3 ms·
No, it's not the same. This isn't a contractor doing work entirely under their own care and control and providing a finished product to Tesla. They were working
by eigenvector 8y ago
No, it's not the same. This isn't a contractor doing work entirely under their own care and control and providing a finished product to Tesla. They were working on Tesla-owned electrical equipment within the premises of Tesla's factory.
I supervise the operations of a power generating station. From time to time, I have specialized contractors working in my substation. You can bet your bottom dollar that they work under safety practices approved and audited by myself/representatives of my employer (the site owner). There would never be - as occurred here - an unqualified worker injured by an arc flash on my site because no contractor worker is starting work until isolation, lockout and grounding has been verified by two qualified people.
When work is occurring on a site that you own and control, you have a responsibility to supervise and audit the safety practices of your contractors. The fact that very basic safety protocols weren't being followed on Tesla's site shows that they weren't doing the due diligence that I expect from professionals in the electrical industry.
- mercer 8y agoJust for clarification: are you saying this is how thing should be, or how this works legally?
- eigenvector 8y agoI can't speak to Cal OSHA rules but where I work, in BC/Canada, yes it would legally be the owner's responsibility. Working for a large multinational it's also our policy in the US and around the world even though it may not be legally mandated in every jurisdiction. By owning our contractors' safety performance, we are trying to remove the perverse incentive that local management had to improve their own stats by contracting everything out at the expense of overall safety.