AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Rust bros property dispute9/8/2023 ![]() In disputing those claims, Rust Movie Productions says it “contests the alleged violation itself – the existence of the alleged conditions and/or that such conditions constitute a violation of the cited provision” that it contests the classification of the alleged violation, and that it contests the proposed penalty. By failing to follow these practices, an avoidable loss of life occurred.” The guidelines require live ammunition ‘never to be used nor brought onto any studio lot or stage,’ that safety meetings take place every day when firearms are being handled, and that employees ‘refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone’ except after consultation with the property master, armorer or other safety representative, such as the first assistant director. Rust Movie Productions, LLC’s documents indicate that it would follow the Industry Wide Labor-Management Safety Committee’s Safety Bulletin #1, ‘Recommendations for Safety with Firearms and Use of Blank Ammunition,’ but failed to adhere to these guidelines on set. The Bureau found that “while the film industry has clear national guidelines for firearms safety, Rust Movie Productions, LLC failed to follow these guidelines or take other effective measures to protect workers. The law properly permits producers to delegate such critical functions as firearm safety to experts in that field and does not place such responsibility on producers whose expertise is in arranging financing and contracting for the logistics of filming.” In contesting the citation, the production company said that the basis for the citation is “factually and legally inaccurate.” It said it shouldn’t have been cited at all because it “was not the ‘employer” responsible for supervising the film set, much less for supervising specific protocols such as the maintenance and loading of weapons. In its findings, the Bureau, which is a division of the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), said the company was “cited for the plain indifference to the recognized hazards associated with the use of firearms on set that resulted in a fatality, severe injury, and unsafe working conditions.” ![]() 'Rust' Armorer Loses Bid To Have Charges Dismissed Judge Tells Lawyers To "Stay The Course" ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |