http://cen.acs.org/articles/87/i31/Learning-UCLA.html

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Beth Shepard <Beth.Shepard**At_Symbol_Here**sial.com> wrote:

Good morning--

The C&EN article indicated that the court ruling was that the PI was considered the employer, because he was the hiring/firing authority for this position.

The woman who died was an employee, not a student.

Industry has also had to develop systems for standardized training & records documenting that training. One of the major areas covered under the ISO standards are operating procedures (OPs) & records documenting the training of employees on those OPs relevant to their position. As ISO certification has become more of a customer expectation, the training systems have become more robust. There must be an independent audit every year to maintain an ISO certification.

In this case, in my opinion, there should have been general lab safety training (locations of the emergency equipment & how to use them), OPs on handling pyrophoric materials, fire/emergency procedures, PPE, exposure procedures, etc., rather than on the specific experiment being performed.

Depending on your preferences, you could use a 4-stage training form (trainer & trainee sign & date the stage; procedure explained, demonstrated, performed with supervision, able to perform procedure without supervision). or you could have a training session (verbal, on-line, outside produced), then have a written test or a practical test. In this case, you'd have the the training documents, the training attendance form & the test to document the training that had been done.

 Based upon my perspective as someone trained in industry culture, rather than academia, no one should be working in a lab alone. While I accept the reality stated by others on this list, I really feel that when high hazard materials are being handled (pyrophoric, highly toxic, explosive, etc.) there should be someone else in the room. In this particular case, if help had been in the room, rather than next door or down the hall, the end result may have been different.
 
Beth

Sigma-Aldrich
Beth Shepard / Technical Compliance Specialist




From:        Beth Welmaker <bwelmaker**At_Symbol_Here**VGTIFL.ORG>
To:        DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**med.cornell.edu
Date:        08/28/2013 07:38 AM

Sent by:        DCHAS-L Discussion List <dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**med.cornell.edu>

This message and any files transmitted with it are the property of Sigma-Aldrich Corporation, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the person or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.