Crane certification issues not ‘clear-cut,’ article source says
The issues surrounding OSHA’s proposed delay of the Cranes and Derricks in Construction Standard are not as clear-cut as the recent article “Refining the requirements” (July 2013) portrays. The regulation took years to develop and was widely supported by the industry, even after it was published in 2010. Since then, extensive California and Ontario studies report 80 percent fewer deaths and 50 percent fewer accidents. Much of the debate surfaced only after special interest groups realized not all certification organizations met the requirements of the regulation. The regulation is an important step forward in creating a safer work environment. With certification by type and capacity, employers and crane operators have the tools to reduce accidents.
I stand by my comments in the article regarding certification versus qualification but would like to clarify my position on the type and capacity of crane requirement.
CIC has certified operators by type and capacity since 2007, years before the OSHA regulation was published. Capacity testing was included as integral to CIC’s testing because subject matter experts determined that this type of testing has value for the employer and the operator. Certification that distinguishes various skill levels provides a respected credential for operators and communicates to employers the level of qualification an operator has achieved. CIC’s certifications are provided in ranges of capacity and do not require testing any specific make or model of crane. It does not add “more testing” and it is not “expensive.” In fact, CIC certifications by type and capacity are the most affordable in the industry. Delaying or eliminating the rule increases safety risks to workers. I encourage OSHA to stand by the rule as it is written.
Crane Institute Certification