Stage rigging collapses at Indiana State Fair

[teqniqal]

From
The problem is, inspected by whom? There are probably less than ten industry experts I'd personally trust to do this type of inspection. None of them a city/county/state inspector. Further, if they are inspecting solely for compliance with a manufacturer's specifications, don't we think that's already being done? I have a very strong suspicion that the evidence will eventually show that the Indiana State Fair structure met all requirements and was assembled in accordance with its manufacturer.

Will requiring a state inspection make things safer?

This is just a start. Any proposed bill takes multiple revisions before it is accepted as law. Let's wait until we see the published engineers forensic analysis before we jump to conclusions about the state of the canopy structure on that fateful day.

 

[mstaylor]

It always amazes when legislators start passing laws before they have a clue what really happened. I had a local inspector last year say he wanted a flip stage tied down. I asked him if he realized there was a complete unit that flips out of a trailer?

 

[venuetech]

well its one step for better or for worse.
PLSN

PLSN news
Bill Requiring Outdoor Staging Permits, Inspections Passes Indiana State Senate
Written by Frank Hammel
Saturday, 28 January 2012 15:48

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana’s lawmakers, undoubtedly mindful of the Aug. 13, 2011 Indiana State Fair staging collapse that killed seven people, made progress in late January toward the establishment of a new state law that will govern the use of outdoor staging. Senate Bill No. 273 passed and was forwarded to the state’s House of Representatives for consideration. Although it may be modified further in the House, it will most likely require permits for any event after June 2012 where staging structures are in use.

The current version of SB 273 can be downloaded from:

http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2012/PDF/SB/SB0273.1.pdf

 

[derekleffew]

Developing news:
Agency cites Indiana State Fair, stagehands union, sound company in fatal stage collapse | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com

From Indiana State Fair Collapse Report Blames Mid-America and IATSE? | Jim On Light :

Something I find confusing and disgusting is that:

1. Governor Daniels has not acknowledged that the State has any blame;
2. the PRODUCERS of this event haven't had any blame placed on them, either.

Does anyone else find this disturbing?

EDIT: IA Local 30 takes the position that they're not responsible for anything:Stagehands union refutes state's fair collapse findings - 12 WTHR

EDIT: JohnHuntington has replied to me privately:

I posted a couple videos on my blog from the IOSHA press conference and links to the actual IOSHA reports. I'm traveling all over the place this week so I don't have time to post on ControlBooth ...

 

[avkid]

$63,000......really?
That's nothing.

 

[techieman33]

$63,000......really?
That's nothing.

The fines usually are, it's the lawsuits that get expensive.

 

[mstaylor]

The union is saying they are blameless. I don't necessarily agree, I think they did schedule the labor and supply the training. I agree citing them for not inspecting the soil conditions is crazy. That falls to the stage supplier and the fair. Also not supplying belts is stupid. Every guy should be supplying their own gear. I didn't realize belts were even an issue. I do agree that the union is not the employer.

 

[ruinexplorer]

There's careful wording there. The union is not culpable for the fines as those are placed on an employer, which the union is not. This is not to say that Mid-America nor the Indiana State Fair could not sue the union to recoup losses due to negligence of any of the members. After all, if one of those employers stated that they needed a certain amount of riggers, and the union supplied them, they should know the training of those members (or over-hire). Of course, an employer can always request information on the capability of certain individuals, but that is rare indeed. I'm most astounded that the fines to the State Fair were not higher since they were the employer at the time of the collapse and ultimately who should have called the show.

 

[MNicolai]

The union is saying they are blameless. I don't necessarily agree, I think they did schedule the labor and supply the training. I agree citing them for not inspecting the soil conditions is crazy. That falls to the stage supplier and the fair. Also not supplying belts is stupid. Every guy should be supplying their own gear. I didn't realize belts were even an issue. I do agree that the union is not the employer.

I would argue that Mid America engineered the structure and would've been the ones responsible for ensuring Local 30 erected it properly.

That said, Mid America claims they informed the Fair the structure was not designed for winds in excess of 40mph and that at that point the area should be evacuated.

If true, all of the blame I care about (injury, loss of life) falls on the Fair for ignoring that declared limitation and it's be up for debate whether the Fair or Mid America should be responsible for property damages.

