OSHA and Ergonomics: The Past, Present, and Future

sitting at desk with correct postureErgonomics is the study of work. From an OSHA perspective, it is the process of designing the job to fit the employee, rather than forcing the employee’s body to fit the job. This process may include modifying tasks, the work environment, and equipment to meet the specific needs of an employee to alleviate physical stress on the body and eliminate potentially disabling work related musculoskeletal disorders (“MSDs”). The overall goal is to eliminate injuries and disorders associated with the overuse of soft tissues, e.g., muscles or tendons, awkward posture, and repeated tasks. Such common injuries include carpal tunnel syndrome, tendinitis, and other sprains and strains.

As some may recall, ergonomics was a very hot topic for OSHA in the 1990s. In 2000, OSHA, which had spent a decade studying ergonomics, estimated that $1 of every $3 spent on workers’ compensation stems from ergonomic issues and that the direct costs attributable to MSDs were $15 to $20 billion a year, with total annual costs upwards of $54 billion.

OSHA began an ergonomics rule-making process in 1992 and started drafting an ergonomics standard in 1995, which eventually culminated in the issuance of an Ergonomics Program Standard on November 4, 2000, which became effective on January 16, 2001. The new rule generally contained requirements for most non-construction employers to identify and abate MSDs. Not surprisingly, there was strong criticism by various industry and business groups about the new rule which focused on, among other things, mandatory compliance, cost, and tension with state workers’ compensation laws. Shortly after taking office, President Bush signed Senate Joint Resolution 6 on March 20, 2001, which repealed the new standard. Read More

About The Author

OSHA and Workplace Violence

The workplace violence tragedy in Florida yesterday where a lone gunman killed five people and then himself at an Orlando awning factory is a sad reminder that workplace violence remains a serious issue for businesses. OSHA estimates that approximately 2 million American workers are victims of workplace violence each year and that it can strike anywhere, at any time. In fact, during a recent fire drill at our building, the Fire Warden spoke not only about emergency exit procedures during a fire but protocols when an active shooter is in the building. Although it is a frightening scenario to think about, businesses can and should be proactive about identifying potential workplace violence incidents and providing appropriate training.

Although there are no specific OSHA standards for workplace violence, ignoring signs and failing to abate recognized hazards including workplace violence could lead to a violation of Section 5(a)(1), the general duty clause, of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. Specifically, an employer that has experienced acts of workplace violence, or becomes aware of threats or other indicators showing the potential for workplace violence would be on notice for risk of workplace violence and should implement a workplace violence prevention program including engineering controls, administrative controls, and training as it generally should for any other kind of recognized hazard in the workplace. Indeed, some states such as New York already require certain employers (public employers) to have a written workplace violence program including conducting a hazard assessment.

Although it is too early to tell in the Orlando case what, if any, signs existed that might have predicted the shooting, law enforcement has stated that it appears the shooter was singling out individuals and that he had at least one negative relationship with one of the victims. In many of these tragedies, there may have been visible workplace violence signs or other indicators.  Read More

About The Author

One DOL Drug Testing Rule Officially Gone – Is OSHA Next?

On May 10, the Department of Labor officially nullified a rule passed during the Obama administration that limited states’ ability to require mandatory drug testing for individuals applying for unemployment benefits.

As we covered in an earlier blog, OSHA’s new electronic recordkeeping rule (which is currently the subject of legal challenge) contains anti-retaliation language which OSHA has interpreted as preventing employers, except in limited situations, from implementing mandatory post-accident drug testing.

Although the nullified rule was issued by the Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration, one reading tea leaves might well predict that the principle at play may well extend to OSHA’s retaliation rule soon. Read More

About The Author

OSHA Compliance – It’s Not Just About OSHA

Most businesses, particularly outside of construction or manufacturing, have probably not been the subject of an OSHA audit or may not have had much involvement with OSHA issues. This is due in large part to the small size of the agency. According to OSHA, with its state partners, there are approximately 2,100 inspectors responsible for the health and safety of more than 130 million workers. Add to the fact that there is no private right of action under OSHA, like the FLSA, and it is understandable why this may be the case.

However, there are other ways OSHA may become an issue for businesses. For example, if your business provides services at another entities worksite, the service contracts often contain provisions that the service provider shall comply with any and all applicable laws and they often reference OSHA specifically. Thus, failing to comply with OSHA standards could provide a basis for a party to terminate a contract even if the “real” reason for terminating the contract may be driven by something entirely different. Read More

About The Author

OSHA Rescinds Fairfax Memo

In 2013, OSHA issued what is commonly referred to as the “Fairfax” memo, a standard interpretation letter that, among other things, permitted non-employee, union representatives to participate in the walk-through portion of an OSHA audit. Last year, the National Federation of Independent Business filed a suit challenging this interpretation. Upon OSHA’s notification that the Fairfax memo had been rescinded and that it had removed the guidance from the Field Operations Manual, the Federation withdrew its legal challenge.

It is welcome news for businesses and perhaps a sign of things to come for other outstanding legal challenges to new OSHA rules and past OSHA guidance including but not limited to electronic recordkeeping, anti-retaliation, higher penalties, silica, and OSHA’s Guide to Restroom Access for Transgender Workers, etc.

Stay tuned…

About The Author

“Volks” Rule. Going, going…

In the final days of the Obama Administration, OSHA finalized a rule that sought to restore what the agency called a “longstanding position” that employers must record and keep records of worker injuries or illness for a full five years or they could be cited.

The D.C. Circuit in a case involving Volks Constructors held that OSHA’s rule of citing employers for the full five year period for such violations exceeded its statutory authority and limited citations to the standard 6 month period.

Last week, the Senate passed a resolution to undo the “Volks” rule and now it will be sent to the President who has indicated that he will sign so it looks like just a matter of time before the “Volks” rule is finally gone.

About The Author

Timely OSHA Issues Discussed at the American Bar Association – OSHA Committee Meeting

Close-up of Hands holding pens and making notes at the conferenceThe ABA – OSHA Committee held its 2017 Midwinter Meeting in Jupiter Florida from March 7 – 10. It was well attended by OSHA practitioners across the country including many prominent government attorneys including: Susan Harthill, Deputy Solicitor for National Operations; Thomas Galassi, Director, Directorate of Enforcement Programs, OSHA; the Honorable Covette Rooney, Chief Judge, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; and Heather MacDougall, Acting Chairperson, Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Many in the audience wondered how the new Administration might affect OSHA in the next four years. As expected, the typical response from the government side was business as usual with one government attorney commenting, “smaller but mightier.”

The various panels throughout the conference discussed timely OSHA issues (many of which have been covered in prior blogs here) including the new electronic recordkeeping rules, annual indexing of penalties, developments in process safety management, criminal prosecutions following workplace fatalities, targeted enforcement initiatives and anti-retaliation issues.

During one panel which discussed legal issues arising from OSHA inspections, there was a particularly lively exchange between management attorneys and OSHA representatives on two specific issues: 1) the right of non-employee, union representatives in a non-union worksite to participate in a walk-around inspection and 2) the right of hourly employees to have a management representative participate in an OSHA interview. Read More

About The Author

OSHA Inspections and Search Warrants – What’s the Rule vs. Best Practice?

inspector with clipboard wearing hard hatCongress granted the Secretary of Labor the authority to enter places of employment to conduct safety and health inspections. The OSH Act provides that such inspections must take place at reasonable times, within reasonable limits and in a reasonable manner and that they may include inspection of relevant conditions, structures and other equipment. For a general description of the inspection process, OSHA has published a Fact Sheet which is available here.

As the Fact Sheet indicates, it is also well-established that an employer may generally request a search warrant before allowing an OSHA inspector into the worksite. There are limited exceptions to the warrant requirement which include 1) consent by the employer 2) authorized third party consent such as consent provided by a general contractor at the worksite 3) emergency situations if there is a compelling need for official action and no time to secure a warrant and 4) if the conditions are in plain view of the public or inspectors while they are lawfully on the employer’s premises. Read More

About The Author

(Slightly) Higher Fines for OSHA Violations Moving Forward

person writing on clipboardAs of January 13, 2017, employers will be subject to higher fines for safety and health violations but not by much – 1.01636 percent to be precise. The increase matches the annual consumer price index by the federal government as of October 2016.  The new maximum OSHA fines are:

  • Repeat, willful: $126,749
  • Serious, other-than-serious: $12,675
  • Failure to abate: $12,675 (per day beyond the abatement date)

States that operate their own Occupational and Safety and Health Plans are also required to adopt maximum penalty levels that are at least as effective as OSHA’s. Read More

About The Author

A Quick Look Back at OSHA in 2016 by the Numbers

construction area inspectionThere are lot of questions about how the Trump administration will affect OSHA in the next four years including who will lead the agency.  The President has already implemented a federal hiring freeze although there are some exceptions built into the mandate. However, it is probably a safe bet to assume we probably will not see an increase in OSHA enforcement and most likely a shift from enforcement to compliance assistance as federal budgets will likely shrink. Read More

About The Author