OSHA Advisory Council

Sept. 9, 2005
minutes

Members: Staff members:

Carol Bufton Debbie Caswell

Harvey Burski James Collins
Pat McGovern Jeff Isakson
Scott Richter Roslyn Wade
Bill Stuart
Daryl Tindle

Members absent: Visitor:

Eric Ajax Greg Rindal

Melanie Allen
Eugene Harmer
Michael Hawthorne
Scott Metcalf
Ed Raine

The meeting was called to order by chairperson Carol Bufton at 10:16 a.m. Greg
Rindal introduced himself and welcomed everyone to Duluth. Bufton thanked Minnesota
Power for hosting the meeting and for all they do in safety.

Members and visitors introduced themselves. The agenda was approved as

presented. Harvey Burski made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 4, 2005
meeting. Bill Stuart seconded the motion. All voted in favor of the motion and the motion
passed.

II. Announcements

Assistant Commissioner Roslyn Wade expressed appreciation to Minnesota

Power for hosting the Minnesota OSHA fall outstate meeting. She stated that Minnesota
Power has been a great partner to both the MNOSHA compliance and consultation
programs. Minnesota Power is a MNSTAR participant and we appreciate their
partnership and appreciate what they do for Minnesota employees.

Wade noted the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) has been very busy and
that she appreciated the flexibility of council members in allowing the June meeting to be
canceled.

Wade stated DLI had a very lean legislative agenda this year and all of the agency
initiatives succeeded. One of the items that will have an impact on the OSHA program
was the legislation passed requiring crane-operated certification by July 1, 2007. This
initiative started with discussions many years ago regarding whom the certification
OSHA Advisory Council -2- September 9, 2005
Minutes

should apply to. At that time, the Legislature asked DLI to convene a workgroup to study
the issue. Wade indicated that cranes not only pose a risk to the employees in that
specific area, but could cause serious damage to people and property in and around a
worksite. The workgroup came to agreement and acknowledged cranes are different than
other types of heavy equipment and that there should be specific guidance in either
OSHA standards or law that would require specific training for crane operators. The
workgroup was representative of the entire industry. The workgroup had very relevant
discussion; however, it took the Legislature until this past session to return to that
discussion. With that in mind, the department drafted some possible language based on
the feedback of the workgroup and the Legislature accepted that language with very few
changes. The language requires that operators of cranes of more than 5,000 lbs are
required to be certified by July 1. There are some very limited exceptions, including those
individuals who are training to become certified operators. The language is in the OSHA
statutes and OSHA personnel will be used to ensure the provision is complied with.
Violations of that statute would be considered like any other safety violation and would
be fined accordingly. That bill passed.

Another significant bill passed this year was the minimum wage bill. This bill
increased the threshold that distinguishes a large employer compared to a smaller
employer. Previously, that threshold was $500,000. The new threshold is $625,000.
Employers grossing more than that amount are considered large employers and the
minimum wage increased to $6.15 an hour for those employers and to $5.25 an hour for
smaller employers – those doing business grossing less than $625,000.

Additional important legislation passed this year directed the commissioner of

DLI to convene a workgroup to study the installation of biotech piping systems and plan
reviews. Minnesota has seen a significant increase in the biotech industry, with a number
of major players looking to expand or initiate business in Minnesota. There was concern
regarding the multiple levels of review required through the city inspection process and
the Legislature asked DLI to study that issue and to provide recommendations to the
Legislature by March 1, 2006. The commissioner will be heading that workgroup.

Wade noted that effective May 16, 2005, the governor issued a re-organization
order requiring five different units that currently administer, inspect or license building
construction activities throughout the state of Minnesota be consolidated under DLI.
Previously, the department had a small program in the overall building construction
process, with the high-pressure piping and boiler code regulation. Under the governor’s
re-organization order, four other units were consolidated to establish the Building Code
and Licensing Division. Those units include: Building Codes and Standards, previously
of the Department of Administration; Residential Contracting and Licensing, previously
with the Department of Commerce; the Plumbing and Engineering unit, previously with
the Department of Health; and the Board of Electricity, which was a stand-alone agency.
DLI also assumed fire code-making authority, although it did not receive the personnel.
Wade indicated these units, including the Boilers and High-pressure Piping unit, have
been consolidated into one division that will report to her, along with the previous
Workplace Services Division. The agency is undergoing major changes, not just the
OSHA Advisory Council -3- September 9, 2005
Minutes

physical movement of those units into the building, but also studying what structural
changes need to be made in the business processes to assure business improvement for
the end users. The majority of employees are moving into the 443 Lafayette Road N.
location. There is also great outstate presence with individuals either working out of
established state offices, as well as some home offices, to ensure services continue
throughout Minnesota.

