Six Flags Great America fined $117,700 for OSHA violations

<QUOTE>
Jeffrey R Smith said:

sprinkler heads in a spray booth covered with unapproved polyethylene bags

They can't tell the difference between the approved and unapproved polyethylene bag...? What idiots...
</QUOTE>

Well, being a designer in the sprinkler industry, I can tell you that there are reasons for using certain types of bags. First of all, spray booths are a very high fire hazard. The fact that they spray (typicaly paint) makes them difficult to protect. If the heads were exposed directly to the paint, they would become coated and never go off, defeating their purpose entirely. The bags are put on to keep the heads clean. The bags becoming coated in too much paint could also prevent the heads from discharging or working properly. That is why they are changed on a regular intervals. If the wrong type of bag is used, i.e. a bag that won't quickly dissapate in a fire situation or one that would melt rather than burn away, could create a coating on the sprinkler head that could also prevent it from working properly.

I realize you were being sarcastic when you said, "I don't know about you...but I certainly feel more safe today." But I know I do. Codes were wrtten for a reason. If we didn't have them people would just do what ever they pleased. In some cases they do anyway. Which is why we have fire inspectors to ensure building owners, and contractors are performing their work properly.

The night club fire in West Warwick, R.I. killed about 100 people. Those deaths could have been prevented had the facility been following proper fire code. *** This post was edited by Jason Hammond 9/11/2007 5:53:20 PM ***

---

...some of what JRS said isn't entirely false. Like most agencies that are supposed to protect the public, they're probably understaffed. So they may be selective in who they go after.

---

That's not what he's arguing though. He's arguing:

---

I’m also sure that our government needlessly and arrogantly fines private entities irrational amounts as a means of tax collection…to say nothing of cushy government job justification.

---

I know Cleveland Fire Prevention is severly understaffed. There are so many buildings in Cleveland that are so much in violation of code, I don't know how they havn't burned down yet.

The fact is…nobody was hurt. Nobody is forced into working in that Malaysian-Sweat-Shop known as Six Flags. There have been no cries of impending disaster from the Six Flags employees…yet our government has stepped in to protect us from what…?

Again, they got the OHSA inspection because of a "track record of injuries and illnesses...above the national average"

People did get hurt.

I also apologize to all hypothetical victims who could have lost fingers or eyesight to such blatant private entity negligence.

The victims of of flash pods, fake ceilings and fire exit violations were "hypothetical" until they were real.

**** happens. Some of it can't be reasonably expected or prevented. C'est la vie. But what can be expected and prevented SHOULD be prevented.

Tell ya what. When i worked as a welder and had to repair my welder, thank god for lock out tag out. I like being alive. Oh some government entities may be pain in the ass, but trust me. OSHA is not one of them.

Safe to say my apology fell a little flat. :) On a side note…the humor of “unapproved polyethylene bags” has now been surpassed by the continued anger and seriousness of the responses complete with selective quotations. ;)

This side of starting a virtual cue thread…nothing fires up the buzz masses like poking fun at governmental intentions and/or incompetence. I loathe responding further as I’m well aware zero minds can and ever have been changed on here. As always the following is merely meant to provide a minority viewpoint counterbalance to the typical for this site. Responses are meant innocently with humor in mind with the understanding that discussing hypocrisy always has its uncomfortable moments.

Read the article again. The inspections were prompted by a program targeting companies with a history for accidents. There was reason for the thorough inspection, and the park got what it deserved.

The reason for the thorough inspection is that the OSHA themselves decided that Six Flags history deserved further examination. I guess if the OSHA says their function is vital…then criticism is unwarranted…? If anybody is unable to see the conflict of interest or at the very least the appearance of conflict…?

If there were no building codes, safety standards, etc., we'd be back in the days of the industrial revolution. If there was no inspection mechanism for these standards, there would be no accountability.

There was a time when civil court proceedings in this country did not involve exuberant attorney fees and million dollar settlements. If this were still the case, your argument might make sense. Our court system presently provides plenty of accountability to ensure it is in any business’s interest to assure safety.

I might add that a $100,000 plus fine is a drop in the bucket compared to a lawsuit for say… “a loss of a hand.” This begs the question…what purpose does a $100,000 plus fine really serve when there are much more serious remedies available through the court process? In reality, the fine serves to add private money to public coffers.

OSHA’s fine system has long since past it’s time as a deterrent for behavior in most cases as judgments and settlements are exponentially more effective. At this time, like many a government agency, OSHA needs to collect fines in order to meet budget expectations and justify their very existence.

If you're going to state your opinion using words like needless, arrogant, irrational or whatever, check your own arrogance at the door and explain why the government is so wrong with something of more substance than "I said so."

Arrogance…? It is not like I’m telling people what car they should be driving or something! ;)

Safe to say, when it comes to providing substance to arguments, I’m pretty comfortable in knowing I make better effort than a lot of people on this site. ;) My history is known to most the long-timers…and failure to provide substance is not typical. You may be confusing your fundamental disagreement with my political opinions as arrogance. I posted with good sarcastic humor…and certainly never intended for this debate to turn so serious.

I've filed a complaint with OSHA. It was the only recourse I had with an unsafe work environment short of quitting, which was not an option at the time.

After posting and reading this site for quite a few years, I can honestly say that this does not shock me a bit. :) You looking for government intervention fits the mold. While I almost always disagree with your political ideology and confrontational style, I most certainly respect your consistency in ideology and apparently, your willingness to fight for what you believe.

Someone else said it. OSHA is one of those government organizations that actually does good work protecting the working public.

Well since somebody else said it…it must be true! :)

Actually this response along with Jeff’s quote above point out a fundamental difference in worldviews. Many of you see government involvement, and automatically assume the government is just and acting in our best interest. Hence you frame the debate by asking that I prove the government agency does not work.

I see things opposite. I think government agencies should actually have to prove themselves to the taxpayers. I personally feel they come up short most of the time.

But, a lot of those violations were probably created by the employees most likely to be affected by them.

We have some body that gets it.

Anybody familiar with guards on machinery knows they are often removed by the worker themselves because they simply are a pain in the ass to work with. Just one small example of how the innocent the government is supposedly protecting may not be so innocent after all.

I’ve got to go now, Hope this enlightens some of you to a differing worldview that you don’t seem to share. Maybe some of the fines were justified…but I can’t shake the feeling that the employees these fines supposedly were designed to protect were taking much greater risks for death and injury simply by driving to work. That is the big picture view for me.

The government has jumped in to protect workers from relatively improbable risks…which is evidenced by the fact that we don’t have many (any?) stories of blind and fingerless Six Flags employees in Gurnee. Yet…OSHA and those responding to this thread would have us believe (as the story is written) that Six Flags is a major safety hazard.

I don’t think it is or ever was. Nor do I believe the risk for some catastrophic accident is statistically less significant on this property than it was before the inconsequential fines were rendered!

*** This post was edited by Jeffrey R Smith 9/11/2007 8:15:23 PM ***

So your "responses" equate to:

-Fines are a conflict of interest intended to benefit the government where $100k is also a "drop in the bucket."
-Let the court system (reactive) deal with unsafe work environments instead of OSHA (proactive).
-Your comfort in knowing you try harder to make an argument means you make a good argument.
-My filing a complaint with OSHA is a personality flaw.
-You think government agencies should have to justify their existence or they aren't necessary.
-Everyone else is wrong because it's incompatible with your enlightenment.

But you can't be bothered with it because you were just being funny, right? We get it.

In my own experience, people have the same view of the function of government-- whether conservative or liberal, democrat or republican, no matter the gender, race or income.

"Government should aid and support me and those who believe what I do about _______, and inhibit (or punish) those who don't think as I do." Fill in the blank with any issue you can think of, and the statement will be true.

Admittedly, it has nothing to do with the thread subject, but I just wanted to say that.

The comment about Jeff's personality speaks wonders about Jeffrey's ignorance towards common sense and expert opinion in order to validate his cynicism towards a government entity.

If there's a significant safety problem at an organization, chances are that a higher-up is well aware of it. If they don't rectify the situation, then clearly they don't find it worth their while to fix said problem... why would one employee complaining change their mind? This is where OSHA is needed in Jeff's situation -- they have the ability to hold organizations accountable for their safety record by giving employees the ability to report problems without being concerned about being fired or ignored by their employer. If OSHA is only a needless interference, then what mechanism do you suggest there should be that holds companies to safety codes and regulations?

You state that the fear of lawsuits should be enough for companies to stay safe. If this was the case, then why does OSHA still find safety violations? Evidently Six Flags wasn't scared enough by potential lawsuits to correct these problems, so what would have forced them to comply with regulations if OSHA wasn't allowed?

Never mind the fact that your entire argument is based on the theory that OSHA is enforcing 'stupid' regulations, yet we've heard from knowledgeable people in this thread that have stated that these regulations are, in fact, critical in ensuring the safety of workers. I admire your ability to hold your course while completely ignoring that people have systematically voided your entire platform. Despite your distaste for politicians, I believe you'd make a fine one yourself.

Working in the manufacturing industry I can assure you that even though some of these violations seem petty, there is a reason why it is a violation. I have questioned some regulations myself only to find out the reasoning behind it. And after finding out the reasoning, then it made complete sense. But I would rather have OSHA tell me that I'm doing something wrong than be ignorant to safety procedure and have someone get injured.

At some time there was some sort of accident involving these violations, and the corrective action was to have regualtions that were so black and white there was no way they could be misunderstood. Corrective action being the term to key on.

It's not like there are some government people sitting around a table discussing on how the government can screw with a business by handing out frivoulous fines. There is a method to the madness. There doesn't have to be a conspiracy theory behind everything.

Chances are SF was warned of the violations previously, but did not correct them. Hence OSHA dropping the hammer on them.

"Government should aid and support me and those who believe what I do about _______, and inhibit (or punish) those who don't think as I do." Fill in the blank with any issue you can think of, and the statement will be true.

I think this is a rather astute observation globally. This would apply to this discussion when one side of the debate automatically assumes their opinions are superior. I know I’ve made it clear that I only post to give the alternative viewpoint as this site historically is dominated by a pro-government crowd. I’m aware of the fact that this is not a forum to change minds. I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. I’m merely pointing out my opinions.

In the following…I’ll make my own arguments and opinions…rather than let somebody else do it or me! ;) It does not go unnoted how I’m consistently able to defend my position quote by quote…while others keep shifting the debate or muddying the waters by combining divergent opinions…

-Fines are a conflict of interest intended to benefit the government where $100k is also a "drop in the bucket."

So you don’t see the conflict of interest of the OSHA themselves deciding which companies need more scrutiny…i.e. which companies are in dire need of there important offerings?

You are incapable of determining that $100,000 fines are indeed a “drop in the bucket” compared to a typical lawsuit court costs…to say nothing of settlement or judgment costs…?

:)

-Let the court system (reactive) deal with unsafe work environments instead of OSHA (proactive).

I think the company should be proactive so as to avoid the reactive court response. I think most companies presently operate in fear of lawsuits. I think the OSHA is a nitpicking agency that has long outlived its usefulness. The proactive component should come from the company itself…or they should pay the price. We do not need big government inconsistently enforcing “what might have beens.”

-Your comfort in knowing you try harder to make an argument means you make a good argument.

I think the first quote of this response fits the bill. In your mind…you’ve convinced yourself that only your opinion is valid. Therefore you are comfortable in making “good/bad” judgments. I’ll leave that stuff to you.

-My filing a complaint with OSHA is a personality flaw.

I’m of the opinion tattle-telling is typically weak and wrong. So far as this is the case…I think you are correct in assuming I see it as a “personality flaw.” Rest assured though…that as for as your “personality flaws” go…tattle-telling is way down the list! :)

-You think government agencies should have to justify their existence or they aren't necessary.

Of course I believe this. Any agency involuntarily spending my money should have to go above and beyond to justify their usefulness/effectiveness.

-Everyone else is wrong because it's incompatible with your enlightenment.

I’ve never said anybody is wrong. You are injecting your debate technique into this. I think we have differing opinions. I pose questions/quotes/opinions to stir the discussion. You ignore most of the discussion and intellectual challenges (as evidenced by you consistently ignoring the questions posed and resorting to placing words in my mouth---see this very quote) and reducing it to right/wrong.

I’ve got to go to work now. I apologize that I’ve no time to get to the rest of you in quote-by-quote fashion. I was going to talk about message board posters not equating to “expert opinions”, Star Trek enthusiasts not being a good source for varying worldviews, accident data (or lack of?) indicating accident rates before and after OSHA inspections, etc.

Basically we’ve got two simple opinions here. One says the OSHA is good, the other says it is not needed. To my knowledge…we’ve all provided subjective arguments interspersed with personal insult…with nary a hint of objective data that would demonstrate the OSHA is actually effective at preventing injury. I’m sure a Google search could hit data that could support either opinion.

*** This post was edited by Jeffrey R Smith 9/12/2007 11:02:28 AM ***

It's amazing how often bad management leads to poor safety records. Not all Six Flags parks are this bad. It's time for an overhaul at SF Great America -- cut out the cancer, remove the management team, their broken ladders and their corrupt corporate culture.

I wouldn't just laugh about these as "silly violations", something serious could be caused by something that seems rather small such as approved equipment or labeling. Seems immature to laugh at this. Sure if they came to my house or whatever would be one thing but Six Flags is a huge business dealing with millions of peoples' lives.

I'd venture to say that if OSHA did a full shakedown like this to ANY theme park, the damage would be pretty similar.