# NYC CRACK DOWN



## mark handler

*11,484 Violations: Surprise Inspections Hit N.Y. Construction Site*
*https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/nyregion/nyc-dob-surprise-inspectors.html*


----------



## jar546

Progressive.  I like it.  Now for all the complaining about how they should not be doing this.


----------



## cda

Low budget coffers?


totaling $15 million in fines


----------



## ICE

No mention of OSHA.  At a pre-job meeting that I attended each contractor spoke for a few minutes.  Each engineer spoke for a few minutes.  Then the safety manager got started.  Thirty minutes later he was going strong.  He knew the fine associated with every violation....but he was not a CalOSHA officer so he couldn't levy a fine.  The fine for a loose powder strip was enormous.....the fine for an expended loose powder strip was large.  You could get shot with your own Ramset if it was found out of the box, unattended.


----------



## e hilton

Have to sign up to read the article.


----------



## jar546

In the main town I take care of we have a jobsite manual that you have to sign for and get a copy of.  Everything in the manual is in the ordinance so code enforcement handles all of those violations, not the building department inspectors.  You can have your own safety ordinances if someone wants to use the OSHA excuse.


----------



## Mark K

-What do you mean by the OSHA excuse.


----------



## e hilton

Ok, if you google it you can read th3 whole article.  Following the link doesn’t work.  This is interesting ... how can you  justify pushing back?  Just follow the rules.  And you can ask for a premptive inspection, and they are decent about that.  


Based on these visits, 11,484 violations were issued, totaling $15 million in fines. Another 2,523 orders were issued to stop work immediately, some because of dangerous working conditions such as missing guardrails and inadequate safety supervision. 

At a handful of sites, an inspector issued a stop-work order after being refused entry for a surprise inspection. Though there has been little public opposition to the surprise inspections, somedevelopers and contractors have said privately that the visits can be a nuisance that disrupts work and leads to unnecessary fines and paperwork for minor infractions.

“I am hearing from property owners and contractors who are getting increasingly frustrated and feel at some point they’re going to have to push back,” said one industry expert, who asked not to be named because he did not want to expose his clients to any repercussions from the city.


----------



## Mark K

NYC has had a problem with enforcement of the building code but this article is about worker safety which comes under the jurisdiction of OSHA or a federally approved state program.  Thus even if you argue home rule  authority for a city to regulate worker safety this enforcement of worker safety by a local jurisdiction  would have  to be tied  back to a Federally approved program dealing with regulation and enforcement..

Without knowing the details of NY law it is not possible to state whether it is legal for the City to enforce occupational safety regulations.  Still it is  clear that in general local jurisdictions do not have authority to enforce occupational safety regulations.  In the case of California there are statutes which make it clear that enforcement of occupational safety is not a building department enforcement concern.


----------



## conarb

Mark is correct, I use *The Blue Gavel Training Guides* at $339 a year, §1.18 Limits the scope of inspection, §1.19 gives the rules that all inspections must proceed under, §1.20 requires the inspector to provide his credentials, §1.21 goes into the necessity for search warrants under certain circumstances, and §1.22 lays out the rules for the Opening Conference before any inspection can commence. I think I could nail Tiger with all kinds of privacy violations.

I would suggest that any inspector wanting to make OSHA (CalOSHA, whatever) buy the applicable Blue Gavel Guide, we contractors have to buy it so you should too.

The big question is why the Hell do you guys want to do OSHA inspections anyway, don't you have enough to do as it is?


----------



## ICE

conarb said:


> The big question is why the Hell do you guys want to do OSHA inspections anyway, don't you have enough to do as it is?



Why would you think that I shouldn’t?  It’s free to you.  It might prevent an injury or even a death and that’s a problem for you?  What exactly would your argument be?   You don’t have a civil right to endanger your employees.  I have a moral imperative to prevent that.


----------



## Mark K

The vigilante mentality.  The vigilante starts out trying to correct what they believe to be an injustice and then proceeding to impose his own sense of morality and in the process subverting the rule of  law and stepping on the rights of those he abuses.  The vigilante rules by fear.  

We have a system of laws.  If you believe that there is an OSHA violation report it to CalOSHA.


----------



## ICE

People like you take the fun out of it.  Don’t get me wrong.....I appreciate that people like you exist for if you didn’t then there wouldn’t be a need for people like me.


----------



## jar546

Mark K said:


> The vigilante mentality.  The vigilante starts out trying to correct what they believe to be an injustice and then proceeding to impose his own sense of morality and in the process subverting the rule of  law and stepping on the rights of those he abuses.  The vigilante rules by fear.
> 
> We have a system of laws.  If you believe that there is an OSHA violation report it to CalOSHA.



This thread is about NYC, NY, not any other city of state.  They have their own set of adopted rules and regulations they enforce, including OSHA training for construction personnel.  They also have 106 pages of jobsite requirements that they are enforcing, much of which parallels OSHA.


----------



## mark handler

Unsafe Conditions effect all those on and around the site.
Crane and wall collapses usually do not happen to the building under construction.
Unsafe conditions can effect the building inspectors as well. unsecured ladders, frayed cords and wires, Energized wires in contact with plumbing, Metal framing, ceiling grids or HVAC systems. all have occurred in my juresdiction.


----------



## Mark K

My postings have recognized the reality that there may be nuances to NY's laws but that in general that in most if not all states local jurisdictions have no authority to enforce occupational safety laws.  This conclusion follows directly from US Supreme Court rulings.  Building officials and local jurisdictions need to realize that there are limits on what they can do.

While the original posting was about NYC it is clear that some individuals not in NYC think that they too can enforce occupational safety.  States and by extension local  jurisdictions can only adopt and enforce occupational safety laws  if their plan has been approved by the Secretary of Labor.

I believe that there should be a recognition that building officials and inspectors can only enforce laws, including building regulations, that were properly adopted.

I have no problem with there being occupational safety laws but my point is that building officials and inspectors cannot enforce them except in a way acceptable to OSHA.  This is because of federal preemption.  

The fact that there are what some see as unsafe conditions does not empower individuals to act as vigilantes.  What is a safety problem is generally subjective so what you may consider unsafe others may not.  The way we have decided to  resolve these differences of opinion is  by adopting regulations defining what is unacceptable or acceptable. It is unacceptable for a government employee to substitute his or her idea as to what is unsafe in place of the adopted regulations.

By the  way it would appear that energized wires in contact with plumbing would be an electrical code violation that the building department could address and thus is not relevant to this discussion.


----------



## ADAguy

"Zapp!"


----------



## mark handler

Mark K said:


> ... not relevant to this discussion.


Not true, everything is Relevant for discussion.
It was not posted to only discuss OSHA issues, I posted it for Open Discussion, That what this forum is for, Open Discussion. If you want closed discussions the ICC website is waiting for your input.


----------



## conarb

The real issue here is building inspectors exceeding their authority, and what should be done about it.  CalOSHA has some pretty stiff penalties if their procedures are not followed.  I've had to take training classes on this, been fined $50 one time in 1971 for running out of toilet paper in the PortaPotty.


----------



## jar546

conarb said:


> The real issue here is building inspectors exceeding their authority, and what should be done about it.  CalOSHA has some pretty stiff penalties if their procedures are not followed.  I've had to take training classes on this, been fined $50 one time in 1971 for running out of toilet paper in the PortaPotty.


If you had good attention to detail and management skills, you would not have run out of toilet paper.


----------



## classicT

jar546 said:


> If you had good attention to detail and management skills, you would not have run out of toilet paper.


Good business skills and you would of back-charged the company providing and servicing the shack.


----------



## conarb

Ty J. said:


> Good business skills and you would of back-charged the company providing and servicing the shack.



I did.

