Opinion ID: 407570
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Serious Violation

Text: 53 Willson was also cited for failure to provide the required interior fall protection; the Secretary charged a serious violation of section .750(b)(2)(i). 30 The citation issued reads: 54 29 CFR 1926.750(b)(2)(i): During skeleton steel erection, a tightly planked and substantial floor was not maintained within 2 stories or 30 feet, whichever is less, below and directly under that portion of each tier of beams on which work was being performed: 55 (a) South side of building-skeleton framework was placed on the ninth level before seventh level was tightly planked, exposing employees to a fall of approximately 33 feet 9 inches, on 3/24/80. 56 Citation and Notification of Penalty, J.A. at 6. 57 Willson attacks this citation on two grounds. First, petitioner claims that the Secretary failed to establish that an employee had been exposed to a hazard. Willson contends in this regard that fall protection is provided to its employees by means of safety belts attached to life lines and that there was therefore no fall hazard at all. Section .750(b)(2)(i), however, requires temporary flooring, not safety belts. Unlike other sections of Part 1926, this standard is clear in its requirements. If Willson believed that safety belts and life lines could provide adequate protection, the variance procedures provided by the Act should have been utilized. See 29 U.S.C. § 655(d). 58 Willson does not contest the fact that the temporary floor in its building was more than thirty-three feet below the workers and that the standard requires that it be no more than thirty feet. Rather, Willson apparently reasons that because its flooring was only three feet below the required level, the violation cannot be considered serious. Willson's tortured logic does little to aid in the resolution of this case. A serious violation is expressly defined in the Act as one where there is a substantial probability of death or serious physical harm. 31 It is undisputed that such harm or death would be likely to occur should an employee be subject to a thirty-three foot fall. Accordingly, we find Willson's arguments concerning this citation meritless, and we affirm the Commission on the serious violation of section .750(b)(2)(i).