48 COR 40-8525 [¶23,169R]
SAFE PRACTICES AND PERSONAL PROTECTION, PERSONAL SAFETY DEVICES AND SAFEGUARDS – HEAT ILLNESS PREVENTION, SUPERVISOR TRAINING Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3395(h)(2) (2022) – Employer failed to provide effective heat illness training to supervisory employees, where the supervisors were not given effective training on how to monitor weather reports and respond to hot weather advisories. The Appeals Board affirmed the violation, but used a different analysis than the administrative law judge, who went beyond the plain language of the safety order by mandating methods and procedures that were not specifically required. SAFE PRACTICES AND PERSONAL PROTECTION, PERSONAL SAFETY DEVICES AND SAFEGUARDS – HEAT ILLNESS PREVENTION, ACCLIMATIZATION Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3395(g)(2) (2022) – Employer failed to closely observe employees newly assigned to a high-heat area for signs or symptoms of heat illness during the first 14 days of the employee’s employment, a serious, accident-related violation. The “close observation” requirement of §3395(g)(2) implies un-acclimatized employees must be observed more closely than other employees. SAFE PRACTICES AND PERSONAL PROTECTION, PERSONAL SAFETY DEVICES AND SAFEGUARDS – HEAT ILLNESS PREVENTION, EMPLOYEE TRAINING Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3395(h)(1) (2022) – Employer failed to provide effective heat illness training to each non-supervisory employee before they began work reasonably anticipated to result in heat illness, a serious violation. Employer’s heat illness prevention plan did not contain, and a newly-assigned employee did not receive, information on the concept, importance, and methods of acclimatization related to close observation of un-acclimatized employees. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD – PREHEARING PROCEDURE DISCOVERY, AND MOTIONS, AMENDMENTS Board reg. § 371.2, Labor Code § 6319(d) (2022) – Pursuant to the relation-back doctrine, the Division was not jurisdictionally barred from amending a citation to include the accident-related characterization. Employer had ample notice of the Division’s position that an employee suffered from heat illness as a result of exposure to high-heat conditions. Additionally, the Division’s motion to amend provided Employer with ample notice of the proposed amendment prior to hearing, and an opportunity to respond.Digest of COSHAB’s Decision After Reconsideration dated February 17, 2022, Inspection No. 1334740.
Read More...