OSHA News Brief: OSHA cites Atlanta-area commercial lamination company for 18 serious safety and health violations; nearly $80K in penalties proposed [05/26/2015]

OSHA News Brief: OSHA cites Atlanta-area commercial lamination company for 18 serious safety and health violations; nearly $80K in penalties proposed [05/26/2015]

OSHA News Release: Federal court finds Martin Foundry, owners and consultants in contempt for not allowing OSHA inspection [05/22/2015]

OSHA News Release: Federal court finds Martin Foundry, owners and consultants in contempt for not allowing OSHA inspection [05/22/2015]

FTC CHARGES COLLEGES WITH MISLEADING STUDENTS REGARDING TRAINING, CREDIT TRANSFERS

FROM:  U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Ashworth College Settles FTC Charges it Misled Students About Career Training, Credit Transfers

Ashworth College has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges it misrepresented to students that they would get the training and credentials needed to switch careers or get a new job, and that the course credits they earned would transfer to other schools. In reality, many programs offered by the for-profit institution did not meet state requirements for desired careers, and the claims made about credit transfers were often not true.
“When schools promise students they can transfer course credits or get a better job after completing their programs, they’d better be able to back up those claims,” said Jessica Rich, Director, FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Ashworth College didn’t tell the truth when it made those promises to prospective students.”

According to the Commission’s complaint, the Professional Career Development Institute, LLC, doing business as Ashworth College, violated the FTC Act by deceptively marketing its online college degree and career-training programs. The FTC alleges some degrees and programs offered by Ashworth College failed to meet the basic educational requirements set by state licensing boards for careers or jobs such as real estate appraisers, home inspectors, elementary school educators, massage practitioners, and more. The FTC also alleges the institution claimed that its credits would transfer even though it lacked supporting data that other colleges and universities would accept their credits.

Tuition at Ashworth College ranges from hundreds to several thousand dollars. Ashworth College does not accept student loans, and students are required to pay tuition in full or make monthly payments. However, it does accept military benefits including GI Bill payments, and has directed some of its advertising to military servicemembers and their families.      

The proposed stipulated court order prohibits Ashworth College from misrepresenting that:

completing Ashworth’s program will qualify students to obtain vocational licenses without any additional training or experience;
Ashworth’s programs provide all the training and credentials required to switch careers or obtain a job in a new field;
there will be job security or steady employment for consumers completing its programs; and that
course credits are generally recognized by, and accepted, by other postsecondary institutions.
The order also includes an $11 million judgment, which is suspended based on the institution’s inability to pay.

Students interested in pursuing a higher education should check out the FTC’s updated guidance, Choosing a College: Questions to Ask. Commission staff also has a new post, An Unlikely Commencement Address, on the Business Center Blog.

The Commission vote authorizing the filing of the complaint and the proposed stipulated court order was 5-0. The complaint and proposed order were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on May 26, 2015.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them.

U.S., CANADA AND MEXICO MEET TO DISCUSS ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT ISSUES

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, May 21, 2015
Officials from the U.S., Canada and Mexico Participate in Trilateral Meeting in Mexico City to Discuss Antitrust Enforcement

The heads of the antitrust agencies of the United States, Canada and Mexico met today in Mexico City to discuss their ongoing work to ensure effective antitrust enforcement cooperation in our increasingly interconnected markets.

The meetings were held among Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, Chairwoman Edith Ramirez of the Federal Trade Commission, Canadian Commissioner of Competition John Pecman and President Alejandra Palacios Prieto of the Mexican Federal Economic Competition Commission.

The discussions covered a wide range of topics, including implementation of Mexico’s new competition law, enforcement cooperation among the three countries’ antitrust agencies, approaches to innovative and disruptive technologies and current enforcement priorities.

“We value our close relationships with our antitrust partners north and south of the border,” said Assistant Attorney General Baer.  “Our shared enforcement interests and tradition of cooperating when investigating mergers and cartels ensure that North American markets remain competitive.  These annual ‘trilateral’ meetings give us a chance to review and improve our enforcement cooperation and to engage in policy dialogue on emerging topics of common interest.”

“These meetings are an important element in building and maintaining the strong relationships that help us meet enforcement and policy challenges in all three countries,” said Chairwoman Ramirez.  “The need to cooperate across our borders increases every year, and we are working together to meet that challenge.”

The four agency heads also spoke at a public conference organized by the Mexican agency, which included remarks by Assistant Attorney General Baer on the importance of anti-cartel enforcement and the role of criminal sanctions in the United States.

