OSHA To Cell Carriers: Maybe Somebody Could Better Equip And Train Cell Climbers So They Stop Dying?

from the this-shouldn't-be-happening dept

Cellular tower climbing is one of the world’s most dangerous professions (in terms of death rate per 100,000 employees), and every time there’s a push to upgrade gear quickly, safety guidelines start to get ignored and contractor pressure builds, resulting in the death rate spiking accordingly. With cell carriers all rushing to outpace one another in terms of LTE upgrades, there has been yet another jump in deaths during the last year. According to the latest OSHA statistics, there were 13 cell tower worker fatalities in 2013, a total that was larger than in the previous two years combined. 2014 isn’t off to a much better start, with four worker deaths occurring in the first five weeks of 2014.

As such, OSHA this week fired off a letter to cell carriers (via PBS), urging them to do a better job in, well, not letting their employees die:

“OSHA has found that a high proportion of these incidents occurred because of a lack of fall protection: either employers are not providing appropriate fall protection to employees, or they are not ensuring that their employees use fall protection properly. As a result, communication tower climbers are falling to their deaths…I am writing to remind you that it is your responsibility to prevent workers from being injured or killed while working on communication towers

That this is something that companies need to be reminded of is fairly sad, especially since they get reminded of it every several years or so. That doesn’t seem to be improving training and subcontractor hiring practices all too much, especially at certain companies. A ProPublica and Frontline investigation from 2012 found that between 2003 and 2011, 50 climbers died working on cellular sites, half of the 100 total number of deaths on all communications towers and ten times the average for general construction work. The report noted the deaths were usually because technicians “were shoddily equipped or received little training before being sent up hundreds of feet.” Some companies’ track records on this front were better than others:

“One carrier, AT&T, had more fatalities on its jobs than its three closest competitors combined, our reporting revealed. Fifteen climbers died on jobs for AT&T since 2003. Over the same period, five climbers died on T-Mobile jobs, two died on Verizon jobs and one died on a job for Sprint.

AT&T’s biggest spike came as the company rushed to address problems post-2009 about the iPhone’s impact on the ill-prepared AT&T network. The OSHA letter doesn’t single out companies for the rash of 2013-2014 deaths, though carriers bury themselves in layers upon layers of subcontractors to minimize cost and liability. With the billions being made each quarter by the wireless industry (particularly with the recent migration to pricey, low-cap, shared data plans) the steep human cost of bit transfer is inexcusable.

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “OSHA To Cell Carriers: Maybe Somebody Could Better Equip And Train Cell Climbers So They Stop Dying?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
46 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

AT&T’s biggest spike came as the company rushed to address problems post-2009 about the iPhone’s impact on the ill-prepared AT&T network. The OSHA letter doesn’t single out companies for the rash of 2013-2014 deaths, though carriers bury themselves in layers upon layers of subcontractors to minimize cost and liability.

This seems to be true with most industries though, why bother trying to adhere to safety and regulations when you can hire back-alley subcontractors that will gladly ignore regulations for you?

I’m wondering when the government will stop being conned by all this and realize that a subcontractor ignoring regulations doesn’t mean the original company has clean hands, either.

SolkeshNaranek says:

Re: Re:

I’m wondering when the government will stop being conned by all this and realize that a subcontractor ignoring regulations doesn’t mean the original company has clean hands, either.

The government will stop being conned when the campaign donations dry up.

Until that happens, the government will not care how many die (unless it happens to a friend or a relative).

Just Sayin' says:

ranting at the wrong people

Your ranting is going in the wrong direction. I know it’s sort of your deal to slam the cell companies at every turn, but the reality is anyone who climbs towers for a living knows to work securely and to tie themselves off when working.

The real problem here is that the employees themselves get fearless, they take risks when moving from point to point on towers or when handling equipment, and they end up falling or being hit and injured. Most of it is related to wanting to get the work done quickly, and not because some cell company exec is standing at the bottom of the tower taking away their safety gear.

OSHA tends to yell at the employer even if there is nothing they can do.

Anonymous Coward says:

“every time there’s a push to upgrade gear quickly, safety guidelines start to get ignored and contractor pressure builds, resulting in the death rate spiking accordingly. With cell carriers all rushing to outpace one another in terms of LTE upgrades, there has been yet another jump in deaths during the last year.”

If you want to build more cell phone towers in less time then hire more workers. and cell phone carriers should invest more money to hire more workers instead of being cheap and trying to cut corners.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Here’s an idea: if they want to curb worker deaths, how about introducing a freakin’ penalty when the death is found to be due to poor training or gear?

