Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: AARON OJEDA DBA FANTOMAS MASONRY INC.

Planned inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned health inspection of AARON OJEDA DBA FANTOMAS MASONRY INC. in 1327 S. FAIRFIELD AVE., CHICAGO, IL 60608 (NAICS 238140). OSHA activity number 346846553.

What this inspection record means

OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Aaron Ojeda DBA Fantomas Masonry INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Aaron Ojeda DBA Fantomas Masonry INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
1327 S. FAIRFIELD AVE.
City
CHICAGO
State
IL
ZIP
60608
Mailing
1243 S SOMERSER LANE, WOODRIDGE, IL 60517
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238140
Employees
6
Ownership type
A

10 citations on file for this inspection.

1903.19 C01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 30, 2024
Abate by
Mar 4, 2024
Penalty
Initial $388 · Current $388
29 CFR  1903.19(c)(1): Within 10 calendar days after the abatement date, the employer must certify to OSHA (the Agency) that each cited violation has been abated, except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.   a. On or about July 19, 2023,  the employer did not certify to OSHA within 10 days after the abatement date that each of the following cited violations issued had been corrected:  Citation Number                                                Item Number                                    Abatement Date 0100112/29/2023 0100411/16/2023 0100612/29/2023
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (O) $388

1910.178 L01 II

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Abate by
Dec 29, 2023
Penalty
Initial $3,349 · Current $3,349
29 CFR  1910.178(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each operator had successfully completed the training required by paragraph (l), except as permitted by paragraph (l)(5), prior to permitting an employee to operate a powered industrial truck safely:  a. On or about July 19, 2023, an employee was required to operate a powered industrial vehicle and had not been provided with training, including but not limited to formal instruction, practical training and an evaluation of the operators performance, thereby exposing employees to struck by and crushing hazards.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $3349

1926.102 A01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Penalty
Initial $4,688 · Current $4,688
29 CFR  1926.102(a)(1):The employer shall ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.  a. On or about July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, an employee cutting masonry block with a portable handheld power saw was not utilizing eye protection, thereby exposing the employee to hazards associated with eye injuries.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4688

1926.451 B01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Penalty
Initial $4,688 · Current $4,688
29 CFR  1926.451(b)(1): Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was not fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii)  a. On or about July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, an employee performing masonry operations from a tubular welded frame scaffold, approximately over twenty-five (25) feet above ground, did not have the working level fully planked, thereby exposing the employee to fall hazards.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4688

1926.451 E01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Abate by
Nov 16, 2023
Penalty
Initial $4,688 · Current $4,688
29 CFR 1926.451(e)(1): When scaffold platforms were more than 2 feet (0.6 m) above or below a point of access, portable ladders, hook-on ladders, attachable ladders, stair towers (scaffold stairways/towers), stairway-type ladders (such as ladder stands), ramps, walkways, integral prefabricated scaffold access, or direct access from other scaffold, structure, personnel hoist, or similar surface was not used.  Cross braces were used as a means of access.  a. On or about July 19, 2023, employees were exposed to fall hazards while accessing and egressing the work platform of a frame scaffold.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4688

1926.451 G01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Penalty
Initial $4,688 · Current $4,688
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Employees on scaffolds more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level by fall protection established in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)-(vii) of this section:  a. On or about, July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, employees conducting masonry operations from a tubular welded framed scaffold, twenty-five (25) feet above the ground, were exposed to fall hazards due to the lack of a guardrail system.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4688

1926.454 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Abate by
Dec 29, 2023
Penalty
Initial $3,349 · Current $3,349
29 CFR  1926.454(a):The employer did not have each employee who performed work while on a scaffold trained by a person qualified in the subject matter to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used and to understand the procedures to control or minimize those hazards.  a. On or about July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, employees conducting masonry operations from a scaffold were not trained to recognize the hazards associated with scaffolding. The employees was thereby exposed to the hazards associated with falls.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $3349

1926.1153 C01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Penalty
Initial $4,688 · Current $4,688
29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(1): For each employee engaged in a task identified on Table 1, the employer did not fully and properly implement the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified for the task on Table 1, unless the employer assesses and limits the exposure of the employee to respirable crystalline silica in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section.  a. On or about July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, an employee was using a handheld grinder to cut masonry block that contained silica. The employer did not implement engineering controls, such as an integrated water delivery system that continuously feeds water to the grinding surface, thereby exposing employees to hazards associated with respirable crystalline silica.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4688

1926.1153 D01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(1): The employer did not ensure that employees were not exposed to an airborne concentration of respirable crystalline silica in excess of 50 g/m3, calculated as an 8-hour TWA:  a. On or about July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, an employee was using a handheld grinder to cut masonry block that contained silica. The employer did not ensure that employees were not exposed to an airborne concentration of respirable crystalline silica in excess of 50 g/m3, calculated as an 8-hour TWA, thereby exposing employees to hazards associated with respirable crystalline silica.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.1153 G01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 9, 2023
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR  1926.1153(g)(1):The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan:  a. On or about July 19, 2023, at the above addressed jobsite, the employer failed to implement a written exposure control plan that describes the measures used to limit employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 346846553.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.