its posts even though the bolts he had ordered were too short, to dismiss his crew at noon without remedying the situation, and to leave the plank unbolted' ten feet above ground over a long weekend without posting a prominent warning, reflect judgments “grounded in social, economic, and political policy” and shielded by the discretionary function exception. Our sister circuits have recognized this, concluding that similar non-policy-based government acts are not protected by the discretionary function exception. Indeed, as one court has noted, a holding that “torts stemming from garden variety decisions fall outside the discretionary function exception is consistent with a primary motive behind the [Federal Tort Claims Act].” Cestonaro v. United States, 211 F.3d 749, 755 (3d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Since “[tjhe question” as to whether the
holding discretionary function exception is no shield to claim of negligence in failing to provide handrails or adequate lighting on footpath holding that the discretionary function exception may apply in the absence of a conscious decision  recognizing a discretionary function exception to that waiver holding asserted negligence in failure to provide adequate lighting or warning in federally controlled parking lot not shielded by discretionary function exception holding that asserted failure to post adequate warning signs along commuter road not shielded by discretionary function exception