The second nurse airlifted to Emory you aren't going to believe your eyes

[bigrebnc1775]

Try that excuse with OSHA, "hey my workers need to see better, so they can't wear PPE" If you can't do a job with the right PPE, don't do it.

If you tell OSHA that the workers cannot see because of the PPE, they will tell you to find a way to minimize or eliminate the hazard and still use the necessary PPE.

That is what they have done. They have a person who watches for any hazards that could potentially damage the hazmat suits. Since he is not going on the flight, and the patient (source of the hazard) is contained inside a hazmat suit, he faces no hazards.

If an electrical lineman is going to be within range of energized equipment, he must wear PPE to prevent electrocution. If he cannot see all the hazards, a spotter will be assigned to watch for the hazards. The spotter does not need to wear the PPE to prevent electrocution. Same situation here.

Wrong at all times on the job you always wear your PPE

His job is watch the workers. He is not handling the patient.

He took something from one of those who had just handle the nurse.

And if whatever he took was not exposed to the virus, he does not need to worry. Since the virus is contained inside the hazmat suits, and the medical staff and patient were suited up in isolation, there is no hazard.

By your way of seeing it, they should have to destroy the tarmac where the people inside the hazmat suits walked.

The hazmat suits stop the virus.

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Try that excuse with OSHA, "hey my workers need to see better, so they can't wear PPE" If you can't do a job with the right PPE, don't do it.

If you tell OSHA that the workers cannot see because of the PPE, they will tell you to find a way to minimize or eliminate the hazard and still use the necessary PPE.

That is what they have done. They have a person who watches for any hazards that could potentially damage the hazmat suits. Since he is not going on the flight, and the patient (source of the hazard) is contained inside a hazmat suit, he faces no hazards.

If an electrical lineman is going to be within range of energized equipment, he must wear PPE to prevent electrocution. If he cannot see all the hazards, a spotter will be assigned to watch for the hazards. The spotter does not need to wear the PPE to prevent electrocution. Same situation here.

Wrong at all times on the job you always wear your PPE

That applies for general PPE. A hazmat suit is specialized PPE and is not worn unless there is a reasonable expectation of exposure. In the situation shown in the OP, there is no reasonable expectation of exposure.

The spotter does not wear PPE for high voltage work, since he will not be within the range of the hazard.

When you wear hazmat gear to go into a tank, does everyone in the entire plant don hazmat gear?

one more time while on any job you are required by OSHA to wear your PPE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TASK IS

BS. You have no clue about what you are saying but at this point I think I will go with what the CDC says is protocol over your opinion.

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

 

[WinterBorn]

If you tell OSHA that the workers cannot see because of the PPE, they will tell you to find a way to minimize or eliminate the hazard and still use the necessary PPE.

That is what they have done. They have a person who watches for any hazards that could potentially damage the hazmat suits. Since he is not going on the flight, and the patient (source of the hazard) is contained inside a hazmat suit, he faces no hazards.

If an electrical lineman is going to be within range of energized equipment, he must wear PPE to prevent electrocution. If he cannot see all the hazards, a spotter will be assigned to watch for the hazards. The spotter does not need to wear the PPE to prevent electrocution. Same situation here.

Wrong at all times on the job you always wear your PPE

His job is watch the workers. He is not handling the patient.

He took something from one of those who had just handle the nurse.

And if whatever he took was not exposed to the virus, he does not need to worry. Since the virus is contained inside the hazmat suits, and the medical staff and patient were suited up in isolation, there is no hazard.

By your way of seeing it, they should have to destroy the tarmac where the people inside the hazmat suits walked.

The hazmat suits stop the virus.

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

 

[WinterBorn]

If you tell OSHA that the workers cannot see because of the PPE, they will tell you to find a way to minimize or eliminate the hazard and still use the necessary PPE.

That is what they have done. They have a person who watches for any hazards that could potentially damage the hazmat suits. Since he is not going on the flight, and the patient (source of the hazard) is contained inside a hazmat suit, he faces no hazards.

