when you get tired chunking down a spar, do this

Re: re: jamoco

"Do you actually run a legitimate tree business, Bixler? "
-Tom

Does anybody run a legitimate tree business anymore? What would you consider legit? What does it take to be legit?

Anyway Tom, I hear ya, I'm trying my best to run 'legit'. I see improvement every year. I started out with a business license and liability insurance... let's see then, on November 9th 2010 I was issued my contractor's license, about a year later signed up for ol' worker's compensation. So in terms of paperwork i'm getting there. I can't say I claim cash money jobs, or don't bend the 'rules' a little bit sometimes. Either way, at the end of the day, all the money that comes in finds a way to go back out ya know? Maybe it's different here in California than in most places, but it's no picnic.
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone evolves at different times, and learns at a different pace, it's all about perception.

...just don't play dirty and keep OSHA off the speed-dial. Haters.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with those two statements, but jomoco, there's alot more than what you indicate in his post. ALOT more. I have had hundreds of opportunities to 'rat' out another company working against ANSI safety regs, but I would never do it. Sometimes there are teachable moments, sometimes you let it be. I'm not in control of all that. What I CAN do is change the way I work, and try to help change the industry from the inside through org's like ISA and TCIA, and I have done that and will continue to do so. And I am deservedly offended when a 'peer' (for lack of a better term) tells me (and the entire TB community) that this substandard behavior is not only OK, but somehow the people engaging in it are perhaps even 'better' than the guy calling them out, and they're just jealous. Bullcrap I say. Unbelievable leap there.

I also started doing tree work with an old beat up truck and a chuck and duck chipper, but I was never ignorant to the teachings of others. Many of the guys I see around doing substandard work (below ANSI Z133 OR A300) WILL NOT CHANGE. That's the difference. The guy in the original video seems to be one of them, and I refuse to defend him, period. After everything I have done to get where I am, I find it offensive that anyone would.

-Tom

[/ QUOTE ]

Tom, I didn't mean to offend you, but I want to be clear on one thing. I don't condone substandard behavior or the obvious disregard for PPE. My mission is not to help change our industry for the better. Unlike you, I don't care how we 'look' in they eyes of the general public, in my humble opinion, most people are stupid anyhow, and you can't fix that. People either are going to get it, or their not. I do my part, in my little bubble, to provide a wonderful service to my clients, I leave changing the image of our industry to people that are passionate about doing so. I applaud and appreciate those who do more than you know.
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
Tom, I didn't mean to offend you, but I want to be clear on one thing. I don't condone substandard behavior or the obvious disregard for PPE. My mission is not to help change our industry for the better. Unlike you, I don't care how we 'look' in they eyes of the general public, in my humble opinion, most people are stupid anyhow, and you can't fix that. People either are going to get it, or their not. I do my part, in my little bubble, to provide a wonderful service to my clients, I leave changing the image of our industry to people that are passionate about doing so. I applaud and appreciate those who do more than you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough.
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
Does anybody run a legitimate tree business anymore? What would you consider legit? What does it take to be legit?

Anyway Tom, I hear ya, I'm trying my best to run 'legit'. I see improvement every year. I started out with a business license and liability insurance... let's see then, on November 9th 2010 I was issued my contractor's license, about a year later signed up for ol' worker's compensation. So in terms of paperwork i'm getting there. I can't say I claim cash money jobs, or don't bend the 'rules' a little bit sometimes. Either way, at the end of the day, all the money that comes in finds a way to go back out ya know? Maybe it's different here in California than in most places, but it's no picnic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was referring to insurance and safety protocol for employees, as well as payroll tax, etc. I would not disparage anyone for taking cash on a job. I don't think anyone is 100% legit in the eyes of the IRS, local, state and federal government... That seems almost impossible. Like you, I do everything I can with the resources I have. I carry all of the necessary insurance and pay into unemployment so that my employees are protected in the event of an accident or loss of work.