The one OSHA requirement that I've refused to obey is the prohibition against walking plates, walking plates is a fundamental carpentry skill, if you can't walk plates you shouldn't be on a jobsite


----------



## ICE

conarb said:


> I did.
> 
> walking plates is a fundamental carpentry skill, if you can't walk plates you shouldn't be on a jobsite


That is ridiculous.  I know top notch, fat carpenters that would never walk plate. Walking plate is a fundamental skill for the circus.


----------



## ICE

Mark K said:


> My postings have recognized the reality that there may be nuances to NY's laws but that in general that in most if not all states local jurisdictions have no authority to enforce occupational safety laws.  This conclusion follows directly from US Supreme Court rulings.  Building officials and local jurisdictions need to realize that there are limits on what they can do.
> 
> While the original posting was about NYC it is clear that some individuals not in NYC think that they too can enforce occupational safety.  States and by extension local  jurisdictions can only adopt and enforce occupational safety laws  if their plan has been approved by the Secretary of Labor.
> 
> I believe that there should be a recognition that building officials and inspectors can only enforce laws, including building regulations, that were properly adopted.
> 
> I have no problem with there being occupational safety laws but my point is that building officials and inspectors cannot enforce them except in a way acceptable to OSHA.  This is because of federal preemption.
> 
> The fact that there are what some see as unsafe conditions does not empower individuals to act as vigilantes.  What is a safety problem is generally subjective so what you may consider unsafe others may not.  The way we have decided to  resolve these differences of opinion is  by adopting regulations defining what is unacceptable or acceptable. It is unacceptable for a government employee to substitute his or her idea as to what is unsafe in place of the adopted regulations.
> 
> By the  way it would appear that energized wires in contact with plumbing would be an electrical code violation that the building department could address and thus is not relevant to this discussion.



I've intervened a few dozen times for good reason.  There was never a suspicion that there might be some dangerous thing happening.  I've had workmen thank me for stopping what was going down.  For that you call me a vigilante?


----------



## JCraver

Ch. 33 of the IBC is the extent of my enforcement capabilities.  If you're doing something really dumb while I'm there I'll probably tell you it's dumb, but I'm not going to write it down on an inspection report.  If it's dumb enough someone is going to die if you continue to do it, then I'm happy enough to call in the State guys and let them have you.


----------



## mark handler

JCraver said:


> Ch. 33 of the IBC is the extent of my enforcement capabilities.  If you're doing something really dumb while I'm there I'll probably tell you it's dumb, but I'm not going to write it down on an inspection report.  If it's dumb enough someone is going to die if you continue to do it, then I'm happy enough to call in the State guys and let them have you.


You do not need to document it, but if you see something that will prevent and injury or death, Something called morals kick in and you should tell the Forman or Contractor. You do not need to report them to OSHA, but you need to live with it.


----------



## JCraver

mark handler said:


> You do not need to document it, but if you see something that will prevent and injury or death, Something called morals kick in and you should tell the Forman or Contractor. You do not need to report them to OSHA, but you need to live with it.



Right.  That's why I said I'm happy to call the State osha guys if there's something on the job that's gonna' kill somebody.  I deal with foreman and/or pm's when I'm doing inspections, so that's who I'm telling "that's stupid" if I see something that is.

I wasn't arguing...


----------



## conarb

Rick18071 said:


> How can you tell? They could be using stolen tools too.  Or not paying their taxes. Not a safety issue.



Guess you don't know, maybe that's why OSHA requires it's inspectors to present certificates at all OSHA inspections. 

If you guys are running out of work and looking for more how about taking over Special Inspector duties instead of OSHA?


----------



## ADAguy

ICE said:


> I've intervened a few dozen times for good reason.  There was never a suspicion that there might be some dangerous thing happening.  I've had workmen thank me for stopping what was going down.  For that you call me a vigilante?



See New Orleans

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/11/25/how-worker-who-survived-catastrophic-building-collapse-ended-up-ice-detention/


----------



## tmurray

I don't enforce workplace health and safety regulations, but I definitely do by proxy. 

If I see what I feel is an unsafe construction site, I fail the inspection. It's failed, not because you didn't follow the applicable laws, but because I cannot enter your site to complete the inspection. You need my approval to proceed to the next phase of construction, so in order to get that approval, you are going to make your site safe.

Also, if I have gotten to the point where I am refusing to go on site, you can bet I am calling our workplace health and safety inspector. 

Safety is everyone's responsibility. I cannot in good conscience turn a blind eye to obvious safety violations. If you see something and do nothing, you bear partial responsibility for the injury or death. This has been clearly established in our legislation and upheld by courts.


----------



## conarb

tmurray said:


> I don't enforce workplace health and safety regulations, but I definitely do by proxy.
> 
> If I see what I feel is an unsafe construction site, I fail the inspection. It's failed, not because you didn't follow the applicable laws, but because I cannot enter your site to complete the inspection. You need my approval to proceed to the next phase of construction, so in order to get that approval, you are going to make your site safe.
> 
> Also, if I have gotten to the point where I am refusing to go on site, you can bet I am calling our workplace health and safety inspector.
> 
> Safety is everyone's responsibility. I cannot in good conscience turn a blind eye to obvious safety violations. If you see something and do nothing, you bear partial responsibility for the injury or death. This has been clearly established in our legislation and upheld by courts.


You sure like to tell other people what to do.


----------



## classicT

conarb said:


> You sure like to tell other people what to do.


You sure like to tell other people how to do their job.


----------



## tmurray

conarb said:


> You sure like to tell other people what to do.


You seem upset that I am exercising my rights.


----------



## Keystone

Not in agreement with surprise inspections, IMO at that point it’s intent is to seek violations at all costs creating a Police State!   

If a site has a legitimate written and signed complaint or while the building inspector or other official is onsite and observed what he/she believes to be a safety issue and fills out a complaint form then the safety inspection should occur.


----------



## mark handler

Keystone said:


> Not in agreement with surprise inspections, IMO at that point it’s intent is to seek violations at all costs creating a Police State!
> 
> If a site has a legitimate written and signed complaint or while the building inspector or other official is onsite and observed what he/she believes to be a safety issue and fills out a complaint form then the safety inspection should occur.


So there should not "roving" Police patrols in your neighborhood, or the use of radar on highways?


----------



## classicT

Keystone said:


> Not in agreement with surprise inspections, IMO at that point it’s intent is to seek violations at all costs creating a Police State!
> 
> If a site has a legitimate written and signed complaint or while the building inspector or other official is onsite and observed what he/she believes to be a safety issue and fills out a complaint form then the safety inspection should occur.


Ok... hang on. Are you familiar with what a 'police state' is?

*po·lice state*
/pəˈlēs ˈstāt/
_noun_
a totalitarian state controlled by a political police force that secretly supervises the citizens' activities.​
Key words therein are 'totalitarian', 'political', and 'secretly'. Law enforcement officers do not secretly perform radar speed checks (we all know they are out there); similarly, contractors know that inspectors look for code violations.

Building officials and inspectors are granted authority through police doctrine and are governed by the same principles. Principles such as probable cause, plain view doctrine, legal search and seizure, etc. This is why all inspectors should have to take the legal module for the CBO exams.

I do agree that surprise inspections are malicious and will create a toxic working relationship; I however disagree that it creates a police state. If their is probable cause, be friendly and get invited onto the site (not that hard) or get a search warrant (via a judge).


----------



## Keystone

mark handler said:


> So there should not "roving" Police patrols in your neighborhood, or the use of radar on highways?


These are not roving patrols, they are individuals tasked with finding violations. 
Roving patrols for the most part make a presence and do not have an identified objective. 

Radar use on highways, as a matter of fact no I prefer to live without them as that isn’t exactly as I described above, individual sections tasked with finding violations.  

SO it’s safe to assume you never go above the posted speed limit. If you do as I suspect the vast majority does then have you considered turning yourself in for speeding OR how about speed detecting monitor in which you’re vehicle self reports your excessive speed for the appropriate ticket and associated license points.  I feel you haven’t turned yourself in for speeding then why, are you above the law?


----------



## Keystone

Ty J. said:


> Ok... hang on. Are you familiar with what a 'police state' is?
> 
> *po·lice state*
> /pəˈlēs ˈstāt/
> _noun_
> a totalitarian state controlled by a political police force that secretly supervises the citizens' activities.​
> Key words therein are 'totalitarian', 'political', and 'secretly'. Law enforcement officers do not secretly perform radar speed checks (we all know they are out there); similarly, contractors know that inspectors look for code violations.
> 
> Building officials and inspectors are granted authority through police doctrine and are governed by the same principles. Principles such as probable cause, plain view doctrine, legal search and seizure, etc. This is why all inspectors should have to take the legal module for the CBO exams.
> 
> I do agree that surprise inspections are malicious and will create a toxic working relationship; I however disagree that it creates a police state. If their is probable cause, be friendly and get invited onto the site (not that hard) or get a search warrant (via a judge).


I could and should consider a different descriptive fact however if any one of us think that this at some point would not be used in a malicious manner then the real misstatement and joke for that matter is on them.


----------



## mark handler

Keystone said:


> These are not roving patrols, they are individuals tasked with finding violations.
> Roving patrols for the most part make a presence and do not have an identified objective.
> 
> Radar use on highways, as a matter of fact no I prefer to live without them as that isn’t exactly as I described above, individual sections tasked with finding violations.
> 
> SO it’s safe to assume you never go above the posted speed limit. If you do as I suspect the vast majority does then have you considered turning yourself in for speeding OR how about speed detecting monitor in which you’re vehicle self reports your excessive speed for the appropriate ticket and associated license points.  I feel you haven’t turned yourself in for speeding then why, are you above the law?


So with that live of thought "don't violate OSHA or the Building Codes" ...."as a matter of fact"... Just Saying....


----------



## conarb

What should be the punishment for a civil servant exceeding his authority?  The building code is tyranny, nobody gets to vote for it other than civil servants, the creation of the ICC took freedom out of the codes and created a monster that is doing nothing but rubber stamping a tyrannical government's policies (just look at Energy and Green codes). Did any of the criminals here ever get punished for the fire sprinkler frauds?


----------



## tmurray

All safety inspections here are surprise.


----------



## tmurray

conarb said:


> What should be the punishment for a civil servant exceeding his authority?  The building code is tyranny, nobody gets to vote for it other than civil servants, the creation of the ICC took freedom out of the codes and created a monster that is doing nothing but rubber stamping a tyrannical government's policies (just look at Energy and Green codes). Did any of the criminals here ever get punished for the fire sprinkler frauds?


I guess the same punishment that anyone should endure if an elected official takes something they write and sign it into law. I mean, very few people have everyone vote on everything they write.


----------



## steveray

Keystone said:


> These are not roving patrols, they are individuals tasked with facilitating compliance.
> Roving patrols for the most part make a presence and do not have an identified objective.



Fixed it.....I'm OK without cops same as other people are OK without the benefit of permits and inspections....


----------



## mark handler

tmurray said:


> ...very few people have everyone vote on everything they write.


We, including Canada, live in a representative government. 

*Republic*: "A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives..." 
*Democracy*: "A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives."


----------



## my250r11

By signing to paper work for the permit, they give us the permission to enter and inspect anytime during regular operating hours. So I can stop and check in anytime. Our state law allows for us to abate any unsafe or life safety issues. I don't enforce OSHA but could call if you prefer over just fixing it and make it safe. Or if bad enough could just red tag the job until it is corrected. Only had to go to that extreme once. Some people are just hard headed.


----------



## mark handler

my250r11 said:


> Some people are just hard headed.


Ya think...


----------

