Workplace Safety - Essay Example

Workplace safety: This paper is primarily based on summarizing and critically analyzing the article “Workplace safety inquiry doesn’t fault Oregon State Hospital”, in special regards to the importance of workplace safety that can lead to disastrous results if not appropriately managed. (Gustafson, 2011). This article reflects on an issue that involves a severe attack on the employee Rich Dean by a dangerous prisoner Lehtinen. Dean is seriously distressed by the news that Oregon hospital will not have to deal with any sanctions in regard to the violent incident even after a long workplace safety inspection undertaken by Oregon’s Occupational Safety and Health Division (OSHA).

This decision by OSHA led Dean to present his issues with the results of the investigation in an interview. Dean voiced facts that set in contrast to the justifications presented by OSHA. According to OSHA, Dean issued a citation against the hospital’s security administration on no grounds. This is because the hospital has always adopted satisfactory security measures and conducted safety assessments before the grave attack on Dean occurred. Also, there had been no violent attacks on any hospital employee by the jail inmates before that incident and high-profile assault prevention training is also given to the employees according to the OSHA report.

Now, Dean claimed that when he was attacked by Lehtinen, the two other employees dog-piled on him and Lehtinen, which gave Lehtinen an easy access to land heavy kicks on Dean’s eyes, shoulders, and neck. Had it not been for the careless action of the two other security men, Dean would surely have saved himself from Lehtinen’s attacks. Also, the emergency alarm system was sadly out of function at the time of the assault. Considering the facts highlighted in the article, it is not easy to remain oblivious to the justifications claimed by the poor hospital employee Dean, who had to cope with serious injuries as a result of faulty hospital security system and is still in the hospital for the recovery process.

This is unequivocally just for Dean to issue citation against the hospital’s security administration because the extent of injuries he has received should be compensated by some just sanctions. The timely functioning of the emergency alarm system was highly important and could have saved Dean from a lot of trouble. Also, it is an unforgivable blunder that Dean was not informed about Lehtinen’s history of assaultive behavior. This highlights a big deficiency in the hospital’s security because had Dean known about Lehtinen’s record, he would never have rushed to the evaluation room for confronting the dangerous inmate all by himself.

The OSHA’s decision is also unjustified because prior to assault, a prophetic warning was issued to the safety regulators that only three security employees were not enough considering the inmate’s dangerous record. But, the security director did not take even the slightest notice of the warning. The matter was aggravated by the action taken by the two other employees who unreasonably piled on top of Dean and Lehtinen and nowhere in the training is mentioned that dog-piling is a useful measure for securing an individual.

This means that OSHA’s claims of maintaining supreme safety measures and giving high-profile security training to the employees are fake and based on empty mockery. Reference: Gustafson, A. (2011). Workplace safety inquiry doesn't fault Oregon State Hospital. Retrieved from http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20110506/NEWS/105060342/Workplace-safety-inquiry-doesn-t-fault-Oregon-State-Hospital