Posts Tagged ‘cell phones’

The high price for fast phones: Cell tower deaths

Tuesday, May 29th, 2012

The boom in cell phones has spawned a huge demand for the building and maintenance of radio towers and that demand accelerated with the introduction of iPhones. The good news was that work proliferated – but under brutal, highly aggressive schedules. Now, with carriers gearing up for 4G networks, the anticipated building boom raises alarm in many seasoned workers – who see a proliferation of less trained, less experienced workers, working under more pressure for less pay – a recipe that points to the potential for more fatalities.

Frontline and Pro Publica focus on cell tower worker deaths, a small industry with a death rate that is about 10 times the rate of construction. Free climbing – climbing completely untethered without any safety gear – was involved in about half the deaths. (See our prior post with a gut-wrenching free climbing video clip: You think your job is tough? It remains one of this blog’s most visited posts.)

Tower work is carried out by a complex web of subcontractors – an arrangement that makes good sense on many levels, but that allows large carriers to deflect responsibility for on-the-job work practices – and for any workplace deaths. These networks are like like the Russian nesting dolls: layer after layer of progressively smaller employers. Tower owners are carriers like AT&T that hire firms such as Bechtel and General Dynamics to manage and complete tower projects. The industry jargon for these firms is “turf vendors.” The turf vendors then hire contracting firms, who in turn hire subcontractors. The end result: less money, less experienced workers, less training, less focus on safety and more deaths. This layering makes OSHA enforcement almost impossible. The lowest rung on the ladder is the one responsible for safety – and enforcement becomes what some industry observers call a game of “whack a mole.” Safety experts say that the responsibility for safety has to lie up the line, probably with the turf vendors.

Contract work and subcontracting is the new normal. The old contract between the employer and the employee is fraying, the concept of lifetime employment is increasingly a quaint tale of yesteryear. How this new normal will play out in terms of employee safety and employee protections should be of great interest to workers as this pattern proliferates in other industries. Even aside from politics, one has to wonder if the very concepts of workers compensation and OSHA — and other worker protections — would come into existence in a fragmented work environment like the current one.

Additional articles from the series
Transcript of a live chat with reporters and project manager for the Tower Climber Protection project. We note that the project manager is Wally Reardon, who commented on our prior post, linked above.)
Jordan Barab discusses OSHA limitations
How Subcontracting Affects Worker Safety

Cavalcade of Risk and an assortment of workers’ comp news briefs

Wednesday, January 27th, 2010

It’s Cavalcade of Risk day – visit the bi-weekly roundup of posts about risk, graciously hosted this week at Wenchy’s Place – check out this week’s edition and wish the hostess a happy birthday while there.
In other workers’ comp-related news:
Medical costs and WC – Joe Paduda explains why you should expect work comp medical costs to be heading up over at Managed Care Matters. He points to one of the primary problems: “Misaligned incentives for work comp managed care programs, and payers’ increased reliance on managed care program revenue and profits.”
Moving violationsU.S. bans truckers, bus drivers from texting. The National Safety Council estimates that at least 1.6 million crashes are caused each year by drivers using cell phones and texting. The NSC has called for a total ban all cell phone use and texting while driving. Here’s a good site to bookmark since cell phone and texting laws have been changing frequently in response to safety reports: State cell phone and texting while driving laws. It’s maintained by the Governors Highway Safety Association.
More on marijuana – Should pot provided as a work comp medical benefit? Roberto Ceniceros talks about a California
marijuana ruling
at Comp Time. Meanwhile, the CA Supreme Court nixed limits on medical marijuana and the Los Angeles City Council voted to close hundreds of dispensaries that have sprung up.
Global risk – Before you open that branch office in Somalia, you may want to take a look at Emily Holbrook’s posting on Risk Monitor: the most hazardous countries for business.
P/C Forecast – What’s in store for the property-casualty industry in 2010? Ernst & Young offer a 2010 U.S. industry outlook. (PDF)
Comp Case Law Over at LexisNexis WC Law Blog, Larson’s Case Law Developments offers their picks for The Top 10 Workers’ Compensation Cases of 2009.
Union censusWorkplace Prof Blog reports on a Department of Labor report which shows that the union density rate was essentially unchanged in 2009 – 12.3% vs 12.4% in 2008. Among private sector employees, the rate dropped to 7.2% from the 2008 rate of 7.6%. Also of note from the report: “The data also show the median usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary union members were $908 per week, compared to $710 for workers not represented by unions. Union members earn 28 percent more than their non-union counterparts.”
Quickies

Want to Avoid Alzheimer’s? Just Keep Talking

Friday, January 15th, 2010

In the interests of keeping Insider readers mentally alert for as long as possible, we present the results of a study that appeared in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease (and is summarized in the Wall Street Journal). The study found that long-term cell phone use appears to protect against and even reverse Alzheimer’s-like symptoms in mice. Here is the Journal’s description of the study:

Mice genetically engineered to develop brain impairments similar to Alzheimer’s in humans were divided into two groups. One group was exposed twice daily to hour-long electromagnetic fields akin to those created during cellphone use. Mice in the other group were not exposed to the radiation. After seven months, young mice in the first group fared significantly better on cognitive tests than their unexposed littermates. Older mice, which had already developed symptoms of Alzheimer’s, exposed to the radiation for eight months in a subsequent experiment also performed better than older nonexposed mice. Mice, younger and older, not engineered to develop Alzheimer’s also appeared to benefit from the radiation. Biopsies suggested such exposure might fight Alzheimer’s by inhibiting the buildup of certain protein plaques in the brain, the researchers said.

Given that exposure to radiation is considered a plus here, head set devices cannot be used. If your goal is Alzheimer’s prevention, you have to keep that cell phone clamped against your ear.
Before you start dialing up everyone on your call list, you might want to take note of a few caveats: first, what is true for mice is not necessarily true for humans. Further studies involving larger numbers of mice would be needed, and even then there would be no definitive correlation with humans.
There are also a couple of potential safety issues connected with cell phones: use of cell phones while driving is a widely-recognized hazard. In some states, use of cell phones without a head set is illegal. After being pulled over, you could try the line: “but officer, I cannot use a headset because I’m trying to avoid Alzheimer’s.” You’ll get a chuckle…and a ticket.
Beyond the safe driving issue, there are some inconclusive but alarming indications that heavy use of cell phones might result in brain tumors.
So there you have it: talking on your cell phone might help prevent Alzheimers, but it might also cause a motor vehicle accident or even a brain tumor. Personal risk management at its ambiguous best. It’s all so confusing, I’m going to take a coffee break. Caffeine, they say, is really good for you. Except when it isn’t.

