Committee Hearing, October 23, 2006

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND CIVIL SERVICE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, October 23, 2006 10:20 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN KRAJEWSKI BILL 060695 - An ordinance amending Section 14 22-310 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP)," by defining the employees to whom an extraordinary extension for participants in the DROP program may apply... RESOLUTION 060738 - Resolution authorizing the Committee on Labor and Civil Service to conduct hearings on worker safety and health at construction sites in the City of Philadelphia. - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2

Good morning, everyone. I'm Councilman Juan Ramos, Chair of the Committee on Labor and Civil Service. Also in attendance are members of this Committee. To my left, Councilman Kelly. To my right, Councilman DiCicco and Councilman Goode. And I know that Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown is also around here somewhere. We have a quorum, and I would like to start this hearing. We will hear first Bill No. 060695. After we hear from witnesses on this bill, we will then go into a public meeting to report the bill out and then go back into the public hearing to hear testimony regarding Resolution No. 060738 on worker safety. I will please ask the Clerk to read the title of the bill.

Bill No. 060695, amending Section 22-310 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP)," by 3 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 defining the employees to whom an extraordinary extension for participants in the DROP program may apply, under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. The first witness on this bill 8 is Mr. Tom Cronin, President of AFSCME District Council 47. Please come up and state your name for the record and begin your testimony.

My name is Thomas Paine Cronin. I'm President of AFSCME District Council 47. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. This is a horrible way to start, but I'd like to apologize for having the wrong number for the bill. So I will send over a corrected copy, and I appreciate you allowing me to testify on this bill. This amended bill expands the description of the circumstances which would allow the Mayor to determine that conditions exist which allow participants 4 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 in the DROP to remain employees of the City of Philadelphia for up to one year beyond the four-year limit. The language of this bill 6 recognizes that any circumstance which diminishes the ability to provide City services to the residents of Philadelphia constitutes a threat to the well-being of our citizens. Such a threat surely requires that City workers be able to continue their service to the City. Since many of the people in the DROP have served the City for so long, they are a valuable resource that the City must be able to employ if faced with a circumstance that affects the delivery of services. These people have the institutional memory which would allow them to quickly respond to extraordinary conditions and immediate dangers. Further, these men and women will have the firsthand knowledge to address the consequences, both anticipated and unforeseen, which would 5 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 impede the City's ability to deliver the services which are so vital to our citizens. Therefore, we strongly support this amended version of the bill and urge all of our Councilpeople to vote in the affirmative. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Cronin, for your testimony. Does this Committee have any questions for the first witness? (No response.)

Mr. Cronin, can you, in one sentence, sum up what this amendment does, in your view?

Well, essentially what we're saying is that there are folks that we represent, and although I'm not here to speak for District Council 33, but I'm sure this is true with 33 as well, that serve in the public health and safety. I mean, I can think of all kinds of folks, for example, in the Health 6 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 Department where if there were an emergency situation where they would be required, and certainly the City's Emergency Preparedness program indicates that there are people across City departments that are involved in addition to police and fire. So what we're saying is that these folks really should be eligible for the fifth year, again, if the Mayor says that there are extraordinary circumstances and if he or she says that there's an emergency, period. That's more than one sentence, but...

I would consider from my point of view that an issue of public safety as it was well defined in the original bill, a very good bill, that the issue of our water treatment plant, if in the event there are workers at that plant that are in this retirement program referred to as DROP and then you are trying to fill 7 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 those vacancies and we need that water treatment plant and because of the environment that we live in in this country, our water supply and our water systems need our safety issues as well nowadays, not just for the consumption of water, the use of water, but because of public safety concerns. So I think it's proper, at least in my view, that this extension be given to all City employees, but that it will be considered only an extraordinary extension as the example that I used, that you wouldn't be able to fill this position at that water treatment plant expeditiously and, therefore, give an opportunity for someone that has moved out of employment with the City to be able to -- for that person to be able to reenter so that we can safeguard our water treatment plant and so forth. Do you see it in the same light?

Yes, I do, sir.

And this 8 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 will be determined by the Mayor. How do you see that?

I see that the same way, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Cronin. Any questions from this Committee? Councilwoman Joan Krajewski has joined us. Thank you for joining us this morning. Thank you, Mr. Cronin.

Thank you, sir. Good morning, Councilwoman.

Good morning.

Is there anyone here that cares to testify in favor or against this amendment of this bill? Can you please come forward at this time. (No response.)

Anything that the members of this Committee would 9 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 like to add? (No response.)

Seeing none, this will conclude this portion of the hearing, and I would like to move from the public hearing into our public meeting, and I would ask Councilman Goode to make a motion on Bill No. 060695 with a suspension. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Is the Administration testifying?

I see the Administration here, but they have not come forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill 060695 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)

All those in 10 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Any nays? (No response.)

The ayes have it. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 060695 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further moved that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council session. I think I already did all this, right? All in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

I got ahead of my own script. I would ask the Clerk to please read the title of Resolution No. 060738. Now we will go back into the public hearing, and I would ask the Clerk to please read the title of Resolution 25 No. 060738. 11 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

A resolution 3 authorizing the Committee on Labor and Civil Service to conduct hearings on worker safety and health at construction sites in the City of Philadelphia.