If an electrical lineman is going to be within range of energized equipment, he must wear PPE to prevent electrocution. If he cannot see all the hazards, a spotter will be assigned to watch for the hazards. The spotter does not need to wear the PPE to prevent electrocution. Same situation here.

Wrong at all times on the job you always wear your PPE

That applies for general PPE. A hazmat suit is specialized PPE and is not worn unless there is a reasonable expectation of exposure. In the situation shown in the OP, there is no reasonable expectation of exposure.

The spotter does not wear PPE for high voltage work, since he will not be within the range of the hazard.

When you wear hazmat gear to go into a tank, does everyone in the entire plant don hazmat gear?

one more time while on any job you are required by OSHA to wear your PPE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TASK IS

BS. You have no clue about what you are saying but at this point I think I will go with what the CDC says is protocol over your opinion.

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Wrong at all times on the job you always wear your PPE

His job is watch the workers. He is not handling the patient.

He took something from one of those who had just handle the nurse.

And if whatever he took was not exposed to the virus, he does not need to worry. Since the virus is contained inside the hazmat suits, and the medical staff and patient were suited up in isolation, there is no hazard.

By your way of seeing it, they should have to destroy the tarmac where the people inside the hazmat suits walked.

The hazmat suits stop the virus.

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

STUPID **** the basic PPE must be worn at all times while on the job site, If you don't think every person on the job site doesn't have to wear their PPE you don't know jack shit. I do this for a ******* living dumb ****

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Wrong at all times on the job you always wear your PPE

That applies for general PPE. A hazmat suit is specialized PPE and is not worn unless there is a reasonable expectation of exposure. In the situation shown in the OP, there is no reasonable expectation of exposure.

The spotter does not wear PPE for high voltage work, since he will not be within the range of the hazard.

When you wear hazmat gear to go into a tank, does everyone in the entire plant don hazmat gear?

one more time while on any job you are required by OSHA to wear your PPE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TASK IS

BS. You have no clue about what you are saying but at this point I think I will go with what the CDC says is protocol over your opinion.

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

TRell you what, go on a construction site and wait for OSHA DON'T WEAR YOUR PPE I have seen guys fined They weren't working but was on the job site.

 

[WinterBorn]

His job is watch the workers. He is not handling the patient.

He took something from one of those who had just handle the nurse.

And if whatever he took was not exposed to the virus, he does not need to worry. Since the virus is contained inside the hazmat suits, and the medical staff and patient were suited up in isolation, there is no hazard.

By your way of seeing it, they should have to destroy the tarmac where the people inside the hazmat suits walked.

The hazmat suits stop the virus.

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

STUPID **** the basic PPE must be worn at all times while on the job site, If you don't think every person on the job site doesn't have to wear their PPE you don't know jack shit. I do this for a ******* living dumb ****

And like a typical dumb ****, you are avoiding the actual topic.

Let me try again. Do you wear a hazmat suit at all times at work?

Look at the OSHA Standard. It requires PPE if there is a hazard present nor is there likely to be a hazard. In the picture in the OP, there is no hazard for the man wearing street clothes. Nor is there likely to be a hazard.

I spent 12 years as the Director of Safety for an operating unit of (at the time) the largest utility construction contractor in the world. I have more certifications and training from OSHA than I am willing to list. I was part of the team that wrote the main safety manual for that company.

If there is no hazard present, or likely to be present, you are not required to wear PPE. Most companies make entire work sites PPE required spaces, but that is the company, not OSHA. For OSHA it depends on the hazards present or likely to be present.

 

[WinterBorn]

That applies for general PPE. A hazmat suit is specialized PPE and is not worn unless there is a reasonable expectation of exposure. In the situation shown in the OP, there is no reasonable expectation of exposure.

The spotter does not wear PPE for high voltage work, since he will not be within the range of the hazard.

