OSHA Advisory Council

Dec. 2, 2005
Minutes

Members: Staff members:

Carol Bufton Susan Boone
Harvey Burski James Collins
Michael Hawthorne Alden Hoffman
Pat McGovern Jeff Isakson
Ed Raine Jim Krueger
Scott Richter Roslyn Wade
Bill Stuart
Daryl Tindle

Members absent: Visitors:

Eric Ajax Flore Allen
Melanie Isabell Allen Stacey Fujll
Eugene Harmer Mark Hysell
Lois Klobachar
John Nesse
Gary Thaden

The meeting was called to order by chairperson Carol Bufton at 10:10 a.m. Members
introduced themselves.

Pat McGovern asked when she should discuss the NORA meeting in Chicago. Bufton
told her now would be fine, because she is aware McGovern would be leaving early.

McGovern reported that on Dec. 19, the National Institute on Safety and Health
(NIOSH) will be meeting in Chicago. It is called a town hall meeting and they travel across
the country to try to organize representation from labor and industry and public institutions to
help identify research priorities for the next decade. The National Occupational Research
Agenda (NORA) has been around for a decade and now they want to do NORA II.

McGovern explained they take seriously the public comment they get and it helps
them decide their research priorities and what kind of research they are going to fund, i.e., is it
going to be in the construction industry, looking at some of the risk factors that cause the
fatalities that we’ve been hearing about in this advisory council or something else.

McGovern said if anyone is interested they should give her their card afterward and
she would resend them the e-mail message and the link. Registration is necessary. She noted
she would be taking comments from her colleagues in the School of Public Health; if anyone
in the group would like her to give comments on their behalf, she would be more than happy
to do that. What NORA asks you to do is: say what the issue is; the number of people you
OSHA Advisory Council -2- December 2, 2005

think are affected by the issue or problem; and how you think research could contribute to
prevention and control of the hazard.

Visitors introduced and identified themselves. Harvey Burski made a motion to

approve the minutes from the March 4, 2005 meeting. Bill Stuart seconded the motion. All
voted in favor of the motion and the motion passed. The agenda was approved as presented.

V. Assistant commissioner report

Assistant Commissioner Wade stated that at the last meeting, the advisory council
started to hear discussion about where the department was headed and that on May 16, 2005,
the governor’s executive order consolidating the code units went into effect. For the
Department of Labor and Industry this meant five different code construction operational
units would now be housed within the Department of Labor and Industry. Previously, the
agency’s involvement with the construction code units was limited to the boiler and high-
pressure piping unit. Now, four other units have been combined with this unit to make up the
Construction Code and Licensing Division. The specific units impacted by this reorganization
include: the Building Codes and Standards unit, formerly of the Department of
Administration; the Plumbing and Engineering unit, formerly of the Department of Health;
the Electrical Licensing and Inspection unit, previously referred to as the Board of Electricity,
which was a stand-alone agency; and the Residential Building Contractors unit, formerly with
the Department of Commerce.

Wade reported the four new units have all been successfully moved into the building
and, collectively, the new division is made up of approximately 120 employees. She shared
that it’s been an especially exciting journey for her because all of the new business units
report to her, making her very busy. Wade stated that while much of her direct focus has been
on consolidation of the code units, her other responsibilities have not been ignored.

Wade explained we’re looking at every opportunity to make the most of the code
consolidation and really go to the heart of the thought processes behind the consolidation. One
of the reasons the Department of Labor and Industry was chosen as the agency to oversee
these units is because of the close ties of building construction and our safety programs. The
group was reminded that earlier in the year they discussed the alarming trend of increased
fatalities and one of the suggestions that came from this group was that we work closer with
the building construction industry, including the state and local inspection staff, to advance
safety at every opportunity and really to get in on the ground floor when the buildings are just
going up or use those other resources to continue to advance safety. Low and behold, a month
later, they have become part of DLI.

Wade noted we are continuing to look at opportunities to pair up MNOSHA staff, get
the management to find opportunities to talk with each other, talk about best practices, look
for opportunities on every level – from the line staff right up to the management, and vice
versa. Her attention has been focused on bringing the groups into the building successfully
and the last group moved into the building Oct. 28. Now, with everyone under one roof, we
are focusing our attention on what additional structural changes are needed to fully implement
this consolidation. We are starting to look at individual functions to determine the most
efficient way to accomplish servicing the construction industry. It’s all been very, very
OSHA Advisory Council -3- December 2, 2005

exciting. It’s been time, resource and labor intensive, but – at the end of the day – the
consolidation is a good initiative to undertake. It has been around for more than 10 years and,
under this administration, we are starting to see the benefits of consolidating and improving
services for the end users.

Wade indicated she is now in the process of hiring an executive director. The
executive director will be invited to future advisory council meetings because there is a strong
correlation between good compliance with the building codes and insuring the integrity and
the safety of both our work and our living environments. Many relevant discussions are taking
place each day with both the MNOSHA Compliance and Workplace Safety Consultation units
working with different components of Construction Code and Licensing Division. It is a
unique opportunity to work with known partners in a very different manner.

Wade stated one of the core stakeholders of the Construction Code and Licensing
Division is the electrical unit. This unit already has partnerships with many of the larger
players in the electrical industry. There is an alliance with both the Minnesota Electrical
Association and the Builders Association of Minnesota. In many respects, these are not new
customers of DLI, but now we have a different relationship with them. A lot of them are
already known partners; for those we don’t know as well yet, we will be getting to know them
better over time.

Wade reported the agency is now preparing for the Legislature. She stated that while
in many of the past years a very lean legislative packet was proposed and maintained, that will
not be the case this year. Because of the consolidation, there is a need for proposing a
comprehensive bill that will clean up the legislation the Construction Code and Licensing
Division previously was under. All the statutory authority will have to be transferred to the
Department of Labor and Industry under the leadership of Commissioner Brener.
Additionally, technical changes must be made to realize the full benefit of the consolidation.
There will be a comprehensive bill, but the proposal is not finalized at this point. By the next
time we meet, we will be able to share with the group the direction we’re heading.

Wade commented we would also be looking for any other quick wins. It is very clear
that we have five operational units that have more similarities than differences; however,
some of the differences include licensing provisions, fee structures and enforcement statutory
construction. We are reviewing the statutes to identify best practices; we are working with the
existing leadership to get the dialogue going about what works and what doesn’t work; and
we are examining whether customer needs are being met. There are many decisions that have
not been finalized, but we have made significant progress during the past six months and we
will continue to make progress. We will continue to rely on the input of the stakeholders to
help shape our future directions. Council members and members of the audience are invited to
bring concerns to Wade’s attention.

Wade indicated that both the compliance and consultation units would be reporting
today. The other unit that is under her purview is the Labor Standards and Apprenticeship
unit; those units are working hard with their limited resources and moving their agendas
forward as well.
OSHA Advisory Council -4- December 2, 2005

VI. Federal OSHA update

Mark Hysell, federal area OSHA director, introduced himself and stated he became
area director for federal OSHA approximately six months ago. He is charged with oversight
of the MNOSHA program for the federal government. Hysell believes it’s not really oversight
of, but rather assistance to MNOSHA. MNOSHA has an outstanding program and he will do
everything he can to help.

Hysell stated there is not a lot of news. Deputy Assistant Secretary Snare is still the
acting deputy assistant secretary and has been acting since President Bush’s election to a
second term. On Sept. 15, Bush announced his intention to fill the position with Edwin Falk
from South Carolina. Falk is presently an attorney and a former chairman of the Occupational
Safety and Health Review Commission. He has an extensive background in safety and health.
Because of the transition, there is no new regulatory news today. Federal OSHA, state-plan
states and MNOSHA are involved in recovery and reconstruction efforts in the south.
Compliance officers and compliance assistance specialists are there working seven days a
week, with no end in sight. It could be many months or years before the process is completed.

Hysell reported the federal OSHA fiscal-year 2006 budget is very tight. Effective Nov.
15, a hard hiring freeze was put in place. There will be no vacancy announcements in the
nation for a federal OSHA position unless it has prior approval by the national office. That
policy will be in effect until further notice. If someone hadn’t been selected, offered and
accepted a position before Nov. 15, they will not be hired.

Hysell noted federal OSHA closed the area office in Minneapolis last fiscal-year and
we are approaching the anniversary of that closure. At the time, it was hoped federal OSHA
would provide excellent customer support to customers in Minnesota and to MNOSHA, even
though those operations were consolidated to the area office in Eau Claire, Wis. Hysell
believes the transition has gone well. Support of the MNOSHA program is as effective as it
was when the area office was located in Minneapolis.

Bruski asked Hysell if he can tell us where he is from and a little about his
background. Hysell responded he is from southern Illinois, which is where he grew up. He
also spent a lot of time in Wisconsin. He was graduated from Southern Illinois University in
Carbondale, Ill., with an engineering degree. He’s worked for the Department of Defense Air
Force in California at Edwards Air Force base in missile test and flight test for 22 years before
taking the position with federal OSHA. He took a position with federal OSHA in 1997 that
was a considerable downgrade from his former federal government position. Originally, he
was a supervisor with the Department of Defense Air Force and moved his family back to Eau
Claire, Wis., where he started as a compliance officer, moved up and was promoted to area
director in April.

Tindle asked if several regional director positions would remain open. Hysell stated all
but the Texas regional administrator position are filled; Texas is being filled on an acting
basis. There are 10 regional administrators in the nation. Federal OSHA is approaching 35
years in existence and, because of that, there are many pending retirements. Everybody that’s
a manager in federal OSHA is pretty close to retirement. This means there will be a big
change at the top coming. It is unknown how the hiring freeze will impact this.
OSHA Advisory Council -5- December 2, 2005

Raine asked how involved Hysell is with the CCO, certified safety operator. Hysell
responded he is not involved at all. Eau Claire enforces the code of federal regulations in
northwest Wisconsin and monitors MNOSHA. Trends in the future will be that some federal
offices in state-plan states will be consolidated into the nearest federal office in a federal
enforcement state. When the federal office in Minneapolis closed, it saved the taxpayers
approximately $90,000 a year in office lease space and equipment, which is nothing compared
to what is being saved in payroll in the four positions from that office.

VII. Staff reports

Compliance – Jeff Isakson

Isakson noted that at the last meeting he presented a number of project reports that
were still in draft form. They have now been completed and the executive summaries are in
member packets. In the first one, fatalities, catastrophes and serious injuries investigated in
the years 2000 through 2005 were analyzed. Part of this project included developing
informative letters to those stakeholders identified as having a higher number of fatal and
serious injuries that occurred within their SIC. We are currently in the process of getting those
letters out.

The second project was to analyze data from the 2004 health inspection program
targeting isocyanate exposure in the spray-on truck-bed-relining industry. That will be
discussed later in this presentation.

Isakson stated two other projects were done by our Research and Statistics unit, one
was to compare workers’ compensation claims and OSHA data initiative cases to determine
whether it makes sense to continue using both sources and ascertain what, if anything, can be
learned to improve MNOSHA’s targeting strategies.

Isakson indicated the final project was analyzing workers’ compensation safety
incentives in Minnesota and offering ideas for expanding these incentives in the Assigned
Risk Plan (ARP).

OSHSPA: Isakson reported that on Oct. 27 and 28, 2005, Commissioner Scott
Brener, Workers’ Compensation Division Assistant Commissioner Patricia Todd and he
attended the Occupational Safety and Health State Plan Association (OSHSPA) meeting in
New York. Isakson noted this was his first OSHSPA meeting and it was very enjoyable. He
learned a lot and met many peers from the other states that share the same incentives and
concerns we do. One of the highlights included a discussion of Hurricane Katrina relief
efforts. In Minnesota at that time, we had 17 volunteers from both the consultation and
compliance groups. Within the past week, two others asked if they could participate in this
effort, putting us at 19 volunteers. To date, no MNOSHA employees have been deployed
through federal OSHA, but a request has been made that the list be updated, because they will
be sending people out, scheduling from January through March 2006.
OSHA Advisory Council -6- December 2, 2005

Isakson noted two of our staff members went to participate in the relief efforts through
the American Red Cross. That was early in the disaster relief effort. One individual has stated
he would like to return.

Isakson commented that the brief explanation provided to MNOSHA about what the
roles and responsibilities would be when staff members go down there is that it is primarily
for outreach and consultation purposes, to work with the folks who are working with the
demolition and renovation process in the area. This will take place for at least one year, if not
longer, and they are also looking to send workers to the Florida area.

Isakson stated another discussion he participated in, with constituents from other state-
plan states, was employee retention. What other states are facing is no different than what we
are facing here in Minnesota. Maryland OSHA is starting to offer an employment package
with the intent being to keep a new employee for three years. Their employment package
includes: premium training, which is training that OSHA provides to an employee coming
from another area in the workforce or someone coming from a safety and health college
program – training that is second to none; resume building, including assigning them the role
of a project manager on an agency project; and, finally, to help to attain CSP/CIH.

Health: Isakson reported MNOSHA’s Truck Bed Liner Local Emphasis Program was
completed for 2005. Thirty-seven sites were inspected, of which 18 were identified with over-
exposures, and 94 citations were issued. The most common citations identified were: no
respiratory protection, methylene bisphenyl isocyanate (MBI) over-exposure, lack of
engineering controls, and no written right-to-know (RTK) program or training. Informational
letters have been sent to affected stakeholders summarizing results and abatement
recommendations. Abatement follow-up is the next phase of the program and will take place
in 2006.

Construction: Isakson stated MNOSHA has a group that meets on a regular basis to
implement the recommendations that were brought forward in March in response to the
fatalities occurring in the construction industry.

Isakson noted our Construction Breakfast program has seen a lot of success; in fact,
attendance has increased 34 percent compared to 2004. The last two Construction Breakfast
seminars – personal fall-arrest systems and skid steer worksite safety – had 175 participants
each. Both presentations were well received. The next breakfast is scheduled for Jan. 17,
2006, and will feature Scott Richert, St. Paul Travelers, who will talk about the cost of not
having a real safety program. Further information can be found on the MNOSHA Web pages.

Outreach: Isakson indicated the small-business presentations will continue through

2006. MNOSHA continues to give presentations on the behalf of the Minnesota Safety
Council, Midwest Center for Occupational Health and Safety, Minnesota Health and Housing
Alliance, and small businesses. Last quarter, approximately 30 presentations were conducted
for 900 participants. In addition, we had a booth at the Midwest Plant Engineering Show. The
fall edition of Safety Lines is available on the MNOSHA Web pages. We will have an article
in the next edition of Safety Lines regarding new crane legislation taking effect July 1, 2007.
OSHA Advisory Council -7- December 2, 2005

Ed Raine commented that in California they waited until the last month and could not
get in. He is aware it is being promoted through the AGC safety committee and that we are
promoting it.

Isakson responded that MNOSHA is moving forward and starting to inform as many
stakeholders as possible, so they can begin their training now and give themselves at least a
year and a half to get their certifications. We are also working with the BNE’s Occupational
Safety and Health Reporter and their end of the year document, which is a periodical, will
have an article about Minnesota. We’re also putting together a number of letters that will be
sent to affected stakeholders that we identify through AGC and ABC, and we will continue to
do that on a six-month basis.

Employee training: Isakson reported that in mid-November, MNOSHA staff

members attended the OSHA 2015 hazardous materials course conducted by OTI in
Shoreview, Minn. We received many positive comments from our staff in regard to this
training. We plan on bringing OTI here again in the spring to present a trenching and
excavation course for MNOSHA staff members. Also, MNOSHA is in the planning stages for
an electrical training course and high-voltage training.

Isakson indicated Bob Sarna is the new Greater Minnesota supervisor for Duluth;
Tyrone Taylor is the new supervisor in the construction area, replacing Mitz Del Caro, who
retired; and Jerry Sykora is the new metro construction principal. There are a number of open
positions in the process of being filled. There are 10 in all, which sounds like a high number,
but analysis shows only two of the 10 were from resignations. The rest are due to promotions
or noncerts.

Isakson stated MNOSHA continues to conduct quality assurance inspections within all
units. Supervisors and principal leads are going out with inspectors and investigators to make
sure there is consistency throughout the state.

Isakson noted the IMIS redesign’s first phase was completed during the past quarter.
This system is being put into place to streamline and simplify data collection, organization
and report writing. This will help MNOSHA move forward technologically.

Isakson reported a group from DLI went to Washington, D.C., last week to meet with
federal OSHA to determine how we can partner to move forward with the IMIS process and
ensure the MNOSHA system meets all the requirements of the federal IMIS system. The
group included an ITS project manager, the IMIS project consultant, Patricia Todd and
Commissioner Brener. Just before today’s meeting, the commissioner told Isakson he’s had
feedback that the meeting was quite a success.

McGovern asked for clarification about the date of the next Construction Breakfast.
Jim Krueger responded it is Jan. 17, from 7 to 9 a.m., and the cost of the breakfast is $10.
Scott Richert, St. Paul Travelers, plans to go over the cost of an injury and also discuss the
compliance issues. Information can be found on the DLI Web site at
www.doli.state.mn.us/brkfst.html.
OSHA Advisory Council -8- December 2, 2005

Tindle asked if there was any input from federal OSHA regarding training for 70E as
compared to 269, because there are rumblings that the lockout/tagout procedure typical to
general industry and the utility industry is going to be enforced in power production. In
talking to a lot of people, he’s learned that physically locking out of all energy sources in a
power plant is a substantial undertaking with valves, hydraulic steam, etc.

Isakson asked Hysell what he could tell them.

Hysell responded the rulemaking committee has extended the comment period for the
revisions of that for 90 days, until Jan. 11. In addition to that proposal, there are also
proposals for working in enclosed spaces and working on energized electrical, among other
employee protections.

A member of the audience asked if there is a plan to increase MNOSHA inspectors.

Isakson responded “not at this time.” He explained there are currently 17 inspectors on the
health side and approximately 40 on the safety side.

Wade stated that discussions began this past year with federal OSHA about
benchmarks. The benchmark process looks at the total population of the state and the type of
industries in the state, then sets minimal standards about what federal OSHA believes is an
acceptable number of investigative staff members. There is some potential, but discussions
have not been finalized yet. We believe there is room for some growth; however, we want it
to be smart growth and make sure we are recruiting and retaining in areas that we need it
most. We have met our targets as previously agreed on with federal OSHA. Part of the
process includes ensuring there are state resources that can be specifically identified for
purposes of matching or requesting additional federal dollars. We have some legwork to do
here in Minnesota. We simply do not have the discretion, by the Legislature nor by our
agreement with federal OSHA, to say we need more investigators. It is a very complicated
process to secure appropriate resources. Before we can target recruiting additional staff
members, we have to secure the appropriate resources that go along with that. Not just at the
state Legislature, but we must also ensure federal OSHA is on board with continuing to
provide us the 50/50 match that our agreement allows.

Workplace Safety Consultation – Jim Collins

Collins stated his presentation would be brief; he has only five items to discuss.
The first item is administrative operations. Last time we met, we had five vacancies; of the
five, we have three filled, with two to go. The other two should be filled soon. This is the first
time we have had this many vacancies going at one time in 10 to 12 years. Thanks to Jeff for
assistance. Those who have come to Workplace Safety Consultation from Compliance, we
consider promotions.

Collins reported item two is an update about the federal inspector general’s audit. At
the last meeting it was reported the federal auditors were here for the first time. They were
here for seven weeks. Their goal was to make sure the consultation program is working as we
have promised the feds and that it works smoothly and efficiently, that all hazards identified
are abated timely. Our focus is for small employers. Four, sometimes five, auditors spent
OSHA Advisory Council -9- December 2, 2005

seven weeks here. At the end of seven weeks, after reviewing federal fiscal-years 2002, 2003
and 2004, they concluded the overall program is being managed effectively and efficiently.

Collins explained that, as in every audit, there is a list of things to be fixed. One of
those has to do with interim protection where the consultant identifies a hazard, explains it to
the employer and if the employer does not fix the hazard right away, which is to remove the
employee from the hazard, they have to provide interim protection for that employee from the
hazard. The records show we did those well, but did not document sufficiently. Going
forward, each serious hazard will have interim protection documented in the file. We do this
now with employers, but there was not enough documentation in our files.

Collins indicated another issue that was brought up was that the local IMIS data did
not always match the federal host IMIS data. We’ll work to rectify the databases to make
them current. This is a work in progress; we’ll work with Mark Hysell. Federal OSHA is also
in the process of changing from old computers to new computers. The timetable is about three
years. There is a long, tedious history with this project.

Bufton offered congratulations for scoring with flying colors.

Collins offered an update about alliances, stating there are currently eight alliances of
official record, with many more informal alliances. Recently there were signings with
Minnesota Mechanical Contractors Association and with the printing industry. We have a lot
of work with the alliances and we are changing strategies; we are working with the alliances
to help us organize training sessions where we actually send consultants to provide training,
but the rooms, coffee, rolls and many other things are provided. It is a nice way to work hand-
in-glove with the alliances. They also make huge contributions in terms of best practices.

Collins commented we also provide training and education at other institutions for
potential alliances, such as Dunwoody Institute, and we have the 30-hour construction course
for future job-site superintendents. Hennepin Technical College has 11 training sessions
scheduled about safety and health management systems training. Last year we did nearly 450
training sessions, training almost 18,000 employers and employees.

Collins reported the MNSTAR program is approaching the last phase of a four-phase
project with Flint Hills, one of our larger accounts. This has gone really well. We’ve
identified more than 100 hazards and they have all been corrected. We reviewed all of the
programs, completed the interviews and now we are on the final phase of making
recommendation to the commissioner.

Collins indicated last year’s LogSafe training has been completed. More than 1,000
people were trained in courses that included CPR, AWAIR, Right-to-Know and fire
extinguisher. The satisfaction rate is extremely high, in the 90th percentile.

Bufton asked how many companies are in the pipeline of the MNSTAR program,
working toward recognition. Collins responded there are five in the pipeline as of Nov. 25; he
anticipates two or three more coming in by mid-January. They are done in phases and
currently we are involved with four of the five sites.
OSHA Advisory Council -10- December 2, 2005

Bufton asked how a company gets into the process. Does the company come to DLI or
does DLI recruit? Collins answered that the word has been out there since the compliance side
had Minnesota First, a program that focused on large employers in general industry. In
addition, we also have former employees out there helping and reminding employers that this
is an excellent program. We are now moving into the construction industry to have a similar
program. It will be a site-specific program for construction.

Collins indicated there would be training coming up this month that will be a follow-
up about our ergonomics study for nursing homes. There will be three sessions. There are 26
nursing homes in the study. The goal of the study is to show a 50 percent reduction in
workers’ comp costs and ensure all employers in the program have an effective safety and
health program. Registration for each of the workshops is looking good. We will continue to
offer this training.

Burski asked if the AWAIR program was being taught in the LogSafe seminars.
Collins responded that this training is done every other year, because it has been requested.
Surveys show this to be a priority.

VIII. New business: Building OSHA’s brand

Bufton stated this discussion goes back to the strategic planning session a year and a
half ago and is one of the last remaining items. At that time, discussion centered on whether
OSHA should be perceived as a compliance organization or a consultation organization?
What does MNOSHA represent in people’s minds, inside the organization and outside? We
felt at that time that further discussion was needed about how we could help MNOSHA think
about shaping their brand to better represent how the agency wants to be perceived. Things to
think about include: how do we perceive MNOSHA; what is the business of MNOSHA; what
do we think is the public’s perception of our business. What do we do and how do we do it?
How easy is it to do business with MNOSHA? What is the personality we want to project?
We will not be able to get deeply into it, but if we could provide comments for the agency to
think about as they go about shaping their brand, that would be helpful.

Tindle suggested the key idea is that “perception should be consistent among all three
groups.” He thinks it is a wonderful goal, but difficult. Look at number eight, “How do we
want our constituents to see us?” What if we could get the concept to employers, to labor and
to the general public that MNOSHA, particularly with Workplace Safety Consultation, could
be viewed as an advisor, a trainer or a mentor who happens to have enforcement authority.
That might be a good way for people to perceive MNOSHA. Right now, when speaking to
employers on properties where he represents the employees, OSHA is almost a dirty word.

Burski agreed with Tindle. He stated he has students currently out doing walk-
throughs in industries and the issue with the employer right now is “I’ll let you come in, but
please don’t report me.” To him, that means they perceive the OSHA folks as something they
don’t want to deal with. We need to find a way to make OSHA look like a more helpful
agency than industry perceives. Comments he receives are “I don’t want anything to do with
them if I can help it.”
OSHA Advisory Council -11- December 2, 2005

McGovern suggested she is curious about how OSHA wants to be seen. Historically,
the accent mark was always on enforcement, yet under the Bush administration, the accent
mark clearly is on consultation. The question she would have for the agency is: how do you
want people to think of you first or is it always both? Should there be an accent mark? If there
should, what would it be? Also, how is the budget structured, consultation versus
enforcement, because that is part of the story too.

Isakson indicated that coming from his past in private industry to the agency, the
perception he would like to see of how people view the agency is that of MNOSHA as an
organization focused toward preventing people from getting hurt. That would be first and
foremost, because that is the business we are here to do. We do this by making sure certain
laws and standards are put in place to ensure that happens, and these are maintained by the
stakeholders affected by them. We are here to help stakeholders achieve this through
outreach, consultation and enforcement.

Raine stated that in construction that is not the message they are receiving. They do
not want to see MNOSHA coming. He is totally opposite; he would welcome MNOSHA on
any job, because he thinks it only strengthens the programs, which is what you try to teach.
He works with 21 companies as a consultant. Ryan Construction is one of the companies he
works with and they welcome MNOSHA on any job, but they are unique. Maybe that is what
the agency can promote, more that you are there to help. Yes, you will fine a company, but
that is not really the point. The fines mean nothing compared to the insurance costs or an
injury; your fines are peanuts. If we can get that message across to them, it might be a goal.

Isakson stated it is an interesting thing when you, as a consultant or others as safety

professionals or administrators, want to move an organization forward to implement a policy
or procedure within the organization, one of the first questions that is brought back to you as
the person recommending that change is “what does OSHA say?” What do the standards say,
being that the standards and those rules are the minimum?

Raine commented he stresses that a lot, that too many minimums are going to cause an
accident. His goal is to put a lot more maximums than minimums in place.

McGovern stated there is a tendency to perceive MNOSHA as a nameless, faceless

bureaucracy and the fear of a fine, and not understanding that you can work with OSHA to
reduce a fine. There is a disconnect between consultation and compliance. If there were a way
to get the face of the MNOSHA staff out there, it would decrease the fear factor. Her personal
experience is that the organization is incredibly helpful and responsive, yet somehow this
does not get communicated. She tries to encourage people getting trained in the occupational
health and safety disciplines to see OSHA as a resource and to communicate that to
employers.

Raine commented he uses OSHA to verify what his companies are doing. He finds
them very helpful, but trying to get this across to employers is a whole different story. He
doesn’t know how to do it. The problem started many, many years ago, when he was a
MNOSHA Compliance officer with DLI. Basically, they were out to get companies. It has
changed now, but the perception remains.
OSHA Advisory Council -12- December 2, 2005

Bufton responded there is a dichotomy because MNOSHA has enforcement authority

and it is the only agency that does in this area; for some employers, that is the motivator to
capture their attention. Clearly, the other piece of it needs to be communicated as well.

Wade stated the agency has looked at its overall mission and has moved from
promoting a safe and healthful work environment to being a trusted resource for both
employees and employers. Redefining our mission will go a long way; however, we are in the
early stages of marketing a new mission statement. OSHA is now 35 years old and a lot can
change in 35 years, going from being on the ground floor of simply establishing minimal
standards in the workplace to really promoting and prioritizing safety in every possible arena.
We’ve seen the political pendulum shift back and forth depending on the administration,
depending on the knowledge base and previous experience. We all benefit when we prioritize
safety. It has been her experience that federal OSHA advertises when large fines are levied.
That is what they advertise to the mass media, so you will see it reported in USA Today that
XYZ organization out of Louisiana, or anywhere else, was fined $250,000 for some named
violation. The part of story that does not get told is that a fine levied is not necessarily a fine
that is collected on. What we leave with the public is a huge distaste for an organization that
seems to have endless power with their ability to fine any employer they find in violation.
That story is not followed up with information that, through negotiation and the settlement
process, OSHA allowed the same company to reinvest $100,000 of the penalty into their
safety program. There seems to be a disconnect.

Wade indicated she would like to see the country as a whole, certainly the state of
Minnesota, move from not only advertising the bad news to the general audience, but to really
starting to talk about how we become a more trusted resource. She believes we are a trusted
resource for employees or, at least, we are a first call for help. She would like us to be a first
call for help for our employers as well. We all have a role to play in that. As she speaks to
different audiences, she always tells them we have two sides of the coin within this building.
We have the workers’ compensation system, for when safety fails, and we have the safety
program, which is inclusive of both enforcement and consultation. We need a balanced
program for safety to succeed, because without strong enforcement our history shows us that
many employers will not prioritize safety. Enforcement was really designed to be a tool to
assure minimum safety standards are complied with. It was never intended to be this huge
overarching stick, where the penalty could be so big that companies fear we are basically out
to put them out of business.

Wade stated she recognizes at MNOSHA it takes a strong economic environment for
the state to prosper and for people to have a place to go to work. We have to somehow rethink
how we talk to individuals about OSHA. Many of the organizations she speaks to have some
relationship with our agency and they know OSHA to be more than just an enforcement
organization. We must be careful, but we must reshape how we think about OSHA and how
we think about the department as a whole. It is a fine line for regulators to walk, because we
do not want the regulatory or the enforcement end to be compromised to just ensure folks
don’t cringe when they see us coming. We can do a better job of getting the message out that
we have resources here that are available to employers. We have technical expertise that is
often available on demand, we look for captive audiences and we have massive information
available electronically. All of you can help us get a different word out to Minnesota
employers, in particular. It is not the employees that cringe; it is those who will be held
OSHA Advisory Council -13- December 2, 2005

responsible for paying a fine. Employers are the group that we need to focus our attention on
to reshape that message.

Raine noted there was a case a few years back where we lost two people, two
electricians and the general contractor got involved. The president of the company came in
and said that if they reduced the fine in half, which was a $25,000 fine, on his
recommendations, the company could take the other half and put it into training; he was
willing to put $50,000 into training in the next 18 months. Since then, they have already spent
another $50,000. This never got in the paper or on the news; only the $25,000 fine was
publicized. Somehow we have to get the media to acknowledge this.

Lois Klobachar stated she thinks we should be out there promoting the MNSTAR
program, MNSHARP, the grants, those things we are doing for the public. The company she
works for got a MNSHARP award and they contacted the papers and other media, but no one
would pick it up.

Tindle commented that OSHA looks like the bad guy for levying the fine, then the
appeal goes through the AG’s office and they become the good guy that splits it up, cuts it in
half or diverts some back to the company. It would be better if the financial structure could be
set up in such a way that OSHA could make the initial suggestion and, therefore, look like
they are advocating the consultation program and training, as opposed to just being the
enforcement entity.

Hawthorne stated that when speaking about the employer, the public perception is
mostly the employees. They are the ones the employer has the contact with. If you have an
employer who is afraid of OSHA, that attitude will be spread down to their employees also. In
his OSHA 10 classes, the biggest thing he has to get through to everybody is what their rights
are. Most of these people don’t understand they do not have to sacrifice their safety for their
employer. No one really understands what OSHA has done for them over the years. An
amazing example he saw was a story about a dam built in Brazil. They didn’t have records for
it, but estimated 145 people died during the construction of that dam. Can you imagine what
we would do if 145 died on a single project here? That is simply unheard of, but we take that
for granted. I think the public perception of what OSHA is and what OSHA does is simply not
known or is not understood.

Bufton noted she was just looking at the national statistics and in all types of injuries
there are a little less than 100,000 people killed in unintentional injuries each year. Of those,
4,200 are in the workplace. All of the rest are outside of the workplace, so that is a huge
tribute to the work of the employers and employees, but was also driven by OSHA during the
past few decades.

Wade explained that our existing process allows us to work with employers.
Whenever there is an inspection, if citations are issued, the employer has the opportunity to
object to either the citation or the dollar value. We do get a lot of contested penalties and
citations and that initiates a process where the employer is invited into the agency in an
informal setting. This is prior to the case’s being referred to the AG’s office. During the
process, we look at the employer’s size and history, the gravity of the violations and the
potential for the hazard to cause serious harm or death. Regardless of the situation, we do
OSHA Advisory Council -14- December 2, 2005

have some tools that take most of that information into consideration even before the fine is
levied. But after the fine is levied or the penalty is assessed, employers still have an
opportunity to negotiate with DLI.

Wade stated that some employers are not motivated. Oftentimes, employers or citizens
as a whole will look for a political solution to issues that could be more easily addressed
through administrative activity. That is, some employers would prefer to look not at how we
can resolve this situation, but how can you get me out of this. The OSHA division as a whole
works through the resolution process very successfully. We do a lot of penalty reduction.
Even the most vocal opponents of OSHA don’t always tell the full story about what their
actual experience was.

Wade inquired how we reshape the thinking around the benefit of having a state-plan
program with these resources available. If we advertise more, people will perceive us
differently. The OSHA program should be perceived as a whole that has two very different,
strategic components, one being enforcement and one being consultation. There are many
different tools that are used through both programs. We have to do a better job of telling the
full story.

Wade asked what other venues there are for us to use to talk about how the settlement
process works. We have professionals in the field that are highly regarded and able to present
themselves in a professional manner. Hopefully, the employer is learning something
regardless of the outcome or what it might mean to their immediate bottom line. We are
saving them money, because the cost of an injury almost always exceeds the cost of an OSHA
penalty that may have forced the employer to correct it before someone got injured. How do
we move to the next level and get a more complete message out that we are managing
expectations. Those resources are also limited. It is not the goal or the intent to inspect every
worksite, nor can we provide consultants to every worksite. We have to find a healthy balance
and ensure we are managing the expectations all around. We want users of our systems to
have a reasonable expectation. We do not want them to fear MNOSHA enforcement, but at
the same time we have to be cautious to ensure they do not look at consultation as the “get out
of jail free” card.

Wade indicated her role is to balance this arena, the same thing with the Legislature
and even within the individual programs. There is just so much the consultants can do and
there is a whole audience that has no motivation to contact consultation or compliance. That is
an audience she wants us to reach as well. Think about what kind of publications your
individual industries use. Is there opportunity for us to provide more information in a user
friendlier tone? It doesn’t have to be a safety magazine, but if each one of your organizations
puts out monthly, quarterly, yearly newsletters or reports, you have an opportunity to talk
about your experience with OSHA as well. Those are opportunities we can capitalize on and
give them a different message.

McGovern stated it is a fine line; in addition to each of us sharing OSHA’s message

with the communication vehicles our organizations use, another one that comes to mind, is the
business sections of local newspapers. Drama seems to sell; if there were case studies of
difficult situations that were somehow made better, if you found the right writer and
OSHA Advisory Council -15- December 2, 2005

developed a relationship with that writer, you can actually work out a strategy. You try to find
a way to pitch your message relative to what their need is with their readers.

Hawthorne commented he agrees with Pat and added if there is any type of survey or
analysis that OSHA has done with any of these companies, that shows where they were and
where they are now. If you can show somebody, almost anybody wants to save money, but
you have to show them that if you spend money you can save money. If you have a company
that got a citation and put $50,000 into their training, what does that save them, what is the
cost saving for them? If someone is reading the paper and reads that a company saved so
much money by spending money on training and maintained their employees, they may go
back to work and suggest trying it.

Bufton stated we have not mined this discussion for all it is worth, and recommended
bringing it back at a later time. Roslyn asked that we think specifically about communication
vehicles where the OSHA message can be shared. It would also be good if OSHA had a set of
key messages that we could all use internally and externally when we talk about the OSHA
experience, so the message gets reinforced by all of it. There are concrete follow-ups we
could have to this discussion.

X. Future agenda item: stakeholder participation

Bufton indicated the discussion for the next meeting would be focused on stakeholder
participation. This comes as a result of conversation started in Duluth in September, about
how to get people involved with these meetings. Please note there are reports in your packet
and Safety Lines is online now. Also note the meeting dates for 2006.

Tindle suggested that with the Construction Breakfast coming up, MNOSHA should
take excerpts from that and create a DVD to market the brand. That is the way you impress
employers, particularly private industry employers. If it costs them money not to do it, they
will find a reason to do it.

Tindle made a motion to adjourn at 11:54 a.m. Burski seconded the motion. All
voted in favor of the motion and it passed.

Respectfully submitted,
Susan Boone
Executive Secretary