At this time, before we get started with the hearing, I would like to make a very brief statement. Good morning. We're conducting hearings today on worker safety and health on construction sites in the City of Philadelphia. On September 20th of this year, Jeffrey Martin was killed in Philadelphia. However, he was not murdered in the violent epidemic that has scourged our City. The 23-year-old was killed while doing clean-up on a construction site on South Broad Street in Center City. He fell six stories through a steel cable barrier and down several floors through a garage area. According to published reports, the subcontractor on the project has a 12 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 history over the past ten years of numerous safety violations. Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace for their employees. I would like to note for the record that in the fourth "whereas" in the original resolution, it is stated "in OSHA's Philadelphia District, which includes Delaware County, there have been fatal construction accidents in the 14 past 12 months, and about half have been 15 the result of falls." I have been notified by OSHA, and OSHA is here present, that that number is incorrect. There have actually been 15 workplace fatalities in the past year in the Philadelphia area and four of those have been in construction and seven of those 15 have been falls. OSHA has also reported nearly 1,300 construction workers died nationwide last year, and 39 percent were 13 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 the results of falls. To have fatal workplace 4 accidents in the past 12 months in 5 Philadelphia, half of them from falls, is 6 extremely alarming to me. According to 7 OSHA, nearly 6.5 million people work at 8 approximately 252,000 construction sites 9 across the nation on any given day. The 10 fatal injury rate for the construction 11 industry is higher than the national 12 average in this category for all 13 industries. So it is timely for this 14 body to examine this growing problem of 15 worker safety on construction sites in the City of Philadelphia. I will be reading and studying carefully your testimony at this hearing to determine legislative action. At this time, I would call to the witness table Marie Cassady, the Regional Administrator for OSHA, Region 3, and I believe she's accompanied by a couple people from her staff. Can you please come to the witness table. 14 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to thank Chairman Ramos and members of the Philadelphia City Council's Committee on Labor and Civil Service for inviting me here today. Thank you for allowing me to testify about the safety and health of workers in Philadelphia. S. Labor Department's Occupational Safety and Health Administration. My region covers Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia. Our regional office is located in Philadelphia and we have ten area offices spread throughout our region. The area office here in Philadelphia covers the City and Chester and Delaware Counties. Before I tell you about my agency, let me address several items in Councilman Ramos's resolution. There 15 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 have been 16 workplace fatalities in Philadelphia during the past year, but only four of them in construction. I will give you more details on the other fatalities later in my testimony. The resolution states that employers must provide a six-foot-high perimeter around dangerous areas to prevent falls. That is incorrect. Employers must evaluate a work site and then implement a fall protection system that is appropriate to that site under existing OSHA construction regulations. Let me give you one example of fall protection. OSHA has regulations requiring that each employee on a walking or working surface with an unprotected side or edge, which is six feet or more above a lower level, must be protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems or personal fall arrest systems, such as a safety harness and lanyard. The requirements are activity-based. The bottom line is 16 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 that the employer needs to provide protection to workers from fall hazards. Let me begin by explaining my agency and our mission. The Occupational Safety and Health Act became law in 1970. Under the Act, employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthy workplace for their employees. Congress charged OSHA with a very important mission, to assure the safety and health of America's workers by setting and enforcing standards; providing training, outreach and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging continual improvement in workplace safety and health. Nearly every man and woman in the nation comes under OSHA's jurisdiction. There are some exceptions such as miners, transportation workers, some public employees and the self-employed. Since its inception in 1971, OSHA has helped to cut workplace 17 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 fatalities by more than 60 percent and occupational injuries and illnesses by 40 percent. We believe those statistics are impressive because the workforce has doubled since then. However, I know you are most interested in the workplace fatalities that have occurred in your City. Our Philadelphia area office has documented workplace fatalities during the past 12 year. Seven of these fatalities resulted 13 from falls, four of which occurred in the 14 construction industry. The other 15 workplace fatalities have been in our 16 general industry area, outside of construction. They include several electrocutions, contact with objects and equipment, and a drowning. I am sure you realize that in order to protect the integrity of our investigations, we cannot talk about specifics, and, therefore, I cannot give you any details on these inspections. What needs to be said is this 18 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 number of fatalities is too high. One fatality is too high. We also need to reduce job-related injuries and illnesses. Our goal is zero, and we continually try to find the best means to reach it. In the Philadelphia office we have five health and seven safety inspectors who respond to fatalities, catastrophes, complaints, referrals, as well as our targeted inspection goals.

Last year, the Philadelphia office conducted 476 inspections and issued 771 violations. Sixty-five percent of those violations were classified as serious, nine were willful and 33 were repeat violations. Of those 771 violations, 392 were for fall hazards and fall hazard-related violations in construction, or, in other words, 50 percent of all of the violations issued by the Philadelphia area office related to fall hazards in construction. These include citations for fall hazards which 19 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 occurred on general walking/working surfaces, scaffolds, ladders, stairs, roofs and fall hazards that occurred during steel erection and residential construction. We also issued citations associated with fall protection training requirements. During the past year, we have conducted two local emphasis programs concerning fall hazards in our jurisdiction, one in residential construction and one that was specifically targeted towards any fall hazards. The goal of an LEP is to conduct inspections where serious hazards exist. The Philadelphia office conducted 60 inspections for fall hazards in residential construction and issued citations for all of these inspections. As a result of this program, 451 workers were removed from hazards, 100 serious hazards were eliminated and 100 serious citations totalling a little over $92,000 20 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 were proposed. There were 34 inspections conducted under the LEP targeting falls, and we again issued citations for all of these inspections. During this program, 56 serious hazards were eliminated and 133 workers were removed from fall hazards. Sixty serious citations totalling almost $26,000 were proposed. Since October 1, 2005, the Philadelphia office has conducted approximately 30 accident investigations, half of those in construction. We are disappointed that some contractors working in this City do not take safety and health seriously. Recently our Philadelphia area Director reached out to 100 contractors working in the steel erection industry in and around Philadelphia. Only eight of those contractors responded to our invitation to discuss safety and health. We need these contractors to believe in safety and health and the benefits that come 21 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 from having a safe workplace. We do not want employers to think of OSHA as just another four-letter word. OSHA's goal is to encourage a culture of safety and health in the workplace. We have learned many lessons since the law was enacted. A safety and health environment is good for business. Why? In 2005, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company in its Workplace Safety Index estimated that employers pay almost $1 billion per week to injured employees and their medical care providers. Even one serious workplace injury may affect the bottom line of a small company. Employers that implement effective safety and health programs may expect to significantly reduce injuries and illnesses and reduce the costs associated with them, including workers' compensation payments, medical expenses and lost productivity. In addition, employers often find that higher employee 22 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 morale and increased productivity translates into profit dollars, while ensuring that workers go home in one piece at the end of the day. For every dollar employers invest in safety and health, they will find it pays back four times over. Since October 2005, our Compliance Assistance Specialist in the Philadelphia office has conducted 75 construction cooperative program outreach and training activities. The Neighborhood Transformation Initiative Partnership that was signed last year between OSHA and the City of Philadelphia is an extraordinary example of how working together helps reduce injuries.

The participating demolition contractors working on the project have a DART rate; that is, days away, restricted or transferred rate, which is days away from work basically, below the national average for demolition contractors. The evidence is in. We know that alliances 23 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 and partnerships work. At this point, we want to say we are very pleased with the referrals we receive from the Fire Department and would like to encourage the Department of Licenses and Inspections to follow suit. They are on the ground at numerous construction sites and have a good handle on projects in the City and can help us prevent accidents and fatalities. Thank you for allowing me to testify today on this very important issue. OSHA's goal has always been to ensure that each worker goes home in one piece at the end of the workday, and we welcome City Council's interest in helping us achieve that goal. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am, for your testimony. Does anyone else on your panel care to testify?

No. That's all.

Any 24 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 questions for this panelist?

I do.

Councilman Kelly.

Yes. Ms. Cassady, you mention in your testimony that you gave numerous inspections on developing sites. You also mention that many citations were proposed. Could you give me an idea of what "proposed" means? Are these citations given to the developers?

Yes, they were. When we issue a citation, everything that is on the citation is listed as a proposed violation, and the employer has 15 days in which to come in, present additional evidence as to why a citation may or may not be valid, and then after 15 days, it becomes a final order. There may be adjustments made to the citation based upon evidence presented at the informal conference. So that is what we 25 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 issued or proposed. It's not necessarily --

In other words, they have days to comply, and 6 is there reinspection at that point? 7

If we do not have 8 evidence that the employer has -- the 9 employer is required to provide abatement 10 evidence to us, and if they do not, then 11 we would reinspect. 12

I see. 13 Do you feel that the citations 14 or the amount of the citations are enough 15 that's going to force a developer to put in proper safety standards?

We have a very elaborate penalty scheme, and penalty amounts for violations can range up to $70,000 per violation. That is usually the type of penalty that we start with when we are looking at either willful or repeat violations.

Well, I'm looking at your testimony here and it has 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 60 serious citations totalling almost $26,000 were proposed. That's over 60 violations.

Right. Serious violations have a penalty up to a maximum of $70,000 -- $7,000. I'm sorry. And we take several factors into account when we assess a penalty for a violation. The first is the gravity of the violation, the likelihood that that violation will in fact result in a serious injury, and then the size of the employer, the employer's history and the amount of good faith that they may have demonstrated during the inspection are all considered when we assess the final penalty. What happens with a lot of small contractors is, there is a very sizable adjustment for size. So if you have a contractor that only has between five and ten employees, the penalty reduction is very, very significant. It's 80 percent.

