قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / Quotes about an armed security guard who was killed were evacuated

Quotes about an armed security guard who was killed were evacuated



The Work Environment Review Commission on Wednesday released a citation issued to a security guard company hired to protect Pennsylvania Turnpike's ticket takers when one of its employees was killed by an armed robber in 2016.

I Secretary of Labor v. Schaad Detective Agency, Inc. ., filed in Washington, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration sued the Schaad Detective Agency for its alleged failure to enforce the personal protective equipment standard after it was discovered that although the agency provided bulletproof vests, it did not require them to be worn by its armed guards.

As explained in court records, on the morning of the shooting, the deceased armed guard, who usually did not have an accompanying bulletproof vest because he thought it was "uncomfortable", was driving in the passenger seat of an unmarked customs car. which contains $ 58,000 and is driven by a toll, according to documents. At an exchange near Littleton, Pennsylvania, a retired Pennsylvania state trooper for 25 years, armed with several weapons and wearing body armor and camouflage mask, walked closer to the van "with intent to commit robbery." During the robbery attempt, he shot Schaad's armed guard and another turnpike employee and killed them both.

A judge in the Administrative Court issued the citation in 201

8 and concluded that the PPE standard did not apply because OSHA did not state that ball-welded vests must be worn to meet the PPE standard: “The Secretary has given insufficient notice to the respondent that bulletproof vests were required carried by its armed security guards at the (Pennsylvania) Turnpike workplace.

"The Secretary's argument as to whether bulletproof vests are considered personal protective equipment is not convincing. Yes, just as shooting is undoubtedly a serious danger, so a bulletproof vest is a form of personal protective equipment. The question is, however, whether the respondent had noticed that they had to be carried by their armed security guards at their workplace on 20 March 2016. '

The whole Commission agreed that the PPE standard does not apply.

"We find that the Secretary has not shown that a" reasonable person who is familiar with the circumstances surrounding the dangerous condition would recognize. . . a danger "that requires the use of bulletproof vests", says the latest decision.

Catalog


Source link