Does anyone know what Massachusetts law or regulation (if any) ... ?

[okeydokey]

I suppose the same could be said for desk chairs.

The point is that there are certain minimum standards for workplaces set forth as a reflection of our society's consensus view of what is fair and safe and respectful of the value of work. Fresh water is one of those.

I think in the case of this unusual problem a little flexibility is in order. It's great that your employer was able to get some jugs of water but what if they hadn't? I think people should not be surprised to have to provide some for themselves in this case. It is short lived.

 

[dakcp2001]

Bottled water and desk chairs? Really? Those do not make a very good comparison. I can't even think of a single way that they could be compared as the same category.

Its the whole entitlement thing I guess that I have a problem with.

You can't bring youself some water for a day or two? I guess I am just annoyed because I work with some of the "complainers" of the world, and one happens to be my cubemate.

 

[Evi]

I have to laugh I was actually in Quincy today I ran into a cvs on my way to the another store and I saw plenty of cases of bottles water. I guess its must taste different when its free.

 

[FireDancer]

As long as there is a sink I think they are in compliance since it has drinkable water coming out of it. In a special situation like a boil advisory they could be forgiven because it is a special circumstance and it isn't their fault (I'm assuming) that the water has been effected.

We have a kitchen at work so we would just boil it, no big deal. We also have vending machines with water if anyone is above boiling it.

 

[bicker]

I think in the case of this unusual problem a little flexibility is in order.

The law does not allow for flexibility in this.

As long as there is a sink I think they are in compliance since it has drinkable water coming out of it. In a special situation like a boil advisory they could be forgiven because it is a special circumstance and it isn't their fault (I'm assuming) that the water has been effected.

Folks: Just read the law. If you can find some reference to "except when it is not convenient because of a water main break" or other exclusions for "special circumstances" that include such an occurrence, please let me know. Thanks.

This forum is often rife with folks expressing entitlement mentality. I'm always first to help them see that that is the case. This, however, is a case where they actually are entitled. That's what laws are for... to outline what people actually are entitled to.


This whole "special circumstances" thing reminds me of a situation back when I was auditing. This was back when there was some massive flooding in the St. Louis area, and specific St. Joseph, where we had some of our industrial clients. The regulations were very clear; we were required to go out there, to review the devastation, and essentially revoke the license we've granted to these factories to sell their products. Here you have people who's lives were devastated, trying to just get their homes in order, and suddenly their jobs were in danger because the factories they were working in could no longer adequately assure the quality of the output. It was very sad, but hard, cold reality, that's the way things are and must be. Someone in Oregon doesn't want a defective brake pad because of a flood in Missouri months earlier.

 

[NatashaDisneyCM]

Does anyone know what Massachusetts law or regulation (if any) requires drinking water in the workplace?

yes..I do! but it is all resolved now!

 

[KAMLEM]

I suppose the same could be said for desk chairs.

That's a little ridiculous.

 

[mkel34]

I jsut read in todays paper that stores in Abington, Cohasset, Scituate all had a good supply of bottled water. If you're (not you, I mean people needing bottled water) in Quincy then a quick drive down 3A to Cohasset would be easier than waiting in that insane line I saw today!

Hingham Stop and Shop was dry but Lowes in Weymouth had pallets stack to the ceiling.

 

[bicker]

That's a little ridiculous.

As was the comment I was responding to, with regard to water. It is "ridiculous" to assert that a workplace shouldn't be required to have drinkable water provided. (It is also illegal.)

 

[okeydokey]

I guess employers could just shut down for a few days and send people home on vacation leave or no pay if they can't comply with the law in this emergency.

 

[bicker]

(Or just bring in some jugs of water.)

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I'd be curious to the specific OSHA regulation that provides the time line of repair or replacment for a compromised water supply.

While the employer must provide it--if a water main (For example) breaks during the day--could the employer be cited for not blinking in an immediate supply of bottled water.

There must be some contingency than to outright call it illegal if they do not provide it immediately.