The primary goal of the re-organization order is to ensure building construction is

performed in a way that ensures the integrity of the buildings and the safety component.
This was one of the recommendations made last year when we were looking at ways to
advance safety. This re-organization provides a more direct opportunity to leverage those
resources to continue to advance safety in the workplace. The entire consolidation will
result in an additional 100 employees for the department; the new division comprises 120
employees.

Wade announced Jeff Isakson is now serving in the capacity of the Minnesota
OSHA Compliance director and Patricia Todd has been promoted to assistant
commissioner of the Workers’ Compensation Division. Wade stated the commissioner
has great confidence in Todd, based on her tenure, experience and success in moving the
MNOSHA program forward.

Wade indicated the agency has started to think about legislation for next year and
stated that if anyone has suggestions or concerns they want DLI to take into
consideration, now would be a good time to advance those. Due to the late start of session
next year, deadlines have not been set yet.

Wade noted the regional administrator for federal OSHA, Mike Connors, is
coming to Minnesota. She and the commissioner will be meeting with him. Wade stated
Connors is an avid supporter of the Minnesota OSHA program and he rarely addresses
the public without mentioning the good work that is going on in Minnesota.

McGovern asked if there would be any follow-up in the meeting regarding

construction safety. Wade said yes.

Burski stated that at the March meeting there was discussion about the Legislature
and possibly trying to deal with work-study students at the university who were exposed
to hazards and not getting proper training; she asked what happened with that discussion?
Wade responded that bill was not successful. She indicated it had been introduced, but
that it had not received a hearing.

Bufton asked if the definition of the size of an employer, which was in the
minimum wage provision, applied to other laws within the state or if it only applied to the
minimum wage issue? Wade responded the dollar volume test for purposes of
establishing the minimum wage only applies to the minimum wage.
OSHA Advisory Council -4- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Bufton asked if there would be some interaction between the MNOSHA

construction program and the new group? Wade responded there would be and indicated
Jim Collins recently led a discussion with the group. As a follow-up, he established a
strategic plan to work with building officials and city and state inspectors to advance
safety. Wade indicated the department has explored using those groups or using the
forums they have established through their educational program and would continue to be
open and looking for how these groups can work together to advance safety.

VI. Federal OSHA update

Jim Collins spoke on behalf of Mark Hysell, federal OSHA area director.

Collins stated the first item is the OSHA response to hurricane Katrina. OSHA has
asked all state-plan states to participate in a response. They are looking for both safety
and health volunteers with special expertise, such as electrical hazards or an industrial
hygiene background. Collins reported MNOSHA Workplace Safety Consultation has five
volunteers. Collins indicated the deadline has been extended to next week. The request is
for a two-week span of time for each volunteer.

Collins indicated the next item to report has to do with Hispanics in Minnesota.
Collins stated there is a calendar designed to identify nationwide safety and health
outreach and training events for Hispanics. The training and education will help to raise
injury and illness prevention for Hispanics, especially in construction. There is a
clearinghouse for training materials to allow anyone in the nation to use the information.

VII. Staff reports

Compliance – Jeff Isakson

Isakson reported the compliance group had been very busy the past six months.
He stated MNOSHA Compliance had hired its first-ever summer intern, a graduate
student from the University of Minnesota Duluth Environmental Health and Safety
program. Isakson stated the intern did a fantastic job. She did a number of research
projects, one of which was to research experience modifier rates to determine whether
they could be incorporated into the scheduling plans as an additional factor to aid in the
selection of companies under target-industry lists. A complete copy of the report is in the
packets, along with the final recommendations.

