The history of protective respiratory equipment can be traced back as far as the 16th century, when Leonardo da Vinci suggested that a finely woven cloth dipped in water could protect sailors from a toxic weapon made of powder that he had designed.[1] Alexander von Humboldt introduced a primitive respirator in 1799 when he was working in Prussia as a mining engineer.
The first US patent for an air purifying respirator was granted to Lewis P. Haslett in 1848 for his 'Haslett's Lung Protector,' which filtered dust from the air using one-way clapper valves and a filter made of moistened wool or a similar porous substance. Following Haslett, a long string of patents were issued for air purifying devices, including patents for the use of cotton fibers as a filtering medium, for charcoal and lime absorption of poisonous vapors, and for improvements on the eyepiece and eyepiece assembly. Hutson Hurd patented a cup-shaped mask in 1879 that became widespread in industrial use, and Hurd's H.S. Cover Company was still in business in the 1970s.
People were developing respirators BEFORE the federal government passed a law? How can that be? How did these people know to build a device to protect their lungs without a law telling them they had to? It boggles the mind.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
MSHA just announced in May 2011 that its inspectors issued 125 citations and 36 compliance orders during special impact inspections conducted this spring at eight coal mines. All of these mines had received increased agency attention and enforcement in the aftermath of Upper Big Branch due to high numbers of violations, a high rate of hazard complaints, inadequate ventilation, and high numbers of accidents, injuries, illnesses, or fatalities.
One persistent problem is illegally gaining advance notification of inspections so that chronic safety problems can be temporarily addressed or hidden.
Protecting Injured West Virginia Mine Workers
Safety violations are powerful evidence of a company’s negligence and legal liability in mining accident litigation. Coal industry officials who cut corners to boost profits introduce extra risks into an already dangerous job. Miners’ lives are needlessly put at risk when the concern for production outweighs the concern for miner safety. Death, traumatic brain injury, paralysis, crushed limbs, amputations, burns and other serious harm can result in an instant if something goes wrong.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So the MHSA puts out self serving statistics justifying their department’s existence...Hmmmm...Interesting...And I definitely shouldn't question manufactured government information that justifies the millions if not billions they are budgeted.
If there wasn't government to beat us into submission, it would be anarchy and people would be lying dead on the streets because of greedy businesses.
Thank You government for keeping me safe. I know that without you big brother, I would be killed by my greedy employer. And as an employer, I may be enticed to kill my employees.
Thank You government for keeping me safe. I know that without you big brother, I would be killed by my greedy employer. And as an employer, I may be enticed to kill my employees.
Cic understands so little about how business operates. Of course Greedy Employers don't want to kill their employees, they just don't want to spend any extra money keeping them safe in the workplace.
I worked for a corporation that had an adversarial relationship with OSHA inspectors. They didn't want to fix any safety problem that would cost them a dime. OSHA cited them, then fined them, then threatened them with larger fines if they didn't comply with ordinary safety standards. The corporation resisted, then found that they could get rid of the whole problem by just actively perusing safety in the workplace. They engaged management and union participation in safety programs... finally establishing a safety committee that now oversees safety in their work place.
The result... OSHA almost never visits their site, since there are no complaints, the safety record has improved and on occasion, when a violation is cited in an OSHA inspection, it is addressed immediately to solve the problem.
That corporation no longer looks at safety as a 'annoyance to contend with' but as a problem to be solved. Everyone, the corporation, management and the workers all benefited.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cic understands so little about how business operates. Of course Greedy Employers don't want to kill their employees, they just don't want to spend any extra money keeping them safe in the workplace.
I worked for a corporation that had an adversarial relationship with OSHA inspectors. They didn't want to fix any safety problem that would cost them a dime. OSHA cited them, then fined them, then threatened them with larger fines if they didn't comply with ordinary safety standards. The corporation resisted, then found that they could get rid of the whole problem by just actively perusing safety in the workplace. They engaged management and union participation in safety programs... finally establishing a safety committee that now oversees safety in their work place.
The result... OSHA almost never visits their site, since there are no complaints, the safety record has improved and on occasion, when a violation is cited in an OSHA inspection, it is addressed immediately to solve the problem.
That corporation no longer looks at safety as a 'annoyance to contend with' but as a problem to be solved. Everyone, the corporation, management and the workers all benefited.
Again, you make illogical cause and effect. You believe the OSHA citation resulted in a safer workplace. That is a GROSS simplification and overstatement of OSHA success. Complying with OSHA standard does not necessarily mean a safer workplace. Citations don't mean you are necesarily unsafe either. If you know about OSHA and their standards, you would realize they are very vaguely written, and anyone at anytime in any company can be cited, regardless of the level of safety in your business. If you do not properly fill out an OSHA 300 log you can be cited. As a matter of fact, with the "adversarial relationship" you talked about in your example, you never stated the citation. Was it for not filling out the proper logs?
OSHA in many cases is a lever for unions to use when organizing labor or negotiating a labor contract. They use the force of OSHA to threaten employers.
Anybody that understands the complexity of the workplace understands that OSHA is the least of all factors that make for a safer workplace. Technology advances, and increasing a companies bottom line are the reasons injuries are down. The cost of injuries and loss of productivity is a larger factor. Managing OSHA is an additional and unnecessary cost that companies have to deal with, and ultimately pass that cost onto the consumer. But it makes people like box feel better, as well as employ a lot of bureaucrats.
The safety violation that I was posting about was filling out a log? Really CICERO!
There are procedural OSHA violations (proper paperwork) and there are actual safety violations (broken bolts on crane wheels). Cicero imagines that all violations are "paper work" violations... however workers don't die from a lack of paperwork, but they do die in the case of poorly maintained equipment or other actual safety hazards.
Some how there is a Conservative logic, that will have a coal mine in W VA that has been out of compliance with ACTUAL safety regulations, that will somehow be IN COMPLIANCE and OPERATE A SAFE MINE, once Ron Paul eliminates any oversight or safety inspections.
I have no idea why Cicero thinks that these rogue mines who resist safely with OSHA, but would suddenly and miraculouslyembrace safety issues once Ron Paul eliminates any incentive to worker safety standards.
Ask him... maybe he actually knows.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Gingrich is just yet another embarrassment for the republican party!! Except for Paul...........all of the rep candidates are laughable and shouldn't be taken seriously. Again..........if paul doesn't win the rep nomination...........obama WILL be a 2 term president.
They will ALL keep the same corrupt system in place except for paul!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
The entire field is an embarrassment to the Republican Party.
A new Pew Research poll finds that as the 2012 Republican presidential nomination unfolds, more Americans say their impression of the GOP field is worsening than improving.
By a margin of two-to-one, 31% say that their impression of the GOP field is getting worse as they learn more about the candidates, while 14% says it's getting better. Another 50% say their impression remains the same.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The new Gallup daily tracking poll of the Republican presidential race has: Newt Gingrich at 37%, Mitt Romney at 22%, Ron Paul at 8%, Rick Perry at 7% and Michele Bachman at 6%.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Some how there is a Conservative logic, that will have a coal mine in W VA that has been out of compliance with ACTUAL safety regulations, that will somehow be IN COMPLIANCE and OPERATE A SAFE MINE, once Ron Paul eliminates any oversight or safety inspections.
I have no idea why Cicero thinks that these rogue mines who resist safely with OSHA, but would suddenly and miraculouslyembrace safety issues once Ron Paul eliminates any incentive to worker safety standards.
Ask him... maybe he actually knows.
Hmmm...W VA mine is out of compliance of OSHA regulation, and the mine STILL has an accident, and yet you believe that OSHA succeeded. That doesn't make sense. Wouldn't that be an example that OSHA didn't work? How many accidents did the W Va mine have before the most recent one?
Then you make the illogical jump that eliminating FEDERAL OSHA and returning it to the states would somehow restrict states from having their own OSHA. Did you know California has their own OSHA standard? Ron Paul never said he would propose a law outlawing State safety departments. So your claim to Paul "eliminating" any incentive to worker safety standards is a lie.
Then you make the illogical jump that eliminating FEDERAL OSHA and returning it to the states would somehow restrict states from having their own OSHA. Did you know California has their own OSHA standard? Ron Paul never said he would propose a law outlawing State safety departments. So your claim to Paul "eliminating" any incentive to worker safety standards is a lie.
I posted on this very subject earlier... that Ronny Paul's Department Destruction won't save taxpayers money, it will it will shift the cost to state taxpayers. Instead of ONE OSHA, the USA will have 50... One in Each State. ( that will save us lots of tax dollars.) But more likely... states who are already tax strapped will lag behind Federal standards and the workers of America will pay with their limbs and their lives... and save CORPORATIONS BILLIONS. Which is his intent.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The safety violation that I was posting about was filling out a log? Really CICERO!
There are procedural OSHA violations (proper paperwork) and there are actual safety violations (broken bolts on crane wheels).
So you are saying that a $50/$100/$200 bolt on the crane , the crane that I assume hoists the product the said company is either transporting or manufacturing, wasn't replaced because of greed? A company purposely risks a crane failure which not only could hurt or kill the operator, but would also hurt the greedy businessman's product that it profits off of? Thank goodness OSHA writes safety violations, because obviously this company you speak of didn't fix a crane, and was not only willing to risk the life of the operator but also risk the product being hoisted.
Thank God for the almighty OSHA. Without them, I don't know what people would do. Has anybody reading this ever talked to an OSHA agent? They couldn't run a hot dog stand.
So you are saying that a $50/$100/$200 bolt on the crane , the crane that I assume hoists the product the said company is either transporting or manufacturing, wasn't replaced because of greed? A company purposely risks a crane failure which not only could hurt or kill the operator, but would also hurt the greedy businessman's product that it profits off of? Thank goodness OSHA writes safety violations, because obviously this company you speak of didn't fix a crane, and was not only willing to risk the life of the operator but also risk the product being hoisted.
Thank God for the almighty OSHA. Without them, I don't know what people would do. Has anybody reading this ever talked to an OSHA agent? They couldn't run a hot dog stand.
YUP. For the time it would take to put the crane down (maybe one shift) to repair the crane, the company felt safe using the existing 9 bolts left in the wheel. Cicero may find this strange... and it obviously doesn't fit his agenda, but I've noticed quite often, the facts don't fit Cic's agenda, so he rejects the facts.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