Accidents are one thing, but if the injuries or deaths could have been avoided, but the proper precautions weren’t taken because it would ‘cost too much’, then hit them, hard(I’m thinking 10x the cost of training and appropriate gear), to incentivize them to care enough about safety to actually do something about it.

Pragmatic says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

I hope you were being sarcastic, “Me.” Not keeping an eye on bad actors for the sake of principle alone is just plain stupid. I should point out that rules are made when some fool does something dumb or thoughtless so we all know not to do it, e.g. drink driving.

So, if you actually meant that further regulation is bad, what do you propose to replace it with? Nothing? Workers have a God-given right to a safe working environment and sadly, it has to be enforced at times.

ofb2632 (profile) says:

Re: Re:

As a person that climbed towers for 12 years and now oversees crews that climb towers, i can tell you that OSHA does fine companies that have members fall. What they really need to do is fine the cellular carrier (ATT, Sprint, Verizon, etc.) as well. If they fined them a million dollars per major incident, they would stop hiring the tower companies that push crews to unsafe work speeds. Most tower companies have very stringent safety / training practices. They will fire anyone caught ‘free climbing’ immediately. Its the companies that put profit over safety that needs to be shut down.

Aerilus says:

As much as I hate to say is I’m siding with the cell carriers on this one. as long as a harness was provided and the towers were equipped with appropriate attachment points. If you can’t figure out that there is a danger of falling off of a hundred foot tower then maybe you need to find a different profession. Personal responsibility has to come into play at some point.

Aerilus says:

Re: Re:

Nevermind. After watching the above youtube clip. it doesn’t look like they are providing any sort of attachment system to these towers and explicitely allowing free climbing in Osha regulations. What the hell. they need a some sort or linear friction based track going all the way up that engages if a fall is detected. the fact that they are building and deploying these towers without such a system is blatantly negligent.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

As you stated, OSHA allows free climbing. If it is allowed how are the cell carriers responsible?

OSHA should take on some of the blame and revise their regulations that currently allow clearly dangerous work practices.

I am normally against more regulation, but it is common sense to require safety gear when climbing hundreds of feet up a tower.

zip says:

I’d like to know how the death rate for Cellular tower workers compares to the death rate for law enforcement, a profession that — as we are constantly reminded every time a cop kills an innocent person — is so extremely dangerous that it justifies the occasional “collateral damage” in the name of “keeping officers safe”.

zip says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Thanks for that. I should bookmark the pages for the next time I’m arguing with a police apologist (a relative rarity on techdirt, btw) who insists that cops’ often-lethal hair-trigger responses are a necessity reality of their hyper-dangerous “kill or be killed” occupation. The statistics certainly slam that claim.

Most published statistics of the most dangerous jobs list certain categories, such as “(electrical/telephone) line workers” which may or may not include cellphone tower climbers, but which are far more dangerous than police work.

Police Apologist says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

You are comparing apples to oranges.

Police see less fatalities because they use their holstered safety equipment without hesitation on a daily basis and cell tower workers do not properly use their safety equipment.

If police did not have holstered safety equipment their death rate would be 1000% higher than cell tower workers.

Anonymous Coward says:

same as linking to copyright

TD was recently arguing about how terrible it is to charge, or make responsible web site that link to infringing content.

The argument is “how far do you want to go” are you going to next want the users of the cell phones to be held responsible?

Oh wait, that was in defence of copyright infringement, this is an attack on carriers!

So how far do you want to go, hold cell users responsible, what about the manufacturer of the chips in the phones ?
After all its the customers constant demand for low cost services that forces the carriers to here contractors who cut corners, so it must be their fault !

Let us know when you have decided how far you want to go, or is it simply enough to take cheap shots at carriers, because, after all.. you don’t like them.

btrussell (profile) says:

I believe the worker has the right to refuse to go up without proper safety equipment. Or do they also employ sharpshooters forcing them to climb?

I’ve cut down many a big dead tree(widow-maker). I’ve also refused to cut a few.

“I am normally against more regulation, but it is common sense to require safety gear when climbing hundreds of feet up a tower.”

Do you fly? If yes, what kind of safety gear are you wearing while 35 000 ft above ground traveling @500 mph? Common sense tells me I’d at least want a parachute.

matt (user link) says:

tower climbers

I have 15+ years in the tower industry. These towers are extremely safe to climb if one apply s every safety option available. Safety climb,double hook,proper rigging,hardhats etc, the issue i deal with as a field foreman is the substance abuse issues these guys have on-sight and off.I hate to hear of fatality’s of any kind but each person is solely responsible for there own safety when in the air.To blame the carrier is horseshit.

Leave a Reply to Aerilus Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...