The second research project done by the intern was to analyze the 31 data. These
are weekly reports by the OSHA investigators that identify what the investigators do.
That information is compared to the federal 31 reports to make sure MNOSHA is at least
as effective in the inspection process as the federal staff and also to make sure there are
no issues or glitches within the group that need to be looked at. A copy of the summary
of that report is also in your packet.
OSHA Advisory Council -5- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Isakson indicated the third project the intern did was to analyze the general duty
citations of the past three years and recommend modifications of specified Minnesota
rules to clarify hazards due to the prevalence of citations that were identified. A copy of
that summary is in your packet also.

Isakson reported there are two other research projects in draft form that will be
available for the December meeting. One analyzes the fatalities, catastrophes and serious
injuries of the past five years to determine – through SICs – which companies needed
more information to help identify specific hazards causing serious injuries. The intern
drafted a formative letter that relates to the hazard alerts. Those letters will be going to
companies that are affected.

The last project was to analyze the health inspection 2004 target program where
we look at isocyanate exposure in the spray-on truck bed relining industry. This report is
in draft form and will also be available in December.

There are a couple other reports in the packets, including the fatal and serious
injury report and the OSHSPA GRASSROOTS publication.

Partnerships: Isakson reported that Commissioner Brener, Assistant

Commissioner Wade and he attended a formal signing at the Ford plant in St. Paul. He
stated it was great to see the UAW and Ford work closely to improve employee safety,
not only at that site, but also throughout that whole corporation. Isakson stated it is
exciting to be able to build that relationship with them to improve worker safety for the
people who work in Minnesota.

Construction Breakfast seminars: Isakson reported that a focus group had been
developed, consisting of a couple risk-managers that are hired through insurance
companies, three construction company safety directors and one safety consultant. The
primary focus for the group was to develop a list of topics that would be covered during
the next year, to help pull more people into the Construction Breakfast seminars. The
topics for the next year are: personal fall-arrest systems, skid steer safety, the cost of not
having a real safety program, a hands-on AWAIR program that works and tubular
welded-frame scaffold safety.

Outreach: Isakson reported that during the past year, MNOSHA Compliance
participated in a number of full-day conferences for small-business owners throughout
greater Minnesota. These conferences provide information about regulatory requirements
and changes. Other participating agencies for these small businesses include DEED, the
Minnesota Small Business Development Centers, the U.S. Department of Labor, the
Minnesota Department of Revenue and the U.S. EEOC.

Isakson stated some of the hazard alerts on the Web site have been updated and
some new hazard alerts have been added. Some of the more recent alerts provide
information about falls from ladders used during advertising sign maintenance, tree
felling, carpenter bracket scaffolding and motor-vehicle safety.
OSHA Advisory Council -6- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Isakson indicated MNOSHA Compliance currently has a few open positions, one
due to the retirement of Mitz DelCaro. In addition, it will be adding an industrial
hygienist to the Mankato office, as well as filling a general industry metro safety
investigator position and an electric technician position in the metro office.

Isakson reported quality assurance inspections were implemented about a year

ago in Greater Minnesota, with a lot of success. Isakson explained that at quality
assurance inspections, a principal, supervisor or industrial hygienist 3 goes out with
investigators during selected inspections to ensure there is consistency in the inspections
being done in the field and also to work with the investigators on process improvement.
This is now being done in all units in Greater Minnesota.

Isakson reported federal OSHA has made some redesign efforts in the IMIS
database MNOSHA uses. The latest is a Web-based solution with an estimated timetable
of three to five years and $77 million to improve. Because of the age of the hardware and
software, MNOSHA decided to develop its own system to interface with the federal
system. One of the goals of the new system is to allow the department to image-enable
the work done by MNOSHA, to eliminate paper filing and to facilitate workflow and file
tracking while inspections are performed. Isakson stated he was involved in similar
projects at a previous job and saw a positive impact on quality improvement that helped
investigators in the inspection process. Isakson stated MNOSHA Compliance uses a
number of different databases to record information and it would be better if the
information were all under the same umbrella.

