Safety and the Supervisor

The Oregon "General Duty Clause" As detailed in the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), known as the Oregon Safe Employment Act OSEAct 654.010 (below) the employer is assigned responsibility and held accountable to maintain a safe and healthful workplace. It should be noted that the general duty provisions are used only where there is no rule that applies to a particular hazard.

ORS Chapter 654 — Occupational Safety and Health SAFETY AND HEALTH CONDITIONS IN PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT 654.010 Employers to furnish safe place of employment. Every employer shall furnish employment and a place of employment which are safe and healthful for employees therein, and shall furnish and use such devices and safeguards, and shall adopt and use such practices, means, methods, operations and processes as are reasonably necessary to render such employment and place of employment safe and healthful, and shall do every other thing reasonably necessary to protect the life, safety and health of such employees. [Amended by 1973 c.833 §5]

A careful read of the General Duty Clause introduces important employer accountabilities and concepts. The employer is to:

"...furnish employment and a place of employment..." - employment refers to the procedures and practices employees are required to use in the course of their work. The is accomplished through effective management controls. Place of employment refers to the workplace, itself: The safe tools, equipment, machinery, materials, workstations, and the physical environment. This is accomplished through effective engineering controls.

What must the employer do to comply with the general duty clause?

To comply with the general duty clause, in general, the court has established the following criteria:

• The employer must keep the workplace free of a hazard to which employees of that employer were exposed. A Hazard To Which Employees Were Exposed. A general duty citation must involve both a serious hazard and exposure of employees. A hazard is a danger which threatens physical harm to employees: One capable of causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm.

  
  ORS 654.010 does not mandate a particular abatement method (action taken to reduce/eliminate the hazard), but only requires an employer to render the workplace free of certain hazards by any feasible and effective means which the employer wishes to utilize. What's the difference between the hazard, itself, and the abatement method? Let's take a look:

  
  

  Employees doing sanding operations may be exposed to the hazard of fire caused by sparking in the presence of magnesium dust. One of the abatement methods may be training and supervision. The "hazard" is the exposure to the potential of a fire; it is not the lack of training and supervision.

  
  

• The hazard must be recognized. The Hazard must be reasonably foreseeable. All the factors which could cause a hazard need not be present in the same place at the same time in order to prove foreseeability of the hazard; e.g., an explosion need not be imminent.

  
  Recognition of a hazard is established on the basis of;

  • Industry recognition - A hazard is recognized if the employer's industry recognizes it.
  • Employer Recognition - Evidence of such recognition may consist of written or oral statements made by the employer or other management or supervisory personnel during or before an OR-OSHA inspection, or instances where employees have clearly called the hazard to the employer’s attention.
  • Common Sense Recognition - Used by Oregon OSHA in "flagrant cases," this theory of recognition is established when it is concluded that any reasonable person would have recognized the hazard.

  
  Let's look at this example to better understand what a recognized or foreseeable hazard is:

  
  

  If combustible gas and oxygen are present in sufficient quantities in a confined area to cause an explosion if ignited but no ignition source is present or could be present, no ORS 654.010 violation would exist. If an ignition source is available at the workplace and the employer has not taken sufficient safety precautions to preclude its use in the confined area, then a foreseeable hazard may exist. b. It is necessary to establish the reasonable foreseeability of the general workplace hazard, rather than the particular hazard which led to the accident.

  
  

• The employer employs feasible and useful methods to correct hazards. The hazard may be corrected by one or a combination of methods that are feasible, available and likely to correct the hazard. However, if OSHA proposes an abatement method that would eliminate or significantly reduce the hazard beyond whatever measures the employer has taken, a citation may be issued.

Wasn't that exciting? It gets even better! This course will help you, as a supervisor, understand your important safety accountabilities to the employer and obligations to your employees. With this goal in mind, have fun and study hard on this informative online training course. Remember, if you have questions please feel free to send your instructor an email.

If you're ready, start Module One now.