Let's break this down a bit into a little bit of what I was just describing. As far as the skill is, we pretty much addressed that. Performance of those skills, demonstration, to use their word, of those skills, as a supervisor, yes, you can in fact, demand that, "Look, if I'm going to ask you to do this, I would very much like you to demonstrate right in front of me, right now, that you can in fact perform these skills." If you think about it, in many ways, if you take those skills, they can actually be considered part of their knowledge base. I mean, what is this person's training history? What is this person's educational history, within their trade? Where did they acquire these skills? You know, was it something they were taught on the job? Is it just something that they looked out on YouTube? We don't know. And how specific do the skills apply to the task at hand? That same specificity can be applied to their knowledge as well.
Anyone who we're looking as to whether or not they're qualified and we have necessarily deemed qualified, should with no doubt whatsoever be able to definitively say when they're justified, when OSHA recognizes that they're allowed to do energized work. I mean, that's one of the basic tenets of arc flash training, is that you do, in fact, know and recognize whether or not you specifically meet what I call "the exceptions" to the primary rule of that you simply do not work on things energized. Well, someone with the training would know, if you haven't had the discussion in the class, that those exceptions apply to certain unacceptable risks that would be created by shutting the power off, in the interest of, say, a hospital. There's certain systems you can't shut down in a hospital, even though hospitals do have, you know, backups to the backups.
When you run the risks of possibly creating a more dangerous situation for someone by creating a safe situation for yourself, when certain systems, by design, when certain processes can't be shut down in the interest of creating a safe work condition for you, these are the type of condition that OSHA recognizes that there are, in fact, going to be times when the power can't be shut off, when the work condition can't be made safe. Knowledge of those exceptions, knowledge of what OSHA mandates in these documents, is something that a qualified person would know right out of game. You know, there would be no question whatsoever, whether or not this person was warned about it.
Next one here, you know, "qualified person must have the ability to recognize all hazards that might be associated with the work task." Well, that's about as fundamental and elementary as you can get, as far as whether or not you, as their supervisor or coworker, are going to allow them, you know, to perform this task. I mean, that will be mighty reckless to assume or knowingly allow someone to perform a task within...you know, reach a certain hazard knowing full well that they can't be fully expected to recognize those hazards.
That, in many ways...that is not a tough criteria to apply there. May get a little trickier, as far as determining do they in fact possess the knowledge, you know, are they in fact fully aware. And then, of course, the second half of this one, based on their knowledge, based on their awareness of these hazards, do they know how to address these hazards appropriately? Once again, that goes back to their knowledge base. If they're claiming to have this knowledge, well, where did they pick it up? Where were they given this knowledge and from who?
Next one, qualified person must understand the limitation of test equipment. Example, voltage testers, you know, how to select the appropriate one, how to apply them properly. And this goes back to work skills, once again, but also, it's a product of the arc flash safety training. The mandate of training that qualified workers receive, because one of the first things that you talk about in that class, when you start talking safety equipment, is whether or not a worker can look at their test equipment and recognize what type of electrical environment is it rated for.
How much of an adverse or unusual electrical condition could take place and still...the worker could still count on this equipment to adequately protect them. You know, using the wrong piece of electrical equipment, in the wrong location, in the wrong way, can actually cause the very the thing that we're trying to avoid. So, you know, assessing someone's "qualifications" is in many ways, you know, checking their awareness of, not just how to use the equipment, but how do they know that what they're using is in fact the right equipment.
Moving on to the next one. They must understand the construction and operation of the equipment associated with the planned task. Well, that's one of the most fundamental assessment criterias that you can think of. Would you want your auto mechanic working on the engine in your car if he wasn't 100% sure how it worked? I mean, that'll make me a little nervous, as far as I'm concerned. It's unbelievable that so many places out there, just for sheer lack of availability of someone who is more qualified, are okay with letting someone who isn't fully qualified go out and explore a piece of electrical equipment, assuming that they're not going to wander too deeply into this thing in order to try to figure how it works so that they can try to troubleshoot and repair it. Well, that's just the definition of reckless, as far as looking out for workers, but it happens.