The Roofing Safety Toolbox

This Safety Talk tells about Ken, a roofing foreman who injured his back while attempting to fix a leak on flat roof.

Ken’s employer is a fairly large regional roofing contractor. They have 73 employees and specialize in commercial and industrial flat roofs. Ken was hired 3 years ago, and had very little roofing experience when he was hired. But Ken did have quite a bit of supervisory experience, good business sense and he wasn’t afraid to get his hands dirty. In fact you would often see Ken jumping-in and helping wherever there was a need.

On the day on Ken’s injury, his crew was working on a job that involved repairing several leaks on the flat roof of a school. One of the leaks was located and was underneath a rubber mat that had been glued to the roof. To fix the leak the rubber mat had to be removed.

To help, Ken attempted to remove the rubber mat by bending over at the waist, grabbing one edge of the mat, and pulling upward. Although Ken was a fairly large man, the mat was glued down really well and he had a difficult time pulling it up. When he finally got the mat detached from the roof, he stood up and felt a burning pain in his back. The pain was pretty bad. So Ken took it easy for the rest of the day. But by the end of the day, the pain started to radiate down his left leg from his hip and Ken knew that he did some real damage to his back.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

This incident summary does not provide much detail about the mat that Ken was trying to remove. It also does not let us know if there was an alternative method for removing it. However it does paint a mental picture of Ken’s posture as he was pulling on the mat. It says that he was “bending over at the waist, grabbing one edge of the mat and pulling upward.” What’s wrong with that posture?

What do you think would have happened if the mat detached from the roof suddenly and unexpectedly?

• It’s scary to think what would have happened if there was an unprotected skylight or short parapet wall directly behind him.
  

With the limited information we have about this incident, what would made this task safer?

• Is there some type of tool that he might have used to pry up the mat?
  
• What if he had asked for help in pulling-up the mat?
  

Have any of you had similar situation that didn’t result in an injury?

This Safety Talk tells about John, a 20 year veteran roofer who fell from a ladder and fractured his foot.

John’s employer has been in business for 20 years, and John was one of the first employees that the company hired. He was one of the company’s lead men and was normally very safety conscious.

On the day of John’s injury, he was working on a job with two other employees and was almost done. They had replaced a shingle roof on a sports medicine office and were drying it in. In fact John was standing on an extension ladder about 12 feet in the air and was putting in the last nail. After that, the crew could clean-up and go home for the day. But before he knew it, the ladder kicked-out from under him. He scrambled to drop his hammer and grab onto to something – anything. But instead John fell to the concrete surface below landing on his left foot. The force of a 225 lb man falling 12 feet shattered his heel bone.

His coworkers saw John fall and ran to help him immediately. The employees from inside the sports medicine office heard the commotion and ran out too. They made sure that John’s ankle was stabilized. Then his coworkers took John to the hospital.

Now John is a lot of pain, and for the next 6 weeks he has to wear a huge cast, and won’t be able do most of the things that he normally does (at work and at home).

DISCUSSION NOTES:

We know that John’s ladder was placed on a flat concrete surface. Why do you think the ladder kicked-out while John was on it?

Why is reaching and leaning to one side hazardous while standing on a ladder?

What is our company policy regarding tying-off ladders?

What are some circumstances that you don’t tie-off ladders when you really should?

What are some of your experiences?

• Have you fallen off of a ladder or had a ladder kick-out from underneath you before?
  
• If so, what do you do differently to prevent that from happening?
  

On August 11^th a laborer for a small commercial roofing contractor sustained a serious laceration to his head. The victim was the 18 year old son of the company owner. He was gaining experience as a laborer, but was new to the industry. It was his father’s plan to eventually turn the business over to him.

The victim is probably not well suited for the construction industry. According to his crew leader, he was a complainer and was not very fond of physical labor. Among other things, he often complained that wearing a hardhat was uncomfortable. He would say that it was too heavy and too hot. Although the crew leader would ride him when he didn’t have it on, he would often take his hard hat off when the crew leader was not looking.

The day of this incident was brutally hot. The crew started work at 5:00 a.m. and they were nearly done for the day when some debris from on top of the 2 story building fell off. That debris grazed the victim’s head as he was loading materials on the hoist. As you probably guessed the victim was not wearing his hard hat.

Although there were no witnesses to the incident, the crew leader heard the victim yell and came running. The object that struck the victim caused a laceration on the right rear of his head. The cut bled profusely. He was transported to the hospital, received 23 stitches and was released.

DISCUSSION NOTES

Often workers are reluctant to wear hard hats because of an expressed concern of the weight and discomfort of heat during warm weather. Considering the protection afforded, the weight theory is negligible. The average hard hat weighs 14 ounces.

Regarding the common complaint that hard hats are hot to wear, a test in temperature of 110 degrees showed that the inside temperature of a hard hats was 5 to 12 degrees less than the outside temperature. In other words, the reflective attribute and air space provided by wearing a hard hat keeps you cooler.

The brain is the control center of the body. The slightest damage to any part of the brain has the capacity to cause malfunctions of some area of the body. The skull, under normal circumstances, protects the brain. But when a possibility of injury from falling or flying objects exists, additional protection is required. This is the objective of the use of hard hats.

Johnny started in the roofing industry as soon as he got out of high school. He is a pretty smart guy and has been fairly successful. He has his own roofing and sheet metal company and has 20 employees. Many of his employees are friends that he has known for years. Their close relationship is probably the reason that they felt comfortable (if not obligated) to tease him on his 40^th birthday. During their lunch break, most of the guys took turns ribbing Johnny, saying that he is now “over-the hill.” But Johnny was in great shape. He ate right, wasn’t overweight, and he even ran a few miles a week to stay in shape.

After lunch, Johnny got on the company’s forklift and placed materials onto the roof. As he was getting off of the forklift he made a conscious (although stupid) decision to proving to himself that he was as fit as a 25 year old. He stood-up at the edge of the lift and jumped to the ground. When his feet hit the ground, Johnny felt a sharp pain in his left knee and heard a “pop.” He knew this wasn’t good. Limping to his truck, in his head he can hear the taunting of his friends and coworkers calling him an “old man.” He knew he was never going to live this down.

One of his employees took Johnny to the hospital where an MRI revealed that he had torn cartilage in his knee.

DISCUSSION

Always use the steps to get off of a piece of equipment. Never jump. It may seem like a short distance, but the cumulative damage to knees and ankles will eventually catch up with you.

Swinging down from a piece of equipment while holding on is no better. Always face the equipment getting off and hold on with both hands.

The company owner in this incident is not that different from you or me. All of us do stupid things occasionally that place expose us to injury. What have you done (or what have you seen others do) fall into that “stupid” category?

Make a commitment now to stop a coworker if you see him doing something stupid that exposes him to injury.

A 23 year old construction laborer sustained a severe ankle sprain that kept him off work for several weeks. His employer is a commercial roofing contractor specializing in flat roofs, and normally operates with 3 crews. This particular crew was reroofing a 4 story office building located across the street from the local hospital.

The day of the injury was a perfect spring day. It was sunny, but not hot, and there was absolutely no chance of rain.

The crew got onsite at 7:30 a.m., had a 20 minute safety talk and discussion, and then went up on the roof to begin work for the day. Three of the men began the task of transporting roofing materials from the roof hoist area to the center of the roof where they were to make repairs that day. The victim (a 23 year old employee with 2 years of roofing experience) grabbed an arm-full of roofing materials and headed for the center of the roof. Unfortunately after only a few steps, his ankle rolled and he fell to the ground in pain.

As he sat on the roof of the building, he quickly realized what had happened. The arm-full of materials he was carrying blocked his view of where he was walking, and someone (perhaps the HVAC contractor) had left a scrap piece of PVC pipe on the roof. He had stepped on that piece of scrap PVC pipe and sprained his ankle severely. Before he could get off the roof to be taken to the doctor, his ankle had already started to balloon and turn blue.

At least for that young construction laborer, that beautiful spring day didn’t turn-out so nice after all.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

What factors contributed to this incident?

Is there anything that we do intentionally and consistently to eliminate slip/trip hazards on jobsites? (If not ask for suggestions from the crew).

Note: If it is not suggested, recommend that the morning routine each day includes looking for slip/trip hazards (and eliminating them when possible).

The victim in this incident was wearing tennis shoes. What type of footwear do you think may have prevented this injury (or at least made it less severe)?

Note: If your company does not currently have a policy addressing footwear, consider requiring laced high-top work boots (except when working on a pitched roof in which the pitch exceeds 4:12, or when special roofing materials require different types of footwear).

The weather was overcast on the day of the incident and the forecast was calling for afternoon thunderstorms. Trying to get in a full day of work before the thunderstorms hit, the crew arrived at the site at 6:00 a.m. and started work. While taking their lunch break they could tell that it was going to rain soon and that their afternoon was shot. Knowing that they would get little accomplished before the rain hit if they went back on the roof, the crew leader told the crew to pack things up for the day. They would finish up the job tomorrow.

While carrying tools back to the truck, one of the employees saw the victim lying on the sidewalk beside the building, unconscious. He yelled for the crew leader who called 911. Before the ambulance arrived, the victim regained consciousness, and complained of a head and neck pain.

The crew leader went with him to the hospital while the rest of the crew packed-up and went home for the day.

The crew leader already knew that the claimant was in a hurry (trying to beat the rain), but didn’t know much else about how the incident happened. Upon talking with him after he was released from the emergency room, the crew leader learned that the victim used a stepladder to retrieve something from the edge of a one-story entrance overhang. He had set the stepladder up quickly and failed to lock the cross-braces before climbing. When he got to top and reached onto the roof, the stepladder collapsed and he fell 10 feet onto the concrete sidewalk, sustaining a concussion and a strained neck.

Although the victim returned to work just a few days later, he learned some valuable lessons about safety on the job.

Discussion Notes:

With as much work as we do with ladders, roofers should know ladder safety better than just about anyone. Obviously victim’s failure to lock the stepladder’s cross-braces contributed to the incident. What else could have contributed to it?

[Suggest these responses if not offered by your employees]

1. The victim was in a hurry.
   
2. He may have reached too far while standing on the stepladder.
   
3. He may have placed the ladder on an uneven surface.
   

What other safety rules are there relative to using stepladders?

[Suggest these responses if not offered by your employees]

1. Do not stand higher than the second step from the top of a stepladder.
   
2. Do not straddle the front and back of a stepladder.
   
3. Always inspect a ladder before using it
   
4. Never prop-up step ladders and use them as extension ladders.
   

A 41-year-old, construction laborer died from heat stroke after being taken to the hospital. The victim worked until 5:00 pm that day and was in the parking lot on his way to his vehicle when he apparently collapsed beside his vehicle. A worker on the second shift at a nearby factory was taking scrap material outside to a dumpster when he found the laborer on the ground. The factory worker returned to the plant and told his supervisor there was a man on the ground in the parking lot in needed an ambulance. After instructing the company receptionist to call EMS, the supervisor went to the parking lot to administer first-aid until EMS arrived. When they arrived, EMS recorded the laborer’s body temperature as 107^o F. He was transported to a local hospital where he died the next day with an internal body temperature of 108^o F. Death was listed by the coroner as heat stroke.

There was water available at the work site for the workers to drink. The laborers took their morning, lunch and afternoon breaks in the air-conditioned construction trailer on site. Additionally, workers were allowed to use the trailer to cool down if they felt over-heated during the work day. According to the coroner’s report, the temperature that day was 90^o F. Also, according to a local weather reporter, the dew point was a humid 69^o.

It was observed at lunch that the victim did not eat, but he did drink water. He was dressed in blue jeans, a tee-shirt and a long-sleeved heavy shirt.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Heat stroke occurs when the body’s ability to dissipate heat is impeded either due to disease or physical exertion. Signs of heat stroke are: the person stops sweating, becomes dizzy, confused and/or disoriented, rapid pulse rate, dizziness, nausea, headache, or a high body temperature of 103^o F. External temperatures over 82^o F increase the risk for heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Employers and employees should observe each other for signs of heat exhaustion or heat stroke. Additionally, workers should be trained to know and understand company procedures for reporting a worker who is exhibiting symptoms of heat stress / stroke.

While working in heat, staying hydrated is important. Drinking the appropriate amount of fluids such as water and/or sports drinks that replace the body’s electrolytes helps the body maintain its appropriate temperature. It is suggested to match fluid loss from the body with fluid intake. Besides drinking plenty of fluids, employees should wear light colored clothing and fabrics that wick away moisture from the skin. Though, not a factor in this incident, when the weather is conducive to heat exhaustion / stroke, workers should also avoid consumption of alcohol and caffeine.

When high temperatures are predicted, employers should consider changing work hours to accommodate the weather. Instead of working in the heat of the day, work hours could be changed from 6:00 am to 2:30 pm, or at a time when heat and humidity exist at a lower level.

On August 11 a 53-year-old construction foreman died when he fell from the roof of a building under construction to a dirt floor 30 feet below. His employer was a sub-contracted to complete the roofing and sheet metal work on a building 850 feet long by 180 feet wide by 30 feet high. At the time of the incident the walls of the building had been completed and approximately one-fourth of the roofing panels had been installed.

The roofing panel supports consist of 5-inch-wide bar joists. These are positioned on 5-foot centers running the width of the building. Fiberglass insulation is placed on the bar joists and metal roofing panels cover this insulation.

The crew, consisting of 5 workers and the victim, had all been working on separate tasks prior to the incident. At approximately 11:30 a.m. the victim and a co-worker went to the roof to begin applying fiberglass insulation over the bar joists. The co-worker obtained a roll of fiberglass insulation 5 feet wide by 77 feet long. The co-worker rolled the insulation toward the victim, who was standing on the edge of the recently installed roofing panels. As the co-worker came within 10 feet of the victim, the victim stepped from the edge of the roofing panels out onto the 5-inch bar joist, lost his balance, and fell to the ground.

The co-worker ran to the contractor’s office (approximately 900 feet away) and called 911. The ambulance arrived in 12 minutes and provided basic life support. The victim was transported to the hospital where he was later pronounced dead in the emergency room.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

All too often employees fail to correct the foremen on a job when they see them disregarding safety rules, failing to wear personal protective equipment, or otherwise exposing themselves to hazards. The truth is that foremen, supervisors, and even company owners are no more immune to on the job injuries and death than the newest laborer on the job. If the coworker in this incident had had encouraged the foreman to wear his harness and lanyard, he might have put it on and lived to tell about the time he “almost” died.

Each employee of our company is not only permitted, but he is encouraged to correct foremen, supervisors and the company owner is you see us putting ourselves (or our crew) in danger. We have an obligation to keep you safe, and we recognize that part of that responsibility involves setting a good example.

As the foreman on this job, how have I failed to encourage safe behavior – either through what I have done; or through what I have failed to do?

In this issue of Safety Talk, you will learn of yet another roofer who died when he fell from a roof. His employer had been sub-contracted to install felt paper and asbestos shingles to the roof of a newly constructed six-unit condominium complex. The roof had a 6:12 pitch and was 120 feet long and 26 feet wide. On the day of the incident (the first day of work on that job), the crew arrived at the site at 8:00 a.m. The crew consisted of the owner, his son, the victim, and one other worker (hereinafter referred to as the “co-worker”). All were carpenters experienced in roofing and siding work. Standard operating procedure called for the owner to inspect the roof of a new structure to see if it was properly prepared before his crew accessed the roof. However, on the day of this incident, the entire crew climbed the ladders to the roof when they got onsite. Since the roof was wet from dew, the owner instructed the crew to sit on the bundles of shingles placed on the roof by the contractor and wait until the roof dried. The crew’s safety equipment and tools were still in the owner’s truck.

At 8:45 a.m. the owner felt that the roof had dried sufficiently and told the crew that he was going to inspect the roof. The owner and his son were on one side of the roof; the victim and the co-worker were on the opposite side. Both pairs of men, who were near the ridge of the roof, began to walk toward the opposite end of the structure. As the victim stepped around a bundle of shingles on the ridge of the roof, he fell to his hip and began to roll to the edge of the roof. The co-worker stepped toward him to grab him but when he grabbed for him he missed. The victim rolled off the roof and fell to the packed dirt surface below.

A worker on the ground immediately called 911. The owner went to the road to show the rescue squad the way to the scene. The fire department arrived within 5 minutes. As the owner was telling the fire department personnel where the injured worker was, a worker yelled that the victim had stopped breathing. A member of the fire department crew administered CPR and the victim began breathing on his own again. The ambulance arrived and transported him to the local hospital. The victim was later transferred to different hospital with a shock-trauma unit. However, several days later he was pronounced brain-dead. After several more days, the life-support systems were removed, and he died the following morning.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The company’s standard procedure was for the owner to inspect the worksite prior to allowing the crew to access the roof. That practice limits the crew’s exposure to fall hazards. In this instance, the crew did not follow the standard operating procedure, and climbed onto the roof before the owner inspected it. Additionally, all of the safety equipment was left in the owner’s truck. The owner unnecessarily exposed the crew to the fall hazard by permitting them to wait on the roof prior to and during roof inspection. 

Although we normally think of the hazards we face while performing our work. What hazards are we exposed to on jobs before we ever get started working?

A painting contractor had been contracted by a large manufacturer to sandblast and paint several air conditioning units on the roof of a 35-foot-high manufacturing plant. The roof was flat and parapet walls 2-foot-high and 8-inch-wide around the perimeter of the roof.

Electrical power to the building was provided by a three-phase, 4160-volt service line, which was anchored 5 feet above the roof surface to two galvanized pipes, located 2 feet apart on the top of the roof, and 2 feet in from the edge of the roof. The power lines and anchorage were guarded on all sides (except the roof edge) by a 6-foot-high chain link fence forming an 8-foot by 20-foot enclosure. The fence has a locked access gate and a 10-inch by 12-inch sign on the gate which states “DANGER – HIGH VOLTAGE – KEEP OUT.”

Noting that the victim was hot and that it was nearly lunch-time, his coworker told him to sit down and “cool off” (due to the heat of the day) while he finished the task that they had been working on. Five minutes later, he finished the task turned around to look for the victim. It was at that point that he saw the victim inside the power service enclosure. The victim’s legs were wrapped around one of the anchor poles with his back arched over the edge of the parapet wall.

Two days prior, the employer was at the site, discussing the job with the two workers. During that time he cautioned them to stay away from the edge of the roof and not to enter the power service enclosure.

Immediately he ran to the roof access door and yelled for someone to call 911. He then went back and entered the fenced-in enclosure by climbing around the end of the fence on top of the parapet wall. He pulled the victim away from the anchor pole into the middle of the enclosure and began administering CPR. He was assisted by a plant employee who arrived at the scene within a few minutes of the incident. The ambulance arrived approximately 15 minutes after the 911 cal was made. Efforts by the EMS crew to resuscitate the victim were unsuccessful, and the victim was pronounced dead at the scene.

There were no eyewitnesses to the incident. However, evidence indicates that the victim for unknown reasons entered the enclosure either by climbing over the fence or by walking around on the parapet wall. Presumably the victim sat down on the roof under the power line, and contacted one of the energized power line conductors with his left hand. The victim’s body provided a path to ground for the current and the victim was electrocuted. The medical examiner’s report indicated deep thermal burns on the victim’s right hand and the inside of his right thigh.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

We will never know why the victim in this incident decided to enter the fenced-in enclosure despite the obvious barriers and warnings. However it is safe to assume that he underestimated the hazard of the electrical service lines. Can you think of occasions that you have worked close to electrical service lines on a roof? If so, what was done to protect you from getting too close?

A 46-year-old male carpenter died after falling 16 feet from a roof onto a concrete porch floor. He was a member of a five-man (a foreman and four carpenters). On that particular day, the crew was laying roofing felt on a 5:12-pitched gable roof of a newly-constructed, prefabricated church building. The roof was 48 feet wide by 106 feet long. The crew had finished applying the felt to half of the roof, and was applying the eighth course to the second half of the roof when the incident occurred.

The victim was walking backward on the roof unrolling the felt. Approximately 8 feet in front of the victim, a second crew member was temporarily nailing down the felt. A short distance behind the second crew member, the two additional crew members were permanently nailing the felt to the roof sheeting. The foreman was on the roof watching the crew.

The men were only unrolling 8 feet of felt at a time because it was a windy day, with gusts up to 25 miles per hour. As the men approached the end of the roof, the foreman was called to the ground to discuss the color of the shingles with the church preacher. The worker temporarily affixing the shingles looked up to see the victim approaching the edge of the roof and yelled for him to “WATCH OUT!!!” But the warning came too late. The victim lost his balance and fell backward off the roof. He fell approximately 6 feet, struck a cross-brace on the framework of the church’s porch, and then fell another 10 feet, striking his head on the concrete floor of the porch.

The crew members left the roof and ran to the victim, finding him unresponsive, bleeding from the nose and ears. One of the workers ran inside the church and the preacher call 911. They were instructed by the 911 operator to perform CPR, which they did. However, when EMS arrived, they could not detect any vital signs, and called for the county coroner, who pronounced the victim dead at the site

DISCUSSION NOTES:

Why do you think that none of the employees on the roof that day were wearing a personal fall arrest system?

Can you think of some circumstances that one of us (or maybe even all of us) have not used a harness and lanyard when we should have?

The victim’s coworker yelled, “WATCH OUT!!!” right before his buddy fell to his death. Unfortunately, his warning came too late. If only someone had said something sooner, he might have lived to see his son graduate from high school. The time to warn your coworkers that they may fall and die is when you see them on a roof without adequate fall protection. Let’s all work on doing better at watching out for one another.

On December 20^th a 26-year-old male sheet metal mechanic died as a result of injuries that occurred when he was knocked through a roof opening and fell 22 feet to a concrete floor below. His employer was contracted to fabricate and install a sheet metal cap over an opening on the flat roof of a large fiberglass manufacturing plant. The 50-inch-square opening was created when an air conditioning duct was removed. The 54-inch-square cap was fabricated from galvanized steel with angle-iron reinforcement and weighed approximately 75 pounds.

On the day of the incident the victim and a co-worker were preparing to install the cap. The victim and the co-worker leaned the cap against a metal frame that had been previously used to support the air conditioning unit. The frame was located approximately 34 inches from the roof opening.

The victim positioned himself between the leaning cap and the roof opening, while his co-worker positioned himself on the other side of the opening. Neither worker was wearing any type of fall protection equipment. The co-worker was kneeling and the victim was stooped over applying caulking to the 6-inch raised curb bordering the opening. A gust of wind blew the cap over, which struck the victim; causing him to fall headfirst through the roof opening, to a concrete floor 22 feet below.

Workers inside the plant saw the victim fall and immediately summoned help from personnel within the plant. A plant nurse arrived within 3 minutes and initiated. When the 911 call was made, a local doctor heard the radio dispatch and responded to the scene. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

Incidents like this are often this are often dismissed as “freak accidents.” But the reality is that the sequence of events that lead to this fall were predictable. What hazards should have been foreseen in this particular incident?

What products do you work with on rooftops that can be expected to be blown by wind gusts if not properly positions or secured?

