I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.I HATE the personal harness thing that we do in this industry. I get it, but I 100% think its a terrible policy.
I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.I HATE the personal harness thing that we do in this industry. I get it, but I 100% think its a terrible policy.
I would be too.I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.
For me the training helps change the culture of the work site. When people shift from the idea of "lets do it the fastest/safest/cheapest way possible" to "lets do it the safest way possible" more people are going to go home in one piece.Given the comments about "rotting your brain", I wonder:
Is this stuff effective because you *learn something*, or because *other people listen, now, when you tell them... because they know everyone's paying attention*...?
I will speculate: because under The Act (OSHA), the EMPLOYER is responsible for the provision, inspection, maintenance, and use (including training for fitting, donning and doffing, etc) of the PPE. If the worker provides their own PPE, the employer may be unable to ascertain the suitability for specific use, how the harness is fitted, maintained, and inspected. The employer standardizing on specific brand/model of harness makes empoyer compliance more likely.I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.
There are specific guidelines from OSHA about employee supplied PFAS, and how employers are to deal with it. Specifically related to footwear, vision protections, and PFAS harnesses. The issue of proper sizing of a harness is often overlooked, in addition to the fatigue factor of wearing a harness that is not properly padded and fitted to the user.I will speculate: because under The Act (OSHA), the EMPLOYER is responsible for the provision, inspection, maintenance, and use (including training for fitting, donning and doffing, etc) of the PPE. If the worker provides their own PPE, the employer may be unable to ascertain the suitability for specific use, how the harness is fitted, maintained, and inspected. The employer standardizing on specific brand/model of harness makes empoyer compliance more likely.
Footer?
When employees come in a standarized size this will work but I don't fit in some harnesses because of my tall slender build (68kg or 150lbs) so I would opt for a harness that I know the history of and I look after.The employer standardizing on specific brand/model of harness makes empoyer compliance more likely.
@Footer ?
By model, I do not mean the same size fits all; we know better. But if a venue keeps all Petzl Newton harnesses, for example, in multiple sizes, all of the inspection points are identical. The point is that in the USA the EMPLOYER is responsible for the provision, use, inspection, and removal from service of all PPE. Some employers (look at Footer) do not want to be responsible for items they did not approve, purchase, and then have to inspect and maintain. What happens when an employer tells a worker "you harness did not pass inspection, don't come back with it."? Or "we lack experience inspecting your special flavor of PPE, therefore you cannot use it on our property or on our time."When employees come in a standarized size this will work but I don't fit in some harnesses because of my tall slender build (68kg or 150lbs) so I would opt for a harness that I know the history of and I look after.
Here (in Australia) as long it is fit for purpose AND meets the required AS/NZS a harness is able to be used. If I invest in a harness that costs a small fortune I am going to look after it. A community harness is less likely to be looked after properly, cleaned when required and the list goes on. I do maintain the need for basic safety training and working at heights training simply because the kids of today have not had the exposure to things like climbing trees and exploring places. This comes from wrapping them in cotton wool because it is too dangerous instead of teaching them about hazards and the associated risks.
Regards
Geoff
Surely if the EMPLOYER has the responsibility and final say you'd be thrown off the job for using your (personal) kit. You're objecting to secondary kit that had to be issued because the original issue didn't suit you, remember?Only if that is also in objectionable condition or cannot be made to fit correctly will I use my own PPE.
Size is one thing style is another. Petzl make great harnesses (my choice in the past) but does it really fit? Even if properly adjusted it may not fit. So better than stocking multiple sized harnesses a couple of different brands or models would be better. A competent person inspecting a harness no matter what brand should be able to find faults (because the faults are all the same sorts of things- abrasion, stitching, stretching , dates, connection points and the list goes on). I am ultimately responsible for my own heath and safety when I put on a harness that I inspect before use. Out OHS act says a couple of things but not limited too "By model, I do not mean the same size fits all; we know better. But if a venue keeps all Petzl Newton harnesses, for example, in multiple sizes, all of the inspection points are identical. The point is that in the USA the EMPLOYER is responsible for the provision, use, inspection, and removal from service of all PPE. Some employers (look at Footer) do not want to be responsible for items they did not approve, purchase, and then have to inspect and maintain. What happens when an employer tells a worker "you harness did not pass inspection, don't come back with it."? Or "we lack experience inspecting your special flavor of PPE, therefore you cannot use it on our property or on our time."
I own two harnesses and several shock absorbing lanyards because I free lance and I am the employer. But on the clock as an IATSE rigger, I wear what the employer provides, and if I find the harness unsafe, I take it down to Human Resources and turn it in for inspection and select another. Only if that is also in objectionable condition or cannot be made to fit correctly will I use my own PPE.
Yes, and it's only if there is no other alternative. I will perform the work at that call and then cancel or decline further work at height with that employer until suitable PPE is provided. That's a choice I, and I alone make. I could be fully dismissed for using my own, and I accept that. I have a union to grieve the termination. As for what is provided "not suiting me", the only reason to decline would be if the PPE was incorrectly sized (too big/small) or found to fail pre-use safety inspection. That's not a whim, it's personal responsibility AND my obligation to report to the employer any unsafe PPE or other work conditions. Hand me the next item and if it passes my check list, I put it on. Not sure what is difficult to understand here.Surely if the EMPLOYER has the responsibility and final say you'd be thrown off the job for using your (personal) kit. You're objecting to secondary kit that had to be issued because the original issue didn't suit you, remember?
But also get ready to see it more and more; I've got a few emails to catch up on with my local's training committee, but I am pretty sure the TTF is telling us how to get people reimbursed for these sorts of classes as 10/30 and beyond become requirements.I believe it’s actually a NY state law that is requiring Osha 10/30.
There is no depth to which I will not sink to be an engaging instructor/presenter even when the material is NOT dry as these things tend to be. I want people to retain this stuff like y'all don't even know.
Sorry missed the thread, LONG week.I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.