I really believe that if we change both the perceived and real risk in our industry that these costs will come down. Companies that blatantly disregard safety and insurance regulations are working directly against that goal.

-Tom
 
Re: re: jamoco

Tom, you bring up a great point, in terms of insurance and employees "THESE GUYS" intern raise the cost of operating business by having total disregard for PPE. When a log hits a guy on the head wearing no hardhat a claim is filed and our costs go up. Shame on them for that. I feel it is much more safe to wear proper safety gear when doing tree-work and if everyone did, our cost would eventually go down... eventually, it would be a long process but yes we would all benefit in the long-run.

One of the main reasons you find me defending these 'cowboys' is because I find myself looking past the bad, and focusing on the skill and technique that a fellow treeworker has to offer - It's a respect issue. I still see a hardworking person, feeding their family, and providing work for their employee's and food for their families. It's easy for me to lose sight of how much this group can be can be doing more harm than good.

It can be tough for me to see the bigger picture sometimes, but one of the main reasons I like treebuzz is because these topics can be talked about and I can learn from my peers, working together to make us all better is important to me.

Just some food for thought, every now and then Riggs says something worth reading
wink.gif
, it may help someday if you you don't ignore the guy.
 
Re: re: jamoco

Bixler, I admire your ability to keep a level head during these sometimes heated debates. I respect your position and although I disagree with some of the points you made earlier, it seems that we're not that different after all. Apologies for any previous nastiness.

...And maybe I'll turn Riggs back on, if at least for entertainment value.
fruit.gif


-Tom
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
Tom, you bring up a great point, in terms of insurance and employees "THESE GUYS" intern raise the cost of operating business by having total disregard for PPE. When a log hits a guy on the head wearing no hardhat a claim is filed and our costs go up. Shame on them for that.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of these guys are working without insurance or WC so, no, our costs do not go up. A part of the reason our cost are so high is that the large companies have human resource people working the job applications and lawyers handling the WC and insurance claims. It saves the big guys money but the small guy still picks up the tab.
 
Re: re: jamoco

Part of the problem too is all the injuries that happen to those who arent even in the profession that get lumped in with us too. I see many municiple workers and homeowners who are open to injuries without ppe. If they get injured it will be recorded as tree/saw related injuries.
 
Re: re: jamoco

I somewhat disagree with Treeco's statement because the perceived risk of treework by the insurance industry comes from more than just the insured. I get the point, but I think that if the industry was better regulated and not viewed as a bunch of cowboys, costs would go down. Anyway, what was this thread about? Flipping logs? :)

-Tom
 
Re: re: jamoco

I missed a whole mess here....

OSHA established at the end of 1970, hmmmmm,,, let's see: "it is estimated that in 1970 around 14,000 workers were killed on the job. That number fell to approximately 4,340 in 2009. At the same time, U.S. employment has almost doubled and now includes over 130 million workers at more than 7.2 million worksites. Since the passage of the OSH Act, the rate of reported serious workplace injuries and illnesses has declined from 11 per 100 workers in 1972 to 3.6 per 100 workers in 2009."

That sounds like a money grab for sure. By keeping all those workers alive and able bodied they can pay taxes.

OSH Act like any other regulatory act provides a level playing field so that all employers are supposed to play by the same rules thus one isn't at a competitive disadvantage. In this case it also improved the workplace for employees. I believe the numbers bear that out.

As for WC TreeCo, the rate is established by 2 factors hazard rating of the industry and the hazard rating of the employer.

Given that the industry rating is a function of workplace accidents and not just claims. Those deaths and, serious injuries that result in hospitalization and some type of investigation, would be on the actuarial radar. Individual mod factors are a function of the individual employer's track record of claims and workplace procedures. Large companies need to have professionals working on this because they are the ones that are more likely to be inspected and by virtue of sheer numbers suffer a workplace accident that will adversely affect their bottomline. If they can keep their numbers down then they will save big time on WC. For example, on a million dollar payroll at 18% manual rate(established by industry hazard rating) your mod factor (established by company's hazard rating) if went from a 1.2 to a .8 you'd realize a $72,000 savings on your WC premium. The cost of PPE and all the other safety procedures required in the workplace are offset by the savings of this and the reduced loss time expenses. Simple math.

