Insurance And OSHA Question

As long as I am on a roll seeking out ways to fully utilize the value of required scope of work items to the line item scenario, here is one that I have never seen applied for and compensated for.

OSHA requires either a fall arrest or eave edge toe board safety system or a safety monitor from a Competent Man, qualified via OSHA Certification.

I am not referring to steep slope or 2 story projects, but a one story which exceeds the minimum height requirement from ground to eave.

Even those walk on pitches require safety guidelines, but are never line itemed for additional compensation, because they are never requested to be implemented.

For a separate Safety Monitor, you would be able to comply with OSHA regulations and should be compensated for the additional man hours for his Certified Monitoring Skills.

Would that be a correct assumption?

Ed>>>

Youall did jest qwite a good enuf job ther Mr. Egg.

Ed>>>

lol. When Tom does that I always think it sounds kinda cute. Yer rite for that example. It jus dont come so unnaturally for me I kinda get all confused about how to do it right to make it really wrong the bestest.>>>

Well if weeze gonna be freekin' word police, I gotsta say egg, it sure wooda sounded better iffin u'da said "unskilledless" instead of ununskilled.

Besides, can you really tell me that irregardless bothers you as much as people that don't know the flippin difference between the words "then" and "than"?

;)>>>

Regardless of any other considerations & etc., you deserve a little round of applause for using your mind to penetrate these mysteries, Ed. You know this, of course, but nobody else seems to be giving you the nod you deserve, so let me do it here. They play the game that way so why shouldn't we play the whole game, not just the segment they point us in. By the way, thank you for using the word 'regardless' instead of the currently normal 'irregardless.' That also shows attention to detail. For any who wonders what the heck I'm talking about, just start with 'regard.' Everybody knows what regard is. Regardless is its opposite. Putting an 'irr' in front of that turns it back into regard. Like 'reverent' and 'irreverent.' or 'rational' and 'irrational.' It would be like starting with the word, 'skilled.' Then we go to 'unskilled.' Then we go to 'ununskilled?' What they heck would that exactly mean I wonder? Not necessarily skilled. Twilight zone for the mind. How about this: Mind. Mindless. Irrmindless. But then usually you just get, "you know what I mean." 'Not too shabby," I understand completely. "Irregardless" just scratches the blackboard.>>>

I said in one of the earlier posts, that it would be an, "Either/Or" option.

Ed>>>

In the situation ur describing u would need one or the other not both unless someone is in fact outside the barriers.>>>

Rozziroofer Said: Ed, i think you need to re-check the osha rules.

Jed (with chit still on ur face) For all my key points its ROZZI not Mac. I would like for my credits to go to me not whoever u r referring to as Mac.

Do you have something to point out?

Ed>>>

Ed, i think you need to re-check the osha rules.

Jed (with chit still on ur face) For all my key points its ROZZI not Mac. I would like for my credits to go to me not whoever u r referring to as Mac.>>>

HOP,

It is an "additional" duty, insomuch as you do not need a monitor unless someone is outside the flagged perimeter, or if a roof is less than 50' wide, there are no flags then a monitor is a full-time requirement. If the monitor is needed, monitoring is to be his ONLY DUTY.

On a steep slope, defined as anything over 4/12, my guys are 100% fall arrest, so a monitor is not an issue, and I don't know what the requirements may be with lesser arrangements.>>>

"legitimacy" is an oxymoron phrase, (lefitimate goes out the window/is only as perceived, where insurance companies are concerned), when coupled w/ins. co.s......

That's enough for me.....>>>

No, I don't, but why would that make a difference?

Your point does not make any sense though, regardless. The Contractor in charge, whether a GC or stand alone Roofing Contractor is ultimately responsible for the crew working under his direction.

The point of this thread topic is to capitalize on all available and legitimately compensated line items in the claims process.

Ed>>>

Hmmm; Lemme guess.....You have "subs" that install roofs too....>>>

TomB Said: Most contract agreements include verbage to the effect that you will complete the work as per applicable governing agencies. In any event, a court would most-likely find following OSHA requirements would be implied,as it would be an illegal act not to. Your proposed, line-item extra, is extremely weak...It would be like charging , a line item extra), for employer FICA contrabutions for your payroll...

Not true when you see an insurance claim writ up.

If what you say where true, then why do they have a line item for installing shingles, for re-setting pipe boot flashings, for removing X amount of layers of shingles, for replacing each individual static air vent, etc...

Every task and job requirement necessitates a separate line item description and appropriate fee to be applied.

They do account for slide guards, (Toe-Boards), specifically on Steeper Roof Slopes, so if what your line of reasoning would indicate were factual, they would not have any need to add that in to the cost of the job for the Steeper Slopes either.

Per OSHA, any eave edge above 6 feet from the ground requires additional safety procedures.

Ed>>>

Most contract agreements include verbage to the effect that you will complete the work as per applicable governing agencies. In any event, a court would most-likely find following OSHA requirements would be "implied",as it would be an illegal act not to. Your proposed, "line-item" "extra", is extremely weak...It would be like charging , a "line item extra), for employer FICA contrabutions for your payroll...>>>

I thought that safety monitor was an additional duty not an exclusive duty.>>>