PT Diver/biologist needed

[Pharonis0314]

Part time help needed at the Rainforest Cafe in Downtown Chicago, IL. Main responsibilities include diving and maintenance in the three aquariums, basic animal husbandry, and other duties as required. Morning and Saturday availability. Needed to work 10-15 hours per week, compensation freom $8.50-10.00/hour. For more information, please contact Rinie at 312-787-1501. Happy diving!

 

[drbill]

A biologist getting paid $8.50-10.00/hour? I don't think so.

 

[MikeFerrara]

A biologist getting paid $8.50-10.00/hour? I don't think so.

A diver getting 8.50/hour?

I used to get $100 a crack to surface swim about 50 ft and dip down about 3 ft to turn on a fountain valve in apartment complex ponds.

I'll make them a deal though. I'll rent them some basic equipment for $75/day.

 

[Thalassamania]

It will come as a shock when they realize that OSHA says they have to hire a commercial diver, and that will mean surface supplied air, a tender, a diving supervisor, etc. Think I should call Rinie at 312-787-1501 and break the bad news, or should I just call OSHA and let them do a site check? <G>

 

[JeffG]

It will come as a shock when they realize that OSHA says they have to hire a commercial diver, and that will mean surface supplied air, a tender, a diving supervisor, etc. Think I should call Rinie at 312-787-1501 and break the bad news, or should I just call OSHA and let them do a site check? <G>

Is that a Chicago thing or what? I saw a documentary on the Monterey aquarium and they use volunteer diver to clean the glass of the tanks (on scuba)


This job only really makes sense for a gung ho 1st or sec yr biology student.

 

[MontereyCADiver]

Hey JeffG,

As a volunteer diver at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, I assist with exhibit maintenance. I can reassure you that MBA&#8217;s dive safety officers have implemented an extensive diver safety program for diving on SCUBA and surface supplied air. Everyone&#8217;s safety is our foremost concern.

I trust the friendly folks at the Rainforest Café in Chicago have an equally effective diver safety program.

 

[NorthernShrinkage]

I trust the friendly folks at the Rainforest Café in Chicago have an equally effective diver safety program.

It should be an awesome safety program thats why they dont have enough money leftover to pay a realistic dive rate

 

[Thalassamania]

Hey JeffG,

As a volunteer diver at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, I assist with exhibit maintenance. I can reassure you that MBA’s dive safety officers have implemented an extensive diver safety program for diving on SCUBA and surface supplied air. Everyone’s safety is our foremost concern.

I trust the friendly folks at the Rainforest Café in Chicago have an equally effective diver safety program.

No one's questioning the safety of the operation (at least I'm not), the problem is that when OSHA promulgated the exemption for research divers it specifically excluded commercial diving tasks. The OSHA commercial diving operations standard applies to all diving operations except:

1. 29 CFR 1910.401(a)(2)(i). Recreational Instruction.
2. 29 CFR 1910.401(a)(2)(ii). Diving solely for search, rescue, or related public-safety purposes by or under the control of a government agency.
3. 29 CFR 1910.401(a)(2)(iii). Diving operations when performed for research, development, and related activities in which human subjects are involved.
4. 29 CFR 1910.401(a)(2)(iv) and 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart T, Appendix B. Diving operations that are defined as scientific diving and which are under the direction and control of a diving program containing all elements specified (manual, DCB, DSO, etc.).
5. Section 4(b)(1) of the OSH Act. Those specific working conditions of diving operations over which other federal agencies exercise statutory.

At the Monterey Aquarium you are likely operating under 29 CFR 1910.401(a)(2)(iv) and 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart T, Appendix B (item iv above), the problem is that the definition of Scientific Diving is: diving performed solely as a necessary part of a scientific, research, or educational activity by employees whose sole purpose for diving is to perform scientific research tasks. Scientific diving does not include performing any tasks usually associated with commercial diving such as but not limited to: placing or removing heavy objects underwater; inspection of pipelines and similar objects; construction; demolition; cutting or welding; or the use of explosives.
While cleaning glass is not specifically mentioned, there are those who would be hard pressed to see that as a “scientific task.”
Appendix B to 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart T - Commercial Diving Operations provides guidelines that are used in conjunction with the final rule to determine those scientific diving programs that are exempt from OSHA's diving standard. The guidelines are as follows:

1. "The Diving Control (safety) Board consists of a majority of active scientific divers and has autonomous and absolute authority over the scientific diving program's operations." If there is no DCB there it is not science.
2. "The purpose of the project using scientific diving is the advancement of science; therefore, information and data resulting from the project are non-proprietary."
   You might make it here.
3. "The tasks of a scientific diver are those of an observer and data gatherer. Construction and trouble-shooting tasks traditionally associated with commercial diving are not included within scientific diving." Here’s where you’ve got trouble.
   