I'm of the mind that a workplace that is safe is better economically for the individual employee, the employer, the industry, the municipality, the county, the state and the country as a whole. We really can't afford to be killing and maiming our workforce. We in the end have to pick up those broken pieces and clean up the mess left behind.

As for my political leanings, put me in the center. In my youth I was a card carrying conservative. I vote based on who will best act as the voice for the constituency they represent, not the one that may follow a party line because it's good for me regardless of the community I reside in.

At the end of the day, I still have to get up and perform, whether it's operations, sales, production or what have you. Yes, I have to compete with the hacks in pick ups, the unscrupulous, the old schoolers, the big boys and, the professionals. I have to overcome the client's objections based on these prices and practices. Sometimes I win and sometimes I lose. I learn from every missed opportunity and mistake.

Not sure what all that makes me except who I am.
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
As for WC TreeCo, the rate is established by 2 factors hazard rating of the industry and the hazard rating of the employer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know. I've been the contact person for WC audits in my company for over 25 years now.
 
Re: re: jamoco

Your head must spin.... I was reading that the NCCI is coming up with a change to the mod factor calculation. How's it going to effect your co?
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]

I'm of the mind that a workplace that is safe is better economically for the individual employee, the employer, the industry, the municipality, the county, the state and the country as a whole. We really can't afford to be killing and maiming our workforce. We in the end have to pick up those broken pieces and clean up the mess left behind.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, each time a solo chipper operator gets eaten alive and spit into the back of a chiptruck, I marvel at just how concerned TCIA and the ISA truly are with the safety and well being of the average treeworker.

A simple two man minimum for crews operating whole tree chippers seems to be a bridge too far for our industry leaders to adopt.

Atleast the poor illegals piling brush into their beat up pickups have a better chance of making it home to their families intact in one piece.

Peter Gerstenberger is an integral part of this industry's reputation problem.

jomoco
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tom, you bring up a great point, in terms of insurance and employees "THESE GUYS" intern raise the cost of operating business by having total disregard for PPE. When a log hits a guy on the head wearing no hardhat a claim is filed and our costs go up. Shame on them for that.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of these guys are working without insurance or WC so, no, our costs do not go up. A part of the reason our cost are so high is that the large companies have human resource people working the job applications and lawyers handling the WC and insurance claims. It saves the big guys money but the small guy still picks up the tab.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who picks up the tab when the small company doesn't carry WC or insurance? The client?

It doesn't surprise me to hear that the large companies are finding ways to push the bill over to guys like me.
 
Re: re: jamoco

There's this federal outfit with the CDC called the NIOSH FACE Program that investigates fatalities at work, including woodchipper deaths on the job.

Each time a groundie gets sucked through a whole tree chipper NIOSH strenuously recommends that the tree industry establish a two man minimum mandate to prevent further woodchipper fatalities.

But on behalf of the huge outfits that run thousands of employees and chippers, Peter has managed to prevent the establishment of an industry wide two man minimum rule for whole tree chipper operation.

Whose interests are being protected in this bizarre scenario?

Why would TCIA oppose our govt's number one recommendation to prevent these gruesome deaths?

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/face/In-house/full9813.html

jomoco
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]
I missed a whole mess here....

OSHA established at the end of 1970, hmmmmm,,, let's see: "it is estimated that in 1970 around 14,000 workers were killed on the job. That number fell to approximately 4,340 in 2009. At the same time, U.S. employment has almost doubled and now includes over 130 million workers at more than 7.2 million worksites. Since the passage of the OSH Act, the rate of reported serious workplace injuries and illnesses has declined from 11 per 100 workers in 1972 to 3.6 per 100 workers in 2009."

