An interesting appeal process
After making the required changes and paying more than $31,000 in fines levied against them by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), UCLA has appealed state regulators’ findings regarding the fatal burning of a laboratory research assistant last year, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Last month I wrote about how Cal/OSHA found Sheri Sangji, 23, was not properly trained and was not wearing a lab coat during an experiment on December 29, which involved volatile chemicals which burst into flames. The regulatory agency deemed these to be serious workplace-safety violations.
But, according to the article, the appeal was not filed to overturn any fines – the money has already been paid. Rather, the appeal will allow UCLA to stipulate that it admits no fault in connection with the findings, which limits the university’s liability, Kevin Reed, vice chancellor for legal affairs at UCLA, told the Times.
In essence the university is protecting their backside from any future litigation or expenses. In a statement Reed said the appeal is necessary to make sure “there was no citation or finding that can be used against the university in any future proceeding.”
The appeal serves as protections against lawsuits from labor unions or criminal action by prosecutors, Reed said.
Two months prior to the incident, UCLA found safety issues during an internal inspection. In a statement, Reed claims those issues were corrected before the December 29 fire, but they were not properly documented, hence the appeal.
On the other hand, Sangji’s family is pressing for more investigations. Her sister Naveen, said they want an investigation by the district attorney, and an online petition has recorded more than 1,300 signatures in support of such an investigation.
This brings up an interesting discussion about the process of dealing with a workplace fatality. Apparently in California, at least, a facility would first pay the fine and correct the mistakes, and then file an appeal in order to save itself from lawsuits.
Of course all these appeals won’t erase the fact that attention to these lab safety details, such as personal protection, prior to the incident would have saved Sangji’s life.
Take our survey; win a training video
We had so many visitors to the OSHA Healthcare Advisor that we want to know you better—what you do, and who you do it for. Click here to take a short survey. If you answer all the questions, you will be eligible to win a FREE Respirator Safety for Healthcare Workers training video. It’s the perfect training video to help prepare for pandemic influenza.
« Way out-of-the-box thinking: Safety soda machines | Home | Just for laughs, what’s wrong with this picture? »
-
Categories
- Ask the Expert—Bloodborne Pathogens
- Ask the expert—General OSHA
- Ask the Expert—Hazard Communication
- Bloodborne Pathogens
- Emergency Action Plans
- Featured
- First Aid
- General Safety and Health
- Hazardous Waste
- Infection Control
- Lab Safety
- Needlesticks & Sharps Injuries
- Notes from the field
- OSHA – Citations & Fines
- OSHA – General
- Pandemic Influenza
- Popular
- Uncategorized
- Waste Management
- Weekly Poll Questions
-
Archives
-
Feeds
Terry Jo Gile
Terry Jo Gile, MT(ASCP), MA Ed.,The Safety Lady® has more than 40 years experience as a certified medical technologist. As president of her own consulting firm, Safety Lady LLC, she is a world renowned speaker and consultant who helps organizations create safety savvy laboratories. Click the links to visit her Web site and her blog.
Terry Jo has written 49 posts.
Leave a Comment