When you wear hazmat gear to go into a tank, does everyone in the entire plant don hazmat gear?

one more time while on any job you are required by OSHA to wear your PPE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TASK IS

BS. You have no clue about what you are saying but at this point I think I will go with what the CDC says is protocol over your opinion.

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

TRell you what, go on a construction site and wait for OSHA DON'T WEAR YOUR PPE I have seen guys fined They weren't working but was on the job site.

They would have ONLY been fined by OSHA if they did not have PPE on and there was a hazard present or likely to be present. Otherwise, the rule is by the company.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

one more time while on any job you are required by OSHA to wear your PPE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TASK IS

BS. You have no clue about what you are saying but at this point I think I will go with what the CDC says is protocol over your opinion.

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

TRell you what, go on a construction site and wait for OSHA DON'T WEAR YOUR PPE I have seen guys fined They weren't working but was on the job site.

They would have ONLY been fined by OSHA if they did not have PPE on and there was a hazard present or likely to be present. Otherwise, the rule is by the company.

I dare you but you've never step foot on a construction site.
OH one more thing You never mentioned this
"The employer shall ensure" OSHA is telling the employer that it is a requirement and another reason is that OSHA isn't always on a job site but they can do a spot inspection.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He took something from one of those who had just handle the nurse.

And if whatever he took was not exposed to the virus, he does not need to worry. Since the virus is contained inside the hazmat suits, and the medical staff and patient were suited up in isolation, there is no hazard.

By your way of seeing it, they should have to destroy the tarmac where the people inside the hazmat suits walked.

The hazmat suits stop the virus.

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

STUPID **** the basic PPE must be worn at all times while on the job site, If you don't think every person on the job site doesn't have to wear their PPE you don't know jack shit. I do this for a ******* living dumb ****

And like a typical dumb ****, you are avoiding the actual topic.

Let me try again. Do you wear a hazmat suit at all times at work?

Look at the OSHA Standard. It requires PPE if there is a hazard present nor is there likely to be a hazard. In the picture in the OP, there is no hazard for the man wearing street clothes. Nor is there likely to be a hazard.

I spent 12 years as the Director of Safety for an operating unit of (at the time) the largest utility construction contractor in the world. I have more certifications and training from OSHA than I am willing to list. I was part of the team that wrote the main safety manual for that company.

If there is no hazard present, or likely to be present, you are not required to wear PPE. Most companies make entire work sites PPE required spaces, but that is the company, not OSHA. For OSHA it depends on the hazards present or likely to be present.

No I don't always wear a haz mat suit, But I do always wear my PPE while on the job

 

[WinterBorn]

BS. You have no clue about what you are saying but at this point I think I will go with what the CDC says is protocol over your opinion.

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

TRell you what, go on a construction site and wait for OSHA DON'T WEAR YOUR PPE I have seen guys fined They weren't working but was on the job site.

They would have ONLY been fined by OSHA if they did not have PPE on and there was a hazard present or likely to be present. Otherwise, the rule is by the company.

I dare you but you've never step foot on a construction site.
OH one more thing You never mentioned this
"The employer shall ensure" OSHA is telling the employer that it is a requirement and another reason is that OSHA isn't always on a job site but they can do a spot inspection.

I have been on work sites all over the eastern half of this country. So please spare me the nonsense.

Yes, the employer "shall insure", but the requirement for PPE is based on whether a hazard is present or likely to be present.

 

[WinterBorn]

And if whatever he took was not exposed to the virus, he does not need to worry. Since the virus is contained inside the hazmat suits, and the medical staff and patient were suited up in isolation, there is no hazard.

By your way of seeing it, they should have to destroy the tarmac where the people inside the hazmat suits walked.

The hazmat suits stop the virus.

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

STUPID **** the basic PPE must be worn at all times while on the job site, If you don't think every person on the job site doesn't have to wear their PPE you don't know jack shit. I do this for a ******* living dumb ****

And like a typical dumb ****, you are avoiding the actual topic.

Let me try again. Do you wear a hazmat suit at all times at work?