Had the Fair heeded that warning, some property would be damaged but nobody would have been put in harm's way.

You cannot expect the Local 30 crew to have any structural engineers on staff to design the structure or verify it's resiliency. They are there to bolt trusses together and assemble the structure as someone else has designed it.

 

[mstaylor]

I would argue that Mid America engineered the structure and would've been the ones responsible for ensuring Local 30 erected it properly.

Agreed, Local 30 supplies the guys, they are told what to do. The riggers are trained though and if they had concerns they should express them. Ultimately it is Mid America's responsibility.

That said, Mid America claims they informed the Fair the structure was not designed for winds in excess of 40mph and that at that point the area should be evacuated.

Probably true.

If true, all of the blame I care about (injury, loss of life) falls on the Fair for ignoring that declared limitation and it's be up for debate whether the Fair or Mid America should be responsible for property damages.

Both, Mid America should have a rep babysitting the structure. The Fair is ultimately responsible for pulling the show down. Sugarland is equally responsible for show cancilation.

Had the Fair heeded that warning, some property would be damaged but nobody would have been put in harm's way.

They certainly should have pulled the show down but ther would have been no way to drop the roof, so it would have gone anyway.

You cannot expect the Local 30 crew to have any structural engineers on staff to design the structure or verify it's resiliency. They are there to bolt trusses together and assemble the structure as someone else has designed it.

I agree completely. As I said higher up, they have trained riggers, if they have concerns they need to express them. The thing is, I don't believe the structure was assembled incorrectly or unsafely. At that point, 30 is out of it. Putting as much crap on the roof as they did, coupled with high winds is what made it fall down.
To me the responsible parties are the Fair, Sugarland and the promoter. MidAmerica to a small part because they owned it.

 

[avkid]

The thing is, I don't believe the structure was assembled incorrectly or unsafely. At that point, 30 is out of it. Putting as much crap on the roof as they did, coupled with high winds is what made it fall down.

I disagree. If you recall, the structure had recently been improved by James Thomas Engineering for this exact situation. MidAmerica did not build it according to the plans supplied by the engineers at James Thomas.

 

[gafftapegreenia]

MidAmerica did not build it according to the plans supplied by the engineers at James Thomas.

Got a linky?

 

[shiben]

I disagree. If you recall, the structure had recently been improved by James Thomas Engineering for this exact situation. MidAmerica did not build it according to the plans supplied by the engineers at James Thomas.

"Modified by James Thomas" and "Plans by James Thomas" kind of go together. If the thing was modified by the designer to handle a larger load, Imma go ahead and say they probably A used some computer modeling to assess it and B probably produced new engineering drawings. Seems highly doubtful that Thomas would engineer a new structure, tell a couple guys how that worked and then wash their hands of the project.

 

[shiben]

Every guy should be supplying their own gear. I didn't realize belts were even an issue.

IIRC PPE is the responsibility of the employer for the most part from an OSHA standpoint. The view is if the company is placing you in a situation requiring PPE, you should be at least paid to compensate you for buying or have bought for you some PPE. At least thats how it works at factories and industrial places here...

 

[cbrandt]

It is generally assumed that every rigger will supply their own gear, because they'll be more comfortable with the safety of it. However, it is the responsibility of the employer to inspect said gear at every gig to make sure that it passes safety standards. Just because someone else brought it, he's still using it on your job site, and you're responsible for it.

 

[len]

I disagree. If you recall, the structure had recently been improved by James Thomas Engineering for this exact situation. MidAmerica did not build it according to the plans supplied by the engineers at James Thomas.

If I understand you, Thomas built the original stage, and then modified it per request of Mid-America, or whoever. If that's true, then the person(s) who designed/engineered the modification (i.e., Thomas or whoever), along with the person(s) who requested it, are both culpable, IMO. Now if I were with Thomas (or whoever built and/or modified the stage) I would want to be there to make sure that my modifications were assembled correctly. I'd also want to know exactly what kind of weight/stress was being placed on it, and verify that the actual extra weight/stress was equal to or less than the stress factors I was given when I was asked to do the modification.

