Scene of the Accident’s Executive Director Todd Hoffman spends a good deal of his time with fire departments, particularly volunteer departments, with his accident-scene training company. Recently Hoffman contacted me because he was concerned about a recent Occupational Safety and Health Administration ruling that will affect volunteer fire departments — that all PPE, with a few exceptions, will be provided at no cost to the employee.
“Employees exposed to safety and health hazards may need to wear personal protective equipment to be protected from injury, illness and death caused by exposure to those hazards,” Edwin G. Foulke Jr., assistant secretary of Labor for OSHA, said of the rule published in the Nov. 15 Federal Register. “This final rule will clarify who is responsible for paying for PPE, which OSHA anticipates will lead to greater compliance and potential avoidance of thousands of workplace injuries each year.”
The final rule also clarifies OSHA’s requirement regarding payment for employee-owned PPE and replacement PPE. The rule also issues an enforcement deadline of May 15, 2008.
Hoffman read the report and contacted OSHA’s Compliance Guidance Group and asked how this ruling would affect volunteer departments.
“According to OSHA guidelines, any person receiving pay, regardless of the amount, is considered an employee and therefore must receive all of their PPE at no cost to them,” Hoffman said. “I asked about the volunteer departments that only pay $1 per call to help cover the cost of gas, and OSHA told me that they would be considered an employee. They also said that all employees are required to each have their own PPE; an employer cannot purchase one set of safety glasses for 20 employees.” The OSHA final rule contains a few exceptions regarding footwear, but does not specifically exempt firefighter boots.
In a perfect world each firefighter — volunteer and career alike — would have his or her own set of safe, personal protective equipment, but that isn’t the case. If a firefighter is hurt because he or she did not have the right piece of personal equipment, what repercussions will it have on the volunteer fire department or district that can’t afford a full set for each firefighter?
Who’s ultimately responsible, the community or local government?
December 7th, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
I’m not sure how this differs from the 29 CFR 1910.156 requirement that all firefighters, career & volunteer who are considered “employees” of a fire district are given PPE at no cost. See 1910.156 (e) (1) (i) which has been around since 1980. If this is something new or different I would be interested in seeing how.
December 7th, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
If fire departments can’t afford to keep their members safe with equipment and training maybe they shouldn’t be in business. The greater liability lies in not protecting your members.
December 7th, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
OSHA has had similar language in its Bloodborne Pathogen and Respiratory Protection regualtions. A few comments I have are:
1) OSHA cannot enforce its rules on units of state and local government due to the constituational provisions. In Illinois, the Dept. of Labor generally adopts OSHA rules by reference and then does the enforcement. In this case, the state could modify the rule while still accomplishing its goal. Depending on how a volunteer FD is governed (are they a private corporation under contract or part of the unit of local government) may affect OSHA’s scope of authority.
2) This issue may appear similar to the “4-person company” issue: Is it important that each vehicle have four members or can the four members assemble at the scene? IN the case of PPE, is it important that all members have thier own PPE or does it matter only that all operating at an incident have propery fitted PPE in good repair?
3) Does OSHA define PPE as just the turnout ensemble or do they include the SCBA in that definition?
Finally, blanket statements about any issue are easy. What is difficult is to understand may be how various constraints affect small communities abilities to deliver minimal emergency services: TIme, compensation, funding, training, facilties and equipment, etc.
December 7th, 2007 @ 3:13 pm
Janet;
Modern PPE needs to be specifically fitted to the employee/member, as does the SCBA facepeice. The days of ‘one size fits all’ for PPE have long been over. What will the reprecussions be for a firefighter who gets injured or becomes a LODD due to wearing a poorly-fitting PPE ensamble or improperly fitted SCBA facepiece?
December 7th, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
I have to side with Chris Walker with some modification. The public should be aware that if the fire department intheir area cannot comply to OSHA standards, they may have no fire protection. I have known people that seek areas of the country for retirement because of the low tax rate. Coupled with this great bargain is the fact that public services in their retirement area may be poor or non-existant. Fire service costs money. I consider OSHA a friend of the firefighter. It used to be standard that a firefighters life expectancy was five years less than other occupations. That is no longer acceptable and OSHA helps make it so. You will see more departments combining jurisdictions and services in an effort to exist financially and still continue to provide services and properly equip their workforce.
December 8th, 2007 @ 11:51 am
If a Fire Department can’t afford FULL PPE for Every Firefighter, They are OUT of BUSNIESS! OSHA’s rules as well as NFPA, keep everyone safe!
As for funding, this is a management issue, if you can’t afford to offer the service without jeopardizing the safety your personnel, you simple do not offer the service.
The placing of a warm body under the (LABLE) of the word firefighter does not mean this individual is a firefighter. First and foremost you must train them, and provider them with the proper PPE.
I have zero tolerance for any manager, leader, department, or organization that cries foul when it comes to funding, training and outfitting their personnel properly to do the job.
Respectfully
Randy Brown
December 10th, 2007 @ 10:57 am
Every week we hear the mantra over and over again that we need to focus on “Everyone Goes Home”, reducing line of duty deaths and injuries and doing the job of emergency response safer. The fact that OSHA clarified who is responsible for paying for PPE is another check mark on the path to reducing LODDs and injuries. Just like it is not acceptable anymore to respond in vehicles without wearing a seatbelt, it is not acceptable anymore to operate at any emergency scene as a local emergency responder of ANY type without proper PPE. States with their own OSHA plans do cover public sector employees. Instead of looking for ways to get around this regulation, we should all be looking for ways to achieve the goal - adequate and proper PPE for all emergency responders.
December 14th, 2007 @ 8:53 am
The bottom line is providing a service means providing people who can perform the functions of that service to the best of their ability. Without the proper PPE the service providers cannot do that. It is then the responsibility of the organization providing the service to ensure that their personnel can perform the functions of the service. I realize that fire departments are a tax-based public service but a firefighter that risks injury by not having the proper PPE is a liability to the community and hazard to the residents. People have certain expectations when they pay taxes for services and the community has a responsibility to meet the expectations they present to their residents.