Face Shields - Shall or Should?

SirTreeRat

SirTreeRat

Location
In the Mitten...
So there was a heated debate at work between two of my co-workers on the use of face shields on hard hats. I watched and listened as the two went at it and thought I would be interested to see what the BUZZERS felt was the standard. I'm going to let this discussion go before I say what side I fall.
OK, one guy says; that you have to wear a face shield during all tree operation. The other guy says; no, you don't have to wear one at all.

So, what is the standard?

What do you wear in the field?

Face shield - Shall or Should?
 
Ear pro and eye pro whether it's face shield and muffs, safety glasses and ear buds, or any combination of the two types. I prefer muffs and face shield on the ground or in the tree, my partner likes glasses and ear buds, whatever floats your boat as long as you stay afloat, right?
 
The face shield at least the wire one does not meet the standards for eye protection from what I understand. I think the face shield is an option. I got used to using one for about a year and now don't wear it and it's a little weird but the safety glasses protect the eyes better than the shield. So I'm going to say unless like the option of the airspade... that no face shield as long as safety glasses are present is okay.
 
I try to use mine. I have the clear plastic one on the Kask. Most of the time I don't bring it down because I'll just forget about it, but I love it when the sawdust is blowing back at me. It provides that extra level of protection when all those chips and dust is blowing in your face. I know Dad has gotten a few scratches on his eye from things like that, and I really don't want to go through that. Plus, it's so low profile(unlike the wire mesh ones that stick out a-ways) that it hardly gets in the way when climbing.
 
I dont believe that the use of a shield is mandatory (if it is, nobody told me, but whats new). I do like to use it though, esp when chipping brush and cutting on windy days. My face is a little tender and wouldnt want to mess up my future modeling career
rolleyes.gif
 
If I understand correctly OSHA only requires ANSI eye wear. Face screens don't count and I'm not sure on the solid shields.

That said, if an injury occurs, and face screens or shields could have been used but weren't then there may be some liability issues that arise.

Myself? there is a time and a place for everything. Getting smacked in the face by saw dust or chips out of the hopper are enough of a distraction that I might hurt myself or someone else as a result. those are times I've opted to use the face protection.

Other times the derned things get in the way.

I think the proper word then would be "Should" and any decision to not use it would thus have to stand up to substantial scrutiny.

Just my 3 pennies worth.
 
Hello all.
I have worn safety glasses, face shields, and at times, a combination of both, in my various careers and activities.

My experience has been that while safety glasses can stop direct hits to your eyes, dust and debris can still get in behind them.
While this may not cause as severe of an injury, it can still injure your eye (scratches) and at the least is usually uncomfortable and an annoyance (I once had a piece of hot slag shoot up under my safety glasses that luckily missed my eye).

Goggles can stop this but are usually hot, fog more often, and may not meet safety standards.

Safety glasses are more fitting and offer better protection now a days but I think at times a combination of safety glasses and face shield is the best bet.
It really depends on the activity and conditions.

I'm very protective of my eye sight so the more protection, the better.
I think many people take their eye sight for granted, I do not.


-BarnHouse
 
Whether its should or shall, I go by 2 eyes, 2 ears, 1 back per lifetime.

I've found that at times it it great to have both, and at others it probably don't help or hurt much. I've been able to get used to it.

If I am pruning a western red cedar, with all it swoopy, droopy, curvy limbs, it is more important. Same for fruit tree pruning as the branches can go everywhere, and there is a lot of fighting criss-crossed limbs/ watersprouts on neglected trees. If I'm removing a maple, it is less important while climbing.

I like it for chipping, and think that it is especially important for high speed chippers, but less important than the proper technique of Chuck and DUCK. Feed and move away down the side of the chipper.

The more I work with other people in crowded spaces, the more important it is to me to have the extra protection of the face screen, which also keep rain off of my approved safety glasses, which in turn makes it easier to see.

I don't Think (not sure) that a face screen ever replaces approved safety glasses.

I know how many times things have almost snuck under both screen and glasses over the years.

Without good vision, and depth perception (binocular fusion of the inputs to the brain from BOTH eyes), how can one function at even close to the same level of performance? Would a loss of vision in one eye be career ending for some people? I know I'd have a hard time judging drop zones, and bidding work. I bet I could drag brush to a chipper alright, but that is not what I would like to be limited to. Would you?
 
OK let me say, the two were talking about the mesh face shields. Neither are saying wearing a shield instead of safety glasses. They know you "SHALL wear approved safety glasses during tree ops"

The main argument is one guy states "OSHA & ANSI says you have to wear a face shield all the time"

The other guy "No it's not a SHALL, but a SHOULD, and it comes down to personal preference, but agrees there are times where you might want to wear one"

I have the standards in front of me, what I'm looking for your interpretation of the wording.
Yes, this is a homework assignment, can you find the standard for PPE regarding face protection? and is it SHALL or SHOULD for all ops of tree work?
 
