Workplace inspector is lacking, audit says

Inconsistent. Inadequate. But improving.

A performance audit of the Utah Occupational Safety and Health Division's compliance section found the state's workplace safety inspector lacking when it came to providing consistent inspections to businesses; a consistent process for and documentation about its assessment of penalties, penalty reductions or case settlements; a structured training program for its own new hires; and managing productivity among its compliance officers.

The report, submitted by the Office of the Legislative Auditor General to the Audit Subcommittee of the Utah Legislative Management Committee on Tuesday, found that "throughout the inspection process, we found unclear policies and practices that may produce an inconsistent enforcement program."

"We found it difficult to understand which policies UOSH follows, is required to follow, and what it chooses to follow," the report stated. "We heard similar comments from (UOSH compliance officers), that they were not exactly sure which policies to follow or why they conduct some investigations."

For its part, the Labor Commission of Utah said that, by and large, it agrees with the audit's findings and will use the report to improve UOSH.

"It's a rigorous process to go through," said deputy commissioner of the Labor Commission Alan Hennebold. "The auditors were very comprehensive in their approach. But it was constructive and helpful, and we look forward to implementing their recommendations."

The audit, started in October 2005, found that the division fell short when it came to making sure safety and health hazards it found at Utah businesses were abated and had "no clear policy" on conducting follow-up or monitoring inspections. In 2005, UOSH verified only 74 percent of hazard abatement within 30 days, even though federal law requires 100 percent verification in that time period. And, in 21 follow-up inspections conducted in 2005, the auditors found that six businesses either did not abate the hazard for which they were originally cited or repeated the hazard.

"We believe that incidence of repeat violations indicates UOSH should put greater emphasis on following up on identified hazards," the report stated. "If UOSH is going to make an impact on safe working conditions, it must first start with employers who have been found to have unsafe working conditions."