In the face of the foregoing evidence of general disregard of the existing requirements of the Labor Law, the question arises why they are not better observed and this inevitably resolves itself into a question of enforcement.

It has been a misdemeanor to fail to observe section 18 since 1893, or section 20 since 1896. Down to 1899 the duty of enforcing both sections in cities was laid upon local police or building authorities, that duty so far as section 18 was concerned being specified only when complaint concerning scaffolds was made. Since 1899 the duty to enforce both sections has devolved upon the State factory inspector or the Department of Labor without geographical restriction (section 20, however, has never applied outside of cities) down to 1916 when for New York City the enforcement of both sections became the duty of the local authorities exclusively, the State jurisdiction still continuing elsewhere. Since 1899 the enforcement of section 20 continued to be the duty of local building authorities also, but from 1899 to 1911 the enforcement of section 18 devolved only upon the State authorities. Since 1911, however, in cities it has been the duty of local building authorities also, to enforce section 18.

The foregoing brings out the fact that there has been varying, divided or double jurisdiction in this matter, as between local and State authorities. Such a condition clearly does not make for centralized responsibility which, on general principles, is necessary for efficient enforcement of law, and this is probably one reason for the lack of better enforcement which has been noted.

So far as the State authorities are concerned, another reason appears in the failure to couple with the duty to enforce means for the systematic performance of that duty. It is perfectly obvious that such requirements can be adequately enforced only by systematic inspection of building work, but no duty of inspection has been prescribed by law save only a direction to inspect when complaint is received in the case of scaffolds. Furthermore, at the outset it was assumed, and the assumption has continued ever since, that the inspection of building work found necessary could be performed by the factory inspectors in addi

tion to their other duties. This assumption in later years would seem to have been unconsidered rather than deliberate, but in any case it has always failed surprisingly to take account of the constant complaint of inadequate forces to inspect factories alone, for which inspection has always been mandatory, or the amount of work and distinctly different technical problems involved in inspection of building work. The result has been that not only in earlier years, when the enforcing duty was enjoined only in case of complaints, but also later, after general duty to enforce was specified, the Department of Labor has limited itself almost entirely to enforcement upon complaint. There has been some enforcement independent of complaints, as in the case of the investigations in 1913 and 1916 above referred to, in connection with which orders to correct violations found were issued. At the present time also, investigations are being made up-state of scaffold accidents reported in the newspapers, with issuance of orders when necessary. But such intermittent and partial efforts leave the general problem of enforcement almost untouched.

Another phase of enforcement in this field also shows a record of negative results. This appears in the failure of a policy of dependence upon complaints by employees to bring violations of law to light. Such complaints have always been very few in number, so rare, comparatively speaking, as to indicate that a policy of dependence upon complaints is futile.

In short, a review of experience as to enforcement of these provisions of the Labor Law, leads inevitably to the conclusion that the matter of enforcement has never been sufficiently studied or adequately provided for, and that one step at least toward prevention of falls in building work should be a study of this problem to the end that the existing safety provisions of law shall be everywhere observed.

Another step to be taken would naturally be an examination. of the present provisions of law as to their adequacy, if observed, for the prevention of falls. The fact that with but few modifications these provisions date back almost, if not quite, twenty years, raises a fair presumption that amendments or supplemental regulations ought now to be added, especially in view of the great

strides in knowledge and technique of safety work in the last few years. Examples of such possible supplemental regulations may be seen in following pages.

MEANS OF PREVENTION IN GENERAL

But discussion of legal requirements is not the main purpose of this bulletin. It is not necessary, and less so today than ever before, to depend upon legal requirements alone for the promotion of safety in industry. Consideration for the welfare of employees, and the possibility of reducing economic loss from accidents made definite and specific by the compensation law both weigh with employers to take measures voluntarily for prevention of accidents. It is to emphasize the seriousness of the particular hazard here considered, and to suggest means of prevention for it in general that is the aim here. Accordingly, in following pages are summarized, from such sources as were at hand, measures recommended by experts which are calculated to prevent injury to workmen by falls in building work. There is every reason to believe that use of measures such as these would prevent a very large proportion of the startling number of fatal accidents due to falls in building work which are now occurring.

