A Firestorm of Misinformation
Guy Ramsey
January 10, 2007 • The State of
Digging deeper into the rules, Robert Vetter, technical director of IVES Training Group, received an official letter from the individual that authored the standard(s) and was assured that although the wording may easily be interpreted as meaning otherwise, the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries (LNI) does not require operators of scissor lifts to wear personal fall protection harnesses. Unfortunately, I can't see that holding up in court…"Your Honor, I don't care what it says in black and white, so-and-so told me it didn't apply to scissor lifts!"
Having personally read the new regulations, it is quite clear to me • and other authorities I have discussed this with • that the wording indeed clearly encompasses these types of lifts, regardless of the intent. Just get a copy of the standard and read it for yourself.
So why does this rule matter to anyone that does not work in the State of
Safety standards should be consistent in substance and global in application. Can you imagine how convoluted and confusing it would be if each and every state took the current federal standards and altered or tailored them? This approach fails to appreciate and respect the very knowledgeable and hard-working experts that make up the various ANSI committees.
I understand that the phones have been ringing off the wall in the Washington LNI offices and with good reason. Like many other professionals, I also was misled by the way the standard was organized and, as a result, started a firestorm of misinformation among industry safety professionals. However, according to Tony Groat of the AWPT, the LNI has posted clarification of the standards on its website. If you work in
If the intent is not to require the use of harnesses and lanyards on scissor lifts and push-around products, as they should not, then the rules must clearly state that. It is that simple.