APTCO, LLC.

48 COR 40-8367 [¶23,087R] SAFE PRACTICES AND PERSONAL PROTECTION, PERSONAL SAFETY DEVICES AND SAFEGUARDS – HEAT ILLNESS PREVENTIONCal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3395(f)(2) (2021) – Employer failed to implement … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »

TCI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

46 COR 40-8172 [¶22,953] GENERAL PHYSICAL CONDITIONS AND STRUCTURES ORDERS – INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PROGRAM (IIPP), NEW OR PREVIOUSLY UNRECOGNIZED HAZARDSCal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 3203(a)(4) (2019) –  … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »

HARRIS CONSTRUCTION

40 COR 40-6907 [¶22,176] CITATION – MULTI-EMPLOYER POLICY Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, §§ 336.10 and 3329(d); Labor Code § 6400(b)(3) (2013) – There was no evidence that the work … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »

JOHN LAING HOMES (2)

38 COR 40-6545 [¶ 21,777R] MULTI-EMPLOYER WORKSITES – CONTROLLING EMPLOYER Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 336.10, Labor Code §6400(b)(3) (2011) – Employer failed to take any steps to address … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »

CHAMLIAN ENTERPRISES, INC.

36 COR 40-6318 [¶ 21,525R] HEARING – FAILURE TO APPEARBoard reg. §355(a) (2009) – The record did not establish that Employer’s failure to appear at a hearing was reasonable and … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »

FOXFIRE CONSTRUCTORS INC.

36 COR 40-6258 [¶ 21,457] TUNNEL SAFETY – RESCUE APPARATUS Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 8430(h) (2009) – The Division established that Employer’s self-rescue devices were not inspected, tested … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »

Ms Clark Roofing (2)

34 COR 40-5845 [¶ 20,960R] PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION – GROUNDS Lab. § 6617(d) (2007) – The Appeals Board rejected Employer’s contention that it had new evidence it could not have … Read More »

This content is only available to premium subscribers. Please login here log in

Read More »