Working that close to an unprotected roof opening warrants the use of fall protection. Why do you think that both employees chose not to put on a harness and lanyard and connect to an anchorage point?

This particular company had no written safety rules and very minimal safety training. If you were in-charge of safety for this company, what would you do to prevent similar incidents in the future?

On February 23^rd the 29-year-old president of a roofing company died when he exited a man-lift, and fell approximately 52 feet from the edge of a roof to a concrete entryway at ground level. His company was working on a renovation project at a local high school. His company was the roofing subcontractor on the job and was awarded the job only after the roofer who had begun the job had gone out of business.

To provide access to the roof (which was 52 feet above ground level), the general contractor mounted a platform on a 60-foot, articulating hydraulic lift. Guardrails around the perimeter of the platform provided fall protection while workers were being lifted and lowered. When the platform was raised in place, access to the roof was provided by a gate on the side of the platform. Hydraulic lift controls were on the platform side opposite the gate. The lift boom was sufficiently long to extend the platform over the edge of the roof, so that workers could easily step down onto the roof (or up onto the platform from the roof).

On several occasions, workers for both sub-contractors complained to the general contractor about the jerking motion of the lift.

At the time of the incident, the new sub-contractor had finished installing the roofing materials and was ready to install the ridge cap at the top of the roof. The victim and two co-workers rode the lift to the edge of the roof. One co-worker opened the gate and stepped onto the roof. As the victim began to follow, he instructed the remaining co-worker, who was operating the lift, to lower the platform. As the co-worker activated the lift controls, the platform jerked and the victim fell from the roof. It is not known whether the platform struck the victim or if the victim was still grasping the gate when the platform jerked.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The victim’s employees as well as the employees of other sub-contractors had complained to the general contractor about the jerking motion of the lift. Although the equipment had not been repaired, the victim chose to use it in order to complete the job. If the equipment had been repaired, this incident may not have occurred. What equipment have you used in the past even though you knew it was not functioning properly?

The general contractor allowed several sub-contractor employees to operate the equipment as needed. It is not known if the general contractor assessed the qualifications of these individuals as operators. However, the general contractor may have been more responsive about repairing the equipment had a qualified operator complained of the problems. Are you aware of circumstances in which employees are permitted to operate equipment which they may not be qualified to operate?

On November 16^th a 41-year-old roofer died when he fell from roof framing to a concrete floor 22 feet below. The victim was employed by a roofing company which employs 45 people. The victim had worked for the employer for 2 years prior to the incident and had approximately 20 years experience as a roofer. The employer has a written safety program, tailgate safety meetings are conducted, and employees are provided with safety-related literature. In addition, safety programs on videotape are presented to employees on days when weather or other conditions make working on the roof impossible.

On the day of the incident, the victim was working with a co-worker to install roof decking panels on a new building. Four other workers were installing the overlying roofing material on another area of the roof.

The decking panels being installed by the victim were composed of wood fiber and portland cement. Each panel was 32 inches wide by 8 feet long by 2 inches thick and weighed 80 pounds. A tongue-and-groove system on the 32-inch ends permitted the interlocking of adjacent panels. Framing material consisted of 4-inch ” I ” beams on 5-foot centers, with 1 7/8-inch-wide inverted “T”-shaped purlins, 32 inches apart, forming the support for the decking panels.

At the time of the incident, the victim was standing with one foot on a panel which had already been installed and his other foot on one of the 1 7/8-inch purlins. He was pushing on one end of an 8-foot panel to force the tongue to engage the groove on the adjacent panel. His co-worker was at the far end of the panel guiding it into the groove. According to the co-worker’s statement, the panel suddenly dropped into place, and this action may have caused the victim to lose his balance. The co-worker looked up and saw the victim fall through a gap in the framing. The victim fell approximately 22 feet to a concrete floor and experienced multiple injuries to the head and chest. A supervisor standing on the floor below saw the worker falling. No fall-arrest devices such as safety harness, lanyards, or safety nets were present.

Emergency medical service (EMS) personnel were immediately called and were on the scene in approximately 2 minutes. The victim was treated at the scene and enroute to the hospital, but was pronounced dead at the hospital 1 hour and 6 minutes after the incident occurred.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The use of a safety harness/lanyard combination is sometimes not practical during construction operations. However, alternative forms of protection, such as the safety nets should be considered. Safety nets can be equally effective in preventing injury or death when a worker falls. The use of safety nets below the workers may have prevented the fatality described above.

What situations can you think of in which safety nets would provide protection when a safety harness/lanyard combination would not be feasible?

On March 13^th a 28-year-old roofer’s helper died when he fell through a three-foot square opening in a roof and struck the concrete floor below. His employer was a roofing contractor who had been in business for 16 years. The company employed 15 workers, 11 of whom are roofer’s helpers.

The victim had been working for the employer 3 weeks. On the day of the incident a roofer’s helper (the victim) and ten other workers were in the process of removing the old roofing material from a one story, flat-roof building. The building was previously used as a retail establishment and was now being converted to an educational facility. As part of the conversion process, all of the old equipment that was installed on the roof had to be removed. After the equipment was removed by another subcontractor, a piece of plywood was placed over the holes. There were thirty holes left in the roof. They ranged in size from six feet by twelve feet to smaller ones averaging about three feet square.

The roofing material had been detached from the roof’s surface. The material was then thrown over the side or swept down one of the holes. The victim was working on a part of the roof that was away from the edge. He was going to push material down through a hole. The victim lifted up the plywood covering one of the smaller holes and pushed the plywood forward with both hands. When he did, he took one step forward and fell through the hole striking the concrete floor 16 feet below.

One of his coworkers called 911 and CPR was performed at the scene by EMS personnel. EMS then transported the victim to the local hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. .

DISCUSSION NOTES:

This company is fairly active in promoting safety. They have an employee safety manual which includes safety rules. Safety meetings (”tailgate talks”) are conducted 2-3 times per week. Monthly training is sometimes conducted in a classroom setting. Furthermore, task-specific training is conducted at the job site when necessary. However, the company’s safety rules do not address the specific task the victim was performing; and since the victim had prior work experience as a roofer’s helper task-specific training was not conducted.

If you were in-charge of that company’s safety program, what would you change?

Prior to removing covers over holes, workers should be connected to a fall arrest system. In this case the victim was able to pick up and remove a cover in one continuous motion. The victim’s forward momentum, along with the possibility that he thought there was a surface under his foot, may be the reason he continued to step forward. Also, the victim may have been looking where he was pushing the cover, rather than to where his feet were being placed.

What else could have been done to prevent this incident?

Can you recall any similar hazards on jobsites that you have been on?

On August 18^th a 36 year-old male roofer died after falling 30 feet from a ladder when the metal pole of a mop he was holding contacted a power line. The company was a small construction contractor that specialized in roofing and sheet metal work. The company employed five workers (including the owner) and had been in business since 1956. The victim was a 36 year-old male roofer who was often considered the crew leader at the job sites when the owner was not present. 

The company had been contracted to install a new roof on a three story row house located in an urban area. The house was located near the center of a group of seven connected row houses and was accessible by the street on one side and a parking lot on the other side. A series of 3,600 volt overhead power lines ran along the street parallel to the building, the nearest of which was approximately 24 to 30 inches away from the building and four to five feet above the edge of the roof. The job, which required laying three layers of tarpaper coated with melted hot asphalt to the flat roof, was anticipated to take five to six hours to complete.

The weather was overcast on the day of the incident. The crew arrived at the site at about 8:30 a.m. and started work. Placing their equipment on the street side of the building, they positioned a 40 foot, two section extension ladder about seven feet away from the building. The ladder was equipped with a pulley wheel near the top rung which allowed them to hoist materials to the roof top with a rope. The crew spent the morning hoisting tarpaper and other materials to the roof until 10 a.m. when the company owner arrived with coffee for their coffee break. The owner looked over the job and then left the site.

After the break, the victim climbed the ladder while holding a roofing mop with a new, heavy nylon mophead attached to a six foot long aluminum pole. As the victim finished climbing the ladder and was moving onto the roof, the handle of the mop contacted the nearby 3,600 volt primary power line. A co-worker on the roof described seeing him shake for a few moments before he fell backwards off the ladder, falling 30 feet to a patch of hard ground below. A passing motorist saw the victim and called 911, and police and ambulance units were sent the scene. The victim was taken to the hospital where he died of his injuries the next day.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

In this case the workers set up the ladder near the power lines, apparently unaware that there was a safer point of access on the opposite side of the building. Obviously the location of power lines is one key consideration when determining where to set your ladder. What are some other hazards that influence where ladders should be placed?

In this incident the victim was carrying the heavy mop up the ladder instead of using the hoist line. What hazards did this create?

On November 8^th a 31-year-old journeyman roofer fell 25-feet through a section of a flat pitch roof. The company had contracted to tear-off and replace the roofing materials on the roof. They had also been contracted to identify, remove, and replace weakened sections of the structural decking. The employer had been in business for 16 years, and employed 25 persons, of which 20 were journeyman roofers. The company had been at the incident site for five days prior to the incident and the victim had worked at the site for three days.

At the time of the incident the workers were in the process of tearing off and replacing roofing material on a flat pitch roof. The workers also were identifying bad and weakened sections of structural decking by visually identifying them from inside the building, taking measurements as to their position and transferring those measurements to the roof and marking the appropriate sections for replacement. The bad sections of roof were marked with spray paint and the workers were instructed not the walk on the marked sections. The replacement sections are two feet wide and up to eight feet long. They are cut to fit when replaced.

On the day of the incident the workers were continuing tearing off the roofing material and replacing the identified bad decking. At approximately 11:00 a.m. the victim and another worker were walking on the roof and were near an identified bad section of decking when the worker fell though the decking to a concrete floor below. The job foreman was first to the victim and requested a co-worker call 911 for emergency assistance. Emergency crews arrived and transported the victim to a local trauma center where he was treated for severe head trauma. The victims condition deteriorated and he was pronounced deceased two days later.

According to the employer there were no indications that the section of decking the worker fell through was weak or bad.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

Employers should identify bad and weakened sections by not only visually identifying the weakened sections of decking but should also by physically testing sections that are in close proximity to weakened sections.

Let’s discuss how to identify weak or bad of sections and roof both physically and through physical testing.

On November 30^th a 35-year-old journeyman roofer fell 12 feet from a fiberglass extension ladder. The banks roofing material had been replaced during the week prior to the incident. The victim and a co-worker were assigned the task of installing some flashing and cleaning up the job-site. The workers arrived on site right after lunch. The workers had one properly constructed 40-foot extension ladder and decided to separate it into two halves so that the victim could access a small section of roof over an employee entrance. The workers blocked off a lane at the drive-in banking area located at the side of the building. The workers then set the lower portion of the extension ladder with the proper slip-resistant feet against the roof over the drive-through lanes. The upper section (extension portion) of ladder was moved by the victim to a roof over the employee entrance. The victim completed the task on this roof, and then returned the ladder to the drive-in banking area, positioning the extension portion of the ladder against the roof and directly beside the ladders mate.

Though not witnessed, the following incident description was captured on the bank surveillance video. The victim then retrieved some nails or tools and a large bristled broom, and then proceeded to climb the extension portion of the ladder. When the victim was nearing the roof line the bottom of the ladder slid outward and the victim and ladder fell to the ground. The broom, being carried bristles down, struck the pavement first and then the victims head struck the end of the broom stick. A bank employee heard the ladder fall and looked out the window to the see that the victim had fallen and was on the ground. Emergency assistance was requested through a call to 911. The victim was semi-conscious when the emergency assistance arrived to treat and transport him to a local hospital for treatment. The victim was then taken by helicopter a short time later to a regional trauma center where he died the next day.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

All commercial-grade extension ladders have the markings on the ladder that read, “CAUTION-THIS LADDER SECTION IS NOT DESIGNED FOR SEPARATE USE.” Alternatively commercial extension ladders may have permanently attached stops to prevent removal of the extension section. The upper sections of extension ladders are rarely equipped with safety feet and are not intended to be used as single ladders. Using a section of an extension ladder in this manner creates potential hazards that can result in serious injuries or death as we see in this incident.

What additional hazards were present based upon the description of this incident?

What are some good ways to secure ladders to prevent them from moving while in use?

Discuss the use of ladders and how items (such as brooms and tools) should be taken to/from the roof.

A 21 year old male carpentry/roofing foreman died from injuries sustained in a 26 foot fall through a roof opening at a 120,000 square foot building under construction. The victim was a 21 year old male employed by the company for 6½ years. He had been performing this specific type of roofing work for 2 years. The final 12 months of his employment were as job foreman. He was also the designated safety person.

On the day of the fatality, the employer had been under contract to apply a finished roofing membrane on a flat 120,000 square foot building under construction. Application of this roofing membrane included the flashing and sealing of 132 skylight openings and 19 HVAC unit openings which were cut into the exposed steel decking of the rooftop. The roofing membrane and flashing/sealing of rooftop openings were to act as the building’s weather barrier against the elements.

While each of the 132 skylight openings were equipped with a 3/4 inch steel reinforcement rod mesh system for future building security, the 6 foot by 12 foot HVAC openings were not. The building plans called for rooftop HVAC openings to be cut into the steel roof decking.

The purpose of openings in the roof decking was to weld a 6 foot by 12 foot by 14 inch high steel HVAC system support curb directly to the building’s structural steel. Once the support curbing units were welded in place, aluminum flashing, tar paper and an asphalt encapsulant were used to create the weather tight seal around each support curb. At a later date, the HVAC systems would be lowered onto the support curbs by crane and be fastened in place.

At the time of the incident, the victim and his employer were jointly working at a curbsite. When the victim stood up to maneuver around a corner of the curb, the employer claimed he appeared to be startled by his proximity to the roof opening. He then tripped over the curb and fell through the opening 26 feet to the concrete floor of the building. Within 3 to 4 minutes of the incident a fellow worker administered CPR until emergency medical services arrived at the site. The victim was then transported to the regional hospital where he died the following morning. 

DISCUSSION NOTES:

There were 151 rooftop openings on this construction site. Of these, 132 skylight openings had been equipped with concrete reinforcement rod style burglar bars which would not only prevent future unauthorized entry into the building, but prevented personnel from falling through the openings during construction. The remaining 19 HVAC system roof openings remained fully exposed. Although the employer in this incident claimed to have fundamental knowledge their unwritten policy only called for the use fall protection devices and/or personal protective equipment when within five feet of roof perimeters. Consequently, no such protection was provided for when close to the unprotected HVAC roof openings

What should have been done differently?

On May 26 the construction crew of a small roofing contractor met and began the day’s work at approximately 7:00 a.m. It was a clear sunny day. A total of six roof workers were present on the jobsite that morning. The roofing materials had been laid out for the morning work. Early in the work day, the victim began walking across the roof section that was already in place. He was walking toward the foreman who was on a lift. According to the foreman, the victim was concerned that the materials had not been laid out properly. As the co-workers began putting the 50 foot sections of insulation in place, the victim walked out on a metal panel that had not been secured. As he stepped on it, the metal panel slid, causing the victim to fall to the gravel floor approximately thirty feet below.

One of the coworkers immediately used his cell phone to call 911. The ambulance arrived on-scene quickly and found the victim unconscious, but breathing. However, later the victim went into cardiac arrest. Medical personnel were able to restore a weak pulse and transported the victim to the nearest medical facility where he was pronounced dead.

The medical examiner’s report listed the immediate cause of death as blunt trauma to the head, neck, and chest.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

There were a number of things that went wrong on this job that contributed to this fatal incident. What were they?

The victim walked onto a metal panel that was not secured in-place. Under what circumstances it is acceptable for a panel to be left unattached on a roof? Can you think of any situation in which it is unavoidable to have a roof panel that is unsecured? What could have been done differently to prevent an employee from stepping onto an unattached panel?

Certainly the fact that the victim was not wearing a fall arrest devise contributed to this incident. Why do you think he was not wearing a fall arrest devise?

Since he was walking towards his supervisor, it is safe to assume that his supervisor was aware that the victim was not wearing a fall arrest devise. With that in mind, do you think the incident can be partially attributable to the supervisor’s failure to enforce the use of ppe?

Ask your crew to share their experiences. Have any of them been in a similar situation?

A 34 year old roofing contractor had his left pinky finger surgically amputated as a result of improper care of cut. He had only been working for his current employer for 2 weeks when he cut his left pinky at work. Not wanting to look like a sissy in front of his new coworkers, he stopped the bleeding but kept working. Four days later he was in the local emergency room with a 103 degree fever, chills and feeling extremely drained. In a mere four days his finger started turning purple, the skin started coming off and there was an extreme amount of puss oozing from the cut. The diagnosis was an antibiotic-resistant staph infection that warranted the immediate surgical amputation of his finger.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

Have you ever had a small cut or scrape at work, but kept working without treating it properly? If so why did you decide not to clean it and bandage it right away?

As an employee of this company we want you to get the proper treatment right away, and limit the potential for infection.

Although any wound can become infected, infection is particularly likely in deep scrapes, which grind dirt into the skin, and in puncture wounds, which introduce contamination deep under the skin. Also, wounds that contain foreign material almost always become infected. The key to preventing infection is proper first-aid. The first step in treating a cut is to stop the bleeding. However, that alone is not enough. To prevent infection, dirt and particles must be removed and the wound must be washed. Large, visible particles can be picked off. However, smaller dirt and particles that cannot be seen can be removed by washing with mild soap and tap water. Dirt and particles that remain after washing often can be removed with a more highly pressured stream of warm tap water. After cleaning, antibiotic ointment and a bandage should be applied.

Medical assistance should be sought under the following circumstances:

• If a cut is longer than about 1/3 inch, appears deep, or has edges that separate
  
• If bleeding does not stop on its own or within several minutes after pressure is applied
  
• If there are symptoms of a nerve or tendon injury, such as loss of movement, or numbness
  
• If a scrape is deep or has dirt and particles that are difficult to remove
  
• If there is a puncture wound, particularly if foreign material in the wound is likely
  
• If you have not had a tetanus vaccination within the past 5 years.
  

All wounds, whether treated at work, home or by health care practitioners, should be observed for symptoms of infection during the first several days after treatment. If any symptoms of infection develop, medical assistance should be sought within several hours.

A 51-year-old male roofer fell through a skylight 30 feet to the concrete floor below. The employer had been subcontracted to replace the roofing on a bottling plant. The prime contractor was installing insulation below the roof while the subcontractor was to remove the tar and gravel built-up roof and replace it with a new rubber membrane.

At the time of this incident, the victim and fellow employees were removing the gravel from the roof top. The roof had 15 rectangular smoke-dome-type, curb-mounted skylights (42 inches by 80 inches). As the victim was moving a full wheelbarrow of gravel toward a trash chute, he stopped and set the wheelbarrow next to a skylight and went over to talk to the foreman. When he returned to the wheelbarrow, he fell through the skylight 30 feet to the floor below. None of the workers on the roof saw him fall, but they heard him scream as he fell through the skylight. Workers within the bottling plant saw the victim fall feet first and strike a 3-foot-high pallet of bottles, which caused his body to flip and his head to hit the concrete floor.

A bottling plant employee called 911 and an ambulance arrived within a few minutes of the incident. When the medical technicians arrived at the scene, the victim was not breathing and had no vital signs. He was transported to the local hospital where he was later pronounced dead.

After the incident the employer removed all of the skylights and secured plywood over the openings. The skylights were reinstalled when the work on the roof was completed.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

Although the background information does not indicate if the victim had prior roofing experience, he had only been working for this employer for 90 days when this incident occurred. It is likely that individuals new to the roofing industry may not fully recognize or appreciate the serious fall hazards associated with working near skylights. What specific precautions or warnings should be stressed to new employees?

If our company had been the subcontractor on this job, what precautions would we have taken before starting work to prevent a similar incident?

OSHA standards indicate that for work around skylights and roof and floor openings, employers should require, provide, and ensure the use of appropriate fall prevention systems that use one of the following:

• Covers or screens
  
• Railings or guardrails 
  

Personal Fall Arrest Systems (PFAS), including a full-body harness, lanyard, connectors, and appropriate anchorage points (tie-offs).

A 24 year old roofer received a serious burn when hot tar spilled on his forearm. His employer was a commercial roofing contractor and was charged with applying a built-up roof on an 8 story office building. Although the victim had not worked for a roofing contractor previously, he had been working for this employer for over a year and had been on at least 5 other roofing jobs in which hot tar was applied.

Although the roof was flat there were two different levels. On the day of the incident, the victim was filling buckets of hot tar for the job while standing on the lower roof level; and was handing filled buckets approximately 6 feet up to the next level. On one occasion, he reached to retrieve a bucket from the higher roof level and attempted to lower it. He believed that the bucket was empty, but instead it was full of hot tar. As he attempted to lower the bucket, it tipped and spilled hot tar onto his arm.

The company foreman called an ambulance which transported the victim to a regional specialized burn care center where he was treated and released the same day. The total surface area of the burn was not very large but it was very deep. The burn required his return to the burn center for skin grafts at which time he was hospitalized for 4 days.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The foreman on this job allowed the job to be set-up in an unsafe manner. He should have never allowed anyone lift hot tar above his head. If the hot tar must be raised in buckets, a hoist and line that is adequate for the load should be used. And in those situations, no employee should be allowed to stand below the bucket that is being hoisted.

Can you ever remember working on a job that required buckets of tar to be lifted up to another level? Do you know our company policy regarding this practice?

Although the incident description did not suggest that the bucket was filled too full, filling buckets too full with hot tar makes them more prone to spilling. Keep the hot tar inside of a bucket at a safe level for hoisting or carrying. Never fill a hot tar bucket more than three-fourths full.

The incident description did not reveal what personal protective equipment (ppe) the employee was wearing. Do you know our company requirements for ppe when filling or carrying hot tar in buckets? At a minimum, wear leather or heat-resistant gloves, long pants without cuffs, long sleeved cotton shirts, non-skid shoes and safety glasses with side shields or goggles when working with hot tar.

Keep a supply or source of cool water available on the roof. Quickly immersing a burn or running cool water over it can reduce the severity of the burn and ease the victim’s pain. However, wait for a medical professional’s advice on removing tar from burned skin. If the tar is removed incorrectly, it may make the burn injury more severe.

There were a total of 19 claims submitted during the fourth quarter of 2008.

• Slips, Trips & Falls (6 claims) initial incurred value $397,313
• Strains (4 claims) initial incurred value $99,926
• Miscellaneous (6 claims) initial incurred value $4,698
• Auto Accident (1 claim) initial incurred value $500
• Cuts (1 claim) initial incurred value $500
• Debris in eye (1 claim) initial incurred value $500

The following were the largest claims that occurred during the fourth quarter of 2008.

An employee was on a residential roofing job when the ladder slipped and he and the ladder fell 20-25′.

An employee stepped backwards from one level to another and fell, suffering a rotator cuff injury that required surgery

An employee tripped over a switch box for a metal folding machine and fell into the machine where the folder came down and crushed his arm.

An employee was carrying a heavy bucket in each hand across a ballast roof and his foot slipped on the ballast and he lost his balance, suffering a hernia that required surgery.

In the course of tearing off an old roof a portion of the roof collapsed causing the employee to fall through.

As an employee was stepping off of a ladder on the roof he stepped onto a soft spot causing him to injure his ankle.

Materials were being unloaded via crane with employees around sides of load when the load shifted causing an employee to sustain a back strain.

As an employee was coming down a stationary ladder on a building he slipped suffering injury to his heel, leg, and knee requiring surgery.

A 34 year old male roofer died after falling approximately 30 feet from a flat roof to the concrete sidewalk.

The victim was working for a roofing contractor that had been in the roofing business for more than 5 years. He had been employed as a roofer on a part-time basis for approximately two years and typically worked only two days a week as a roofer.

At the time of this incident he was working with a co-worker installing 4 x 8 sheets of insulation material on the deck of a flat roof. They were working near the front edge of the 2½ story apartment building. With his back to the unguarded edge of the roof, the victim was placing the edge of the sheet of insulation against the end of a sheet previously placed on the roof. Not realizing that he was close the unguarded edge of the roof, he stepped backwards and fell approximately 30 feet to the concrete sidewalk below. His co-worker did not witness the fall.

When his co-worker realized what had happened, he called 911. The ambulance arrived within 5 minutes of receiving the call. Upon their arrival the victim was unconscious, in respiratory arrest and was bleeding from the ears, eyes, nose and mouth. The victim’s head, neck and back were immobilized and he was transported to the hospital. CPR was provided en route to the hospital, but he was pronounced dead upon arrival at the hospital.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

It is not clear from the available information about this incident if the employer had any policies in-place relative to fall prevention. If this had been our company, what fall protection measures would have been in-place?

There were only two employees on the jobsite. It is quite possible that the limited number of employees may have contributed to this incident. How well do you adhere to company safety policies when you are on a small job and there are only 2 or 3 employees on the jobsite? Does it depend upon who you are working with? Why do many employees tend to take safety less seriously on small jobs?

Although the victim in this incident had been roofing for a couple years, he was a part-time employee who only worked 2 days per week. What challenges do you face when working with someone who does not work as a roofer as their primary occupation? What special precautions should be taken when working with someone whom you are not accustomed to working with?

On the day of the incident, the victim, his uncle, a cousin, and a fourth worker were replacing the asbestos shingles on a church roof. It was late into the third day of work when the victim suggested to his uncle that they stop and complete the job the following day. After telling his uncle that he would make sure that the cleanup work on the ground was completed, the victim descended one of the two 40-foot aluminum extension ladders that were used to access the roof of the church. The edge of the roof against which the ladders were placed was 27 feet above ground. Therefore, it is estimated that the ladder was extended to about 30 feet in length. A 7200-volt power line was 15 feet from the side of the church and 35 feet above ground level.

After the victim descended the ladder, the uncle noticed that the ladder was being raised higher. Although the uncle could not see the workers on the ground, on two occasions he heard the cousin tell the victim not to raise the ladder any higher and to watch the power line that ran parallel to the side of the church. The victim replied that he knew what he was doing. The uncle then saw that the ladder was still being raised, and was being moved in the direction of the power line. (It was standard company procedure to lower the ladder to the ground by sliding it to the left or right down the face of the building.) The uncle walked to the edge of the roof to see what was going on. As he reached the edge of the roof he saw the ladder contact the power line. The ladder fell, breaking contact with the power line and the victim collapsed on the ground. The uncle immediately descended the second ladder and began administering CPR on the victim. The victim was transported via ambulance to the local hospital where he was pronounced dead. During interviews with the uncle it was learned that the victim had been “unusually distracted” for the two days prior to the incident. The uncle also stated that the victim was well aware of the electrical hazard presented by the power line since that was one of the hazards they addressed before beginning any new job.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The workers believed that the 15-foot clearance between the power line and the church roof was sufficient to ensure their safety. They knew that the ladder, which was not fully extended, was not long enough to contact the power line. No one could explain why the victim raised the ladder and moved the ladder in the direction of the power line, especially after being warned. One possible explanation is that the victim had been “unusually distracted” the past two days. What type of things could conceivably keep you from focusing on safely performing your work tasks?

The aluminum ladder used in this incident was conductive. If a ladder constructed of non-conductive material had been used in this case the incident may have been prevented. Do you know what circumstances is it acceptable for you to use an aluminum ladder?

Energized power lines in proximity to a work area constitute a significant hazard. A safe working distance between ladders and power lines should be maintained at all times. Does everyone know our company policy regarding maintaining a safe distance? Under what circumstances will we contact the power company to place insulating hoses or blankets on power lines in close proximity to a work area?

A 28-year-old roofer died after being struck on the head by a 94-pound counterweight. The company removing and replacing a 9,600-square-foot built-up asphalt roof. They used a swing hoist, whose boom was welded in place, to transport materials between the ground and the roof. The front of the hoist was placed against a 12-inch-high parapet. The hoist had a lifting capacity of 400. Six counterweights were used and weighing from 70 to 135 lbs each.

On their final day at the jobsite the workers were lowering the unused materials and equipment to the ground and loading it on the company trucks. Four workers (including the victim) worked on the ground, while the remaining two workers stayed on the roof to hook the loads to the hoist rope. The last piece of equipment to be lowered to the ground was a 55-gallon drum tar dispenser mounted on a 4-wheel, rubber-tired cart. The tar dispenser and cart had been raised to the roof individually at the start of the job; however, tar had accumulated on the latches securing the dispenser to the cart and the latches could not be released. The workers decided to lower the cart and dispenser together. The total weight of the cart and dispenser, measured after the incident, was 266 pounds.. Since the boom was welded in place, it projected over the edge of the building and therefore could not be positioned directly over the load. The hoist could not lift the load high enough to clear the 12-inch-high parapet before swinging the load over the edge of the building and lowering it. As a result, the workers on the roof assisted in lifting the dispenser and cart unit from the roof. As they began to push the drum and cart over the parapet, the right front tire caught on the parapet. The workers told the four-man ground crew to give them about 3 feet of slack in the hoist line. When they received the slack line, the workers began to push and lift the right side of the cart. When the right front tire cleared the parapet, the dispenser and cart unit fell over the edge of the roof. The force created by the unit’s 3-foot free-fall, and the abrupt tightening of the hoist rope, pulled the swing hoist forward off the roof and catapulted all six counterweights over the edge. As the four workers on the ground began to run away from the building, the victim was struck on the head by the 94-pound wooden counterweight. He was transported via ambulance to the local hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

In this incident, the boom of the swing hoist was welded in place even though it was equipped with a gravity latch to hold it in place while raising or lowering material. This not only increased the strain on the hoist and counterweight, but made it impossible to lift the load clear of the roof edge before swinging the load out away from the roof to allow it to be lowered. The equipment manufacturer should be consulted to determine if the proposed modifications would have adversely affected the equipment or created any potential hazards. Are you aware of any equipment that we use that has been modified in some manner?

In this incident, the workers on the ground were exposed to the hazard from falling material while the material was being lowered to the ground. The workers holding the hoist rope could have been stationed farther away from the area to which the materials were being lowered to lessen the exposure to falling objects. Additionally, one worker on the ground could have been designated as an observer to give as early warning as possible to the workers if material fell from the roof.

A 56-year-old male roofer died after falling approximately 15 feet from a 40-foot extension ladder. The company had been contracted to replace a 35,000 square-foot, 27-foot-high built-up roof on an office complex. A five-man crew was performing the work. The workers had been at the site for 1 week and work had progressed to the point that the only task remaining was the installation of the flashing around the perimeter of the roof. The day of the incident was to be the last day at the site.

At 8:30 a.m. on the morning of the incident, the foreman and two of the roofers climbed the ladder to the roof. The workers were using a 40-foot fiberglass extension ladder tied-off at roof level to access their work area. On his way to the ladder, the victim passed the tar kettle where he asked for, and obtained from the attendant, a rag to use for the day. The attendant watched the victim climb the ladder to a height of approximately 15 feet, then turned away to prepare the tar kettle for transport from the site. The attendant heard something hit the ground behind him and thought the workers on the roof were throwing waste to the ground; however, when he turned, he saw the victim lying on his back on the gravel driveway.

The attendant yelled to the foreman, who, with one of the co-workers, descended the ladder to the ground. The co-worker went into the office complex to have someone call an ambulance. The co-worker then ran to the hospital, which was located up the hill from the complex, to summon help.

The foreman began administering CPR but stopped when he realized the victim had broken ribs. The ambulance arrived within 5 minutes and transported the victim to the hospital where he was pronounced dead by the attending physician.

Although the tar kettle attendant saw the victim ascend the ladder to approximately 15 feet above ground level, the event was unwitnessed. It is not known whether the victim slipped or tripped, then fell from the ladder. The steps of the ladder were clean and dry.

The medical examiner stated that there was no evidence of any physical condition that might have contributed to the incident. Blood alcohol and toxicology reports were negative.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The ladder in this incident was a commercial-grade fiberglass ladder with a 300 lb. capacity and was tied-off at the top to prevent it from moving. The ladder was clean and there was no evidence of a foreign substance that might have been a factor in the incident. Additionally, the workers had received training in ladder safety. From the known information it is not clear what caused the victim to fall. Ask you crew to offer some possible contributing factors… for example, the victim passed by the kettle shortly before the incident. It is possible that he had some residue on the sole of his shoes that caused him to slip.

A 27-year-old laborer for a roofing company died of injuries sustained when he fell through the roof of a sports coliseum. The incident occurred on a college campus where a project was underway to strengthen the roof structure of an arch-shaped sports coliseum 262 feet long, 241 feet wide, and 91 feet high. The structure had a “built-up” roof consisting of ceiling tile roughly 2 inches thick, plywood sheets, asbestos insulation, and a rubber membrane. The contractor was adding steel purlins between the existing purlins, essentially reducing the spacing to 4-foot centers. Once this was done, the roof was replaced. The final step was repairing the rubber membrane by gluing a strip of rubber over the slice.

Protection was required to be worn by all workers on the roof. All workers on the roof were required to wear full-body harnesses with shock absorbing lanyards and rope grabs. Tie-off points were provided by 3/8 inch wire ropes, strung lengthwise along the surface of the roof, at 40 and 80 feet from the eaves. A third rope was secured around the perimeter of the air-handler ducts mounted at the peak of the roof. Nylon life lines, size-matched to the lanyard’s rope grabs, were dropped at various locations for the workers to tie off from.

The victim was using a roller and solvent to clean the membrane while the foreman was readying the membrane patch and beginning to apply the adhesive. The victim, wearing fall protection, worked his way towards the peak of the roof while the foreman’s work kept him occupied near the bottom of the slice. Shortly before 1:30 p.m., the victim had progressed to the peak, between 80 and 90 feet from the eaves, and was out of sight of the foreman. The victim disconnected his lanyard from the lifeline and his harness. At 1:30 p.m., workers inside the coliseum heard a noise near the ceiling, and observed the victim fall and hit the floor.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

It is not known why the victim disconnected his lanyard from the lifeline or why he disconnected the lanyard from the harness. It is possible that once he reached the peak of the roof, he did not feel the need for fall protection, since the peak was essentially level so he disconnected from the lifeline. Also, during discussions with the foreman, it was learned that it was not unusual for employees to disconnect from lifelines after reaching the top of the roof, since the lifelines were rigged on the surface of the roof, and the lanyards dragging around the workers were cumbersome and made it difficult to work. After disconnecting he would have had to carry the lanyard with rope grab attached. To do this, he may have pulled the lanyard through the straps of the harness, allowing the slack to hang down from his waist. Walking with the lanyard in this manner, would have allowed the rope grab to bang against his leg. This may have been enough of an annoyance that he disconnected the lanyard from the harness and laid it on the air handler duct. It may be possible to alleviate the annoyance of dragging lanyards by suspending them from overhead lifelines.