Isakson reported this project was put out for bid earlier this year and four
consulting companies submitted proposals. Of these, the proposal from Assured
Consulting was accepted. Phase one will be completed at the end of September, at a cost
of $86,000. Phase one consisted of the consultant meeting with a group of users to
determine what IMIS encompasses, what other databases are being used and what other
information should tie into this program. A feasibility study is included to determine
project requirements, detail design, costs and resources. At the completion of phase one
MNOSHA will have an idea of what phase two will cost. Phase two will actually start to
build the system.

Stuart asked if Isakson could share any names of the people in the focus group
and explain how those individuals were chosen. Isakson stated one of the other managers
was involved in that process, but said it shouldn’t be a problem to get the information.

Tindle asked whether the schedule for the Construction Breakfast seminars is on
the Web site and indicated he is particularly interested in the cost of not having an
effective program. Isakson responded that the schedule is on the Web site.

Bufton asked Isakson to talk about his background for those who do not know
him. Isakson responded that he has an undergraduate degree in electronics engineering
and technology, and a master’s degree in industrial safety and health. Prior to going back
OSHA Advisory Council -7- September 9, 2005
Minutes

to college, he worked as a mechanic on the railroad. After graduation, he worked for a

number of paper companies, including Meade in Escanaba, Mich., as its safety and health
manager, and Potlatch in Cloquet, Minn. He began working for MNOSHA in 2003, as its
Greater Minnesota supervisor in the Duluth office.

Workplace Safety Consultation – James Collins

Collins reported that in fiscal-year 2004/2005, the department spent $1.1 million
for the safety grant program. Of that amount, the employers put in $3.3 million to match,
for a total of $4.4 million. There were 180 grants offered; the private sector received 127
and the public sector received 53 grants. Collins indicated it is a very good and popular
program. He stated MNOSHA receives more applications than it has money for, but there
is good criteria in place for screening the applications. The program tries to award the
grants that will give the highest impact.

LogSafe update: Collins reported 14 workshops were conducted throughout the

state this year. A partnership has been developed with the Minnesota logger education
program, which is one of the larger logging groups from outstate, and two very successful
conferences were done with this group. Collins stated the usual on-site training and
seminars throughout the state will continue. The training topics this year were: Right-to-
Know; hearing conservation; AWAIR programs; and lockout/tagout. MNOSHA also
contracted out for two programs: fire protection use of extinguishers and CPR/first aid.
Both were with Mesabi College on the Iron Range.

Administrative operations: Collins reported MNOSHA consultation also has a

few vacancies to fill. Phil Jacobs went back to the private sector. Phil did a good job on
management and supervisors training; he may be contacted to help with other types of
training. Collins reported two other consultant positions that need to be filled, one public
sector and one VPP in construction, which is unique to Minnesota. This is the first time
Workplace Safety Consultation is focusing the VPP MNSTAR program on construction.

Productivity: Collins noted that Sept. 30 ends the federal fiscal-year, when
MNOSHA has to account for what has been done with the funds received for the year.
Collins reported that, once again, MNOSHA has surpassed the goals that were set for the
year. It asked for close to 800 initial visits and got nearly 1,000. Out of 600 training
sessions, it has trained slightly more than 20,000 workers in the state. For initial visits, it
usually tries to calculate penalty savings. This year, it identified more than 5,000 hazards
and, because all were removed, employees are safer and – in terms of the penalty
calculations – nearly $4.3 million were saved.

Alliance: Collins stated there are currently five alliances, with two more having
been offered. Workplace Safety Consultation recently signed with the Mechanical
Contractors Association. These alliances help with training and also in partnership with
colleges, universities, and trade and business associations.
OSHA Advisory Council -8- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Collins reported the inspector general is coming to Minnesota to review

MNOSHA consultation safety records. Minnesota OSHA is 90 percent federally funded
and has to follow federal regulations. Other states being inspected are New York,
Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia. The goal is to look at timely abatement of hazards. Every
time a serious hazard is identified, consultation works with the employer to set a time
frame for corrective action. Those that exceed 90 days uncorrected without extension are
the kinds of records the feds will be looking at. If it goes past 90 days and an extension
has not been granted, the employer is referred for enforcement action.

