09:48:29 CDT6CST
>Comments: Authenticated sender is <email@example.com>
>From: "Wayne Pferdehirt" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Organization: Engineering Professional Developmen
>Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:48:28 CST
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Subject: Re: 5 Most Important Questions to Ask OSHA
>X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.53/R1)
>X-Comment: This message was sent to you from the
>X-Comment: email discussion list. If you reply to this message, your
>X-Comment: message will be sent everyone on the list.
>X-Comment: If your reply is of a personal nature, please address it to
>X-Comment: "Wayne Pferdehirt" <email@example.com>
>X-Comment: Please verify all addresses before sending email.
>X-Comment: Thank you for your participation in
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
Email the PNEAC Webmaster