 

[MNicolai]

If I understand you, Thomas built the original stage, and then modified it per request of Mid-America, or whoever. If that's true, then the person(s) who designed/engineered the modification (i.e., Thomas or whoever), along with the person(s) who requested it, are both culpable, IMO. Now if I were with Thomas (or whoever built and/or modified the stage) I would want to be there to make sure that my modifications were assembled correctly. I'd also want to know exactly what kind of weight/stress was being placed on it, and verify that the actual extra weight/stress was equal to or less than the stress factors I was given when I was asked to do the modification.

Good questions to be asking, but the answers are superfluous if the Fair was in fact told not to use the structure with winds in excess of 40mph. Doesn't matter who put the structure in the air or designed it. The winds at the time of the collapse were estimated at 60-70mph -- much greater than the structure was designed to support.

It doesn't change the fact that the roof should have been brought down or that temporary outdoor roof/stage structures should be designed for this kind of bad weather, but this structure did last longer than it was engineered and did not fail prematurely.

The only "out" for the Fair IMO is if they specifically requested a structure stronger than the one that was built and Thomas/Mid-America underdelivered. Otherwise Thomas and/or Mid America got their out when they said "Evacuate at 40MPH+ winds" unless in the moment a representative from one of those parties explicitly gave the OK for the show to continue.

Something smells fishy about why the show wasn't cancelled and I don't think Local 30, Mid America, or Thomas had a hand in the show going on other than that people like Nathan Byrd had gone into his followspot chair and hadn't refused to do the show. I'm also willing to guess someone like Nathan wasn't in a position to know what the trusses were rated for, nor that a strong line of winds was approaching the staging areas.

 

[mstaylor]

IIRC PPE is the responsibility of the employer for the most part from an OSHA standpoint. The view is if the company is placing you in a situation requiring PPE, you should be at least paid to compensate you for buying or have bought for you some PPE. At least thats how it works at factories and industrial places here...

In industrial and munufacturing plants you are talking about mostly fall protection for lifts or ladders. Theatrical riggers and steel erectors generally supply their personal gear. Some companies, including mine will supply them but most insist on their own. This can lead to a standoff. I will not wear a tour supplied belt. Many tours won't allow you to wear your own. I have never seen a union supply any gear for anybody.
I was unaware there any special modifications had been made to the stage. From an OSHA standpoint Local 30 has little or no responsibility. I know when we do outdoor stages we depend on the staging company to make the call if their roof will hold the show. The staging company has to be in on the conversation of weather.

 

[teqniqal]

There's careful wording there. The union is not culpable for the fines as those are placed on an employer, which the union is not. This is not to say that Mid-America nor the Indiana State Fair could not sue the union to recoup losses due to negligence of any of the members. After all, if one of those employers stated that they needed a certain amount of riggers, and the union supplied them, they should know the training of those members (or over-hire). Of course, an employer can always request information on the capability of certain individuals, but that is rare indeed. I'm most astounded that the fines to the State Fair were not higher since they were the employer at the time of the collapse and ultimately who should have called the show.

The situation with Local 30 is NOT the same as with most other locals, and this is the reason that IOSHA has determined that they would fine them. In Local 30 the officers operate a business entity that process payroll and contracts workers, making them an employer. This is very different than most other union offices. Also, the fines are for the damages done to the Union Local 30 employees, not the general public, or the State Fair Commission, or Mid America Sound, or James Thomas Trusses, or any of the other parties.

 

[ruinexplorer]

Yes, they operate a payroll service out of their office, but I don't know the fine line in Indiana whether or not they define that payroll service as an Employer of Record, which would then be the employer of those union hands. However, since the payroll service is listed as being incorporated, then it is technically a separate entity from the union. In any case, I would say that there will be better definitions as to what an employer actually is, and the responsibilities for off site work as in the case of Employer of Record. Will the law require that all employees not working at the physical location of the "employer" now have to have a safety officer at the job site. If so, how many employees would have to be working before that additional employee were mandated at that site.

Of course, the fines levied against Local 30 were only for those employees and not others, since those were separate fines. Plus, OSHA (granted this is IOSHA which may be slightly different) is only responsible for the workers, never the general public. This is why there were no fines for the death of the Christmas Pageant rigging death a few years back. The girl who died and the rigger were both volunteers, not covered under OSHA.