Look at the OSHA Standard. It requires PPE if there is a hazard present nor is there likely to be a hazard. In the picture in the OP, there is no hazard for the man wearing street clothes. Nor is there likely to be a hazard.

I spent 12 years as the Director of Safety for an operating unit of (at the time) the largest utility construction contractor in the world. I have more certifications and training from OSHA than I am willing to list. I was part of the team that wrote the main safety manual for that company.

If there is no hazard present, or likely to be present, you are not required to wear PPE. Most companies make entire work sites PPE required spaces, but that is the company, not OSHA. For OSHA it depends on the hazards present or likely to be present.

No I don't always wear a haz mat suit, But I do always wear my PPE while on the job

The hazmat suit is also PPE. So you are saying that you don't wear the hazmat suit when there is no hazard for which it would be the proper PPE? And yet, you think the medical protocol officer should be wearing one, despite the fact that there is no hazard which warrants its use.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How does anyone know if it's exposed? Do you? you're defending something that you don't know about because you weren't their. At least I have the common sense to question it. You dumb ****

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

STUPID **** the basic PPE must be worn at all times while on the job site, If you don't think every person on the job site doesn't have to wear their PPE you don't know jack shit. I do this for a ******* living dumb ****

And like a typical dumb ****, you are avoiding the actual topic.

Let me try again. Do you wear a hazmat suit at all times at work?

Look at the OSHA Standard. It requires PPE if there is a hazard present nor is there likely to be a hazard. In the picture in the OP, there is no hazard for the man wearing street clothes. Nor is there likely to be a hazard.

I spent 12 years as the Director of Safety for an operating unit of (at the time) the largest utility construction contractor in the world. I have more certifications and training from OSHA than I am willing to list. I was part of the team that wrote the main safety manual for that company.

If there is no hazard present, or likely to be present, you are not required to wear PPE. Most companies make entire work sites PPE required spaces, but that is the company, not OSHA. For OSHA it depends on the hazards present or likely to be present.

No I don't always wear a haz mat suit, But I do always wear my PPE while on the job

The hazmat suit is also PPE. So you are saying that you don't wear the hazmat suit when there is no hazard for which it would be the proper PPE? And yet, you think the medical protocol officer should be wearing one, despite the fact that there is no hazard which warrants its use.

I'm saying I always wear my PPE at least the standard at all times. He had NO PPE on at no time no matter who or what he touched.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I have to wear at least the basic PPE everyday that I work so you are ******* dismissed.

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

TRell you what, go on a construction site and wait for OSHA DON'T WEAR YOUR PPE I have seen guys fined They weren't working but was on the job site.

They would have ONLY been fined by OSHA if they did not have PPE on and there was a hazard present or likely to be present. Otherwise, the rule is by the company.

I dare you but you've never step foot on a construction site.
OH one more thing You never mentioned this
"The employer shall ensure" OSHA is telling the employer that it is a requirement and another reason is that OSHA isn't always on a job site but they can do a spot inspection.

I have been on work sites all over the eastern half of this country. So please spare me the nonsense.

Yes, the employer "shall insure", but the requirement for PPE is based on whether a hazard is present or likely to be present.

As directed by OSHA, I really doubt you have you can easily read something on the internet, but you are acting as if you don't understand what it is you are saying.

 

[WinterBorn]

I can say that they were suited up in isolation because that would be the proper protocol, and because doing otherwise defies the purpose of the hazmat suit.

You dumb ****. Tell us again how all PPE is worn all the time? I dare say I have more knowledge of OSHA and safety regs than you could dream of.

STUPID **** the basic PPE must be worn at all times while on the job site, If you don't think every person on the job site doesn't have to wear their PPE you don't know jack shit. I do this for a ******* living dumb ****

And like a typical dumb ****, you are avoiding the actual topic.

Let me try again. Do you wear a hazmat suit at all times at work?

