1984-01 January IBEW Journal.pdf - International Brotherhood of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

S~FETYTIPS for you and your family The Reagan Administration has struck again at Occupational Health and Safety regulations. This time they arc attempting to destroy many of the protections provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration'S IOSHAI Electrical Standards For Construction, {Subpart "K" of 29 CFR 1926). The lBEW has strongly opposed this action and has requested.3 public hearing on OSHA's proposals. President Pillard, in a lettcr to OSHA stated that "The IBEW strongly be· lieves that the prescnt standard, is far superior to OSHA's proposed amended standard. The present standard is succinct and clearly understandable by employers and employees alike, and at the same lime it contams essential protective provisions which the proposed amendment would remove." OSHA, in it's discussion in the Federal Register, argues that the National Electric Code {NEq should not be referred to, or incorporated by reference, in Subpart K. The IBEW strongly disagreed. While this might be true of many voluntary standards that are written in language, only recommending safety practices, the NEC is written in mandatory language. In addition, as OSHA admitted in their Federal Register notice, the NEC provides the basis for electrical safety regulations in over 2000 munkipalitles throughout all 50 states. Thirty seven states and the District of Columbia have adopted it as their electrical safety law, and it is enforced by over 12,0CI0 governmental electrical inspectors. OSHA is trying to eliminate references to the Code, and replace some of the Codes provisions with differently worded requirements. Anyone familiar with the electrical construction industry ca n see the problems of having to comply with tWO di{ferent lengthy documents, each required by law, but conflicting with each other in certain respects. OSHA has left out the section of 18 I IBEW JOURNAlIJANUARY 1984 IBEW Responds to OSHA Proposals Ground Fault Circuit ProtectIOn, one of the most cited proviSIons in the present standard. This section is one of the mOSt basic provisions for electrical safety on a construction site. The lBEW has suggested that the only prOVIsion of the present standard that should be changed would be the elimination of the so-called "assured equipment grounding conductor program," that OSHA now permits as a substitute for a Ground Fault Circuit interrupter IGFCI). The lBEW recognizes that the "assured Grounding Program" provides employee safety when it is first installed and tested, but no one can guarantee its protection a few mmutes, days, weeks, or months later. In the process of being exposed to the weather, tools and workers many things can prevent it from providing the needed - "'--~., •• protection, protection that can be furnished by a G FC!. In addition OSHA proposed prohibiting the grounding of receptacles by means of grounded water pipes, while the NEC in Section 250.81 requires it. The reasons OSHA gives for deleting this requirement are properly covered by the NEe. OSHA proposed eliminating the requirement of testing grounds, something that is extremely important on construction sites. Their proposal would weaken the bonding requirements as contained in the Code. The provisions of the NEC in this area are fundamental to employee safety. OSHA, in theIr proposal, has made several incorrect statements, such as saying that their proposed standard clarifies the NEC requirement indicating where Junction boxes are required instead of clarifying this requirement it quotes, word for word the Code language in this section. By these and many other suggested proposals, OSHA seems determined to make enforcement of electrical safety provisions on the construction site more confUSing. By changi ng several definitJons from those given in the Code, and by not only varying the wording of items required by the Code, but actually changing some " and eliminating others. this admin· istratlon seems determined to not only frustrate their compliance officers, but also the electrical contractors and thei r employees in the area of safety. A great many representatives of our industry, including approximately 50 reprcscnting the mEW have put in many hours each yea r at· tempting to update the NEC to provide safety to the industry and to the public. Their efforts ha ve been such that States and municipalities have adopted the National Electric Code as a legaJ requirement for construction in their jurisdiction. We must prevent OSHA from issuing a Federal Standard that would conflict with it. < • •
