From:
Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject:
Re: [DCHAS-L] [EXT] Re: [DCHAS-L] Letter to the National PTA regarding the rainbow flame demo
Date:
Oct 2, 2019 13:11 UTC
Reply-To:
ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety
In-Reply-To:
Re: [DCHAS-L] [EXT] Re: [DCHAS-L] Letter to the National PTA regarding the rainbow flame demo
Good points all, Bruce. In the practical world, and from doing expert witness, the fact is that the OSHA regulations can be gotten into a personal injury lawsuit even though they did not apply to the injured student. They are introduced as "minimum nationally accepted standards of practice." Sometimes it takes a Frye hearing to do this, but it usually works. And if that doesn't work, there are some professional practice standards that are consistent with fed OSHA rules that can be introduced to make the same points.
Then if juries are made familiar with the OSHA training and precautions that the school should have provided for the teacher, plus the jury sees that those training and precaution requirements were not in any way extended to the student, you have a presumption of negligence on the part of the school. Remember, there are bound to be people on that jury who, at considerable sacrifice, put their own kids through school. They expect that at least the minimum safety standards would be met in protection of students. And this is in part why the major hit in the $60 million award in the Beacon High School case went against the school. The Jury got it. They understood that there actually were two victims in that courtroom, the injured student and the untrained teacher.
So Peter and others are right that fed OSHA has no "jurisdiction" over public schools, but in fact, the school had better meet these OSHA standards anyway. And those standards include a written risk assessment for non-routine work, better known in education as a freaking good lesson plan.
Monona
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Van Scoy <bvanscoy**At_Symbol_Here**TWC.COM>
To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU>
Sent: Wed, Oct 2, 2019 7:13 am
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] [EXT] Re: [DCHAS-L] Letter to the National PTA regarding the rainbow flame demo
Monona,
You are right-on with this answer, but I think it needs expanded upon. Yes, administrators and teachers need to enforce the rules. ACS should NOT lead in the defense of enforcing the lack of a written risk assessment with training. What ACS should do is provide examples of the accidents/injuries that have routinely occurred over the past years with those that continue to occur, with a solid example of what is expected of BOTH administrators and teachers. If this was done, administrators would know what to look for in the assessment, teachers would know what is expected and could be held accountable if not following the "Lesson Plan incorporating the assessment". Regardless of OSHA, this would allow a sound legal footing for teachers to be held liable and negligent. Note: I am not a J.D., just a safety person. But I do agree with a previous post that minimizing the reactive ingredients would lesson the risk, but that has to be recognized up front - in the lesson plan. This demonstration has caused and continues to cause to much harm to youth, maybe a different approach may provide different results. Great example of needing a high level root cause analysis. If proven well enough, administrators and teachers would have to take note.
I'm running into a brain block, but wasn't that called the limiting reactant in basic chemistry? It's been a long day-
BruceV
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU> On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 12:22 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] [EXT] Re: [DCHAS-L] Letter to the National PTA regarding the rainbow flame demo
Not having an eye wash where employees are using or storing chemicals that are Category 2A or lower is a violation of 1910.151.
And under hazcom, doing a demo with metal salts and methanol requires a written risk assessment and training.
So you are absolutely right when you say there are rules in place but they are not enforced. And that's why the OSHA citations are always given to the employer. OSHA requires the employer to enforce the rules. But steadfastly ignore this obligation. And it is my opinion that school administrators, the people OSHA expects to enforce the rules, know bupkis about safety.