Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Site Image

Current Requests for Revision of Occupational Definitions
Proposed Revision: Cement Masons
Date of Record: ​January 1, 2014
Comment Period Ends: January 31, 2014

 Comment Period has Ended

 Comments

 

Date Submitted: 01-30-2014

Source: Ben Juhl - LaRusso Concrete, Inc.

Dear PWR Coordinator,
 
My name is Ben Juhl.  I am with LaRusso Concrete.  We are signatory with the Cement Masons and the Laborers.  I wish to provide some clarification regarding the current revision request.
 
The revision is intended to address only work that is historically and currently performed by Masons.  There is no intention of moving work that is currently under the either the Cement Mason’s or Laborer’s jurisdiction to another definition.  The requested revision is needed only to correct a previous revision.  We believe the previous revision may have been made inadvertently, as it had not been requested and was not mentioned or even noticed at the time.
 
The current BOLI Group 1 classification for Cement Masons includes this item: “Grinds or chips concrete in preparation of patching or to produce a finished concrete product.”  As the line item states, this work is performed in the course of achieving specified finishes, which is the heart of the trade.  This work may require an array of tools and equipment, including grinding and polishing equipment to provide exposed finishes which are currently popular, and which may sometimes be corrective in nature, but is all focused on the finished product. 
 
This particular work exposes our Masons to silica dust and is therefore an elevated hazard which requires training and protective precautions more comparable to Cement Mason Group 2 activities, which include sandblasting and bush hammering.  Prior to 2006, the classification item was in fact part of Group 2.  We believe moving it to Group 1 may not have been intentional.  In any case, the current revision request is based solely on the need to move the item from BOLI Group 1 classification back to BOLI Group 2. 
 
Please note that the item in question is in Group 2 in our contract with the Cement Masons (where it has always been). 
 
There is an objection to the request, on the basis that it would be a change of jurisdiction for work that is currently being performed by Laborers.  This is not the case.  We wish only to properly classify work that is currently and has historically been performed by Masons, and to ensure that they are paid appropriately for the typical hazards that are encountered in the course of this work.
 
Thank you for your consideration.
 
Ben Juhl
Estimator / Project Manager
503-263-4500
503-263-4502 fax
503-710-8755 cell
 

___________________________________________________________________________________

Date Submitted: 01-29-2014

Source: Greg Held - Oregon & Southern Idaho Council of Laborers

To view comments click here.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

 

Date Submitted: 01-27-2014

Source: Eric Hill - American Concrete Cutting  

My name is Eric Hill, and I am with American Concrete Cutting.  I am writing you in regards to the recently advertised “Current Requests for Revision of Occupational Definitions”, proposed by Cement Masons, closing 1/31/14.
 
We write you from the perspective of running an open shop concrete sawing company.  We service Union and Non-union companies alike, have been bound by project labor agreements at various times, and have employees signatory to different trades.  Furthermore, we represent the collective interest of our employees, who wish to pay dues to fewer union trades, not more.  We employ at the peak of the construction season approximately 20 people.  We regularly work in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California.  We work for Commercial, Residential, Highway, Industrial and Utility contractors alike.  With all of that we are well versed in Concrete Sawing, Drilling, Grinding, Breaking, Roughening and removal.
 
In our opinion, the omission of “grinding machines” by BOLI may have been purposeful.  We do not think a change is warranted, as proposed most recently.  Simply put, we do not think Grinding Machines or Concrete Saws should fall under Cement Mason’s groups.
 
We own a large variety of grinding equipment, grinding on all sorts of structures, of all different sizes.  That classification has always been easy, if small and hand held, or smaller walk behind, it falls within a Laborer.  If a ride on, it is a Power Equipment Operator.  This is simple, as the hand held nature of saws, and being a laborer, allows for all types cutting and grinding equipment to fall within 1 trade.  And we often see this, with other trades trying to claim our specialty work.
 
Furthermore, the term “Concrete saws and grinders both walk behind and hand held” is far too broad.  This would drastically encroach into work within the jurisdiction of the Laboerers and Power Equipment Operators.  It would further confuse the matter, not clarify, as we have many ride on highway grinders.
 
From our experience in serving the Commercial, Residential, and Heavy Highway market, the tools the Masons generally use are much smaller than average, hand held most often, significantly less horsepower than most grinders, and are very limited on cutting depth or area.  This would make inclusion as proposed inaccurate in our opinion.  Should there be any changes, the work needs to be regulated by horsepower or size.  And even at that, small sawing is easy to teach, and traditionally any laborer is skilled in that area to perform high quality work.  Leave the work with Laborers and Power Equipment Operators.
 
Please let us know what more information we may provide.
Thanks,
Eric
 
 
Eric Hill
General Manager
American Concrete Cutting
PH: 541.726.8597
FAX: 541.726.8146
Location: 32900 Roberts Court
              Coburg, OR 97408