Distractions Behind the Wheel, Revisited

Tuesday, August 4th, 2009

The other Nicholas Sparks is in a bit of trouble: not the well-known writer, but an obscure 25 year old tow truck driver from upstate New York. The lesser known Sparks has earned himself a place in the Business Hall of Shame when he raised multi-tasking to new heights (or better, depths). He was talking on one cell phone, texting on another(!), when, surprise of surprises, he lost control of his vehicle, smashed into another car, careened across a front lawn and plunged his flatbed tow truck into a swimming pool. The 68 year-old woman driving the other car suffered head injuries but is in good condition; her 8 year old niece suffered minor injuries.
Sparks has been charged with reckless driving, talking on a cell phone and following too closely. He was driving a truck for Adams Towing Company. While I was unable to find an area company listed under this name, I do hope they carry robust liability coverage. The company is clearly guilty of negligence and will pay dearly for their multi-multi-tasking employee.
Driven to Distraction
The New York Times has singled out the use of cell phones while driving as a major danger. They have a begun a series focusing on this new road hazard entitled “Driving to Distraction.” In their most recent article, they describe the ubiquitous talking on cells performed by taxi drivers. (My family caught a cab during a downpour in Brooklyn last week; I sat in the front seat and listened to one side of a conversation in an Arabic tongue that was underway when we entered the cab and continued after we had paid and exited.)
While New York City has one of the most stringent laws in the country prohibiting taxi drivers from using cell phones while driving, it is rarely enforced. Fewer than 800 summonses were issued to cab drivers in 2007. If the law were enforced, the annual summonses would run in the hundreds of thousands.
It all comes down to this: anyone who drives can no longer plead ignorance to the dangers of talking/texting and driving. A new and potentially huge liability has emerged for the employers of people who drive in the course of employment. The employers are going to be held accountable for the mistakes of their employees. Property will be damaged and people will be hurt, even killed. In order to avoid liability, management will have to demonstrate that effective cell phone policies have been both promulgated and enforced.
Which leads to one final question: with liability ultimately falling to the insurance companies, what steps have they taken to ensure that policy holders have mitigated this ever-increasing risk? How will their underwriters identify the companies most likely to produce the next Nicholas Sparks – the driver, that is, not the writer.

Cell Phones: Unsafe at Any Speed?

Monday, June 1st, 2009

We’ve been following the tentative steps taken by management to confront a relatively new and ubiquitous risk: the use of cell phones while driving. Most people seem to realize that cell phone use is a dangerous distraction, whether involving talking or, lord help us, texting. While surveys indicate that nearly every driver (98 percent) considers him or herself a safe driver (NOT!), fully 20 percent of drivers between 16 and 61 admitting to texting while driving and 80 percent admit to talking on their cells. What we have is a serious disconnect between risk and action. We are all just driving obliviously up DeNile.
We have focused our attention on the potential risks to corporations, who are liable for the actions of their employees “in the course and scope of employment.” Back in 2001, Dyke Industries settled a case for $16 million, involving one of their salespeople taking out an elderly pedestrian while chatting on a phone.
Maggie Jackson in the Boston Globe writes that some corporations have taken aggressive action to mitigate the risk. Back in 2005, the engineering firm AMEC prohibited employees from any and all cell phone use while operating a vehicle. DuPont, a legendary leader in safety, first required employees to use headsets and then, on second thought, forbid all cell phone use while driving. AstraZeneca has similar policies in place.
Risky Business
What about everyone else? When, if ever, will managers of major and minor corporations bring the hammer down on blatantly risky behaviors behind the wheel?
We have two thoughts on the matter. First, it will take a few more tragedies to get the attention of corporate America on this risk. We all seem to labor under the delusion that multi-tasking is necessary and harmless. It is neither. Secondly, insurance companies are bound to wake up and smell this distinctly acrid brew: underwriters for general liability and fleet auto policies will begin to ask whether potential insureds have policies in place prohibiting the use of cell phones while driving. Those failing to implement such policies may find themselves scrambling for coverage. Perhaps a few innovative carriers will begin to offer discounts to employers with credible policies in place.
Employees subject to cell phone restrictions are beginning to develop new means of coping. Heck, there are support groups for everything, why not for cell phone withdrawal? Here are some of the tips that have emerged:

Plan Ahead. Call and send messages before leaving your desk.
Play relaxing music in traffic jams to reduce the frustration of “not doing anything.”
Turn off wireless devices. Still tempted? Lock them in a bag. Place the bag in the trunk.
Put a message on your voicemail saying, “I’m in a meeting or driving.”
Take a cab instead of driving, especially on out-of-town trips.
Warn people who regularly call – i.e. spouses – that you aren’t available in transit.

The Insider would add one more tip: when driving, just drive, with one relentless point of attention and with one goal in mind: arriving safely at your destination. For most of us, driving is the riskiest part of the work day, yet we treat driving as a relatively mindless means to an end. Alas, if we are not careful, driving may be the last thing we ever do.