I don't even think face shields are a should. I don't have the Z in front of me, but I seem to remember the mention of face shields as an option during chipper operation, not to replace eye protection. So maybe there's a should in that part, but I know for sure it's not a shall.

-Tom
 
I love homework assignments. I've lived on them for the past 3 years.
tongue.gif


Z133.1 3.4 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

3.4.1 PPE as outlined in this section, SHALL be required when there is a reasonable probability of injury or illness that can be prevented by such protection.

3.4.2 Workers engaged in arboricultural operationsl SHALL wear head protection (helmet)... (all the time)

3.4.3 Face protection SHALL comply with applicable federal regulations as well as with ANSI Z87.1 (There's the kicker..what does OSHA say?)

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=na...on+face+shields

Which basically states when and as necessary for the face shield. But it does NOT take the place of safety glasses.

3.4.6 Hearing protection provided by the employer SHALL be worn when it is not practical to decrease or isolate noise levels that exceed acceptable standards

3.4.7 Eye protection shall comply with ANSI Z87.1 and SHALL be worn when engaged in arboricultural operations.


Personally, David and I both have face shields on our helmets so they might be utilized as and when necessary. They do NOT take the place of safety glasses and we both wear those all the time. (You can ask David how important that is after an accident took away his sight in one eye.)

Sylvia
 
I would agree that they shouldn't be a shall or a should. I think that face shields should be another tool in the toolbox that have their place in certain applications but aren't required for all of them.
 
Well I see Sylvia gets an A on her homework assignment. However; this is where the whole argument started: "3.4.1 PPE as outlined in this section, SHALL be required when there is a reasonable probability of injury or illness that can be prevented by such protection."

This states that "PPE SHALL be required when there is a reasonable probability of injury" The words "reasonable probability" are at the heart of this debate.

Now in: 3.4.3
" Face protection SHALL comply with applicable federal regulations as well as with ANSI Z87.1"

So what does the Z87.1 say about face protection?

And where does OSHA or ANSI say a "Face Shield" is PPE?
 
Were talking face shields while running chainsaws on the ground or in the tree or while chipping brush or stumping or pruning in general.

This debate is not about tree spraying or mixing chemicals or welding.
 
IMHO, the wording in the Z133.1 3.4.1 is often overlooked.

You could very well argue the fact that many facets of our work poses risk of injury to the face; therefore, a face shield, if designed to reduce that risk, SHALL be worn or at least be on the helmet to be implemented at a moment's notice.

The ANSI Zs say "face protection" rather than the more limiting term of "face shield". I would think this is due to different aspects of work requiring different configurations of the protection. The fact that they don't say "shield" specifically, I would not take as an out for not having it listed as a PPE. My vote, therefore, is a face shield is a PPE.

I confess to not having read the Z87.1 so am not sure if they simply control the design and construction, labeling products that meet said criteria or also define the situations where they are supposed to be implemented. (My belief has been the former.)

http://www.visionrx.com/library/enc/enc_ansi.asp

"The ANSI Z87.1 standard sets forth requirements for the design, construction, testing, and use of eye protection devices, including standards for impact and penetration resistance. All safety glasses, goggles, and face shields used by employees under OSHA jurisdiction must meet the ANSI Z87.1 standard. The eyewear standard includes the following minimum requirements:


Provide adequate protection against the hazards for which they are designed
Be reasonably comfortable
Fit securely, without interfering with movement or vision
Be capable of being disinfected if necessary, and be easy to clean
Be durable
Fit over, or incorporate, prescription eyewear"


OSHA states "when necessary". There are circumstances or jobs that simply may not need or require a face shield; the eyes, being so very delicate can be injured by such a wide variety of situations and circumstances everyone has simply said "SHALL" on the eye protection.

The above quote also refers to "under OSHA jurisdiction"...well, there is another cop out for you. Many tree care companies fly under the radar of OSHA due to few employees. Personally, we do not take the stance that since we do not have to answer to OSHA, this allows us to take foolish risks. Many of these are common sense precautions.

So, STR, I believe your co-workers could each present a very strong debate for either side. FWIW, with the wording of 3.4.1, I would be hard to argue against the mandate to have face shields on every helmet in our industry. And if I had employees, helmets would all be equipped with face shields, as ours are. The convenience factor of being able to flip them up and out of the way, or immediately down again, there really isn't any excuse NOT to have them.

Sylvia
 
It's a should not a shall at this point. "Eye protection shall be worn" but not both, face protection need only "comply" but there is no requirement to wear it stated.
 
At the spring Z133 meeting we worked through a new section concerning high pressure excavation tools. There was plenty of discussion about what type of face protection will be required in the new version of the Z133. I don't have the verbiage at my finger tips right now but I believe that it will say that Z87 eye protection is required and face protection is suggested.

This makes perfect sense doesn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom