HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Guest Blogs

Regular Checks Lead to Consistent Safety

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 2/2
GTOlover
User Rank
Platinum
Re: There is only one way
GTOlover   12/12/2013 8:54:21 AM
NO RATINGS
TJ, I agree with you on holding corporations responsible. However, I would also add that we need to hold government responsible as well. It seems to many in the beuracracy can be bought. It is time that government overseers are held responsible when their oversight is shown to be fluff. But even this scares me as the unintended consequence is a balloning of regulations and procedures mandated on businesses that would effectively kill any kind of industry that is remotely dangerous.

It is easy for us and the blogger to demand more, but it is the people that need to be alert and force the corrections. If I thought the instrumentation and maintanence at a refinery was questionable, I would not be silent and would either be fired or quit for my own safety.

TJ McDermott
User Rank
Blogger
There is only one way
TJ McDermott   12/12/2013 1:41:34 AM
NO RATINGS
I'm with Nancy, I'd avoid more government regulation if I could.

I think there is only one way to get corporations to pay attention - SIGNIFICANT penalties for breaking regulations.  The ONLY thing that corporations care about is the bottom line.

As an analogy - think of what would happen if the penalty for being caught talking/texting on your phone was not a $150 fine, but rather 10 years in prison.  Phone usage while driving would stop cold.

If this is a problem worth solving, then the penalties should be strict.  Perhaps the CEO should be held resposnsible and punished accordingly.  They're earning large salaries, there should be responsibility to go with it.

Corporations already enjoy rights that were origininally intended for human citizens.  If corporations enjoy such rights, they should also bear the penalties.  If a human can be sentenced to capital punishment, why not apply something similar (say, dissolution) to a corporation?

Or, how about confiscating all profits of a company for a period, split between injured parties and the government?  The company continues, employees retain their job, but shareholders do not earn anything.

We might have regulation enough now, but let's see some realistic punishment to go with it.

Nancy Golden
User Rank
Platinum
Regulating Safety and Adding Redundancy
Nancy Golden   12/11/2013 3:23:55 PM
NO RATINGS
"As this isn't the first occurrence, it shows that instead of relying on internal checks, third-party organizations must be given more power to check out instrumentation and shut down operations. With a government body responsible for the checks, disasters can be prevented as there will be no reason to cut corners if they want to continue operating. A dedicated organization will protect the safety of the workers and the environment."

While I would rather not add to the list of government regualtion - unfortunately this is true. While companies should have enough internal expertise to assure safety - often that is not the case. Having an upcoming OSHA inspection has motivated many otherwise uninterested companies into seeking appropriate safety initiatives. It seems to me that redundancy is also an important factor that needs to be implemented - especially in critical areas.

<<  <  Page 2/2
Partner Zone
More Blogs from Guest Blogs
The age of touch could soon come to an end. From smartphones and smartwatches, to home devices, to in-car infotainment systems, touch is no longer the primary user interface. Technology market leaders are driving a migration from touch to voice as a user interface.
Soft starter technology has become a way to mitigate startup stressors by moderating a motor’s voltage supply during the machine start-up phase, slowly ramping it up and effectively adjusting the machine’s load behavior to protect mechanical components.
Despite the astronomical benefits offered by 3D modeling, it is quite surprising that nearly 75% of the manufacturing industries still perform design operations using 2D CAD systems. What is the reason that keeps companies hesitant from adopting 3D technology?
Energy harvesting in particular seems to be moving at an accelerating pace. We now seem to be at a point where it is possible to run low-power systems primarily from energy harvesting sources. This is a big shift from even just a couple of years ago. Three key trends seem to have accelerated this dramatic shift.
ABI Research, a firm based in the UK that specializes in analyzing global connectivity and other emerging technologies, estimates there will be 40.9 billion active wirelessly interconnected “things” by 2020. The driving force is the usual suspect: the Internet of Things.
Design News Webinar Series
3/31/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
2/25/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
5/7/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
May 4 - 8, Designing Low Power Systems using Battery and Energy Harvesting Energy Sources
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Last Archived Class
Sponsored by Proto Labs
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2015 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service