Can you stop 27 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 the construction from taking progress?

If we document what we consider to be an imminent danger and the employer fails to take immediate action, then we can post an imminent danger notice. We can go to the courts to get a restraining order until the violation is fixed.

Because it seems to me that with all this development that's going on in the City of Philadelphia, especially Center City, you have a lot of developers and they're putting up these large buildings and condos and everything else, and they're worth millions upon millions of dollars. If they're looking at it to rather stop the pace that they're building this thing, they would gladly pay a small fine and keep on going without making any changes to their --

That's very true, but our penalty system is progressive. So if in fact -- take fall protection, 28 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 for instance. If we go out and we document a fall protection --

But you do have reinspections, in other words?

We do have reinspections. And if we document that a violation continues to exist or that a violation has recurred after we've cited it once or twice, that's when these much, much higher penalties come into play and it's also when we can start to ignore things like the size of the employer. For serious violations, we are bound by the law to consider those factors. Once we get to a willful violation, we can issue the $70,000 penalty without taking into account the employer size.

And you also can stop the further construction.

As I say, if we have something that we call an imminent danger where we feel the likelihood of death or serious physical harm is imminent unless that violation is 29 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 corrected immediately, we can post an imminent danger notice and we can pursue a restraining order from the courts. I can tell you that it is a very rare occurrence that we will go out and find something like that that an employer does not abate immediately.

Okay.

They will usually remove their employees from the site and if it's fall protection that needs to be installed or a trench that needs to be shored, that usually happens while we are on the site.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilman Kelly. Any other questions from members of this Committee? (No response.)

I have a few questions. 30 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 When I received or when I read a quote from OSHA I guess about five or six weeks ago, you used the word "alarming," and your testimony today does in fact sound alarming. Although it seems as though OSHA is out there and I know that you are and that you've gotten such cooperation from the City through its demolition program, through the NTI program.

Yes.

You state in that you're disappointed that some contractors working in this City do not take safety and health seriously. You go on to state that you reached out to 100 contractors working in the steel erection industry and only eight of those contractors responded to your invitation. You state here that "some contractors." I think that might have been more appropriate if your statement is in fact correct, -and I assume that you've done your homework and that you consider it 31 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 correct, -that it's probably more appropriate to say "most contractors" here instead of "some," because you have eight out of only 100. But not to get into all of that. That can take us all day, which I'm willing to be here all day, but why do you think you had such a poor response?

I think that there are still a number of contractors out there that regard injuries and illnesses and problems on construction sites or even in general industry as the cost of doing business. I personally had discussions with contractors along those lines and --

So it's okay to get a couple guys hurt on a job once in a while because --

And the workers' compensation costs are built right into their bids for the job. As crazy as that sounds to me, who has spent a lifetime working in safety and health, that is 32 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 nevertheless the way a tremendous amount of businesses regard that. I am happy to report that we are seeing a turnaround in participation with partnerships, with cooperative agreements that we formed, for instance, with some of the contractors associations where this realization that this is the cost of doing business is not necessarily the best way to do business, and as a result of that, we have formed some very, very positive partnerships. We've done training and we have industry groups out there working with us to get their members as well pushing the issue of workplace safety and health is the way of doing business. It is a long, slow learning curve and we really were disappointed at this turnout, but --

What did they say? Did you call back and ask them, How come you didn't come to this important meeting of contractors on the issue of safety? 33 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

I think we extended the invitation. I don't know that we -- we extended the invitation through the unions. It was my Philadelphia area office, and that's how the invitation was extended. My understanding is, we did not follow up and call them and ask them why they did not attend.

I sure hope that that's not the mindset, that it's the cost of doing business. I was a construction worker before I was elected to this body and I am glad I didn't have any of those contractors that I worked for over the years that just saw me as something that might come up in an insurance policy, but that in fact these contractors that I worked for I think for all those years, about 20-some years, most of those contractors had us going to safety meetings in the morning, wearing your hard hat properly, not backwards, and boots and safety gear and protective 34 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 clothing and everything else. I sure hope that that's not the mindset, because that's a horrible mindset for a worker to go and for them just to be discarded as just part of doing business.

As I say --

I'm quite sure the Martin family will not appreciate that after the husband fell to his death on a construction site. That was the father and the husband of someone back home. Every single worker is human valuable, precious human worth. But we'll get into that. How do you compare the average yearly fatal rate in Philadelphia to cities like New York, LA, Chicago? These are cities that have a construction boom going on as well. How do we compare to this fatality rate that you refer to as alarming?

That's somewhat difficult because it's clearly dependent upon the number of work sites you have, 35 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 the amount of construction, the size of the population. New York and Los Angeles are much larger cities than Philadelphia. In looking at my region, which is something that I can more easily address, I would have to say that probably the next largest city that we have is Washington, DC. I would say the safety and health experience in Washington, DC is similar to what we're seeing in Philadelphia. New York and Los Angeles, number one, are both out of my region, so my experience with those are -- I just don't have it. I can't respond to that.

So you're saying that Philadelphia might just be an example of what's happening in other big cities, that New York and Washington are going through a similar cycle because of the construction boom?

Certainly because of the construction boom there are a lot of the issues. If you look at national 36 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 statistics, which I will mention a little bit, overall you're seeing a reduction in construction fatalities. It is not a significant reduction, but it is a small percentage. It's maybe two or three-tenths of a percent from last year, and last year it was pretty much a static level from the year before. But those levels are going down gradually. Probably the thing that is most disturbing, however, is that there is a significant increase in the number of fatalities that are occurring for non-English-speaking workers in the construction industry. The increase is particularly noticeable in the Hispanic community where you do have a significant increase in the number of fatalities for Hispanic workers. Even though the overall level of construction fatalities is decreasing, for that group of people it is increasing, and it is an area that we are targeting very carefully and we are spending a lot of time working with 37 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 various Hispanic groups to, number one, get the word out to the workers that they have the right to demand safe and healthful working conditions. There are a lot of factors that make Hispanic workers somewhat reluctant to report problems to OSHA if they're working on an unsafe work site, but as I say, we are spending a lot of time and energy reaching out to that community in general and to leaders of that community so that these workers realize that they do have the protection of the federal government in terms of their working conditions.

Are you doing that locally here in Philadelphia proper?

Yes, we are.

You mentioned in your statement, you refer to residential construction. Do you see the problem being bigger in the residential construction 38 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 versus the commercial construction?

Yes, we do at this point, and I think the reason --

That Hispanic stuff is tied into residential?

Absolutely. Absolutely. That is one of the factors. The other factor is that for many years, clearly what we looked at was large construction sites, and larger employers at this point for lots of reasons frequently have gotten a much better grip on safety and health and have come to regard it as the way to do business. The problem is with smaller contractors, and that's typically what you have on residential construction sites, are smaller contractors that are frequently hiring minorities. And the situation is an area that clearly needed to be addressed. We're having much more injuries than illnesses on those types of work sites.

In this 39 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 business a lot of it is union, non-union. This residential, is this mostly union or non-union?

Mostly non-union.

Mostly non-union. Are a lot of these falls happening in non-union -- are you saying that some of these fatalities are higher in non-union sites than union sites?

I don't think that we can say that, because a lot of times with residential construction, what we're seeing are workers getting injured and seriously injured, not necessarily fatals on residential sites, although there are some. It seems to be a mix of union and non-union. Some residential sites are unionized, but the workforce, for the most part, is the same.

In your organization's opinion, in OSHA's opinion, what items do you think need to be done on a City level to make 40 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 construction sites safer? If you have any recommendations, you can give them to me now. Your testimony has been quite impacting, at least for me. A bunch of my colleagues feel the same way, because you have given us some very alarming information and you have made some very matter-of-fact statements at the witness table, and I appreciate your candor and your honesty. Since you guys are the experts in this, I take it to be truth.

What I would point to is the Neighborhood Transition project, which we have partnered with the City on. That has worked out extremely well, and we are finding at times our cooperative programs working with contractors that really do want to work with us, which has been the case with the Neighborhood Transition project, produces much better results because the safety and health attitude gets ingrained in what's happening. We can't be there all 41 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 the time, but once you have contractors buying into that theory and working with us, the safety and health at the sites remains good whether or not we're there to watch it all the time, which is really what we are looking for in the end, that companies in many ways become self-policing in making sure that their workers are safe, because inspectors 11 for just a city the size of Philadelphia, 12 clearly we can't be everywhere. The fact that the City has chosen to partner with us on this project and we've cooperated with training and with identifying the contractors has really, really been a very positive experience, and I would hope that we could do more of that.

If there was one thing that you would recommend to us on how the City can better monitor the safety of workers on construction sites, what would that be? The Department of License and Inspections is going to testify shortly. I mean, what would you 42 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 in your expertise --

Again, I think probably the easiest way to do this -- and, again, it's something that we are seeing from the Fire Department and we have done this with other groups as well -- is that if L&I happens to see serious hazards on a work site that no 10 one seems to be interested in correcting, if they would call my Philadelphia area office, we would send an inspector out there to make sure that those hazards got corrected.

L&I doesn't call you when they see --

They will call us sometimes, but my guess is that there's probably many times when maybe they don't want to bother us. I'm not pointing fingers, but I think that there's probably many times when they could call us and for whatever reason they don't. They apparently always give us a call if they see a trench, which is clearly a 43 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 very serious issue. I don't know that we get calls all the time when there are fall hazards. So that's certainly one very easy way. And, truthfully, it doesn't just have to be L&I. It could be other City workers that happen to see a problem. We have no problems if there are Street Department workers out there that happen to see a trench. We would more than welcome a call from them that there are employees working in an unprotected trench, and we will go investigate.

Okay. Thank you so much for your testimony. Any other questions from this Committee? (No response.)

Thank you.

Thank you.

Since we're dealing with government entities that have a direct or indirect involvement on worker safety or enforcement, Otis 44 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 Haigler, can you please take the witness table. Good morning.

Good morning.

For those of you in this room, this gentleman is not a stranger by a long stretch to this Chamber. He comes here, right, Councilmembers, he comes here and sits there very often and has had a very distinguished career as a public servant in the City of Philadelphia. Mr. Haigler, please.

Thank you. Good day, Councilman Ramos and members of the Committee. , Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Accompanying me here to also present the Department's testimony on Resolution 22 060738 is Michael Maenner, Manager of Licenses and Inspections Construction Inspection Division. Today I am here to provide testimony on Resolution 060738, 45 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 which calls for hearings within this body to investigate worker safety and health on construction jobs located within the City of Philadelphia. As the Committee is aware, the Department of Licenses and Inspections is the regulatory arm of the City that enforces local laws governing building construction. We enforce these laws by regulating individuals and activities through the licensing of qualified persons to perform certain work, the enforcement of local, state and federal laws related to construction to ensure compliance, and the issuance of permits for construction work performed on properties located within the City. The primary mission of the Department with regard to regulating the above is to safeguard the public welfare. Indirectly by regulating individuals through licensing and enforcing laws related to building construction in order to ensure compliance, certain aspects of 46 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 worker safety are also considered. The International Building Code, IBC, as promulgated by the International Code Council and adopted by the City as its building code, contains language within Chapter 33 related specifically to safety at construction sites. The provisions of this chapter 11 include the following safeguards during construction operations: One, provisions for fire standpipes for use during construction that are within one floor of the highest point of construction projects; two, provisions that at least one temporary lighted stairway is available and accessible when a building project exceeds 50 feet in height; three, provisions for properly located and serviced fire extinguishers; four, provisions requiring protection of public and private property during construction; and, five, provisions requiring permits to be obtained by qualified individuals 47 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 for welding and cutting operations. And I might want to add for that last one the requirements for welding and cutting operations is something that I'm intimately familiar with since I used to be in charge of the area of Licenses and Inspections that would inspect for those things, and we have a requirement for permit activity, that you have to notify the Department within 48 hours prior to commencing a welding or cutting operation so that we can arrange for an inspection of that operation at that time. Further, the Department requires that builders hire a registered engineer to evaluate the impact on adjoining property and, when necessary, provide for shoring and underpinning of the property to prevent shifting, property damage and trench collapse which could trap workers conducting excavation work. I'm going to say that we have a very good relationship with OSHA. We 48 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 have a very good relationship with OSHA and have made frequent referrals to them for their action to enforce federal laws related to worker safety when conditions are observed during the course of our inspection of permit activity and which may pose a threat to same. Finally, as a way of addressing worker safety prior to the commencement of excavation projects, the City actively promotes the use of the State's One Call System to locate buried utilities. The activation of this system provides contractors with much-needed information as to where lines are buried so as to avoid accidental breaches which could cause property damage, injury or death. The toll-free number for the PA One Call System is 1-800-242-1776.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department's testimony on Resolution 060738. I will be happy to answer any questions at this time.

Thank you, 49 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 Mr. Haigler. Any questions from this Committee for Mr. Haigler? (No response.)

Mr. Haigler, we have this construction boom and you require all these permits. I know about these permits. It takes time. There's a lot of sites to visit. How much are you able to get around to these sites? OSHA used the word "alarming" when it comes to the fatalities particularly due to falls on construction sites. Are you getting around? Are you alarmed also by the incidents in the past year?

Well, of course. Anybody would be very much alarmed if they hear reports of any worker safety issues related to death or injury. So that would be an alarming indication or alarming condition. Again, as stated in my testimony, the Department of Licenses and 50 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 Inspections' primary role is to inspect for construction-related permit work related to the construction code that we enforce. Primarily these are laws related to how a building is constructed and the material that may go into that building type construction. Our inspectors primarily are out there to inspect to ensure that the laws that have been adopted by the City of Philadelphia are in compliance. Again, worker safety is an aspect of what we do certainly. Our primary goal is to deal with public safety to make sure that the public welfare is secured by the enforcement of our laws.

How much are you able to get around with the personnel that you have to all this construction and all these permits that are required and for you to do the work that you do? I mean, are you getting to 80 percent of the jobs, 70 percent? I mean, are you getting to all the jobs? 51 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

I'll let Michael Maenner, who is our Director of Construction Inspections, answer that question.

Mr. Maenner, will you please state your name again and your title for the purpose of the record.

Mike Maenner. I'm the Construction Inspections Manager for Licenses and Inspections. We get to 100 percent of the jobs.

You get to --

In various phases of the job.

And I know that on the very human element, we're all alarmed, but do you see that because maybe this construction boom going on commercially, residential, downtown -- I just drove through a part of North Philadelphia this morning. Thank God, there's some houses being built in this 52 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 whole big parcel of land in North Philly, and that's a very positive thing, but are you concerned as OSHA is about the safety of workers on construction sites?