That sounds like a money grab for sure. By keeping all those workers alive and able bodied they can pay taxes.

OSH Act like any other regulatory act provides a level playing field so that all employers are supposed to play by the same rules thus one isn't at a competitive disadvantage. In this case it also improved the workplace for employees. I believe the numbers bear that out.

As for WC TreeCo, the rate is established by 2 factors hazard rating of the industry and the hazard rating of the employer.

Given that the industry rating is a function of workplace accidents and not just claims. Those deaths and, serious injuries that result in hospitalization and some type of investigation, would be on the actuarial radar. Individual mod factors are a function of the individual employer's track record of claims and workplace procedures. Large companies need to have professionals working on this because they are the ones that are more likely to be inspected and by virtue of sheer numbers suffer a workplace accident that will adversely affect their bottomline. If they can keep their numbers down then they will save big time on WC. For example, on a million dollar payroll at 18% manual rate(established by industry hazard rating) your mod factor (established by company's hazard rating) if went from a 1.2 to a .8 you'd realize a $72,000 savings on your WC premium. The cost of PPE and all the other safety procedures required in the workplace are offset by the savings of this and the reduced loss time expenses. Simple math.

I'm of the mind that a workplace that is safe is better economically for the individual employee, the employer, the industry, the municipality, the county, the state and the country as a whole. We really can't afford to be killing and maiming our workforce. We in the end have to pick up those broken pieces and clean up the mess left behind.

As for my political leanings, put me in the center. In my youth I was a card carrying conservative. I vote based on who will best act as the voice for the constituency they represent, not the one that may follow a party line because it's good for me regardless of the community I reside in.

At the end of the day, I still have to get up and perform, whether it's operations, sales, production or what have you. Yes, I have to compete with the hacks in pick ups, the unscrupulous, the old schoolers, the big boys and, the professionals. I have to overcome the client's objections based on these prices and practices. Sometimes I win and sometimes I lose. I learn from every missed opportunity and mistake.

Not sure what all that makes me except who I am.

[/ QUOTE ]

"OSH Act like any other regulatory act provides a level playing field so that all employers are supposed to play by the same rules thus one isn't at a competitive disadvantage. In this case it also improved the workplace for employees. I believe the numbers bear that out."

It's not government that keeps it equal, its competition. Things get better because of free market.

Treehumper, you can't cheat a cheater... Copy and paste off OSHA website doesn't work for me. How do you think I got through public school?

The rate of workplace fatalities was dropping at the same rate before OSHA was established. That's a fact.

There is a limit to workplace safety. It has to do with the wealth of the society. As it becomes wealthier, we invest in more capital equipment, as workers become more productive, their wages increase. Those workers and companies can then opt for taking that increased wealth to make a safer workplace. Don't be fooled and give the government the credit, it's us, the working people that deserve it.

I give you a big red REDO!
 
Re: re: jamoco

[ QUOTE ]


Who picks up the tab when the small company doesn't carry WC or insurance? The client?

It doesn't surprise me to hear that the large companies are finding ways to push the bill over to guys like me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The owner of the small company picks up the tab. Often the hospital that performs the care to the injured person goes unpaid. Often the injured worker goes uncompensated unles they sue the owner but often the owner only has his rented mobil home as an asset. The only way the homeowner would have to pay is if conditions that caused the injury or accident were his fault.....like if he had a deep covered pit full of tigers, etc. The big companies and even the one I did the most paper work for in the past has several catagories of WC....like landscape, secretary, tree worker, sales, etc. with various rates and pushes as much as they can over to lower rate catagories. Also with a legal team on staff they find way to limit their payouts in creative ways.

These small companies and they claims seldom end up costing insurance companies money or ending up charged up to WC. It's the small company employee that gets the shaft most often. The small time business owner goes belly up, moves and starts over again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom