Labor Law Guy

Top Ten Regulations OSHA Gets Questions About

Posted in Federal Labor Law, Random Musings by laborlawguy on June 26, 2009

Here’s a list of the top ten enquiries sent by e-mail to OSHA about its regulations. The agency keeps tabs both by e-mail and phone enquiry, so a notation in parentheses shows the phone rank and regulation link:

  1. Powered industrial trucks (1910.178, #3)
  2. Sanitation (1910.141, #4)
  3. Hazard communication (1910.1200, #2)
  4. Bloodborne pathogens (1910.1030, #1)
  5. Personal protective equipment, general requirements (1910.132, #5)
  6. Medical services and first aid (1910.151, #6)
  7. Ergonomics (no OSHA standard, not on phone list)
  8. Electrical, general requirements (1910.303, not on phone list)
  9. Respiratory protection (1910.134, #8)
  10. Air contaminants (1910.1000, #7).

Stolen shamelessly (but with attribution) from Safety News Alert, which also notes:

“The two questions in the top-10 list of questions received by phone that aren’t on the e-mail list are about indoor air quality (no OSHA standard) and permit-required confined spaces (1910.146).”

Tagged with: , ,

Modification Practitioners (!) Come Under the OSHA Knife

Posted in Federal Labor Law, Random Musings by laborlawguy on March 4, 2009

I was grateful to learn today that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has clarified its position on modification practitioners.

Say who?

It’s a fancy term for tattooists and body-piercing artists (I’m not sure artists applies, but whatever), and OSHA has stepped in with a Letter of Interpretation (LOI) about training requirements for said manipulation practitioners.

In answer to the question, “Does OSHA consider generic bloodborne pathogens training to be sufficient for modification practitioners (tattooing and body piercing artists), or should annual training be specific to the unique procedures and practices within the industry (i.e., industry-specific training)?” Richard E. Fairfax, OSHA’s director of the agency’s Enforcement Programs Directorate, noted that 29 CFR 1910.1030(g)(2) does require that all employees with occupational exposure to blood and OPIM* receive initial and annual training on the hazards involved and how to avoid them.

“While the provisions for employee training are performance oriented, with flexibility allowed to tailor the program to, for example, the employee’s background and responsibilities, the categories of information listed in paragraph 1910.1030(g)(2)(vii) must be covered, at a minimum.”

That’s probably more than any of us would care to know about OSHA and tattoos and body piercings, but if you’re curious, you can go to to the What’s New section for Feb. 28, 2009.

* Other Potentially Infectious Material, and yes, I had to look it up.

Tagged with: