Vol: 46 | No: 2346 COR 40-8166 [¶22,948R] SAFE PRACTICES AND PERSONAL PROTECTION, PERSONAL SAFETY DEVICES AND SAFEGUARDS – FOOT PROTECTION, APPROPRIATE FOOT PROTECTION REQUIRED FOR EMPLOYEES EXPOSED TO FOOT INJURIES Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3385(a) (2019) – The Appeals Board affirmed that Employer violated the safety order by failing to provide appropriate foot protection, a serious violation. Employer’s argument that the citation was defective because the alleged violation description stated Employer failed to “provide” foot protection, while §3385 uses the term “required,” was rejected by the Appeals Board. The ALJ’s penalty determinations were upheld. Digest of COSHAB’s Decision After Reconsideration dated May 28, 2019, Inspection No. 1200875. Ed Lowry, Chair. Judith S. Freyman, Board Member. Background. The Division issued four citations to Employer, an operator of a large packaging and processing warehouse. The citations alleged: failure to open the battery compartment cover to dissipate heat when charging batteries; failure to mount accessible fire extinguishers; failure to provide appropriate foot protection to exposed employees; failure to equip a powered industrial truck with a parking brake or other device to prevent the unattended vehicle from moving; and failure to assure eyewash supplied potable water at specified flow rates. In a decision dated August 22, 2018 [¶22,858], the ALJ upheld all of the violations. Employer petitioned for reconsideration, solely contesting the ALJ’s findings on the serious violation of §3385(a), failure to provide appropriate foot protection to exposed employees. Decision after reconsideration. Employer asserted the citation was defective because the alleged violation description charged that Employer failed to “provide” foot protection, when §3385 uses the term “required.” Employer specifically argued the safety order only directs an employer to “require” foot protection for its exposed employees. The Appeals Board rejected this argumen | Published on: June 14, 2019
46 COR 40-8166 [¶22,948R]
SAFE PRACTICES AND PERSONAL PROTECTION, PERSONAL SAFETY DEVICES AND SAFEGUARDS – FOOT PROTECTION, APPROPRIATE FOOT PROTECTION REQUIRED FOR EMPLOYEES EXPOSED TO FOOT INJURIES
Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3385(a) (2019) – The Appeals Board affirmed that Employer violated the safety order by failing to provide appropriate foot protection, a serious violation. Employer’s argument that the citation was defective because the alleged violation description stated Employer failed to “provide” foot protection, while §3385 uses the term “required,” was rejected by the Appeals Board. The ALJ’s penalty determinations were upheld.
Digest of COSHAB’s Decision After Reconsideration dated May 28, 2019, Inspection No. 1200875.
