Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Safety violations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Safety violations. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 9, 2023

Amazon Cited by OSHA for NJ Warehouse Safety Violations

A federal workplace safety investigation has again found workers at an Amazon fulfillment center exposed to ergonomic hazards, this time at a Logan Township facility. 

Friday, February 4, 2022

OSHA fines New Jersey company $130,000 for methylene chloride violations

 The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited a New Jersey company $130,000 for methylene chloride violations. Exposure to paint strippers containing methylene chloride remains a severe health concern for workers. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently refused to extend the United States Environmental Protection [EPA] agency's regulations to cover methylene chloride in the commercial setting.

Wednesday, March 17, 2021

OSHA cites New Jersey frozen dessert manufacturer after second amputation injury on same machine

Despite two severe amputation injuries in 2018 and 2020 on the same machine at a Lakewood ice cream manufacturing plant, a recent federal safety and health inspection found the company continues to ignore protocols designed to prevent other workers from suffering similar injuries.

Saturday, March 23, 2019

Employer Held Liable for Failure to Protect an Employee from Fatal Workplace Violence


The US Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) has upheld safety violations against an employer for the death of an employee caused by workplace violence. The employee died from nine stab wounds received on the front lawn of a patient’s home following a home visit in December 2012.

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Passaic NJ distribution warehouse fined $112K for two dozen safety violations

OSHA cites Oaxaca Mexican Products for blocking fire exit, 20 other serious violations

Oaxaca Mexican Products, 100 8th St., Passaic, New Jersey was issued citations by the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued citations for one willful, 20 serious and three other-than-serious violations on May 3, 2016.

Saturday, March 30, 2013

Employer Fined $185,000 for Exposing Employees to Toxic Substances and Other Safety Isues


Even products that are fit for human consumption are made with chemicals, that are used in the manufacturing process with greater concentration, are health hazards. A company in NJ failed to protect its workers from those concentrations and as a result are facing serious charges by OSHA. The precaution to a workers' compensation claim is maintaining a safe work environment so that accidents, injuries and toxic exposures to not occur.

The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited eSmoke LLC, an electronic 
cigarette manufacturer based in Lakewood, with 20 workplace safety and health violations. OSHA's inspection was prompted by a complaint alleging serious safety and health hazards throughout the facility, resulting in $184,500 in proposed penalties.

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

OSHA Cites NJ Recycling Company for Safety Violations Following Worker Amputation

The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Lieze Associates, doing business as Eagle Recycling of New Jersey, with one repeat and three serious safety violations after a worker's fingers were amputated in December 2012 at the company's North Bergen recycling transfer station. OSHA's investigation was initiated in response to a referral by the North Bergen Police Department and has resulted in proposed fines of $70,070.

"This incident should have been prevented by simply locking out the machine's power source," said Kris Hoffman, director of OSHA's Parsippany Area Office. "Eagle Recycling of New Jersey's continued disregard for complying with OSHA safety standards will not be tolerated."

OSHA inspectors found that procedures were not used to lock out the energy source of a conveyor belt system while the worker was clearing a cardboard jam, which resulted in the amputation. OSHA cited the company with a serious violation for failing to implement a lockout/tagout program to control potentially hazardous energy. Another violation includes failing to ensure a ladder placed with the two top rails was supported and placed with secure footing. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

The repeat violation was cited for exposing workers to 8-foot fall hazards while working on unguarded platforms. A repeat violation is issued when an employer previously has been cited for the same or similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcements states within the last five years. A similar violation was cited in 2009 and 2010.

The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, ask for an informal conference with OSHA's area director in Parsippany, or contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Friday, January 4, 2013

Repeated Fall Injuries Results in OSHA Fines of $58,000 to NJ Employer

The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Beno Stucco Systems of Rochelle Park with six safety violations – including five repeat – involving fall and scaffolding hazards while employees were applying stucco to a commercial building in Westwood, N.J.

OSHA's June investigation was initiated as a result of an imminent danger fall hazard. Proposed penalties total $61,600.

