Reda Pump Company, Division of TRW, Inc.
Safety-shoe item settled
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 1983, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A judge affirmed a personal-protective-equipment citation based on Reda Pump's failure to require engineers working with hourly employees during pump assembly and disassembly to wear safety shoes. After obtaining Commission review, the company adopted the safety-shoe requirement, represented that the condition was abated, withdrew its contest to the item, and agreed to pay $280. The Commission approved the settlement.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 1910.132(a) (personal protective equipment).
- Outcome: Citation item resolved by settlement; $280 penalty.
- Key point: The employer resolved the reviewed item by requiring safety shoes for participating engineers, confirming abatement, and withdrawing its contest.
Full text (OSHRC public release)
Docket No. 79-3691
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Complainant,
v.
REDA PUMP COMPANY,
DIVISION OF TRW, INC.,
Respondent.
OSHRC DOCKET No. 79- 3691
ORDER
The parties' Stipulation and Settlement Agreement is approved.
FOR THE COMMISSION
Ray H. Darling
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Dated: NOV 21 1983
RAYMOND J. DONOVAN,
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Complainant,
v.
REDA PUMP Co.,
Division of TRW, Inc.
Respondent.
OSHRC DOCKET NO. 79-3691
STIPULATION AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
I
The parties have reached agreement on a full and complete settlement of the issues
remaining before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
II
The parties stipulate as follows:
(a) On June 17, 1980, the Respondent, Reda Pump Co., Division of TRW, Inc., filed a
petition for discretionary review in the above captioned matter excepting to Judge
LaVecchia's affirmation of Citation 1, Item 1, for Respondent's failure to comply with the
protective equipment standard at 29 CFR 1910.132(a). This petition was granted by
Commissioner Cottine on July 17, 1980.
(b) Subsequent to the decision of the administrative law judge, Respondent did, in fact,
require its engineers who are participating in and working with the plant hourly employees
in the assembly and disassembly of pumps to wear safety shoes while on the plant floor
observing and engaged in the assembly and disassembly of pumps, and Respondent hereby
represents that the conditions alleged in the citation have been abated.
(c) Respondent hereby agrees to withdraw its notice of contest in the instant proceeding
as to Citation 1, Item 1.
(d) Respondent hereby agrees to pay a penalty of $280.00 for the alleged violation.
(e) Respondent hereby agrees to post this Stipulation and Settlement Agreement in
accordance with Commission Rules 7 and 100(c).
WHEREFORE, the parties request that this Stipulation and Settlement Agreement be approved
by the Commission.
Dated this 1st day of June, 1983.
The Administrative Law Judge decision in this matter is unavailable in this format. To
obtain a copy of this document, please request one from our Public Information Office By
e-mail ( [email protected] ), telephone
(202-606-5398), fax (202-606-5050), or TTY (202-606-5386).
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read Commission precedent from 1983. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.