The second bureau objective is to review the records of extensions granted to

determine an interim protection is in place until the permanent protection is provided.
The opening conference is Sept. 13 in the regional office. There will also be an opening
conference at DLI and a closing conference to discuss the findings.

Collins reported five people have expressed interest in volunteering for the
hurricane Katrina relief effort. Federal OSHA provided a checklist of the requirements
needed. All volunteers should be qualified as industrial hygienists or safety professionals.

McGovern asked if the inspection by the inspector general was congressionally

initiated. Collins responded that a few years ago, federal OSHA looked at consultation
programs across the nation to see how targeting was done and if states followed the goals
they proposed to the feds for the grants. Most states followed the goals, but some states
got the money without meeting the grant requirements. The feds became critical and
wanted to know a little bit more about consultation. Under 1908, the regulation that
governs consultation, if hazards are on the books, the employer must abate the hazards.
However, letters often need to be sent reminding these employers to get the hazards fixed
within a time frame or explain why they are not fixed, to get an extension. If the
employer follows the consultation requirements, OSHA enforcement doesn’t go to the
employer except for fatalities, catastrophes and imminent danger situations. The feds
want to know if the regulations allowing consultation to get the grant money are being
followed. Consultation is also asking for more money and the feds want to make sure the
programs are currently as effective as enforcement.

Stuart asked how many companies, what percentage, go beyond the 90-day
correction deadline and need reminder letters. Collins responded the 90-day timeframe is
for employers that are not cooperating. If they are cooperating, extensions are granted for
good reasons. However, before granting the extension, employers are asked to put interim
protections in place to prevent an accident. That’s not a violation of the rule. The rule is
only violated if a hazard exceeds the mutually acceptable time frame and the employer
has not abated or contacted the consultation program. To prepare for this audit, the feds
ran a report for 2002, 2003 and 2004, and found two hazards not corrected within those
years. After checking the records, it was discovered this was the result of a glitch in the
old system. Stuart stated his interpretation was that it is an extremely rare percentage of
people that are going beyond the 90 days. Collins responded that in terms of the violation
of the rule, very few.
OSHA Advisory Council -9- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Stuart commented that was great and he is pleased to hear it is an extremely small
percentage, in fact, possibly zero percent.

Wade referred to the March 4, 2005, memorandum about how the agency
responded to the 16 recommendations made by the OAC at the Sept. 12, 2003, meeting.

1) Use workers' compensation data, experience modification rates, to determine

enforcement focus.

Wade said the experience modification rate is not a reasonable predictor. Not all
companies have an experience modification rate from their insurer and it could be costly
to develop one. She thought there was a good targeting system in place and the
experience modification rate would not be helpful to the targeting process.

Wade was impressed with the intern’s EMR report in the meeting packet and
encouraged everyone to read the report.

2) Define the differences between federal OSHA and MNOSHA requirements and
keep only the ones that positively impact safety and health.

Wade noted MNOSHA performs an annual review of statutes and rules to make
sure they are at least as effective as federal regulations. It is MNOSHA’s goal to move
forward and be more effective, not “at least as” effective.

3) Increase the effort in reducing workplace violence incidents.

Wade noted Vikki Sanders, MNOSHA Workplace Safety Consultation, is doing

an outstanding job and moving that agenda forward. They are dedicating resources to
education and outreach and are targeting high-risk workplaces. Sanders’ work is based on
word of mouth and referrals made to the consultation program, based on how effective
she has been in the past. She gives employers and employees the right language to use
and teaches them how to identify potentially violent situations. Recent feedback from an
employer gave her an astounding rating.

Sanders recently conducted employee-based training. Afterward, one employee

came to management and said he had been troubled for quite some time and that there
was a potentially volatile situation that had been brewing for years. This individual
recognized his or her own behavior was negative to another employee and there was an
opportunity to look at the behavior, not the individual. Consultation is moving that work
forward and will continue to invest resources in that area.

4) Move ergonomics ahead.

