In MD, summers can easily see 100+ with high humidity. At those times, I am absolutely Begging to be somewhere less humid. 100+ is hot anywhere, but when high humidity is added, the Only comfort is A/C (or preferably a walk-in freezer). In lower humidity climates, one is able to attain relative comfort by finding shade or a place to swim.... neither of which offer significant comfort in high humidity.
Florida can and does get quite hot and humid during the summer.
Kent.... to paraphrase James Carville
> It's the Humidity Stupid
Well, if someone asks me how hot it is, I assume they're asking about the temperature. In Looziana, your mileage may vary, I understand. :>
Self-employed subject to OSHA rules?
This and the new law to slow down when in an area with any work signs and with any flashing lights to a speed 20mph below normal speed limit are part of the new traffic codes being passed every year that enable our DPS officers to fulfill their quotas.
Kent sure.
As you're aware, when discussing "rules" as promulgated by Administrative Agencies, such as the TSA one might say, they do not pass "laws" but their "rules" have the same effect as "laws" and can and are used interchangeably. For instance, the TSA has a rule that says you cannot take a loaded pistol on a plane, but you will face a judge if you break that "rule".
All that being said, I don't really care if you heed the rule/law or not. I was pointing it out as people (workers), even those under 11 employees who are not subject to OSHA rules (that pesky rule/law thing again) are subject to it. While I am a firefighter when I'm not a surveyor, and that was how I learned about it, during our briefing with TxDOT, I asked the pointed question about ALL individuals within their rights-of-ways, and the answer from the general counsel had come down from on high, that any individual, working, regardless of their job, within their ROW, must conform to this new rule/law, lest they be ticketed by the Texas Department of Safety.
Feel free to disregard this if you wish. Texas' enforcement of it may be contrary to the Federal RULE, but it is what is being enforced.
Self-employed subject to OSHA rules?
> > It has nothing to do if you subcontract to them, but if you are simply conducting business within their R.O.W. It's a federal law.
>
> Can you cite a reference for this "law"? The only requirements I've found so far are those of this federal rule:
>
> "All workers within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway who are exposed either to traffic (vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel) or to construction equipment within the work area shall wear high-visibility safety apparel."
>
> That does not cover the surveying operations that I do since I am neither exposed to traffic nor construction equipment.
>
> More fundamentally, as a self-employed person, I don't believe that I'm subject to the same OSHA rules that any employees I had would be.
I believe the key word here is "OR". Kinda like when in 1987 the Texas legislature redefined what is a subdivision and changed "and" to "or" for division of land.
Kent sure.
> I asked the pointed question about ALL individuals within their rights-of-ways, and the answer from the general counsel had come down from on high, that any individual, working, regardless of their job, within their ROW, must conform to this new rule/law, lest they be ticketed by the Texas Department of Safety.
Well, if you read the actual rule, you have to be exposed to traffic or construction equipment. Simply being one whose duties require him to walk in the right-of-way merely qualifies you as a "worker". If you want to rely upon some TxDOT attorney to interpret all laws for you, be my guest. :>
Self-employed subject to OSHA rules?
> > "All workers within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway who are exposed either to traffic (vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel) or to construction equipment within the work area shall wear high-visibility safety apparel."
> I believe the key word here is "OR". Kinda like when in 1987 the Texas legislature redefined what is a subdivision and changed "and" to "or" for division of land.
Actually, the point was that if you are neither exposed to vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel nor to construction equipment, the rule doesn't apply to you as a surveyor even if you fall within the definition of "worker".
Self-employed subject to OSHA rules?
> > > "All workers within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway who are exposed either to traffic (vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel) or to construction equipment within the work area shall wear high-visibility safety apparel."
>
> > I believe the key word here is "OR". Kinda like when in 1987 the Texas legislature redefined what is a subdivision and changed "and" to "or" for division of land.
>
> Actually, the point was that if you are neither exposed to vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel nor to construction equipment, the rule doesn't apply to you as a surveyor even if you fall within the definition of "worker".
If you want to contend that being within the right-of-way of a road does not expose one to traffic, or construction, then be my guest. Most rational individuals would submit that those limits for roadway purposes, expose one to traffic, or construction.
Please, by all means, just buy the other vest. I get that you cannot admit when you're wrong, and argue like hell to the contrary (I think for your own personal enjoyment) but I don't really care Kent and you're wrong on this matter. Truly I tell you, I was trying to help initially, but now, I find it hard to find the effort to care less about this subject.
Kent sure.
> > I asked the pointed question about ALL individuals within their rights-of-ways, and the answer from the general counsel had come down from on high, that any individual, working, regardless of their job, within their ROW, must conform to this new rule/law, lest they be ticketed by the Texas Department of Safety.
>
> Well, if you read the actual rule, you have to be exposed to traffic or construction equipment. Simply being one whose duties require him to walk in the right-of-way merely qualifies you as a "worker". If you want to rely upon some TxDOT attorney to interpret all laws for you, be my guest. :>
I feel confident in saying that those individuals who might issue someone a citation for violation of the rule, got their information and direction from the same place.
Self-employed subject to OSHA rules?
> If you want to contend that being within the right-of-way of a road does not expose one to traffic, or construction, then be my guest. Most rational individuals would submit that those limits for roadway purposes, expose one to traffic, or construction.
I guess they haven't stood in some of the places in some of the rights-of-way I have. "Expose" refers to the risk of being struck by a motor vehicle. There are plenty of places where that risk is vanishingly small. As for construction, as a general rule if there is no equipment at work, no earth being moved, no nothing, the risk of a caterpillar arriving from nowhere to strike a surveyor is likewise minuscule. Fun fact!
Keeeeeeent!
Come over to the dark side!
Use the force, Kent!
Dump the Filson, there are better alternatives available on the market!