Labor Unions Sounding the Alarm On Lowering of Workers' Standards of Living As Detrimental to the Entire Nation The workers of America :lTC facing a serious, even dangerous, new prob Icm-onc which could eventually declmale the very qualu y of their lives. And so far, neither Congress nor the White House have expressed any concern. Only the labor unions which represent affected workers have sounded the alarm. The problem IS multifaceted and double-pronged. It In volves wage conceSSions, givebacks and takeaways. It Involves, among other thlOgs, deep and damaging cutbac ks In health benefits. It Involves the rapc of the nation's bankruptcy laws as a specific tool to kI ll the nation 's labor laws and destroy the labor movem ent. ThiS IS a problem, which Will onc day destroy the very fiber of the Amencan economy-and all for the individual profit of a handful of corporate personalities-un less action • IS taken agamst It . Take a look at the recent situation created by Creyhound. The nauon WIde bus firm deCided that It needed deep concessIOns from itS employees or fa ce bankruptcy. When e mployees balked at the Creyhound demandswhich would have cut wages and benefits by more than 40%-the company proceeded to hire scabs and strikebreakers to opera te ItS buses. Workers represented by the Amalgamated Transit UllIon entered IntO a strike which has been at thts Writ- 109 particularly bitter, Congress has --i turned its back on thiS dispute. If ~ such a stnke had been call ed in the railroad mdustry, Congress would have fo rced an Imposed settlement on both Si des. r Eastern Alrlllles made SI milar threats agamst ItS workers. Only thelT labor unions saved Eastern employ· ees from what could have amounted to Virtual destruction. And take a look at the horrendous situation on Contlllental Ai rl ines where management thumbed ItS nose at the RaIlway Labor Act-the same labor la w which covers radroad workers-and fo rced workers to stnke or return to work at half pay. And even then, that pay had to be collected not from Continental but from • the bankruptcy courts. I I By Richard J. Calistri, Editor, Labor Newspaper There IS no doubt that Contmental 's actions have been taken simply to destroy the workers' unions and their legitimate labor contracts. But what IS even worse, 10 many respects, is that these actions ma y ha ve been taken for the personal enrichment of a handful of corporate money grabbers. Only the unions-and that Ineludes at least twO railroad umonshave fought the move and arc now engaged 10 court action to Stop Contmental from abrogating Its labor contracts and misusing the nation's bankruptcy laws. All these companies a rc preytng on the despair of mllilons of unemployed Amencans to achieve thelT goa ls. They are tapptng the ranks of people desperate for jobs and the money they bnng to support themselves and thelT families as the source for stnkebreakcrs and scabs. They arc wilhngly pitting Amencan workers agamst each othcr just to hne thclr own pockets and destroy the unions with which they must negotiate. The big questions for rai lroad workers: Wh cn does It hit us!. Rail ;[s He Really Necessar y?' labor already IS standll1g guard, alert to the problem and ready to do battle. But tndlvldual railroad workers must be ready tOO and mUSt be willing to Start fightlllg baek right now. Probably the best way to do that IS fo r workers to Immedi.'Itely Stan pressmg thclr legislators-local, state and national-for some answers to thclT questions such as thesc: -Why arc corporate giants bemg allowed to usc laws designed to protect workers to destroy workers' rights! - Why are the corporations of Amenca bemg allowed to use bankruptcy laws as the tool to destroy workers and thel( uOlons~ - Why has Congress fai led to act so fa r! And railroad workers should emphaSize that these recent actions by corporate Amenca could serve as the tool to destroy thc nation's econom y. Anythmg which harms work ers by lowenng their standard of hvmg, their self-esteem, the warp and woof of thell li ves ca n only serve to destroy the IlImon. Start fighting, and do It now IBEW JOURNAL! JANUARY 1964 1 19
Page 2 and 3: EDITORIAL COMMENT " Collective Barg
Page 4 and 5: RECIPROCAL AGREEMENT WELFARE FUND A
Page 6 and 7: 'BEW LOCAL UNIONS PARTICIPATING IN
Page 8 and 9: SEVENTH DISTRICT PROGRESS MEETING H
Page 10 and 11: J • • IBEW/RCA Negotiations-Lef
Page 12 and 13: ~ Vp OUr SeCUfil}' s WIS. SfHIOR OI
Page 14 and 15: 1'01' Democl'a tic * * * * * * * *
Page 16 and 17: • THE 1984 remains a time 01 unce
Page 18 and 19: depal tnlent of Research and Educat
Page 22 and 23: LDC~L LINES ATTENTION, PRESS SECRET
Page 24 and 25: 22 Recipients art Broth~rs of Local
Page 26 and 27: Notice: Travelers Who Worked In Jur
Page 28 and 29: - United Way p!:opte .n the ,n lOdu
Page 30 and 31: " Graduates C! .d''' ~'''~'1 • Tu
Page 32 and 33: picturct, or (ll her maten al l, II
Page 34 and 35: Ihe b'UUI fhh-JJ·pt)undl, 4 ounce
Page 36 and 37: 34 Business Manage. Bob jenSbc: r 2
Page 38 and 39: VfW, ~ Vete r,n of World War II, &e
Page 40 and 41: looking ahead, OUr nut malo r soc.
Page 42 and 43: Volunteers Antenna Elatne Thomas, R
Page 44 and 45: 42 The work SItuation tn the Champa
Page 46 and 47: 44 Local , NECA Form Work Recovery
Page 48 and 49: 46 62 and have a 10Iai 01 76 pOlnu
Page 50 and 51: .. 1116 will h.ve put In lDany lonl
Page 52 and 53: 50 w~ will .rust hIs good·natu,tdn
Page 54 and 55: 52 This ncw yur makt It a pOint 10
Page 56 and 57: W~.d 01 Sahoa, and Dave Hnlihan 101
Page 58 and 59: 56 [regrct to report the death, of
Page 60 and 61: sa Workers uh 10 right a . ~ , Mont
Page 62 and 63: 60 llode He hu fhe e nthuSlutu; IU
Page 64 and 65: 62 Cable Splicer Thi. il Iht fOl d
Page 66 and 67: "''' SUnllmt ..... "''' -"' Pens (&
Page 68: • • INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD O

1984-01 January IBEW Journal.pdf - International Brotherhood of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?