Oh, absolutely. My inspectors are workers also and they're on the construction site. So any flagrant violations we usually do report.

I guess my question is, in the past year, do you see this being more of a concern because of all of the construction boom versus a couple years ago?

Yes.

Okay. Have you taken any other remedies? I mean, do you have any opinions of what things can be done on the short-term or long-term basis in Philadelphia to improve workplace safety?

Well, several years ago all the inspectors for Licenses and Inspections took a class that was given by OSHA for open trenches, and we 53 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 generally inform our inspectors -- because they are on the job site, I'm concerned with their safety also, and any fall hazards they may come across, to report those.

Okay. I'll defer to Councilman DiCicco. Councilman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have one question. Mr. Haigler, on of your testimony, the paragraph that begins, "Further, the Department requires that builders hire a registered engineer to evaluate the impact on adjoining property and, when necessary, provide for shoring and underpinning," et cetera, is that requirement for all excavation or is there a criteria? For instance, single-family housing development, one house being built where the lot is being excavated, are they required to do that?

Well, Councilman, 54 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 this is in reference to a bill that recently passed. It was enacted, and it was due to a lot of work that we worked on together. It's primarily for excavations that have been left unattended for more than six months. If a foundation permit was issued for a particular project and the excavation was left unattended for more than six months, then the Department has a requirement now to require that the property owner hire an engineer to submit to the Department information related to that construction excavation to make sure that it is still safe. Also, there are certain requirements that the excavation put up certain types of barriers to prevent access to that so that would prevent persons from coming in contact and harming themselves if they were to come into contact with -- that would have imposed a safety risk. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I 55 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 understand that, because as you said, we worked for quite amount of time on that bill, and I think it's a good bill, but that is generally after the excavation has been left unattended --

That's correct. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: -- for six months. What I'm asking is, I'm going to go build a new home tomorrow and I take an old property, a vacant structure, down and I do excavation. At that point, am I required to have an engineer evaluation of that excavation, or does it only pertain to large-scale development, Symphony House as an example or any of the other high-rises? Is there a criteria?

Councilman, I'm going to have to get back to you on the question. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Because I think it's important, just as important, whether it's large-scale development or single-family dwelling that when any time 56 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 there is an excavation and there are adjoining properties, that some evaluation needs to be made that, A, the excavation is being done properly and that there is a safety mechanism in place to keep it from collapsing.

The Department as part of its building construction permit process, there are requirements as part of that process to require engineering reports for various inspections for areas that the Department would not inspect on its own for structural steel, for excavation, for soils. We require soils reports from engineers. So it's a requirement that's built into the process itself. I don't know if it's a requirement that's routinely done every time a permit is taken out, but if the engineer that we have on staff reviews the plans, the construction plans, and there is something indicated on the plans, then that engineer can require additional reports from qualified design 57 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 professionals. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Again, I understand the reason we did the other bill after six months, but I'm a little bit concerned that maybe there should be some sort of a requirement during that permitting process that would also provide for some sort of engineering evaluation. Whether it's a single-family rowhouse in the middle of a block, generally there's properties on either side.

I believe it is, but I will give you a definitive answer. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And I don't want to drive the cost of construction up any higher, but this is an issue of public safety, so I think we need to look at that a little bit further. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Councilman. Councilman Kelly. 58 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Haigler, I just want to ask you, most of the infractions that you come across and you refer them to OSHA, do they generally, most of them, come from the same developers or is it across the board, it could be any developer? In other words, I want to know, is there people that are doing business in Philadelphia and they're constantly going against all the safety regulations that we have in the City or against your codes?

I'll let Mr. Maenner answer that question again, since he's more familiar with the day-to-day operations of inspections.

It's usually various contractors, and most of those complaints or referrals were for open trenches. So it's usually in the street.

Would this be the smaller contractors or are these 59 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 the big contractors who are working on large projects?

It would be the smaller contractors.

That's where most of the infractions occur?

Some of the infractions. I don't know whether I could say most or half or give a percentage.

That are referred to OSHA, I'm speaking about.

Yes.

Most of them are the smaller contractors then, right?

Yes.

Is it basically the same contractor or are they numerous contractors?

It's numerous contractors.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 60 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Thank you, Councilman Kelly. Any other questions from this Committee? (No response.)

How many referrals have you made in the last year to OSHA, if any? Do you have any idea how many?

I have no idea.

One, two? You've made some in the last year?

Yes. We have 28 inspectors. I mean, we might not make as many referrals as the Fire Department by virtue of the fact they have more people, but I couldn't give even a guesstimate as to how many.

When you make these referrals to OSHA, what kind of response have you gotten that you can recall and how were they of help in remediating the problem?

Actually, OSHA 61 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 has always been very responsive. Even going back to when I was an inspector, they respond immediately to the site.

Okay. Thank you so much for your testimony this morning. My intention is to gather all this information, take a look at it, study this and we'll get back and get copies out to you, and I'll be looking for any legislative action, if necessary, to make this City a safer place for workers. Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you.

Thanks.

The next person scheduled to testify is Mr. Pat Gillespie of the Philadelphia Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO. And I don't see Mr. Gillespie, but I see Mr. Consenza. Mr. Consenza, I assume you're here to testify on behalf of Mr. Gillespie and the Building Trades? 62 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Yes, I am, Councilman.

Okay. Please state your name and your organization's name please for the record.

My name is Fred Consenza and I'm with the Philadelphia Building Trades Council. I'm here for Pat Gillespie. I am a business representative for the Building Trades. I am the Chairman of the Philadelphia Building Trades Safety Committee. I'm an OSHA 500 instructor. I'm here today to speak for Pat Gillespie and, like you said, the alarming problem that we have with the industry today. Part of the problem I think is that OSHA is understaffed. They need help, because I handle -- my area is Delaware County, Chester County and Philadelphia, and the Philadelphia region of OSHA covers that same county, the same three counties. To get in Chester County 63 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 or Delaware County, if there's a problem and you call OSHA at o'clock or o'clock, to get out to a construction site in Chester County, it might take them a day to get there. They need help. The Philadelphia Building Trades has an alliance with OSHA. Years ago people thought of OSHA as the enemy, and with this alliance, OSHA is not our enemy, they're our friends. We work with Dominick Salvatore. We meet monthly. What we do, we try to come up with ways to prevent accidents. We've developed a system for tracking injuries, which OSHA doesn't even have a tracking system to track the incidents that happen. They just get the reports of what happened. We're trying to be proactive, and OSHA is a big part of this, because like I said, Dominick Salvatore is in our alliance that we have with them, and it's an alliance because Dominick is not an enforcement, he is working with us to help us prevent 64 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 accidents. So there's a big difference. And the contractors have to look at OSHA as our friend, not as the enemy. And over the years, they've always looked at them as somebody to stay away from, get a lawyer, go in and fight with them. It's better if they're fined $100,000 to say, listen, I'm going to put 50,000 of that fine into training and I'll pay you the other $50,000, or $75,000 into training and pay a $25,000 fine. It benefits everybody. We're here to try to make sure that people go home at the end of the day. It was alarming to hear that OSHA put a request out to 100 steel erectors and only eight responded. I know in our industry there is a handful of steel erectors that do high-rises, and I just have a question on that. I want to know if they were eight union contractors or non-union. That's a big difference to me. They were union? Thank you. 65 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 Because building a high-rise, not only are the men and women working on those projects in jeopardy, but it's the pedestrians that are walking around the site that have to worry about something happening to them, where, God forbid, you're walking down the street and somebody drops a spud wrench that from 10 feet or from 200 feet, it could kill you. 11 We're working with the 12 Philadelphia School District now, that every student that will be coming out of high school will have either an OSHA 10 or 30 card in their pocket for that partnership we have with the Building Trades, that they're already hitting the apprenticeships with that card in their pocket. Our apprenticeships are teaching OSHA 10 and 30. Most of them are up to OSHA 30. And we have journeymen refresher courses. These men and women are coming in at night on their own time and getting trained and certified with OSHA. And we're talking about 66 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 construction accidents, and the falls and the ditches are a major problem. In today's market, everybody that could afford to buy a little piece of property north of Spring Garden Street somewhere is digging a hole and putting a house up and making a million dollars, and there's a problem, because it's their first time ever building a house.