Look at the OSHA Standard. It requires PPE if there is a hazard present nor is there likely to be a hazard. In the picture in the OP, there is no hazard for the man wearing street clothes. Nor is there likely to be a hazard.

I spent 12 years as the Director of Safety for an operating unit of (at the time) the largest utility construction contractor in the world. I have more certifications and training from OSHA than I am willing to list. I was part of the team that wrote the main safety manual for that company.

If there is no hazard present, or likely to be present, you are not required to wear PPE. Most companies make entire work sites PPE required spaces, but that is the company, not OSHA. For OSHA it depends on the hazards present or likely to be present.

No I don't always wear a haz mat suit, But I do always wear my PPE while on the job

The hazmat suit is also PPE. So you are saying that you don't wear the hazmat suit when there is no hazard for which it would be the proper PPE? And yet, you think the medical protocol officer should be wearing one, despite the fact that there is no hazard which warrants its use.

I'm saying I always wear my PPE at least the standard at all times. He had NO PPE on at no time no matter who or what he touched.

No PPE was required. He is not on a construction site. There is nothing else moving close to them. His job is to make sure they got onboard the plane without incident.

 

[Politico]

Yeah, let`s listen to a bunch of redneck swampdwellers. I am sure they know more about medical science than actual professionals.




******* ridicilous!

My guess is I had more NBC training than any of them

I had NBC training as well. That is a very different situation. In an NBC attack, the entire outside area would be considered contaminated. That is not the case here. There is no Ebola on the tarmac. It is contained in the patient's suit.

Just asking, if so then why is everyone else wearing a suit?

Because they were getting on the plane.

 

[WinterBorn]

Basic PPE. Is a hazmat suit considered basic PPE?? And is the requirement to wear PPE a company policy or because there is actually a hazard present?

TRell you what, go on a construction site and wait for OSHA DON'T WEAR YOUR PPE I have seen guys fined They weren't working but was on the job site.

They would have ONLY been fined by OSHA if they did not have PPE on and there was a hazard present or likely to be present. Otherwise, the rule is by the company.

I dare you but you've never step foot on a construction site.
OH one more thing You never mentioned this
"The employer shall ensure" OSHA is telling the employer that it is a requirement and another reason is that OSHA isn't always on a job site but they can do a spot inspection.

I have been on work sites all over the eastern half of this country. So please spare me the nonsense.

Yes, the employer "shall insure", but the requirement for PPE is based on whether a hazard is present or likely to be present.

As directed by OSHA, I really doubt you have you can easily read something on the internet, but you are acting as if you don't understand what it is you are saying.

What you believe really doesn't matter to me. Nor does it change the facts.

OSHA bases the requirements on the hazards present or likely to be present.

 

[Freewill]

Yeah, let`s listen to a bunch of redneck swampdwellers. I am sure they know more about medical science than actual professionals.




******* ridicilous!

My guess is I had more NBC training than any of them

I had NBC training as well. That is a very different situation. In an NBC attack, the entire outside area would be considered contaminated. That is not the case here. There is no Ebola on the tarmac. It is contained in the patient's suit.

Just asking, if so then why is everyone else wearing a suit?

Because they were getting on the plane.

So prior to being on the plane there was not risk? Are the pilots wearing suits?

 

[dannyboys]

Canadian CBC radio yesterday interviewed the head writer on health issues for a Canadian newspaper.
As soon as I heard he was about to be interviewed I asked myself how long it would take him to trash FOX News. He did.
His explanation as to why the ******* fool 'clipboard man' wasn't wearing any protective gear was: "When people are wearing that protective gear they can't see in front of themselves so he was telling them where to walk to board the plane".
Unfucking believable!

 

[eagle1462010]

PPE is taks specific........PERIOD..............

In this case, they were following CDC protocol.........Unless someone can cite a different protocol, aka verifiable data then he was following the procedures set for this task...................

These guys are experts in this field.........They don't want to catch Ebola, and the nurse was contained in a bio suit. He acted as a safety observer and by the CDC guidelines he was legal to the task.