   The third guideline concerns the tasks performed. The scientific diving definition in the standard states that such diving must be done by employees whose sole purpose for diving is to perform scientific research tasks. Also contained in the definition is a list of those tasks that are traditionally considered commercial, with emphasis on construction and the use of construction tools (such as heavy equipment, power tools, explosives, welding equipment, burning equipment). As OSHA discussed in the final rule (see Federal Register notice 47 FR 53357), a commercial diver is typically an underwater construction worker, builder, and troubleshooter; a scientific diver is an observer of natural phenomena or responses of natural systems, and a gatherer of data for scientific analysis. The tasks performed by the scientific diver usually are light and short in duration; if any hand tools are used, they are simple ones (such as a small hammer, collecting jars, special hand-held measuring devices, plastic core tubes, hand net, suction fish collector, camera, or slate pencil). As was indicated in a Federal Register notice (49 FR 29105), an example of task distinction might involve a scientific study of kelp. The construction of the kelp bed used in the project is not scientific diving since construction activities are commercial diving tasks; however, the consequent studies made of the kelp would be scientific diving tasks. Another example of task distinction was provided in the discussion of the final guidelines (see Federal Register notice 50 FR 1046). Lowering a large object into the water (such as the Project Aquarius habitat), even though a part of a scientific project, is not scientific diving. The special skills of an underwater scientist, including observation and data-collection skills, do not contribute to the placement of a large object underwater. OSHA avoided the possibility of the exemption applying to scientific divers who undertake such tasks while participating in a scientific research project by focusing the definition on the sole purpose of the dive (scientific research tasks), eliminating dives with mixed purposes, and further indicating typical examples of what OSHA considers to be commercial tasks. It is noted that the scientific diving community supported this limited definition (see the amicus brief in United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners v. Department of Labor, No. 82-2509 (D.C. Cir. 1982)).
4. "Scientific divers, based on the nature of their activities, must use scientific expertise in studying the underwater environment and, therefore, are scientists or scientists in training." And trouble here.
   
   The fourth guideline concerns special qualifications. As was previously noted, a scientific diver is an observer and data gatherer involved in studying the underwater environment, its organisms and its dynamic processes, in order to promote underwater science. OSHA concluded, based on the nature of these activities, that these divers must be able to use scientific expertise in studying and analyzing the underwater environment. Consequently, OSHA requires these divers to be scientists or scientists in training. For example, a project to map segments of the ocean floor might hire commercial divers to undertake certain mapping tasks. These commercial divers are neither scientists nor scientists in training as prescribed by this guideline and, therefore, would not be eligible for the exemption. If, however, scientific expertise was needed to effectively accomplish tasks associated with the mapping (such as specialized geological knowledge), and a geologist trained as a diver performed the special geological tasks associated with the mapping, then such diving tasks would meet this particular criterion. As stated previously, however, all program criteria and guidelines must be met in order for this diving scenario to qualify for the exemption. In promulgating the exemption, OSHA rejected using credentials to determine who is a scientist. However, the Agency accepted the limitation that divers covered by the exemption had to be scientists because this limitation reflects the scientific diving community's underwater activities, and it prevents obvious commercial diving from being construed as scientific diving.

 

[JackConnick]

Agreed with all of the above.

I'm a volunteer diver for The Seattle Aquarium, and we have a very extensive safety and documentation program.

Gee, $8.50 hr for a biologist and diver. Wow!

Jack

 

[Thalassamania]

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a simple solution to the problem, but many of the aquaria that I know have their heads in the sand or they want to have their cake and eat it too. It took the science community about eight years and several million dollars to get our exemption, I can't see the aquaria mounting the same sort of fight so we need to find a way to bring them in under the science exemption, but I'm not sure how to do that. I'm working with two aquaria on this issue at the moment so I welcome any thoughts. I fear that just having, "a very extensive safety and documentation program," does not cut it. Montery Bay Aquarium is an organizational member of AAUS, but Seattle is not (only about eight aquaria are) and that is, in reality (at the moment), the best test we got.