With L&I, what they're doing with the engineering seal that you have to have so you don't make the house next to you fall down is a great thing, but when you put a scaffold up to put the brick on the front of that house, they're two feet away from a power line that they didn't protect. There's electrocutions. They're not building scaffold right. There is a lot of problems, and I don't want to talk union/non-union, but I'm going to, because I also am a union organizer for the Building Trades, and what I do is go to work for non-union contractors. I get hired with them, and 67 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 I get fired because I bring up safety issues with them, and I have proof to back up what I'm saying. When I bring up a safety issue, they'll fire me from the project. That's alarming where we represent people and we have a hard time getting them to make sure that things are done safe. I've personally called OSHA, I would say, once a week. I probably call them 50 times a year, and I call on union contractors as well as non-union contractors, because I want everyone to go home at the end of the day. But when you get fired for bringing up a safety issue, that's just criminal and something should happen to those people. There's a law. It's an 11(c), which a lot of people really don't know about. So OSHA is doing what they can do with what they have. They have a big area and it's tough getting outside of the City because of the glut of work that we have going on right now. 68 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 But that's just that type of construction. There's people getting killed not today that are going to be killed in ten years or years where we 6 thought we got all the asbestos out of 7 these buildings in schools back in the 8 '80s. It's not out of there. We took 9 out what we saw then. Now we're ripping 10 walls down and exposing asbestos that we 11 never took out in the '80s because it was 12 behind walls. Now people are opening up 13 every wall in the building and letting 14 the brick walls show and they're 15 refitting out the buildings. There's a ton of asbestos in these projects, and I know it firsthand because I'm on the jobs. And as far as the question you asked OSHA if they stop jobs, they have a little bit of a harder time than I do. When I go to a job site and there's safety issues where we stop the project ourselves, all the unions, we'll make the contractor fix what he has to fix. So I 69 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 don't want to talk a lot about union and non-union, but there is a big difference in the way the two work, where the housing market with the minority workers that are working on them sites, they need help. We're here to help them, but the contractors keep them away from us where we're trying to organize just to show them the difference between working safe and how they are working. Like I said, I'm out on the projects. I'm the Chairman of the Safety Committee and I'm also an organizer. So I know both ends of what's going on in the real world. I appreciate it for letting me speak to you.

Thank you, Mr. Consenza. Thank you for your very thorough testimony. Any questions from this Committee to this witness? (No response.)

70 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 Mr. Consenza, you represent the Building Trades and the Building Trades are affiliated with the AFL-CIO, so I would expect you to talk union. So feel free to speak your mind and how you've seen it in your position within the Building Trades. But what triggered this hearing was that I read that this young man, I believe years old, named Jeffrey 11 Martin, was killed in Philadelphia in a 12 downtown project and that he fell six 13 stories through a steel cable barrier 14 down several floors to a garage area and 15 that he's a member of the Building 16 Trades, I believe affiliated with the 17 Laborers Local 332 that I'm very familiar 18 with. This got a lot of attention. 19 What is being done or what is 20 the role of the Building Trades in this 21 particular incident, the companies 22 involved? There were reports that the 23 company that this young man worked for had other problems in other jurisdictions. Where does that stand 71 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 today, the investigation, who is involved in it?

Well, OSHA is involved in the investigation, and the company is Fabi, where I don't want to get into too much detail with Fabi, but I worked for Fabi in Atlantic City. I have nothing good to say about them. I worked for the Building Trades when Fabi was working on Delaware Avenue. I had issues with them on that project. I had issues with them on this project. And my heart goes out to the Martin family for the loss of Jeffrey. It could have been prevented. But I'd rather stay away from talking about Fabi, because I get aggravated. What we've done through the Building Trades, we've mandated new guide rules that we're reaching out to all the bigger general contractors, because they're the only ones that could build high-rises, where we have it on the Symphony House right now, we have it in 72 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 place at the Comcast Center and we're going out, like I said, to all the big contractors who do build high-rises. If anyone touches a perimeter cable that is not supposed to touch that cable, they are fired from the job, and that's come up from the Building Trades Council. And we have 100 percent agreement with all the trades that belong to the Council. So any time a perimeter cable has to get touched, removed, anything, they go to the general contractor. It's like working down the refinery. You get a permit to touch that cable, and if you don't have a permit to touch it, the worker is off the site, and the foreman will also be removed if he told the worker to take that perimeter cable down without the proper permission.

The contractor that Mr. Martin was working for, was that a union contractor, the Fabi group? I believe you referred to them as Fabi. 73 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Is Fabi a union contractor?

Yes.

Yes.

I ask that --

And I say that the way I say it because, like I said, I worked for the company years ago down the shore. They are a union company, yes.

And the reason why I asked that question, because you represent the Building Trades, which is an affiliate of the AFL-CIO. You're a union guy and you seem to have no 17 hesitance to criticize a union contractor in this particular case. So I want to commend you for that, because at least from my vantage point, it says that if it's wrong, it's wrong, it's wrong. And then any particulars? I know that there's probably some court action going on on the Martin case. Is there anything that has changed on that 74 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 site that can further prevent anyone from falling on that job? I believe -- is L.F. Driscoll here?

Yes, sir.

We're going to get to L.F. Driscoll soon. You already mentioned there the barrier.

Yes. We told -- and that was at our suggestion -- that anybody touching the cable, you fire them from the job, and that's coming from the unions telling the general contractors to do that, where we have no problem with replacing a guy, because I'd rather see somebody lose a couple days' pay than to lose a life.

So the investigation on the Martin case is still ongoing?

Yes.

Do you know of any other remedies that have been put in place since that tragedy? 75 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Yes. There's a lot of different things going on with the Symphony House that is going to make it a safer project, and I don't want to speak too much about what is going on because I'm probably going to have to testify when the case comes up for the Martin family, and I'll do that and it's against a union contractor. And union/non-union, I'm going to testify and tell them what happened. The main thing is, when you go to work, you get up early, your wife is sleeping, your kids are sleeping, you go to work. At the end of the day, you're supposed to come home, sit down and have dinner with them, and for Jeffrey Martin, his life was cut short. And that's just one person. There are so many accidents that happen in the construction industry. Besides mining, it's one of the most dangerous industries that you could work in. You're supposed to go home at the end of the day, and if a contractor puts 76 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 you in a position like I was that I brought up safety issues and I got fired, that contractor should --

Do you think this was an isolated thing, Mr. Consenza?

What? Contractors that fire people for bringing up safety issues?

Yes.

Not at all. And I could give you a lot of documentation to back up what I'm saying, because like I said, I do go to work for non-union companies.

Undercover?

Yes, and I'm very good at it. But there has to be a change. And eight contractors showing up for the steel erectors, those eight contractors are probably the only eight that build high-rises. So if it was four that -- but I know the iron workers are working with their contractors every day and they're sitting with OSHA helping 77 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 them critique their steel erection standards, if I'm not mistaken, correct?

No. 5

You're working hand in hand with iron workers locals?

Yes.

So we are changing, but the change isn't happening fast enough, I believe.

Thank you so much, Mr. Consenza, for your testimony, for your recommendations as well. If at any time I will need to call on you to get some of this documentation that you have, I will sure ask you to make it available to me, because I think this is a very, very important area, and what I have seen over the years is that regardless of how people might feel about union or non-union, union jobs seem to put a whole lot of emphasis, at least maybe in my limited experience, though I've got some experience, that there seems to be much more of an emphasis on 78 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 safety and the care of workers. That's not to discard any other entities' desire for safety on their jobs as well. Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you.

Our next witness will be Mr. Roscoe Green. He's the Training Director for the Laborers District Council.

Good morning, Councilman Ramos and the rest of the Councilmembers. I want to thank you for being able to come and testify about a very important area concerning worker safety and construction site safety. Again, my name is Roscoe Green. I'm the Training Director for the Laborers District Council Education and Training Fund. We represent construction craft laborers in the five-county Southeastern Pennsylvania area. We cover Bucks, Montgomery, Chester, Delaware and Philadelphia counties. We primarily 79 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 train construction craft laborers in all facets of work done by laborers under the Building Trades. We've been training since 1982. In general, we train about 1,400 to 1,500 construction workers a year. Since 2003, we've trained 81 people in the OSHA 30 safety course. Since 2002, we've trained over 1,400 people in what's called a PSM/OSHA 10 combination class, and that allows people to get their completion card for the OSHA 10 course as well as a PSM card, which allows them to work in refineries. And also since 2002, we trained over a thousand people in just the OSHA 10 construction safety class. I've included information that I left with the Councilmembers a brief description of the OSHA Outreach Training Program Guidelines. We take a rather simplistic approach toward worker safety and construction safety, and, that is, we believe that making workers as aware as possible of the hazards that might be 80 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 present on a construction site is the best way to have them be safe and productive workers on a construction site. We understand that it involves a partnership between workers and employers. Employers are mandated by the OSHA Act to do certain things, and one of those things is to train workers in the hazards of the work, the work site and things that might happen on the site. We emphasize to the workers that you not only have to be concerned with the work that you're doing, but you also have to be concerned about those that are working with you and those that are working around you, because there's sometimes things that other people do and not the craft and not the workers that you're working with that causes some of the accidents and incidents on the job site. I currently have six instructors in my program. They're all 81 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 authorized by OSHA to do the outreach training. They conduct 10-hour training. They can conduct 30-hour training. We do a special OSHA 30 health and safety class, that we combine that with CPR, first aid and AED training. We emphasize to all the members of the Laborers District Council that it's very, very important to at least get an OSHA 10 card. We recommend to the foremen and stewards on the job that they get the OSHA 30 and any additional training that might be available in specialties that they're doing out on the job site. And exactly what is the OSHA 10? The OSHA 10 is ten hours of training that primarily covers topics that are covered in the CFR 1926 OSHA manual, and it covers ten hours of training in any of the subjects that you have there. Six are required and then you have electives with the other ones. The OSHA 30 goes a little bit further, in that it covers 30 hours of 82 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 training. We combine that, again, with the CPR, first aid and AED class. And, again, we recommend that to all foremen and all stewards there on the job. The reason why we address those classes to each one of those categories of workers is because if you have a situation where everyone on the job site is buying into safety -- and that includes the owners, management, the superintendents, the project managers and the workers -- you have a much better chance of avoiding and minimizing accidents and incidents on the job if everyone has a basic same knowledge of the dangers of the work site and what has to be done to prevent them.

We have a two-pronged approach to the training. One is the initial training where you get the full complement of hours, and also we do something a little bit different with our refresher training, is that instead of leaving them a large gap in terms of 83 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 coming back and getting retrained or refreshed, we recommend to all people to take our classes, come back each year for an annual refresher. Although some areas and some parts of the Act do not indicate that you need annual retraining, we insist on it because we think that the more you get it, the repeated times that you get it, the more it might sink in. We also have people that can give testimony in the classes as to incidents and accidents they've seen on the job site and recommended ways of trying to prevent it. One of the things about the OSHA training that is sometimes misunderstood is that the OSHA training does not certify you in anything. The OSHA training is an approved program of training. The trainer or the instructors and the curriculum is approved by OSHA. What the students get is, they get a completion card that they've successfully completed that number of hours of 84 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 training in that area. One of the things that we recommend to them by putting a lot of the responsibility on what they do after they leave the training is that we ask them a question. We ask them to ask themselves, who is with you 100 percent of the time on a job site? And the general answer is you're the only one that's with you 100 percent of the time. You may have the greatest foreman in the world, you may have the greatest superintendent in world, you may have the greatest steward in the world, but once that steward or that superintendent or that project manager leaves you, you are responsible for keeping an eye out on you. If you're to get back home with all your fingers and all your toes, you have to take part of that responsibility. It is a partnership with management. It is a partnership with the employer. Again, the employer has to meet his obligations by making sure that 85 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 everyone is trained on the job to recognize hazards and to do things to help minimize and eliminate them, but also you as a worker have the responsibility that once you're trained, that you then go out and you do things that help make job sites safer. And we continue to encourage all of the members of the Laborers District Council, people that are working with our laborers on the job, to get the necessary training to make job sites safer. One of the things that we do do with them is, we introduce them and make sure they understand the general duty clause, in that an employer does have the responsibility to provide a safe and healthful work site. We also tell them about the Section 11(c), complaints that can be filed, that if you feel that you've been discriminated against on a job site because you've talked about safety and you had issues with safety, 86 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 that within 30 days of this discriminatory act taking place against you, you can report it to OSHA. And if I may briefly, the Act reads the employee rights under Occupational Safety and Health Act, "You have the right to bring up workplace safety and health conditions to your employer, co-workers and union and to file a complaint with OSHA without fear of losing your job or having otherwise adverse action taken against you. The Act provides that employees may not be discharged or discriminated against for filing safety and health complaints or otherwise exercising their rights under the Act. " One of the things we give our trainees is, we give them this card, a laminated card, to carry in their wallets. It has on it the OSHA office 87 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES.

" It's not there to cause a lot of job problems and employer/employee problems, but it's there to educate the people and to let them know that they can get in touch with OSHA if there are problems on the job. Again, we serve as a training provider for union contractors, signatory contractors, in Southeastern Pennsylvania. We encourage every job site, every employer to have daily toolbox meetings and weekly safety reviews to find out what's going on on the job site and what can be done to help improve those situations. Mr. Chairman, any questions?

Thank you, Mr. Green, for your testimony. Any questions from this Committee for Mr. Green? 88 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 (No response.)

Mr. Green, are all members of the Laborers District Council mandated to take an OSHA 10, a safety course, before they go on a construction site?

It's a voluntary program. It's highly recommended, but solely voluntary. It's not mandated. However, there are parts of the country, there are states in the United States and provinces in Canada that require that all workers on the construction site have at least the OSHA 10, at least the OSHA 10.

What percentage of your members -- and you're referring to a member of the District Council, construction worker, that goes to your facility and takes the course, right?

Yes.

Do you have any idea what percentage go out and take that course at your training facility? 89 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Well, at least ten percent of the membership on a revolving basis take one of the three classes that I mentioned, either the OSHA 30, the PSM or the regular OSHA 10. In addition to that, we have four-hour and eight-hour safety awareness classes that we get. For instance, in the area of fall protection, we have an eight-hour course on that that can be done on a Saturday or over the course of a couple evenings. And it primarily covers Subpart M of the regulations, fall protection, and related sections in the standard.

But in your agreements with the union contractors, there are these stipulations of them providing these, besides that they are legally bound to abide by all OSHA regs, but that also that these weekly safety meetings happen and so forth. How do you monitor? Do you monitor that stuff to see if it's going on?

Well, all of that 90 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 is part of how the Act and the standards are written. The employer, a good employer, would have a health and safety plan program written that can be reviewed from time to time. He can monitor the workers that are sent on the job to check to see what kind of safety training that they've had. One of the things that happens with the Act is that we pretty much service the contractor as a training provider so that he can fulfill the requirements of that part of the Act. We as the education and training benefit for our union members, we do the authorized OSHA training. A contractor can get copies of those cards, keep them on file 19 and have that part of his record-keeping system that he's fulfilled his obligation as a contractor by making sure that his workers have had the training.

Thank you, Mr. Green, for your testimony today, and continue to do what you're doing, because 91 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 it seems that from your line of work, that safety is first and foremost for the members of your District Council. Thank you.

Yes.

We're going to call up a couple. How about if we try this, since we're looking at training going on in the area of safety on construction sites, how about we call Mr. Jim Dollard. He's on my list here, Safety Coordinator for IBEW. (No response.)

He's not here. Okay. Tony Wigglesworth from PALM; Mr. James Sassaman, Director of Labor Relations and Safety for GBCA. Can you come so we can get -- I know it's been a long morning. I'm trying to follow this, get this list going. All right. Mr. Wigglesworth, will you please state your name and your occupation for the record, please. 92 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738

Sure. I'm Tony Wigglesworth, the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Area Labor Management Committee. Chairman Ramos, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. In my role as the Executive Director, I operate a program called Built-Rite, which is a construction labor management program of the Philadelphia Area Labor Management Committee. Since 1985, Built-Rite has concluded $14 billion worth of construction in and around Philadelphia. I'm going to speak from the experience we've had on the projects that we've been involved with. I want to characterize those projects, first of all, as all large projects; second of all, all are all-union projects; third, there is a requirement that owner, contractor and union be engaged in the construction process on a Built-Rite job; and, finally, the characteristic is that there would be a high level of labor 93 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 management cooperation on those projects. Past projects in the City of Philadelphia include both Stadium projects, the recently concluded Terminal projects, the first Convention Center and hopefully soon the expansion of our Convention Center in Philadelphia. Every Built-Rite project has beyond its participation an agenda, and every Built-Rite meeting starts with safety. When we speak about safety, we focus not on incidents and accidents, but on near misses, because to prevent those is to prevent future incidents. But we require the participation of all three parties, and our approach to construction safety, while it's rooted in our heart, really is manifest through our head. It's a dollars and cents approach to safety on construction jobs. In fact, good safety does save money. I want to talk about construction for a second. Construction really is a network of shared 94 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 responsibility and objectives, and what we're all looking for is no surprises and no mistakes. We want to minimize risk. We want to maximize our benefit. Nowhere is it truer on a construction site that those four characteristics come into play than on safety. And I want to also speak for a minute about best practices on construction projects as we've experienced it through our involvement in construction. What we look for is prudent owner actions, starting with pre-qualification of contractors to ensure that those contractors that work in a job have strong safety records, have experienced modification rates that allow us to work with contractors who have performed safely in the past and are going to be attendant to safety now and in the future. Second of all, we work with responsible contractors. Responsible contractors are those, in our experience, 95 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 that place safety personnel on a project and provide training to their employees so that safety incidents not only are prevented on the project but really are unthinkable on construction jobs. We work with organized, observant and engaged unions, unions that sponsor apprenticeship programs to make sure that every individual that comes to the job understands safety and their role in safety and that advocates on behalf of their employees. And, finally, we encourage every employee on our construction projects to act as their own safety officer. I want to conclude really with an observation, and it's an observation that's rooted in W. Edward Stemming, who is the father of Total Quality Management in this country and internationally. He was fond of saying that "that which is unmeasured ends up unimproved," and it's been our experience in construction that 96 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 that which is undiscussed remains a trap for an individual that could be on that construction job. And with that, I'll conclude my comments.

I like that quote. You've been doing this for a long time and you have a pretty decent record of being able to do labor management agreements and making these job sites safer. Are you just limited to the union contractor, and, if so, why? Why not get the others involved?

Sure. Our experience is largely in the union sector. We have been involved with projects that have had some non-union personnel, and I guess characteristic of what Fred Consenza said a little bit earlier in terms of the Building Trades Council's position on safety, wherever we're involved with a non-union workforce, they're invited into our 97 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 process. Safety doesn't know a union card or a non-union card. As to why most of our experience has been in the union sector, there are two reasons. The first reason is, in and around the Philadelphia area we have found unions to be responsible parties in labor management programming. They provide a focus for employees, they provide a network, and they also provide training. The second reason why you will find us on union projects and not union projects is because we're basically unknown to the non-union sector, and one of the reasons for that is, given the success we've had in working with the union sector, we have little impetus to work with the non-union sector.

Did you have a contract over at the Symphony House project where this young man fell to his death?

We've had no 98 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 involvement with the Symphony House. We are actively involved with the construction of the Comcast Center.

But not at the Symphony House where this young man fell to his death?

No, sir.

Once you enter into contracts with employers/the respective unions, do you monitor on your own how this agreement is being upheld, and how has that gone?

Generally, owners, contractors and unions -- and I would direct the comment largely to owners, because we're an owner-driven process. Owners that engage in our process from the very beginning understand that they're going to have a hands-on involvement in the construction activity. That's one of the prerequisites for wanting us around. In terms of how we actually get involved, and I'll speak specifically 99 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 regarding safety, how we get involved in safety on a project, that's really dependent upon the characteristics of a specific job. When we're active in a refinery and a petrochemical plant, we pay attention to certain issues, exposure issues, certain kinds of injuries. More to the point of your current experience and the reason for these hearings, our involvement with the Comcast Center is our first involvement with a high-rise building, and I can tell you that we've paid specific and special attention to issues of fall protection ever since that project started. Our observation is generally if you're in a petrochemical plant and you're injured, you may break a hand or you may break an arm or you may be exposed. Unfortunately, if you're involved in a high-rise enterprise and you have an injury, often it's a much more serious injury and it's often a fall.

In your 100 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738 organization's opinion, what things can be done on a short-term or long-term basis in Philadelphia to improve workplace safety? And if you have any ideas that you think could be done through legislation that would improve worker safety, can you please offer them.

I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest that I have the answers. I would suggest that any conversation, any law, any ordinance, any administrative rule, any policy that requires more discussion at a local site level on construction projects and requires construction workers, particularly the non-union sector because they spend long apprenticeships in order to understand safety conditions on projects, any procedure that requires conversation of the local level between they and their employer with the active participation of the owner can't help but encourage safety on local construction projects. 101 10/23/06 - LABOR - BILL 060695 - RES. 060738