At the end of the day I want my crew and self to be able to go home. After last weeks CAL-OSHA Low-Voltage Regs class I attended I wonder how long even municipalities can remain operating. I understand that PPE is necassary and a protocol may be essential, but some of the proposal is rediculous. In voltage ranged from 50-600V (low-voltage classification) after January '07 it is proposed necassary to wear a fully incapsulated fire resistant suit to de-energize or for live testing. This PPE also requires six-month testing and re-certification. When will common sense be considered a factor of self-responsiblity. My crews recieve extensive safety training, and individuals need to be somewhat responsible.
Just my thoughts.

Generally the individual is responsible but the company liable as well as responsible for PPE and training. Typically 440V and below utilizies commom sense but with arc-flash a present danger and preventive measures available we should incorporate all safety measures and ensure they are used - someone has to assume the role of responsibility and tag; if you're in supervision, you're it! It's a responsibility not a burden but doesn require a little more planning and organization.

In the "see you in court" environment I think the company is always liable until prove otherwise.

Man what ever happended to the days of working on 10KV power supplies whose vacuum tubes put out X-Ray, standing in front of a 6.9Kv breaker watching what it is doing for troubleshooting purposes. Or digging a couple of fingers out of an emergency diesel generator(not mine). You've never experienced excitement such as seeing a phase to ground short on a large motor (5000 h.p.), which evaporated about 15 pounds of copper from the motor. The fireball was about 10ft in diameter. A fine layer of copper all over the place. What does that do to the lungs?

I have experienced all of this just to name a few.

Just remember, the Navy used to teach us to rest our wrist against the cabinet. That way if you do get across something hot you'll possibly only lose your hand and not your life.

I am glad to see more stringent safety requirements, although some do seem to be designed to make the job more difficult.

In some situations companies insist that you do things in this manner or you were considered a problem.

It may take longer or make it more expensive. The management and employers should want to provide the most protection for its employees.

Is it really cost effective not to?

Whitout mentioning the floor has evidence of the water leak from the roof that is not repaired yet.

Spencer makes an excellent point: you can't afford to get the employee hurt... loose the $60K/yr guy cost you dearly with him/her hurt and cost plus actually needing that person and having to replace (if you can) him/her or be short-handed. Workers comp/insurance, bills, lost production --- it reallys adds up when someone get hurt and misses time. Plus there's tax incentive to get the right stuff for safety.