Scaffolds

A recent publication by the Travelers' Insurance Company on "Safety Engineering Applied to Scaffolds" gives a complete description of the various kinds of scaffolds and the methods of insuring safety to the men working upon and around them. This is the first comprehensive study of American experience in scaffold construction from the standpoint of safety. Most of the following recommendations are based upon the descriptions contained in this treatise.

Scaffolds are roughly grouped into three main classes -- pole, suspended and outrigger. Pole or fixed scaffolds are most common. In these the weight is supported by poles or uprights which remain in place until the wall is completed. The bricklayers' pole scaffold utilizes the wall itself for supporting the inner edge of the working platform and hence requires but one row of poles or uprights. Pole scaffolds are used almost exclusively in constructing buildings not over five stories in height and higher ones that have no framework of structural steel.

In the construction of high buildings with steel framework swinging or suspended scaffolds are used. Such a scaffold consists of a platform swung by steel cables from the upper part of the steel framework of the building in such a manner that it can be conveniently raised and lowered.

Outrigger scaffolds consist of platforms supported upon beams which extend out through windows or other openings in the walls and which are secured to the framework or flooring within the building. Outrigger scaffolds are not recommended when some other kind can be used.

POLE SCAFFOLDS

Poles or uprights should be straight, straight-grained and free from bad knots and other imperfections. They should be set as nearly vertical as possible to insure stability of the scaffold. They should be set as near the wall as possible. The standard distance from the wall to the poles in a bricklayers' pole scaffold is 4′ 6′′. Poles should not be spaced farther apart than 7′ 6′′ from center to center. They should be fixed at their lower ends to prevent displacement.

Cleats for splicing poles should be not less than 1/4" thick and should be wider than the poles. They should overlap each pole not less than 2'. There should be two cleats to every joint or splice and these should be on adjacent and not on opposite sides of the poles. Wherever possible the practice should be followed of breaking joints when splicing poles.

Ledgers should be fastened to the inside of the pole. This shortens the span for the putlogs. The vertical distance between ledgers should not exceed 5′2′′. Each ledger should be fastened to each pole with 5 first-class cut nails of large size, preferably 10-penny. Wire nails should never be used for this purpose.

one at

Putlogs should be close grained, sound and free from knots. There should be at least three putlogs to every plank each end and one in the middle. They should rest on the ledgers as close to the poles as possible.

Planks should be carefully selected, straight-grained, sound, and free from bad knots or other defects. The standard size is 2" x 9" x 16'. When such planks are used they should be laid 5 wide. The space between the outer poles and the wall should be

filled in as nearly as possible to prevent the falling of men or materials. If the scaffold is properly built there is no necessity for fastening the planks to the putlogs since the weight of the planks and the load they carry is sufficient to prevent their displacement. Planks should not abut on the same putlog.

Pole scaffolds should be braced not only to insure stiffness to the scaffold itself but also to prevent the scaffold as a whole from falling away from the building. The poles should also be supported by longitudinal bracing to prevent the scaffold from collapsing parallel to the wall. All braces should be of adequate size and of suitable material.

A guard-rail should be constructed for pole scaffolds, so placed that the height from the platform to the upper edge of the rail is 40". These rails should be at least 6" x 1" and should be securely nailed to the side of the poles facing the platform. Two guardrails, the upper one 40′′ high, are preferable to one.

A foot-board should project above the platform at least 7′′. It should make a tight joint with the platform in order to prevent materials from falling.

Wherever possible a netting of stout wire, having meshes not greater than 11⁄2", should be used along the outer edge of the scaf- . fold platform. This netting should extend from the guard-rail to the foot-board and should be securely fastened to both.

SUSPENDED SCAFFOLDS

The use of swinging or suspended scaffolds is limited, in new work, to buildings with steel or concrete skeletons. When properly constructed such scaffolds are the most economical and the safest for use on high buildings. The flexibility of suspended scaffolds is an asset in the construction of modern high buildings.

The attachment and care of cables should be in charge of men who are skilled in such work. It is quite common for builders to lease scaffolds instead of owning them. In such cases the erectors and caretakers of the scaffolds are men skilled in such work.

The platform should be tight enough to prevent the smallest tool from dropping through. It should hang close enough to the building to prevent men from falling through between the platform and the wall. Planks are usually 2′′ x 9′′ x 12' or 14'. They