From: Ralph B. Stuart <rstuart**At_Symbol_Here**CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Judge denies three Harran defense motions
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:22:29 +0000
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 5564F9EDC11C09468EE5DAF02B5CB30F4A8557EB**At_Symbol_Here**
In-Reply-To <8D0721A7F246D9C-BB8-20CA2**At_Symbol_Here**>

> And "documented training" means exactly what it says.  Sit down sessions provided by the school or the professor with attendance taken and ideally a short test at the end to provide proof of comprehension. 


I don't entirely agree with this. In my mind, a training program consists not only of a single explanation of the expectations for doing hazardous work, but follow up oversight through observations of the worker and inspections of the work process over time. Otherwise, this process does not demonstrate comprehension, but simply appears to be a transfer of responsibility from the supervisor to the trainee.


The challenge in an academic environment is that the institutional culture is oriented towards education rather than training and there are no expectations for follow up after the final test in the educational setting. This expectations gap is part of the challenge the National Research Council's Task Force on laboratory safety culture is facing.


- Ralph


Ralph Stuart CIH

Chemical Hygiene Officer

Department of Environmental Health and Safety

Cornell University




Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.