Two positions were created in the Workplace Safety Consultation unit to assist
employers in reducing the occurrences of work-related musculoskeletal disorders
OSHA Advisory Council -10- September 9, 2005
Minutes

(MSDs). They are continuing to focus on nursing homes. Information in the meeting
packets describe the effort put forth and give the number of employees and students who
have participated in training. There is still room for growth and they will continue to give
resources.

5) Increase productivity of inspectors.

MNOSHA managed to increase the number of inspections in spite of high

turnover. Wade indicated the past fiscal-year for both state and federal were very
impressive years for the MNOSHA Compliance program. The consultation program
continues to impact thousands of employers and an equally proportionate number of
employees. Wade stated there has been a significant increase in just the past year in the
number of inspections that were conducted, with no increase in the number of inspectors.
Progress has also been made in the time it takes to generate reports from the opening
conference to the time that citations are actually issued. This is particularly important,
because the employer is not obligated to take abatement action or control the hazard until
MNOSHA Compliance issues the employer its report. After MNOSHA becomes aware
that a hazard exists, then the ball is in the MNOSHA court to ensure employers recognize
the legal responsibility to control or abate that particular hazard. Moving that from an
average of 44 days to 25 days is a very significant improvement in general industry, as is
moving from 70 to 55 days in the health industry. Feedback is received on a monthly
basis from federal OSHA’s tracking of MNOSHA’s progress as a state-plan state: how
we perform based on our strategic plan, how we compare in our own region and how we
compare across the nation. In every measurable area except discrimination, MNOSHA is
performing significantly better than other state-plan states in our region, as well as
nationwide. That is comparing both state-plan states and federal-OSHA-plan states. Wade
stated that while she is extremely impressed, MNOSHA is not resting on its laurels. This
work is very important. And, while we are making progress in all of these areas, this is
good work, but there is more work to be done. So, although we have made significant
quantitative improvement, during the next year Wade will be working with Isakson on
qualitative improvements that can be made in the program as well.

6) Use the advisory council to facilitate stakeholder input in planning.

Wade asked the council to look at the value of taking the meetings outstate if we
cannot generate additional public interest. She pointed out it’s time-consuming, requires a
different kind of planning and, while it’s a good idea, if it’s not going to generate
additional input, we should stop to weigh the value of the time and effort it takes to put
10 to 15 people on the road.

Burski stated he attended the meeting in Rochester and today’s meeting, and it
seems like we are not getting outside guests other than the people who are hosting. In
fact, we do not get OAC members either.
OSHA Advisory Council -11- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Bufton stated maybe there should be discussion about whether the structure and
content of the meeting and how it gets promoted. Maybe it needs to be more of an open
forum and less of a reporting session and publicized to generate outside interest.

McGovern stated that it didn’t seem to be worth the time and effort for so many
people to travel. If you have a different agenda, then we could revisit the question.

Burski indicated he knew a news release was sent to Duluth papers, but he didn’t
know if the paper published it.

Tindle – I see some tie between items six and seven. I do not know how this
organization and the general organization and OSHA can make themselves more publicly
acceptable. The interesting part of question seven was what do people think of OSHA.
My experience is they think of the compliance function a whole lot more than they think
of the consultation function.

7) Continue to build a brand. (Action planned for next year.)

Wade indicated this action item will be on the December agenda; Chairperson
Bufton will lead that discussion.

8) Look at companies that are using behavioral safety models.

Wade commented that two companies shared their experience, so we have

satisfied that request as well.

9) Ensure that when goals are set within the program they are measurable and we
have an ability to impact them.

Wade explained it is extremely important when goals are set in the program that they are
measurable. The agency is fortunate to have a Research and Statistics unit that has been
extremely valuable in helping to set measurable goals. Several years ago, the agency
went through a process of establishing performance measurements and, on a monthly
basis, each operating unit – both for the policy units and the general support units –
provide a detailed monthly report to the commissioner and the executive staff.

10) Encourage MNOSHA to better utilize external resources to broaden our impact.