The repeat violations, with $58,520 as the proposed penalty, were cited for exposing workers to fall and scaffolding hazards, and for failing to provide workers with protective helmets to prevent injuries from falling objects. A repeat violation is issued when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years. Similar violations were cited in 2007, 2009 and 2011.

One serious violation, with a $3,080 proposed penalty, was cited for failing to have a competent person inspect scaffolds and scaffold components for visible defects before each work shift and after any occurrence that could affect a scaffold's structural integrity. Additionally, the company did not conduct an inspection of the job site, materials and scaffold components, to prevent employees from working without full planking, fall protection and scaffold access. A serious citation is issued when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

"This company repeatedly neglected to implement basic, common-sense and legally-required safeguards to ensure that scaffolds were erected properly and fall protection was provided for employees working at heights of 10 feet or more," said Lisa Levy, director of OSHA's area office in Hasbrouck Heights, N.J. "OSHA will not tolerate employers jeopardizing the safety and health of workers."

OSHA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health are working with trade associations, labor unions, employers, universities, community and faith-based organizations and consulates to provide employers and workers–especially vulnerable, low-literacy workers–with education and training on common-sense fall prevention equipment and strategies that save lives. OSHA has also created a new fall prevention Web page at http://www.osha.gov/stopfalls that includes detailed information in English and Spanish on fall protection standards.

Beno Stucco Systems has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply, meet with OSHA's area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Warehouse Workers Are At Risk By Company Safety Violations

Warehouse worker suffer unique risks associated with their employment. Many warehouse workers suffer injuries at work that lead to seriously disabling Worker’s Compensation claims. U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration  (OSHA) has taken a major step in enforcing regulations in Jersey City,New Jersey, in an effort to make the work environment safer.

OSHA has cited Continental Terminals Inc. for nine serious and two willful safety violations at the company's Jersey City facility. Inspectors were notified of alleged hazards at the facility while they were inspecting another Continental facility in Kearny. Proposed penalties total $130,900.
The willful violations involve not protecting workers by allowing them to ride on the forks of forklifts, where they were exposed to falls of 10 feet, and permitting them to work on elevated platforms devoid of guardrails. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowledge or voluntary disregard for the law's requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health. The citations carry $98,000 in penalties. The serious violations include having exit doors that were sealed shut, allowing damaged powered industrial trucks to be operated, stacking materials insecurely, not having a hazard communication program, using damaged electrical cords and not labeling electrical panels. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known. The citations carry $32,900 in penalties.

"Because fall hazards are among the leading cause of death among workers, it is vital that employers provide workers with proper fall protection," said Kris Hoffman, director of OSHA's Parsippany Area Office. "Employers are responsible for ensuring safe and healthful workplaces, and will be held legally accountable when they fail to do so."


Continental Terminals Inc. is a coffee and cocoa warehouse business that employs 10 workers at its Jersey City site; it was recently fined $162,400 by OSHA for safety violations at its Kearny site. The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with the OSHA area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.In April, Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis announced a campaign to provide employers and workers with lifesaving information and educational materials about working safely from ladders, scaffolds and roofs in an effort to prevent deadly falls in the construction industry. In 2010, more than 10,000 construction workers were injured as a result of falling while working from heights, and more than 250 workers were killed. OSHA's fall prevention campaign was developed in partnership with the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and NIOSH's National Occupational Research Agenda program. More information on fall protection standards is available in English and Spanish at http://www.osha.gov/stopfalls.

Read more about "forklifts"
Sep 21, 2012
Forklift injuries produce serious workers' compensation claims, so it is no surprise that the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is acutely concerned about forklift safety rule ...
Jun 21, 2012
... include failing to perform a personal protective equipment hazard assessment; provide an eyewash station for workers exposed to corrosive chemicals; provide fire extinguisher training; provide training for forklift operators; ...
Nov 08, 2012
Forklift injuries produce serious workers' compensation claims, so it is no surprise that the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is acutely concerned about forklift safety rule .
Jan 24, 2010
An attorney for an injured worker quickly requested that a potentially defective forklift be preserved, but did not hastily have an expert conduct a physical inspection. Ciapinski v Crown Equipment Corp., 2010 WL 183903 (N.J. ...