I'm talking for a temporary situation. Clearly if a boil water issue was listed for days on end, then the employer would have ample time and should provide it.

The absence of such language within OSHA doesn't automatically make it illegal.

 

[marlynnp]

Exactly! I'm sure anyone reporting an employer in these circumstances withint he first few days of this issue would be met with an, "Are you freaking kidding me. We'll make a note of that but don't plan on seeing us."

If I were in an area where I knew there was an issue with the water supply. I'd be sure to bring my own if I were that worried about having some.

 

[bicker]

While the employer must provide it--if a water main (For example) breaks during the day--could the employer be cited for not blinking in an immediate supply of bottled water.

The only thing the employer can be cited for is not closing down. Shut downs are very common where employees have significant leverage.

The absence of such language within OSHA doesn't automatically make it illegal.

Yes, it does. The law is the law. If there is a requirement then the requirement must be complied with.

 

[bicker]

Exactly! I'm sure anyone reporting an employer in these circumstances withint he first few days of this issue would be met with an, "Are you freaking kidding me. We'll make a note of that but don't plan on seeing us."

What is a more likely scenario is that the workers will shut down the operation and go home, as per the law. Unions, if there are any, would even go so far as to order their members to go home.

 

[dakcp2001]

What is a more likely scenario is that the workers will shut down the operation and go home, as per the law. Unions, if there are any, would even go so far as to order their members to go home.

No, they wouldn't. That would be job abondonment and a violation of the contract. And since we are on the topic, unions dont "order" their members to do anything. Issues get voted on and contracts get negotiated. If there were an issue, it would be addressed. People wouldnt just up and leave. It is work not the Ritz Carlton.

 

[bicker]

No, they wouldn't. That would be job abondonment and a violation of the contract.

No it wouldn't. The contract requires that the business be in compliance with the law.

 

[MassJester]

Speaking as both a Labor & Employment attorney and a member of management, I can say quite matter of factly that workplaces are always required to have potable water on hand while the workplace is open. Water, heat, means of managing human waste and other essentials designed to ensure a safe and healthfull workplace are required by law. You must provide them or close the workplace until you can.

Not only are there pertinent OSHA standards, but there are multiple state and local codes on point.

There are certain particular occupations and workplace circumstances that allow for exemptions, but the average workplace is not exempt.

 

[dakcp2001]

No it wouldn't. The contract requires that the business be in compliance with the law.

Have you read your contract? If you'd like I can go get the article that states it is an illegal walkout. If there was a violation of the law, they would address it, in a proffesional manner. Such as asking for water. I also imagine that if someone were to complain to OSHA about a lack of potable water, I imagine rather than shutting down the place immediately, I think they would address the employer and have them get some. I don't work for OSHA, but I imagine that common sense applies.

I feel sorry for your cubemates.

So MassJester- moot point since the employer provided water, but do you think if they arrived at work and all decided to walk out they wouldnt have been fired? Or should they have maybe asked for some? You know, like adults?

 

[Arielle22]

What is a more likely scenario is that the workers will shut down the operation and go home, as per the law. Unions, if there are any, would even go so far as to order their members to go home.

Bicker, usually I appreciate your point of view but this thinking seems extreme to me.

I work in downtown Boston but live in Scituate. I heard about the ban and packed 2 bottles of water to take with me on Monday. Problem was solved.

The ban was all over the news and radio so I don't see how someone could miss it even if you weren't in the affected areas.

If workers leave then if they are non-exempt they don't have to be paid or allowed to use paid time off (question of whether they would get in trouble aside). If they complain to OSHA, how long do you think the process would take? By the time OSHA got to the complaint the water would have been restored. Maybe OSHA would fine the company but in the meantime the workers would be out pay.

If it was an ongoing issue of not supplying water then I can see a complaint to OSHA. But sometimes being illegal does not make it logical. A little common sense goes a long way.

I agree the entire water ban was false hysteria. When I was in the Weymouth BJs on Saturday, pallets of water were continually being brought out and people would grab the entire pallet.