Wade indicated there are five alliances and two others being pursued. She reported
a partnership was signed just a few weeks ago and it was impressive to see labor and
management so committed to ensuring the safety of the workers. We have a few other
partnerships as well. We look at partnerships to impact those areas that are representative
of large numbers of employees or employers and that’s just a way to stretch our resources
a little bit further to ensure we are having as much impact as we possibly can.
OSHA Advisory Council -12- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Wade noted there are also the MNSTAR and MNSHARP partnerships and that
Minnesota Power is a partner through those programs. Those are ways we are partnering
and for Minnesota Power to make the commitment to host today’s meeting is indicative
of a very healthy partnership. It’s unfortunate we are not able to attract other users of our
system to see our good work, but be assured we are doing our very best.

Wade stated the commissioner is an avid supporter and marketer of the MNOSHA
consultation program. He has an open-door policy and encourages individuals, regardless
of their specific area of interest, to continue to provide feedback to the agency, so we can
improve the services we provide to employers and employees.

11) Strengthen the role of the advisory council.

Wade urged the council to continue to provide feedback and not to feel limited in
any way. She invited members to bring any concerns to our attention at any time. She
told them if opportunities are identified through internal organizations where we can be
more effective, she’s counting on the council to bring them to our attention.

12) Build stronger relationships with employers to share data and resources and to
share best practices.

Wade reported some of this has been done through the alliances and partnerships,
and we will continue to look for ways to share relevant information.

13) Increase the number of candidates for the Art McCauley award.

Wade stated this is extremely important and is continuing to be promoted.

Announcements are sent to many of the larger organizations, and individuals have an
opportunity to make an application at any time during the year. As many of you may
recall, we chose not to award the Art McCauley award this year, because of the lack of
interest that was shown. We received just a few applications and, although those
individuals certainly deserve some applause for their commitment to safety, we did not
feel the applications received raised to the level of making an award. She encouraged
assistance in the advertising the Art McCauley award so we can truly recognize the
efforts of individuals committed to safety who are making a difference every day.

14) Review the surveys to see if we are getting to the heart of the issue. (Action
planned for next year.)

Wade pointed out that at our last meeting, this group was invited to take a look at
the suggestions and to provide some feedback to the council. If anyone is prepared for
that discussion, we may open the floor up for some discussion of that today. If not, that
could be an item we come back to at a later date. Part of the challenge is many employers
have shown little or no interest in providing the feedback to us. The paper survey seemed
to provide a better response. Now that it’s an electronic survey, we have gotten little or
no response. It’s extremely important we hear from employers; if we don’t get the
OSHA Advisory Council -13- September 9, 2005
Minutes

feedback from a survey form, we will continue to look for other ways to get the feedback
needed to ensure we are being effective. Please continue to give that some thought and
bring your feedback to the council.

McGovern – It sounds like the number one issue is how to increase response rate.
Is it too late to then put it on the agenda for next time?

Isakson shared information regarding some of the things done in this area since
the last meeting. He noted the icon on the Web page has been moved to a more prominent
location at the top of the page, so people can find it easier; the Web site address is now
printed on the front of all of the new business cards for the investigators; the Web site
information has been added to the OSHA inspection booklet that is a handout provided to
every employer; the Web site information has also been added to the OSHA information
sheet that is another handout provided to employers; and, the Web site information has
been added to the inspection checklist to remind the inspectors to mention it during the
inspection. Still in progress is a review of all handouts for other opportunities for
providing that information and researching whether it’s possible to make the survey a
pop-up when users exit the Web site.

McGovern asked if the process for the survey was that people complete the
evaluation at the end of an inspection. Iskason indicated that was correct.

McGovern noted that, in terms of social response theory for how you do surveys,
there are a number of classic things, such as when you have a personal relationship and
you set up an expectation of people owing you something. It would seem people would
want to be viewed favorably with the inspection. Do you ever talk to the employers to
find out why they don’t fill it out? Isakson responded they did not.

McGovern asked how long it takes to fill in the survey. Isakson indicated it’s not
a very long survey, so it should only take three to five minutes.

McGovern suggested doing a follow-up call if not received within a week.

Bufton suggested an e-mail message from the inspector with a link to the Web
site, so all they need to do is click that link and be sent to the survey.