Are there situations in which your crew members remove their fall protection because it is an annoyance?

A 48-year-old roofing company manager was killed when he fell 30 feet onto a concrete floor. He had worked in the roofing business for 26 years and was the Operations Manager for the company. Part of his job was to serve as the company’s safety officer. In that capacity, he had the responsibility to follow-up on roofing sales by inspecting new job sites to determine what safety equipment would be required. He was also responsible for ensuring that the necessary equipment was provided and maintained at each job site, and for inspecting the work as completed at each site.

The job site where this incident occurred was a 60′ x 120′ garage roof. The old roofing material, which consisted of paper- and tar-covered Tectum, was to be covered by the crew with sheets of corrugated steel decking. The roof had a 3:12 pitch. Two days prior to the incident, before initial work began, the victim had inspected the site to determine what safety precautions should be taken, where to store materials, etc. The roofing work began on Friday (the day prior to the incident). The crew of six men had completed about one-quarter of the job on the first day. On Saturday morning, the victim and the witness had arrived prior to the other five crew members in order to inspect the previous day’s work and to assemble the safety equipment to be used that day. As Operations Manager, it was his usual practice to inspect all jobs in process on a daily or almost-daily basis. As had been directed by the victim on Thursday, caution lines made of yellow rope had been placed approximately one foot to each side of, and parallel to, the beam of the roof peak, and workers were not required to tie off with their retractable lifelines if they remained within that lined-off area. In addition, the workers had installed a steel cable along the beam of the roof peak to which the retractable lifelines could be hooked. The victim had just finished inspecting and approving the completed work and was involved in a discussion with the witness as they attempted to retrieve two rope grabs which were lying outside the caution line. According to the witness, because of their conversation, neither he nor the victim was paying sufficient attention and when the victim reached to pick up the robe grabs, he stepped too far beyond the caution line onto an old section of roof that was not strong enough to hold his weight. The roof gave way, and he fell through it to the concrete floor 30 feet below. The other crew members were just beginning to arrive. They ran to the guard booth to call 911. The ambulance arrived and transported the victim to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 6:50 am.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

In this case, fall protection equipment was available at the job site, but a determination had been made by the victim that workers would be safe without it if they stayed within the caution lines. Unfortunately, even the victim, who was the company’s designated safety officer, forgot to tie off prior to stepping outside the caution line to retrieve two rope grabs. This incident illustrates the importance of using fall protection equipment whenever working from elevations where there is a danger of falling, without exceptions for “safe” areas.

It is not known why the rope grabs were located outside the caution line. Although it is not unusual for such equipment to remain on the job site overnight while work is in progress, it normally is stored in a more accessible place. The worker who left it the day before was probably unaware of the danger of that particular section of the roof.

A 33 year old apprentice roofer received serious burns when he slipped and fell in hot tar. At the time of the incident, the roofer was charged with carrying hot tar in buckets from the kettle to the location on the roof at which it was being applied. He was carrying two buckets of hot tar across the roof when he stepped into some freshly applied hot tar and slipped. The slip caused him to fall into the hot tar. He was also splashed by the hot tar in the buckets he was carrying and suffered serious second and third degree burns to his head, face, neck, chest, arms and hands. These burns required over two weeks of hospitalization and numerous surgical procedures.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. What injuries (or near miss events) does this remind them of?

After discussing the events that they share, discuss the following:

Hot tar is a petroleum by-product and very slick or sticky. Either condition (slick or slippery) can cause a trip or fall. For that reason, each and every hot tar job should be planned to avoid getting hot tar on surfaces where workers might walk.

In addition to planning hot tar jobs, it is recommended mop carts with wheels and push handles be used to transfer hot tar to the application point. Remind workers when doing this, to carefully twist buckets or mop carts to un-stick them from the roof to avoid splashing of the hot tar.

Whether buckets are wheeled (and be pushed); or if they are carried, workers should keep the hot tar inside of a bucket at a safe level, and should never fill a hot tar bucket more than three fourths full.

Whenever working with hot tar, the proper personal protective equipment (ppe) is a must. Employees should be required to wear heat resistant gloves with stretch wrist cuffs (no gauntlet style wrist cuffs), natural fiber clothing – long sleeve shirts that extend over the cuff of the glove, long pants and high top work boots. Additional protection (including face protection) should be worn if operating the kettle.

Lastly, we need to be prepared for the worst and ready to act quickly if an hot tar injury occurs. Each job should have a supply or source of cool water available on the roof. Quickly immersing a burn or running cool water over it can reduce the severity of the burn and ease the victim’s pain. Additionally, every worker on a hot tar job should be trained in first aid for tar burns.

A 22-year-old roofer was fatally injured after falling 23 feet through a skylight opening. The victim was working to replace the old roofing from a high school gymnasium roof. Replacing the roof required ripping up and replacing the old tar paper and underlying fiberglass insulation on large areas of the school roof. New sheets of insulation were to be placed, covered with tarpaper, and sealed with hot asphalt. The finished roof would be coated with a light colored paint.
On the morning of this incident, a light fog covered the school as the workers arrived at 6:00 a.m. for their first day of work. The company foreman had arrived two hours earlier to start the asphalt kettle and look over the job before the remaining crew of 15 roofers came on site. Work began by replacing the roof over the school’s gymnasium. The 100 foot long by 80 foot wide roof was constructed of concrete covering a base of 22 gauge steel decking plates. Four plastic domed skylights were built into the roof, which were built on an eight inch high raised curb.

The company owner was supervising the work as the crew started to rip one half the roof (lengthwise) and remove the plastic domes from the skylights. Demolition of the roof went quickly and was completed within two hours. The victim helped to remove one of the skylights, which was immediately covered with a thin sheet of fiberboard to keep dust from being drawn into the gym. The fiberboard was to be in place only a few minutes until the opening could be covered with stronger plywood.

A short time later, the victim and two other workers were talking and walking across the roof. They walked around one of the skylights, which was being removed by another crew, and towards the skylight with the fiberboard cover. As he approached the skylight, the victim stepped eight inches up onto the fiberboard, which broke under his weight. His co-worker reportedly saw him fall straight through the skylight, landing on his feet on the gym floor and striking his head as he fell into a fetal position.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

Never, ever leave roof openings unprotected, unguarded, or uncovered. Covering them with a material of insufficient strength is just as hazardous as leaving the opening unprotected.

With this incident, there was more than meets the eye. The medical examiner’s report noted a positive toxicology for drugs in the victim’s blood. No matter what you think you know, drugs (including prescription, non-prescription, and illegal drugs) can influence your judgment. Because your life (and the lives of your coworkers) is more important than any job, we have a “no tolerance” policy towards alcohol and illegal drugs.

A 21-year-old roofer helper died after falling 22 feet through a roof opening. His employer was a roofing and sheet metal contractor that had been subcontracted to install roofing materials on an addition to the gymnasium at a middle school. At the time of the incident, corrugated roofing panels had been secured to the roof deck, and weather insulating strips were being applied over the panels. The roof area was approximately 114 feet long by 96 feet wide, and contained one roof hatch opening 292 inches wide by 35 inches long. The opening was covered by a 4-foot-wide by 8-foot-long, 1 inch thick sheet plywood. The roof had a 1:48 pitch.
On the day of the incident, five workers – a foreman, two roofers, and two roofer helpers – were placing insulating strips over the panels on the roof deck. The foreman was working on the roof deck approximately 20 to 25 feet away from the roof opening. The victim, after finishing a task, approached the foreman and asked what was to be done at the plywood area. The foreman replied “wait until I finish cutting around this unit and I’ll show you, because there is a hole there.” The victim walked away in the direction of the plywood as the foreman continued his task.

Although no one saw the victim fall, evidence at the site suggests that the victim had either (1) intentionally removed the plywood from the opening; (2) lost his balance and fell; or (3) unintentionally displaced the plywood and stepped or tripped into the opening. The victim fell 22 feet to the concrete floor, striking his face and head.

Upon hearing a noise the foreman turned around and saw the victim falling through the opening. The foreman yelled to the other crew members and they all descended from the roof to aid the victim. The victim was conscious, but bleeding from the ears, nose, and mouth. 911 was called and an ambulance arrived about 10 minutes later. The victim was transported to the local hospital where he died 17 hours later.

Discussion:

Although the roof opening was covered with a 4-foot-wide by 8-foot-long piece of 1 inch thick plywood, the plywood was not secured to prevent inadvertent displacement. Since the incident was not witnessed, a determination could not be made as to whether the victim intentionally or unintentionally moved the plywood.

It is our company policy that all roof openings which have the potential of becoming hazards during construction, should either be secured with a standard railing and toe-boards on all exposed sides or with a cover capable of supporting a worker’s weight without danger of displacement.

Securing the plywood properly would have prevented any unintentional movement. How well do we do at covering roof openings and securing them to prevent them from unintentional movement?

A 19-year-old family member of a self-employed roofing contractor died when he fell through a skylight to a concrete floor 35 feet below. The victim was assisting the roofer repair water leaks on the flat roof of a commercial warehouse. The incident occurred at the completion of the two-day project. The victim was walking backwards to roll up a torch hose when he apparently tripped or stepped into the skylight. The acrylic plastic domed skylight shattered under his weight and the victim fell approximately 35 feet to the concrete floor. The victim’s father immediately called for assistance and notified emergency services. The victim was transported to a local emergency room where he died a short time later.

The roof of the building was flat construction with skylights. All the skylights are acrylic (plastic) domed. None had barricades or warning lines around them and the domes were not placarded with safety messaging relating to weight bearing and fall potential. Steel grills had not been installed beneath them. The building has a 5′ parapet wall surrounding the entire roof to prevent falls from working at or near the edge.

The building’s owner contacted the roofing contractor to repair several small leaks that had recently developed. The job was estimated take about two days to complete. The roofing contractor was self-employed and was at times accompanied by his son who helped with roof repair work. The work to be done on the day of the incident was not in the immediate vicinity of any skylights. The roofing contractor noted that there were about a dozen skylights on the roof and reasoned that the risk of falling through a skylight was remote.

Immediately preceding the incident the victim and his father had been talking, facing each other. The victim was backing up unrolling the torch’s hose, preparing to roll it up for storage and removal from the site. The father turned away from his son for “just a moment” to do something and heard a loud noise and immediately turned around in time to see, “the skylight exploding”. His son was not in sight. The father immediately went to the skylight opening and observed his son on the floor of the warehouse, below. A call was initiated for emergency services and the father went to be with his son. The victim’s father was not sure if his son stepped onto the skylight, tripped over something, or simply lost his balance and fell into it.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Remember – the father reasoned that the risk of falling through a skylight was remote. What is your crew’s opinion of his assessment of the hazard created by the skylights? Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents.

In this incident, the roofing contractor reported that the victim was not looking at where he was walking (”backing up”) and may have been distracted by a conversation he was having at the time. The installation of a simple visual or physical warning system may have alerted the victim that he was getting close to a possible hazard area (skylights). An example of this type of system could be as simple as overturned plastic buckets with a length of wood, conduit or some other material placed on top of them (repeated if necessary) and strategically located, to alert workers of the hazard presented by plastic domed skylights. If employees are going to enter and work in areas where falls are a risk secure methods need to be taken to protect them from falls i.e., fall protection or fall prevention. Temporary guardrails should be installed around any skylights in the immediate vicinity of where work is taking place and not removed until all work in these areas is complete.

A 40-year-old laborer died when he fell through an opening in a warehouse roof, 27 feet to the floor below.

The employer was repairing the roof of the warehouse portion of a commercial building. The work was done at night because the coal tar on the roof would release hazardous gases if disturbed in the heat of the day. The site had adequate halogen lighting. None of the workers on the job were using fall protection.

After the roofing material was removed, 4×8 foot sheets of plywood were exposed. Any damaged sheets needed to be replaced. The helper’s job was to follow the workers who were replacing the plywood, and to pick up the damaged sheets of plywood they had removed. He disposed of them in a chute.

On this evening, one worker had removed a sheet of damaged plywood, but had run out of nails to attach the replacement plywood. He walked away to get more nails. The opening where the damaged plywood had been was left unguarded. The crew was not informed that it was temporarily unguarded. The opening was covered by silver-colored insulation inside the roof.

The helper came along, picked up the sheet of damaged plywood, and headed for the chute. He stepped into the opening, ripped through the insulation, and fell 27 feet to his death.

DISCUSSION NOTES:

The employee who was removing the damaged plywood ran out of nails to attach the replacement plywood. He left briefly to get some more nails. What should he have done differently? Under what circumstances it is acceptable to leave a roof opening unprotected?

Ask your crew to share their experiences. Have any of them been in a similar situation?

A 42 year old roofing contractor foreman was run over by an all-terrain forklift at a construction site. The foreman was employed by a roofing contractor doing work on a high school under construction. The victim was hand delivering some construction materials to the crew. He approached the all-terrain forklift from the back of the equipment. The forklift operator did not see him as he turned the vehicle sharply right to pick up some insulation. At this point the victim was walking next to the forklift’s left rear wheel, which was a few feet from a stack of panelized roofing insulation. The forklift had rear-wheel steering so when the forklift turned right, the back-end of the forklift swung left and the rear wheel caught the victim’s foot, causing him to pitch forward under the wheel. When the forklift continued to move forward, it ran over the victim’s left leg and torso. The victim died at the scene.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. Has any member of your crew ever approached a forklift or other piece of construction equipment, not knowing if the equipment operator saw him? Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Then discuss relevant company policies, such as those that are listed below.

• Never approach operating construction equipment without communicating with the operator by some means (i.e., verbal communication, radio, hand signals, and/or some sort of clear visual contact and recognition). Make sure you don’t approach equipment from the operators “blind spots.”
  

   

• Our employees who are permitted to operate forklifts and other mobile construction equipment must be trained and periodically evaluated. Do not operate any mobile construction equipment unless you have been authorized by the company.
  

   

• We are each required to wear high visibility apparel when working around mobile equipment.
  

   

• Adhere to the jobsite’s “Internal Traffic Control Plan” that defines motor vehicle/construction equipment and pedestrian traffic lanes.
  

   

• Think about each piece of equipment that we use on our jobsites. Are there mirrors to help the equipment operators minimize blind spots? On which pieces of equipment are they needed?
  

There were a total of 21 claims submitted during the third quarter of 2008.

Although 5 claims (24% of the claims during the 3^rd quarter) involved motor vehicle accidents, this is a little misleading. All 5 claims involved a single motor vehicle collision in which a crew cab of roofers was struck by another vehicle while they were stopped in construction traffic. The initial combined incurred value for this claim was set at $5,600

Three claims were for eye injuries. In two of these, the employee was not wearing safety glasses. These three claims incurred a loss of $1,500

Three claims involved cuts or puncture wounds. One occurred in the fabricating shop in which an employee was cut with sheet metal. Another involved an employee cut while using a utility knife. The third involved an employee who stepped on a nail. Collectively they incurred a loss of $1,500

One claim was the result of heat exhaustion – initial incurred value $24,000

Two claims occurred from hot asphalt that splashed on employees. One incident occurred when hot asphalt was being poured into a mop cart. The other occurred while loading asphalt into the kettle. These claims incurred a loss of $41,408.

One claimant suffered an insect sting – initial incurred value $500.

Three claimants suffered a strain or sprain. One incident involved an employee who strained a finger removing old roofing material. Another involved an employee who strained his back pulling the starter rope on mechanical broom. The third involved an employee who was unloading insulation and was struck by a pallet that slid, straining his neck. Collectively these claims incurred a loss of $26,852

Three claims were slips or falls. Two were falls from an elevation, including one incident in which an employee fell through rotten wood on roof and fell to ground. Another involved an employee who jumped off of a stepladder that was falling, fracturing both ankles. The third slip/fall incident involved an employee who injured his ankle while seaming a panel. Collectively these claims incurred a loss of $556,479.

Sheet Metal Mechanic Falls 25 Feet Through Roofing Insulation

A 41-year-old male sheet metal mechanic died after falling 23 feet through roofing insulation and landing on a hardwood floor. His employer was a roofing contractor that had been in operation for 22 years and employed 12 workers. General written safety rules are reviewed with all employees upon hire. Training was accomplished on the job. Tailgate safety meetings were conducted by the job foreman when necessary. Safety meetings were held prior to the start of each job to discuss the hazards associated with that job. The victim had worked for the employer for 12 years and had 15 years prior experience.

The employer had been contracted to replace the fiberglass insulation and corrugated metal roofing on an 80-foot-wide by 140-foot-long church roof with a 1:12 pitch. A five-man crew (general superintendent, foreman, roofer, and 2 sheet metal mechanics) was sent to the site to complete the task. The men were to remove a 36-inch width of metal roofing and insulation at a time and replace them with new panels and insulation. This required removing three, 3-foot-wide by 6-foot-long panels and replacing them with the new 20-inch-wide by 16-foot-long panels.

To remove the panels, the roofer would hold the end of the old panels up and pull them back as the sheet metal mechanics removed the screws that attached the panels to the roof joists. Because the men were installing panels smaller in width than those being replaced, open space with exposed insulation existed around the work area.

At 3:00 p.m. on the second day at the site, work had progressed to a point where the men had completed work on an area measuring approximately 25 feet by 115 feet. As the victim finished removing the screws holding the next piece of old roofing, he stood up and stepped backward into an opening approximately 3 feet by 6 feet that was covered only with fiberglass insulation, and fell 23 feet to the hardwood floor inside the church, striking his head. The foreman went to the church parsonage to have the preacher summon EMS while the rest of the crew assisted the victim. The victim was found unconscious but breathing. He was transported to the hospital by EMS, where he died 1 hour later.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Then discuss relevant company policies, including the company’s process for conducting jobsite hazard surveys.

Employers should conduct a jobsite hazard survey prior to the start of any job, identify all hazards; and should implement appropriate control measures prior to starting a job. A jobsite hazard survey in this instance would have determined that there would be exposed roof openings and a need for some type of fall protection.

Roofing Mechanic Trainee Electrocuted

A 19-year-old roofing mechanic trainee was electrocuted after contacting an energized electrical conductor.The employer, a residential/commercial roofing contractor had been contracted to remove old roofing materials from the roof of a warehouse and to install a new roof system including roofing felt, rubber membrane, and aluminum flashing. The roof was 50 feet wide by 80 feet long and had a 2:12 pitch. Two electrical service entrances were located on the corner of the roof. One of the electrical service entrances had insulated conductors while the other did not.

At the time of the incident, the old roofing material had been removed and the roof’s wooden deck had been repaired in several areas. Base roof felt had been installed on the roof deck. About 3:30 p.m. all work had been completed except for installing the flashing around the roof’s perimeter and placing the membrane over the roof felt. The victim and a co-worker were instructed to measure the perimeter of the roof and to cut aluminum flashing to size. The victim, working on the corner of the roof, was cautioned by the foreman to be aware of the electrical conductors in that area. The victim knelt between the corner edge of the roof and the electrical service entrances (approximately a 2-feet by 2-feet working area) to take the measurement around the perimeter of the roof’s corner. After taking the measurement, the victim stood up.

Upon standing upright, the victim either lost his balance and stepped into the electrical conductor (or misjudged his position in relation to the electrical conductors’ location and stood upright) into a conductor. The victim’s chest contacted one of the uninsulated energized conductors. A co-worker looked up and saw the victim in contact with the conductor and shaking violently and shouted to the foreman for assistance.

The foreman and co-worker used a wooden board to push the victim away from the conductor, lowered him to the ground in the bucket of an aerial lift truck, and without formal training, attempted to administer CPR. In the interim, the foreman telephoned EMS for assistance. The EMS arrived in less than 5 minutes, continued CPR, and transported the victim to the emergency room of a local hospital where he was pronounced dead approximately 25 minutes after the incident occurred.

DISCUSSION: Ask your crew to share their experiences. Has any member of your crew had a close-call with uninsulated energized conductors? Ask your crew to identify the electrical hazards on the current jobsite or a past job. Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Be sure to discuss the following.

The surface of the roof contained at least two identifiable hazards (i.e., two electrical service entrances located on the corner of the roof creating a tripping hazard, and exposed electrical conductors creating an electrical hazard). Before the start of any work, a jobsite hazard survey should be conducted that includes identifying potential situations for employee contact with energized electrical circuits. Furthermore employees should to be notified about protective measures (i.e., identification, testing, de-energization, locking/tagging of energized conductors, verification, posting and maintaining proper warning signs, or avoidance of that area of the roof) 

Employees should know and comply with OSHA standards prohibiting them from working in close proximity to energized electrical circuits where employees could make contact in the course of work, unless employees are protected against electric shock by de-energizing and grounding the circuit and/or by effective guarding.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. Do any of them know of inoperative safety equipment on the existing vehicles used by the company? Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Then discuss relevant company policies, such as those that are listed below.

• We must perform regular vehicle maintenance checks to ensure that our vehicles are in safe operating condition, which includes checking for the proper operation and adjustment of the emergency brake; which must be capable of safely holding equipment fully-loaded on a grade.
  

   

• We must be aware of each truck’s load capacity and not exceed it.
  

   

• Whenever possible (even if it is inconvenient) avoid parking on inclines. If it is necessary to park on an incline, do the following:
  

   

  • Set the parking brake
    

     

  • Chock one front wheel and one back wheel with chocks that are large enough to prevent the truck from rolling
    

     

  • Turn the front wheels at an angle to the curb or berm so that if the vehicle does roll, it will roll into the curb or berm.
    

     

Under no circumstances should you place your body behind a moving vehicle to try to stop the vehicle from rolling.

The ABC’s of Fire Extinguishers

Just as there is a right tool for every job, there is a right extinguisher for every fire. The classification of an extinguisher (identified on its nameplate) corresponds to the class or classes of fire the extinguisher controls. On most construction jobs, we are concerned with Class A, B and C fires. Consequently, the best extinguisher to have on a job is a multi-purpose Class ABC extinguisher, which contains a dry, powdered chemical under pressure. The following describes the classes of fire and the kind of extinguisher that can be used on each.

CLASS A FIRES

These are fires involving wood, paper, trash and other materials that have glowing embers when they burn. Use a Class A or Class ABC extinguisher on these fires. Always remember that a Class A extinguisher contains water and should be used only on a Class A fire. Used on gasoline, it can spread the fire. Used on electrical fires, it can cause you to be electrocuted.

CLASS B FIRES

These are fires involving flammable liquids and gases, such things as gasoline, solvents, paint thinners, grease, LPG, and acetylene. Use a Class B or Class ABC extinguishers to extinguish these fires.

CLASS C FIRES

These are fires in energized electrical equipment. Use a Class BC or Class ABC extinguisher to extinguish these fires.

SOME IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER

1. Use the fire extinguisher whose class corresponds to the class of the fire.
   
2. Never use a Class A extinguisher, which contains water or foam, on a liquid or electrical fire.
   
3. Know where extinguishers are located and how to use them. Follow the directions printed on the label.
   
4. Keep the area around the fire extinguisher clear for easy access.
   
5. Don’t hide the extinguisher by hanging coats, rope, or other materials on it.
   
6. Take care of the extinguishers just as you do your tools.
   
7. Never remove tags from extinguishers. They indicate the last time the extinguisher was inspected.
   
8. Report defective or suspect extinguishers to your Supervisor, so that they can be replaced or repaired.
   
9. When inspecting extinguishers, look for cracked hoses, plugged nozzles, and corrosion. Also, look for damage that may have been done by equipment running into the extinguishers.
   
10. Don’t use extinguishers for purposes other than fighting fires.
    

Nobody wants afire. But if one starts, know what extinguishers to use and how to use them.

Roofing Laborer Dies After 60-Foot Fall

A 33-year-old laborer, working for a roofing contractor, was removing debris from a commercial building roof when he slipped and fell 60 feet to the sidewalk below. His employer was a roofing contractor in business for approximately one year was contracted to replace a roof on a commercial building. The owner of the company had 15 years of roofing experience working for other contractors. During the preceding five years as an employee for other contractors, the employer had started a part-time roofing and siding business of his own. Laborers were employed on an as-needed basis. Several months before the incident, the victim had worked as a temporary employee for the company for one day and had been re-hired by the company the day before this incident.

It was the second work day at this particular job site and the three workers were to finish discarding bags of debris from the roof. The decedent and one of the laborers accessed the roof through the building interior, up a flight of stairs to a five-step ladder which led to the roof opening. Two personal fall arrest systems were available for the laborers to wear before they accessed the roof area. The personal fall arrest systems were secured to roof anchors by 25 foot lanyards so that when the laborers entered the roof area, they were wearing a personal fall arrest system and already tied off. A third laborer was in a pickup truck parked next the building and the contractor was standing by the truck to load the bags of debris dropped off the roof by the two laborers.

When the laborers approached the roof access, Laborer No. 1 used the personal fall arrest system and accessed the roof first. Laborer No. 2 (the victim) accessed the roof without using the personal fall arrest system. He grabbed a bag of trash and began walking toward the edge of the roof when he slipped and fell 60 feet to the sidewalk below. He died due to multiple blunt force injuries.

All personal fall arrest equipment needed for each job was provided to each employee by the employer. Company safety procedures required each employee to wear and use necessary safety equipment and personal protective equipment. Failure to comply with company safety rules resulted in the termination of employees.

It was suspected that there was dew on the roof. It is unknown and if either man was wearing anti-skid shoes or gloves.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. If you were Laborer No. 1 in the above scenario, what would you have done upon noticing that your coworker was not wearing the harness and lanyard provided? Stress the importance of looking out for your coworkers.

Roofer Helper Electrocuted When Ladder Hoist Contacted Powerline

A 21-year-old roofer’s helper was electrocuted and a co-worker received serious electrical burns, when the ladder hoist they were positioning contacted an overhead power-line. The employer in this incident was a small family-owned roofing construction company that had been in business for 27 years. The company employed seven workers, including three roofer’s helpers. The victim had worked for this employer for 2 years on a part-time basis as a roofer’s helper.

The company had been contracted to remove old roofing materials (i.e., felt paper, asphalt shingles, nails, etc.) from a single-story structure and apply new ones.

At the time of the incident, the old roofing material had been removed and new felt paper had been applied to the roof. Shingles were being applied to one side of the pitched roof when one of the company owners instructed the victim and his co-worker to reposition the ladder hoist (a single aluminum ladder, 26-feet long, equipped with a 3 hp gasoline motor, pulleys, wire rope, and a metal hoist platform) from one side of the residence to the opposite side.

The victim and co-worker picked up the ladder platform hoist and carried it to the opposite side of the building. A single-phase, 7,200-volt overhead powerline ran perpendicular to the roof; it was located 15 feet above the roof and approximately 24 feet from ground level. The workers stood the hoist upright, leaning it against the edge of the building while the feet of the ladder remained on the ground. At that time, the workers determined that the location of the hoist was incorrect and they repositioned it. In moving the ladder hoist, it contacted the overhead powerline causing electrical current passed down the ladder; enter the victim’s hands; pass through his chest; and exiting his right foot to ground, causing his electrocution. The current simultaneously entered the co-worker’s right side and exited his left foot to ground, causing serious electrical burns.

Seconds after the incident, one of the two company owners rounded the corner of the residence and saw the workers falling to the ground. A motorist driving by the residence also saw the incident, stopped his vehicle and ran to assist the workers. The company owner had the building owner call EMS, then proceeded to give assistance to the injured co-worker, who was conscious but disoriented. The motorist checked the victim and administered CPR until the arrival of the EMS, about 15 minutes later. The EMS transported the victim and co-worker to the local hospital where the victim was pronounced dead on arrival, and the co-worker was admitted for treatment of electrical burns.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. Has any member of your crew had a close-call with an overhead powerline? Ask them to identify the electrical hazards on the current jobsite. Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents.

The powerline in this instance was within 15 feet of the roof. Before the start of any work, employers should identify hazards that may put the worker at risk, and develop and implement ways of controlling the those hazards [e.g., positioning the ladder platform hoist on the side of the building where no possible contact with the overhead powerline could occur, or making arrangements with the local utility company to de-energize or cover the powerlines with insulating line hoses or blankets when the work must be performed within minimum safe distances.

Roofer Dies After 15-Foot Fall from a Roof

A 23-year-old roofer died from injuries he sustained when he fell over the unprotected edge of a roof of an elementary school gymnasium to an asphalt walkway approximately 15 feet below. The employer was a roofing contractor and had been in business for 38 years. The company had several roofing jobs in progress throughout the region and employed approximately 30 employees. The incident occurred at a public elementary school where the employer had been contracted to remove shingles from the roof of the elementary school and to install a new metal roof. At the time of this incident, the seven-man crew had removed the old shingles and had put down a layer of ice and water shield.

The project manager indicated that everyone in the company was trained in fall protection and that a fall protection system was required for this job. For reasons that remain unclear, the crew did not use the fall protection system required by the company on the day of the incident. According to the project manager, the company’s fall protection plan for low-slope roofing work required the use of a safety warning line and a safety monitor. When workers moved outside the safety warning line and into the 6-foot space between the warning line and the roof edge, roofers were to be “tied off or under the watchful eye of a safety monitor.” On the day of the incident, the safety warning line was not in place, no employee had been assigned safety monitoring duties and the victim was not tied off.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. How well do they know your company policies regarding the use of fall protection? How well do they adhere to those policies (consistently)? Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Then discuss relevant company policies.

Laborer Falls Through Skylight Opening in Warehouse Roof to the Ground

A 39-year old laborer was fatally injured when he fell through an opening in the roof of a commercial building.

The employer had been in business for approximately 3 years at the time of the incident. The company had 20 employees with 10 working on site at the time of the incident. The victim had worked for the company for 3 years and had worked at the site of the incident for 1 day as the employer’s lead man.

During the time the building was sitting empty, portions of it were boarded up. This included nailing ³/₈-inch thick, 4X8 sheets of plywood from inside the building to the bottom of the skylight frames. The sheet of plywood on which the victim stepped was nailed with 1½-inch long drywall nails along both long sides. It was nailed along one side with 7 nails driven straight in and on the opposite side with 10 nails which were toe-nailed.

The victim had removed a skylight from the opening in the southwest portion of the building and was changing from a larger to a smaller socket in his power driver he walked onto the plywood located in the skylight opening.
The plywood gave way on the side where 7 nails were located. It remained attached and hanging by the side that had 10 nails. The victim dropped 20 feet to the dirt below and sustained fatal trauma to his head.

According to the employer’s foreman, the employees were warned about not stepping on the plywood covering the skylight openings.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Then discuss relevant company policies. Be certain to discuss the following:

• Openings in roofs are normally guarded by standard guardrails or equivalent means. Another means of providing protection from falling through the opening, is to place a cover over the opening that is capable of supporting the weight of employees and materials that may be placed upon it. Although the opening was covered with a piece of plywood, it was not capable of supporting the weight of a person.
  

   

• In addition, employees were not required by the employer to wear personal fall protection on this job. Since the roof opening was not properly guarded or covered, it would normally be required because employees could walk in the area where a danger of falling existed including the skylight roof openings.
  

   

• Lastly, no visual warnings were placed on the roof at the time of the incident to alert employees to fall hazard areas. Verbal admonitions were given to employees not to walk on the plywood covering the skylight openings, but there were no visual warnings around these openings. Painted lines, barrier tape, “NO STEP” signs, or other visual warnings, if in place around the perimeter of the skylight, may have prevented the victim from walking on the plywood-covered skylight opening.

Construction Contractor Killed by Fall from a Ladder

A 59-year-old painter/independent contractor died of injuries after he fell while working from a metal extension ladder. The victim was working alone on a 90-foot by 20-foot addition to a farm equipment storage building. The building was metal roofed with closed sides and back, and open in the front. The building sat on a concrete slab. The victim was working from an aluminum extension ladder putting the finishing touches around the roof beams near the front of the building. The contractor and the ladder fell backwards to the concrete floor where he suffered massive head trauma.

The incident occurred at a small county museum. The building was to be enlarged by constructing a twenty by ninety-foot extension identical to the existing structure. A local contractor (the victim in this incident) won the contract to construct the extension. At the time of the incident, the majority of the new extension had been completed and the victim was in the process of completing the final touches.

On a Tuesday morning, the victim went to work at the county museum to do some touch-up painting and applying strapping or banding tie-downs on the underside of the extension’s metal roof. Earlier that day, the victim had been in contact with two of his employees who were performing contract maintenance at a different job site in the area. Sometime around 2:20 -2:30 PM, the victim’s employees were driving past the museum and attempted to spot their boss working on the farm equipment building. One of the employees saw the victim lying on the concrete floor of the new building extension. They rushed to the victim and found him face up on the concrete floor under the ladder. The victim was airlifted to a hospital about 50 miles from the incident site, and died two days later from his injuries.

The victim was using an extension ladder to do touch up painting and install roof tie downs along the structural beams and support posts inside the open front of the building. The ceiling/roof sloped substantially from the back of the building up to the open front. The slope went from 10 feet high at the back of the building, to 16 feet high at the open front, a pitch of approximately 4/12.

Because of the roof slope and the fact that the building had no interior walls, it would be very difficult to safely use an extension ladder or straight ladder inside the building. A stepladder may have offered safer access to the work area. Stepladders are designed to work freestanding, supported by a stable surface. The concrete floor of the interior of the building would have provided ideal support. In addition, because stepladders are self-supporting, they are better suited for working in areas where solid secure wall surfaces are not present for supporting the top of non-self-supporting straight or extension ladders. Non-self-supporting ladders require the worker to maintain a three-point contact on the ladder at all times. When properly used, stepladders allow the worker the use of both hands while standing on the ladder. The stepladder is a more appropriate tool to carry out short duration, lightweight work within the effective operating zone/safe reach of the ladder. Typically, those jobs could include activities such as inspection, repair, and painting of small areas of a building or equipment.

DISCUSSION NOTES: Ask your crew to share their experiences. How do they decide what type of ladder is the most appropriate for the task? Discuss the hazards associated with using whatever ladder is the closest and “most convenient” to use. Ask your crew to suggest things that could be done to prevent similar incidents. Then discuss safe work practices relative to ladder use.

Beginning on September 1, 2008 the newly revised Safety Talk publication of the CRSMCA-SIF will be posted here. Until then, check-out some of the other pages on this new website.