| Home | About General Crane | Bankruptcy | Customers | Litigation Database | Finances | Property | Safety | Area Standards | For Workers | Press Releases | Search |
Contact Us
|
S A F E T Y N E W S |
Republic Tower OSHA Reports, May 6, 2010 New documents and analysis are now available on the Safety Page for General Crane USA. Among the additions are two Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspection reports for General Crane USA affiliate Republic Tower & Hoist. One OSHA report documents a 2005 tower crane accident where Republic was cited for failing to follow the crane manufacturer requirements, as well as for willfully refusing to submit records for inspection. The second inspection, from February 2009, cited Republic for failing to follow the proper protocols for its OSHA injury reports. Safety issues and concerns cited in the Republic OSHA investigations above – including reporting problems on injury logs; crane deficiencies and mechanical failures; and failing or refusing to produce documentation to OSHA investigators – have also surfaced during investigations into General Crane. Below are examples of core safety issues documented against General Crane USA in recent years. Third-Party Crane Inspector Cites Numerous “Deficiencies” on Tower Crane
THIS CRANE HAS BEEN FOUND DEFECTIVE The OSHA investigator learned that a third-party crane inspector had found “a series of deficiencies” on the crane. A memo on General Crane letterhead acknowledged the deficiencies found by the third party inspectors. Among the deficiencies were the following:
The OSHA official noted that the General Crane’s tower was “pending to be dismantled per Hunt Moss request.” To date, General Crane has not erected a new tower at the project, which is still in full swing. General Crane Cited for Underreporting on Safety Logs
Upon receiving the safety forms, OSHA officials cross-checked General Crane’s logs against Florida’s workers’ compensation databases and conducted interviews with company personnel. OSHA inspectors flagged twelve (12) cases where underreporting occurred during this time period. They included seven separate instances where the company’s safety logs provided incomplete details, neglecting to record an injured worker’s days away and/or restricted time. Also, OSHA found five separate cases where General Crane failed entirely to register worker injuries in its logs. Companies in the construction industry often use their OSHA logs when bidding on projects, and many contractors require that they review the safety logs during the bid process. Following OSHA’s investigation into General Crane’s safety logs, CraneWatchdog.com conducted its own review of public workers’ compensation records and found at least two more cases where General failed to report employee injuries in its logs (see here and here). Crane Accident in High-Wind Conditions Results in Serious Injury
OSHA officials on the scene reported that its attempts to investigate the accident were “met with formidable resistance.” OSHA was given “inconsistent accounts of events and conflicting statements.” Furthermore, the contractor that hired General Crane for the job provided the investigators with documentation “indicating that they never received daily reports from General Crane USA.” Based on interviews with eyewitnesses and the crane operator, the investigators found that the crane, which was used to raise and lower a 3,500 pound I-Beach, had been “experiencing mechanical difficulties.” A witness would confirm that the crane’s problems were corrected only after the incident. The OSHA report went on to summarize the sequence of events resulting in the accident:
OSHA officials cite a number of “causal factors” for the accident. According to the OSHA report, the injured employee did not receive any formal training. OSHA also pointed to management issues that contributed to the accident:
Following the investigation, OSHA proposed $15,000 in penalties against General Crane. The injured worker later sued the company in Broward County Court. The lawsuit remains pending. -------------------------------------- For more details and documentation, visit General Crane’s Safety Page. Also, click HERE to read more about OSHA inspection reports on General Crane and its affiliates.
Insurance Problems Surface April 20, 2010 General Crane USA is at risk of losing certain insurance coverage within the next 10 days if its insurer does not receive proper payment. According to an emergency motion filed yesterday by Gulfstream Crane, LLC (General Crane USA), the company previously gained clearance from the bankruptcy court to procure financing in order to purchase insurance policies for its crane rental operations. Earlier this year, General Crane entered into two separate finance agreements with Premium Assignment Corporation (PAC) to buy roughly $380,000 worth of policy coverage from USI Insurance. General was required to make down payments totaling over $90,000, followed by monthly payments of nearly $35,000 over the next 8 months. In turn, PAC would acquire the USI policies on General’s behalf. However, in yesterday’s filing General Crane asserted that PAC “has not released the financed premiums to the insurers.” Furthermore, the company argues that “if PAC does not extend financing to the Debtor [General] … then USI Insurance will cancel the Debtor’s insurance policy to the detriment of the Debtor and its estate.” According to General Crane, PAC is holding up financing until the bankruptcy judge amends the original orders permitting General to secure financing from PAC. The central sticking point concerns language regarding PAC’s remedies if General defaults on the loan agreement. The current order allows for PAC to pursue default remedies only after a hearing before the court. But General notes that “PAC’s policy is that it will not extend financing unless it is entitled to pursue default remedies without necessity of further hearing or order of the Court.” Because it would be “extraordinarily difficult to secure alternative financing” before cancellation of its policy, General is asking for the court to accommodate PAC’s wishes and “delete the provision requiring notice and expedited hearing before the Court upon default.” CraneWatchdog.com will report more as this story develops.
More Details on Third-Party Inspections of February 24, 2010 Yesterday we reported on an OSHA investigation into General Crane’s Linden 8752 tower crane formerly working on the Marlins stadium project in Miami, Florida. The investigation revealed that the project’s general contractor, Hunt-Moss, ordered General Crane to dismantle the tower crane in December 2009. At the time of the OSHA site visit, the investigator found a sign posted on the crane by Hunt-Moss, dated 11/18/09, stating: “THIS CRANE HAS BEEN FOUND DEFECTIVE: DO NOT OPERATE THIS CRANE.” OSHA also obtained results from multiple third-party safety inspections of General Crane’s Linden tower crane erected on the construction site. A General Crane USA document dated November 30, 2009, addressed to Baker Concrete (a subcontractor on the Marlins project), discloses numerous “deficiencies and recommendations” cited by the third-party inspectors. Below is a list of some of the identified tower crane deficiencies.
General Crane claimed in the document that “corrective actions” were taken to “satisfy the items on the report.” Click HERE to read the document in its entirety. For a full re-cap on the events at the Marlins project, visit the General Crane Safety page.
New Details Surface on General Crane’s Marlins Stadium Tower Crane February 23, 2010
The OSHA investigation, initiated on December 3, 2009, discovered third-party crane safety reports citing “deficiencies” in General Crane’s Linden 8752 tower crane, erected originally in mid-November 2009. Another third-party crane inspector reported welding failures that weakened the pins at the base of the crane. When the Fort Lauderdale Area OSHA investigator arrived at the Marlins Stadium construction site on December 3, the investigator noted: “Hunt Moss prohibited Gulfstream Crane, LLC to operate the crane until a third party inspector certifies the crane.” The OSHA official also observed that “the Linden 8752 tower crane had a red tag posted by the General Contractor that read ‘DO NOT OPERATE THIS CRANE.’” The OSHA investigator learned during the site visit that the tower crane was “pending to be dismantled as per Hunt Moss request.” While conducting the inspection the investigator obtained a third-party crane inspection report by PIC Crane Safety Services, LLC. The report, according to the OSHA official, “indicated a series of deficiencies and recommendation to be performed on the crane before a certification is issued.” Two other third-party crane inspectors were also brought in to examine General Crane’s Linden tower. One of the inspectors cited structural problems with pins at the tower crane base:
During the process officials from Gulfstream Crane provided the OSHA inspector with a letter from crane manufacturer Linden Comansa America “authorizing General Crane to fix or replace any structural components of the Linden Comansa Tower cranes.” In December 2009, Linden Comansa America, LLC sued General Crane USA in Harris County, Texas court, alleging that General Crane had unlawfully “stolen” over $800,000 in tower crane parts. As reported earlier by CraneWatchdog.com, General Crane dismantled the Marlins Stadium tower crane on December 8, 2009, and then quickly thereafter re-erected the crane on December 11. Upon returning to the construction site on December 14, the OSHA investigator noted that the crane was in operation. General Crane was able to “provide a copy of the certification from a third party inspector and a copy of the certificate of inspection of the crane pins from OC Laboratories, Inc.” The OSHA official subsequently closed the investigation. However, the narrative involving General Crane’s Marlins stadium tower crane did not end there. A little over a month later, on January 20, 2010, General Crane again dismantled the Linden tower crane on the stadium construction site. At this time we are awaiting verification for the reason behind the second tear-down. To date, General Crane has not erected a new tower crane at the construction project, which is currently in full swing. For the ongoing chronology of General Crane’s tower crane issues at the Marlins stadium in Miami, visit our Safety page, or click HERE. Also, a full copy of the OSHA inspection report is available HERE. OSHA Files Citation Against October 27, 2009
Employers are required by federal law to maintain a log of all recordable work-related injuries and illnesses, referred to as an OSHA Form 300. OSHA’s Fort Lauderdale office cited General Crane USA for two types of recordkeeping violations after its inspectors found a total of 12 instances where underreporting occurred. They included seven separate instances where the company’s safety logs provided incomplete details regarding days away/restricted time for reported workplace injuries and five separate cases where General Crane USA failed entirely to record worker injuries in its logs. During an informal settlement agreement between OSHA and General Crane USA, the $5,000 penalty was reduced to $3,750. Among the terms of the settlement, the company agreed to post the settlement in a prominent place near the violation and to develop/review its safety and health program. Area Director Darlene Fossum signed on behalf of OSHA. In addition, General Crane USA agreed to contact the University of South Florida Consultation Program for “assistance implementing an effective safety and health program.” General Crane USA co-owner Jim Robertson previously served on the Florida Public Task Force on Workplace Safety, which was administered through the University of South Florida. In an August 2008 court deposition, Robertson testified that his company’s safety record “is huge to us. And we’re well-known for it. It’s unprecedented in the marketplace.” For more safety-related information on General Crane USA and its affiliated companies, visit our Safety Section. Additional information regarding reporting workplace safety concerns can be found below: How to File a Complaint with OSHA: The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) website offers information on how to report safety and health concerns at your workplace. According to OSHA law, complainants have "the right to request that their names not be revealed to their employers.” For more information, please click HERE.
|
In the fall of 2009 General Crane erected a tower crane on the construction site for the Florida Marlins new baseball stadium. During an OSHA inspection visit in December 2009, the investigator found that the project’s general contractor, Hunt-Moss, has posted a red tag on General Crane’s tower which stated the following: 
In September 2009 OSHA officials requested the mandatory 300/300A safety logs from General Crane for the 
In August 2004 OSHA investigators responded to a 
The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a $5,000 fine against General Crane USA on September 18 for underreporting its mandatory worker injury logs.