CPSC's FR enforcement record not impressive
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is not impressing too many people in the mattress industry with its seemingly lax enforcement of the federal mattress flammability standard. And that is a shame.
The FR law, which went into effect in July 2007, was among the most expensive regulations ever enacted by the agency. It took effect after years of study and work by the mattress industry, and it forced bedding producers to develop stringent new FR quality control systems, to learn how to incorporate new FR materials into their production processes, and to meet substantial new documentation requirements. In short, the FR standard ushered in a new era in the mattress industry.
But now the CPSC is failing to live up to its end of the bargain, in the view of some bedding veterans. Having required so much of the mattress industry in creating the FR rule, CPSC now seems to be demanding too little of the industry in enforcing it.
Industry observers say they are aware of just two public mattress recalls in the two years that the FR standard has been in effect. One came last fall, when Serta said that its own routine quality testing had determined that some Serta mattresses didn’t meet the FR standard. And the second came just a few days ago when 2,700 beds made by Loyal Bedding of Miami and distributed only in Puerto Rico were recalled.
Not to minimize the importance of that latest action (all unsafe beds should be recalled, of course), but that is a very limited recall.
CPSC should be vigorously enforcing the flammability standard, which is now the law of the land. Its apparent failure to do so creates an unlevel playing field, one where cheaters have little to fear. And that is just plain unfair to those producers who have taken the FR standard seriously.
midwestbedman commented:
It should really not be surprising that 1633 is virtually unenforceable on many of these swap meet bottom feeders. I liken them to mobile meth labs constantly on the move looking for their victims hooked on a cheap high that leaves them with a hangover of buyers remorse in the morning. The CPSC with it's 60 million dollar budget overseeing literally thousands of products has no chance of stopping this. Fortunately the vast majority of mattresses sold are compliant from what I have seen.
PornoLab.TV commented:
Hi! The mind of your site is royally
go very good blonde TV tube.
thanx
Compliant importer commented:
I believe it boils down to 2 points: What is the size of our business and how much can you loose if you get caught being wilfully non-compliant.
My company having spent $10K just to get the prototypes from LMG and another budget of close to $40K/year on testing just for record keeping purpose with a price adjustment of 15% on products just to cover the cost of the extra FR materials, this regulation is not a game for us. When you are part of a business which spent the last 40 years trying to make a name for yourself and taking counsumers' safety in mind, it makes it easier to spend all that money to be compliant at all levels but hearing there are small local manufacturers just ignoring this ruling is what gives the industry a bad reputation. THe bad apples must be found and disposed of to protect the good ones.
Investor commented:
SOunds like everyone agrees it isn't working, isn't being enforced, and can't really be enforced due to vagueness of the law. So get rid of it. Useless legislation.
Wan Can Nyguen commented:
It's not just the manufacturers, many retailers are flaunting the law by knowingly selling mis-matched sets and optional foundations that have not been tested in compliance with CFR1633.
Steve commented:
In response to Scott and Investor; Scott, I for one have notified the cpsc by phone and mail, I have also told inspectors in person of such companies and happen to know I am not the only one notifying them. Investor, the rules are very vague and when I myself and other suppliers and manufacturers have voiced concerns and asked questions we get the same answer. "You as manufacturers police yourselves and refer to the 1633 handbook and visit our FAQ section on the internet". My favorite line is "use reasonable criteria" when it comes to interpreting this law. My method of reasoning is different than yours Im sure. We realize that the cpsc is understaffed but now the federal government is involved and we are now a federally regulated industry same as cars, food, etc.
scott commented:
Before you throw the CPSC under the bus consider and of you that know of mattress companies that are not compliant or actually worse than them. There's a toll free hotline you can call and take out all these people that are selling unsafe mattresses. It's your moral obligation to do so, and whining about it doesn't do anyone any good.
Second, you have an understaffed organization policing hundreds of products...lead paint ring a bell?
Finally, any half witted person would have the CPSC sign a confidentiality agreement as soon as they come in the door which makes any public notice impossible.
Bottom line, they are out there, I can assure you. Why not help them and call in the ones taking advantage?
Investor commented:
I am fairly familiar with the process and methods that are used by the larger companies to track FR. There is a vast difference in method and philosophy. It is evident that either the bedding manufacturers are playing games and making up their own rules or the law is written in such a vague way that it is open to wide interpretation, therefore renderring it unenforceable.
Do everyone a favor and get rid of the law. You will save the bedding companies some much needed money right now.
Steve commented:
California has been going through this for 4 years now and we still know there is lots of cheating going on. Its only cheating if you get caught!!! Inspectors don't take this too seriously, they seek out the more convenient and easily accessible places to visit and ignore the renovators and swap meet vendors. They are after all government employees.
mattressguy commented:
I have to totally agree 100% and its finally time Dave you came out and said something. For the past two years we have been begging for mattress inspections in the state of Florida but have heard of nothing. Now its too late as these producers who are not producing FR have put us out of busniess. Our mattresses are always going to be more expensive. We spent so much money to being compliant and then the mattress producer down the street builds the mattress with used materials and sells them as brand new and stating they are FR. We buy them all the time to open them up and they are never FR. This law is a joke and they should just get rid of it as it is doing more harm than good. None of the retailers care about the rules. They would careless about selling sets only, or mattress only. They just want to sell beds, period. Get rid of the rule or enforce it like you made us believe you would. Makes me sick. This rule was made to stop importers but they are actually following the rules and the local manufactures are the ones breaking it. Shame on the CPSC.
bedman101 commented:
hmmm, did you ever think that well maybe they have done some testing and are seeing pretty good compliance out there and he industyr is generally doign a good job...
Investor commented:
This FR law should never have been passed. The implementation and ongoing costs far outweigh the limited benefits of CFR1633. If IPSA would have had strong leadership at the time this was up for a congressional vote, it would have been defeated. CPSC needs to look at rescinding this act.
springypoo commented:
I agree 100%! Many mattress manufacturers are totally ignoring FR COMPLIANCE. WAKE UP CPSC!
Diego commented:
Hold their feet to the fire, Dave!