Burski asked if it that could be included with a close-out of the case.

Richter noted that when someone says it’s a survey, they think everything is going
to be made into a statistical report. He asked if it could it be called a comment card. He
noted he sends comment cards out for every one of their service calls and, out of 2,500 to
3,000, they probably get 2,000 back.

McGovern asked if the inspector gave the employer anything in writing or if it is

a verbal request to take the survey online. Isakson responded there was not and that is one
OSHA Advisory Council -14- September 9, 2005
Minutes

of the things on a list that is starting to be done by printing that information on handouts
and discussing it at the closing conference.

McGovern suggested a visual queue, because they might not want to do it right
then, but if they had a colorful postcard or something to put on their bulletin board as a
reminder.

15) Special effort to keep employees within the program

Wade noted one of the areas of concern expressed by this group and internally is
the amount of turnover we continue to see in the MNOSHA programs. For many years
that was a one-sided conversation, with us seeing significant turnover in our compliance
program. However, most recently we have seen a significant increase in the turnover in
the consultation program as well. It is important we keep this particular topic in context.
We are limited with what we can pay and are bound by the bargaining agreement. In
addition to being bound by the bargaining agreement, we must be cognizant of the
individuals who are already a part of the program. We have instituted a process that
allows every departing employee an opportunity to provide us very specific feedback
about why they are leaving the MNOSHA program.

Wade noted that, to the extent that the goal is to have a positive impact on
employees and employers in Minnesota, we believe losing our staff members to private
business is not the worst thing. It is a beaurocratic and administrative nightmare that has a
profound affect on the ability to plan the work. However, individuals leaving stay within
the safety and health industry and go on to have a more direct impact on a smaller
number of employees. We are continuing to look at this as a significant issue, because we
believe it is necessary to have some degree of stability for us to maintain effectiveness.
We have identified it is generally between the three- and five-year mark when individuals
start to make a determination about whether they want to stay with MNOSHA long-term.
Generally speaking, those who stay beyond five years tend to be individuals who have a
plan to stay with the program for the long-run. So, with that in mind, we have developed
another position between the senior and principal levels; those individuals qualifying for
that promotional opportunity are individuals who have demonstrated their ability to
conduct the volume and qualitative inspections. They are individuals who have
performed some of the more difficult inspections. We believe that by providing yet
another promotional opportunity, it may encourage a few more people who are looking to
leave right at that critical moment, just when they are fully trained, to stay with
MNOSHA a bit longer.

We are continuing to look at the program management to ensure there isn’t

anything specific within the management that is encouraging individuals to leave. The
managers have participated in 360-degree feedback and we’re getting feedback from all
different levels. We are committed to continuing to look at this as an important issue, but
we cannot allow the turnover to cripple the program. We think by being the feeder source
for future safety directors, that too is an investment in ensuring that Minnesota
workplaces remain safe.
OSHA Advisory Council -15- September 9, 2005
Minutes

Bufton noted it would be interesting to benchmark turnover against that of safety

professionals. Perhaps we are stretching for solutions to a problem that doesn’t exist,
because there are jobs that turnover at a regular pace as the norm and not the exception.
While we hope we can keep employees as long as they are productive, the productivity
numbers and the quality numbers are high enough that it would seem it’s not impacting
negatively on the program.

Collins reported two colleges, Mankato and Cambridge, did a need analysis for
safety people and have created a two-year certificate. This may help to reduce the
turnover, because we will have more two-year safety and workers’ comp graduates.

16) Add another person to answer the phones

Wade indicated other things are being done to ensure the customers are serviced
in an expedient manner. The phone tree has been updated to provide options for callers to
select from. Wade stated the budget does not allow or support the proposal to simply add
another person. She noted they looked at the programs and tried to streamline them to
ensure the majority of time is dedicated to inspection activity.

Wade said this was extremely valuable feedback and it forces MNOSHA to look
at its programs. If anyone has further input or research to consider, please make DLI
aware of it.

McGovern made a motion to adjourn at 12:43 p.m. Burski seconded the

motion. All voted in favor of the motion and it passed.

Respectfully submitted,
Debbie Caswell
Executive Secretary