The meetings build on the foundations laid by the 1995 antitrust cooperation agreement between the United States and Canada, the 2000 agreement between the United States and Mexico and the 2001 agreement between Canada and Mexico.  The agreements commit the antitrust agencies to cooperate and coordinate with each other to make their antitrust policies and enforcement as consistent and effective as possible.

COMPANY WILL PAY $300,000 CIVIL PENALTY AND CEASE MARKETING, SALES OF FLAMMABLE HYDROCARBON REFRIGERANTS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Enviro-Safe Refrigerants Agrees to Halt Sales of Unapproved Flammable Hydrocarbon Refrigerants as Direct Replacements for Ozone Depleting Substances

Enviro-Safe Refrigerants Inc. of Pekin, Illinois, has agreed to pay a $300,000 civil penalty and cease marketing and sale of unapproved flammable hydrocarbon refrigerants as substitutes for ozone depleting substances (ODS).  ODS are being phased out of production and importation because they deplete the Earth’s stratospheric ozone layer.  As part of the United States’ transition away from ODS, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program evaluates and approves substitute refrigerants so that they can safely and legally replace ODS.  EPA evaluates these potential substitute refrigerants according to health, safety and environmental criteria.  The Clean Air Act addresses ODS and establishes standards and requirements where a substitute for an ODS is sought to be introduced to the marketplace.

According to the two-count complaint, filed simultaneously with the settlement today in the Central District of Illinois, Enviro-Safe allegedly violated Clean Air Act requirements through the marketing and sale of two flammable hydrocarbon refrigerant products, ES 22a and ES 502a, as substitutes for ODS without providing the requisite information to EPA for review and approval.  EPA has not approved any flammable hydrocarbon as a replacement for ODS in systems not specifically designed for flammable refrigerants and has warned that use of flammable refrigerants in those systems presents a risk of fire or explosion.

“With this settlement, Enviro-Safe will pay a penalty, stop its nationwide sales of unapproved flammable refrigerants and ozone depleting substances, and notify consumers of potential safety hazards from these products,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden of the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.  “This civil action illustrates how the requirements of the Clean Air Act guard consumer safety and the health of our environment each and every day.”

“The actions Enviro-Safe will be required to take under this consent decree will protect consumers and the environment from a potentially dangerous product,” said Regional Administrator Susan Hedman of EPA.

In addition to paying a penalty and halting non-compliant sales, the company will also state on the label of any flammable refrigerant, its website and other marketing materials that the refrigerant is “flammable to an open flame or spark” and to “proceed with caution if used in systems designed for non-flammable refrigerants.”  Labels must also include any use restrictions for approved substitutes.  The company will notify by mail all known past customers that purchased products labeled “ES 12a,” “ES 22a” and “ES 502a” of potential safety hazards associated with such products.

U.S. DOL REPORTS DUCT MANUFACTURER FACES FINES RELATED TO DOZENS OF WORKER INJURIES

FROM:  U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT 

Pennsylvania duct manufacturer faces more than $1M in fines as workers

suffer dozens of injuries, including crushed and amputated fingers

Lloyd Industries Inc., named severe safety violator, defies federal safety inspectors

MONTGOMERYVILLE, Pa. — Lloyd Industries Inc. manufacturers the ventilation, duct and fire safety products used at places like New York's Chrysler Building, Philadelphia International Airport, and the stadiums the New York Yankees and Baltimore Ravens call home.

In the last 15 years, the people who work for this southeastern Pennsylvania manufacturer have been left to worry about returning home with a workplace injury as Lloyd Industries allows them to operate machines without protection from dangerous moving parts, and exposes them to hazardous noise levels without yearly tests to protect their hearing.

Despite numerous federal inspections, warnings, fines and promises to stop putting workers at risk, the company's repeated failure to keep its employees safe has resulted in approximately 40 serious injuries since 2000. These injuries include serious lacerations as well as crushed, fractured, dislocated and amputated fingers.

After an inspection prompted by a gruesome injury in July 2014, the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration levied $822,000 in fines against Lloyd Industries Inc. bringing the company's total OSHA fines to more than $1 million since 2000. OSHA has also placed the company in its Severe Violator Enforcement Program.

"William Lloyd and Lloyd Industries are serial violators of OSHA safety standards, and their workers have paid the price," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "No employer is above the law. For 15 years, they have repeatedly put their employees at risk of serious injuries. This must stop now."

In the July incident, the die on a press brake machine dropped on a worker's right hand, resulting in the amputation of three fingers. The machine lacked required safety guards and had not worked properly before the incident — a fact of which the owner was aware.

Since 2000, William Lloyd has shown a pattern of defiance toward OSHA safety standards: Inspectors find violations, including the absence of safety guards to prevent serious injuries from moving machine parts. Lloyd then agrees to correct the hazardous conditions and accepts OSHA penalties, but similar violations are found when the inspectors return. In one instance, OSHA officials were forced to summon U.S. federal marshals to gain entrance to the plant when Lloyd refused to admit them, even after they obtained a warrant.

During one inspection, Lloyd complained to OSHA inspectors that the machine guards that protected his employees slowed production. He also made a conscious decision in 2013 to stop an audiometric testing program required to prevent employee hearing loss, OSHA found. The testing only resumed in December 2014, after OSHA's investigation.

In its latest inspection OSHA issued 10 willful violations based on the company's repeated failure to guard machines, and to provide annual audiometric tests. Additionally, the company was cited for three willful, four serious, and seven other-than-serious violations for electrical hazards, noise protection, and recordkeeping violations. Read the citations, here and here.

Incorporated in 1981, Lloyd Industries Inc. manufactures fire and smoke dampers. It employs approximately 70 workers at its Montgomeryville site and 25 employees at a second location in Orange Park, Florida. The firm's workers' compensation insurer is AmeriHealth Casualty Services in Philadelphia. The company has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA's area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Each year, more than 200,000 American workers suffer cuts, lacerations and amputations from operating parts of dangerous machinery. Investigators often find various upsetters, power press brakes and forging machines used in the plant lack adequate safety mechanisms. Machine hazards continue to be among the most frequently cited by OSHA.

DOJ FILES SUITE AGAINST BUSINESS FOR VIOLATING RIGHTS OF NAVAL RESERVE CAPTAIN

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT   

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Justice Department Files Federal Lawsuit Against Park City Business for Violating the Employment Rights of Utah Naval Reserve Member

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division and U.S Attorney Carlie Christensen of the District of Utah announced today the filing of a complaint in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City against Veteran’s Trading Company (VTC), a business with headquarters in Park City, Utah.  The complaint alleges the business violated the employment rights of Naval Reserve Captain Paul M. Costello under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).  Costello is a Navy veteran with a disability who has served his country as an F-18 fighter pilot.  Since 1997, he has served as a member of the United States Naval Reserve.

According to the complaint, filed by the United States on Costello’s behalf, Costello’s military service was a motivating factor in VTC’s decisions to deny his request for re-employment and, ultimately, to terminate his employment.  The United States claims that both actions by VTC violated Costello’s USERRA rights.

The complaint further alleges that in July 2013, VTC fired Costello from his job as company President due to his military service and subsequently denied Costello’s application for reemployment following his active military duty in September 2013.  On April 30, 2015, VTC pre-emptively filed its own suit against Costello in Utah state court claiming that he was inappropriately remunerated for his service to the company while he was on military leave; despite the fact that while he was on military he took personal leave in order to preside over company meetings.  In addition to filing its federal complaint, the United States removed the employer’s action from state court to federal court.

“The brave men and women who serve in our Armed Forces should never have to fear losing their job while they’re deployed overseas,” said Acting Associate Attorney General Stuart F. Delery.  “That’s why the Department of Justice is committed to protecting the employment rights of service members and we will continue to devote time and resources to hold bad actors accountable.”

“Captain Costello served our nation honorably, and USERRA guarantees his right to re-employment upon his return from service,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division.  “Through the department’s newly created Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative, we will continue to build on our strong ties with federal partners and continue using every tool at our disposal to protect the rights of the men and women who serve in our Armed Forces.”

“Members of our National Guard and Reserves make many sacrifices, including spending months or years away from their jobs and families,” said U.S. Attorney Christensen.  “When our service members are deployed in the service of our country, they are entitled to retain their civilian employment and to the protections of federal law that prevent them from being subject to discrimination based upon their military obligations.  We are filing suit today, on behalf of Captain Costello, a member of the U.S. Naval Reserve, to ensure that he does not lose his rights while he was protecting ours.”

USERRA protects the rights of uniformed service members to retain their civilian employment following absences due to military service obligations, and proved that service members cannot be discriminated against because of their military obligations.

The lawsuit filed by the United States seeks damages equal to the amount of Costello’s lost wages and other benefits caused by VTC’s failure to comply with USERRA and a dismissal of VTC’s complaint.  It also seeks an order requiring VTC to return Costello’s ownership and distribution shares and pay him all amounts that were distributed to shareholders between June 9, 2013, and the date of judgment.  The lawsuit seeks an order requiring VTC to pay for all litigation fees related to the court action.

Costello initially filed a complaint with the Labor Department’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service, which investigated this matter and, after resolution failed, referred it to the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation Section.  This lawsuit followed as a collaborative initiative between the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah.