OSHA Inspections

OSHA Proposes Rule that May Allow Union Organizers and Plaintiffs’ Attorneys to “Walk Around” Workplaces

Eric J. Conn Leave a comment

By Eric J. Conn and Mark Trapp

Earlier this month, OSHA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for a “Worker Walkaround Representative Designation Process” Rule, which would expand the circumstances when non-employees, particularly union representatives at non-union workplaces, can accompany OSHA inspectors during enforcement inspections.

The proposed rule would allow union representatives, other labor or community activist groups, and even plaintiffs’ attorneys (or their expert witnesses) direct and early access to non-union workplaces and employees, potentially as a front for organizing campaigns where they otherwise would not have access or to advance personally injury lawsuits. Similarly, the rule could allow competitors, contractors, or others onsite to employers’ detriment.

The Washington Legal Foundation featured an article by Eric J. Conn of Conn Maciel Carey’s national OSHA Practice and Mark Trapp of CMC’s Labor & Employment Practice about this development. Here is a link to the WLF article.

Employers OSHA Inspection Walkaround Rulemaking Coalition

With that backdrop, we understand that employers have a strong interest in having a seat at the table for this rulemaking.  To that end, Conn Maciel Carey’s OSHA Practice and Labor Law Practice are collaborating to organize a fee-based company-anonymous coalition of employers and trade groups to advocate for the most reasonable possible fed OSHA regulation about third party participation in OSHA inspections. Continue reading →

OSHA Launches Enforcement National Emphasis Program Targeting Warehouses, Distribution Centers and High-Risk Retailers

Eric J. Conn 2 Comments

By Eric J. Conn and Darius Rohani-Shukla of Conn Maciel Carey LLP’s National OSHA Practice

On July 13, 2023, OSHA announced a new enforcement National Emphasis Program focused on Warehousing and Distribution Center Operations.  The new NEP was signed-off by the Head of OSHA a month ago – on June 14, 2023 – so it became effective as of July 13, just as the public was first learning about it.  We have combed through the Directive for OSHA’s new Warehouses NEP and identified the following key information that warehouse operators and retailers need to know.

What motivated OSHA to Launch the Warehouses NEP?

Over the last ten years, warehousing and distribution centers have experienced tremendous growth, with the number of estimated employees in that industry nearly tripling from 2011 to 2021.  As part of that growth, the injury and illness rate in that space has also dramatically increased.  Specifically, OSHA’s perspective is that this NEP is warranted because of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data that shows that injury and illness rates for the establishments covered by the NEP are significantly higher than the overall industry average.  As a result, OSHA’s new Warehouses NEP is tailored to address the hazards in those workplaces that OSHA deems as posing the most safety and health hazards.

The Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, Doug Parker, had this to say about the new Warehouses NEP:

“Our enforcement efforts are designed to do one thing: lead to permanent change in workplace safety.  This emphasis program allows OSHA to direct resources to establishments where evidence shows employers must be more intentional in addressing the root causes of worker injuries and align their business practices with the goal to ensure worker health and safety.”

What Employers are covered by this NEP?

This NEP targets warehouse-related industries as identified by seven NAICS codes, as well as a set of “high-injury retail establishments,” as identified by five NAICS codes.  Here are the specific warehouse industry segments covered by the NEP:

The so-called “high-injury rate retail establishments” are a subset of the retail industry with particularly high industry average DART rates; i.e., high rates of injuries and illnesses that cause days away from work, restricted duty, or job transfer.  They were included because OSHA believes they present the same or similar hazards as warehousing and distribution facilities, particularly in loading and storage areas.  Here are the specific retail industry segments covered by this NEP: Continue reading →

10 Reasons Why It Is Critical For Employers To Get OSHA Injury and Illness Recordkeeping and Reporting Right — And How to Ensure It is Done Right

Eric J. Conn 1 Comment

By Eric J. Conn and Lindsay A. DiSalvo

Although OSHA injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting has always been important from an OSHA compliance perspective, making correct recording and reporting decisions (i.e., not over- or under- recording or reporting) has never been more vital than it is today. We are at a moment in OSHA’s history when the agency is clearly staffing up and ramping up inspections and enforcement generally, and with respect to injury and illness recordkeeping specifically, OSHA is on the precipice of issuing a significant expansion of the injury and illness data required to be submitted to OSHA each year.  Indeed, OSHA sent the final Electronic Recordkeeping Rule to OMB for final review, which is the last step in the rulemaking process before the rule is published.

OSHA developed and repeatedly touted its injury and illness recordkeeping program as a “no fault” system, requiring certain injuries and illnesses to be recorded (or proactively reported to OSHA), regardless whether the employer or its safety program could have prevented the injury. In practice, however, recordkeeping data has become another tool OSHA uses to justify enforcement efforts and actions against specific employers or their industries. From publicizing recordkeeping data to “shame” employers, or using the data to target enforcement resources, OSHA has made it essential for employers not to over-record cases; i.e., they must carefully scrutinize each potential recordable injury or illness, rather than erring on the side of recording every close call. Of course, there are also real and growing enforcement risks for under-recording; i.e., failing to record or report cases that should have been recorded or reported.

Accordingly, it is more important than ever before to make sure your organization fully understands the nuances of OSHA’s recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

Here is our take on the Top 10 reasons it is critical for employers to get OSHA injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting right (not recording or reporting more cases than necessary, and not failing to record or report cases that should be):

1.  OSHA’s Electronic Recordkeeping, which puts previously internal data now in OSHA’s hands and on its public website, is about to expanded significantly.

As a result of OSHA’s E-Recordkeeping rule, employers’ injury and illness data is now published on OSHA’s public website.  Unfortunately, because OSHA’s injury and illness recordkeeping program was designed to Continue reading →

Uh Oh, OSHA’s Here: How to Prepare For and Manage OSHA Inspections [Webinar Recording]

Theresa Green 1 Comment

On Thursday, June 8, 2023, Aaron Gelb, Mark Ishu, Dan Deacon and Ashley Mitchell presented a webinar regarding Uh Oh, OSHA’s Here: How to Prepare For and Manage OSHA Inspections.

Over the past year, the number of OSHA inspections has soared, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic eased, and the National Emergency has now come to an end. We are seeing, as part of OSHA’s focused effort to use (and sharpen) all the tools in its toolbox, more inspections, higher penalties, record numbers of $100K+ citation packages, and a continuing rise in willful and repeat citations and worker safety criminal prosecutions. OSHA continues, also, to look for new and creative ways to proactively inspect employers with targeted enforcement initiatives and emphasis programs, while also significantly expanding punitive measures such as the Severe Violator Enforcement Program (or SVEP), and the new Instance-by-Instance citation policy), creating a number of minefields for even the most conscientious employers. In short, the consequences for employers being caught ill-prepared for an OSHA inspection, and making bad choices during an inspection, are more dire now than ever.

This webinar provided Continue reading →

Third Circuit Applies Narrow Reading of the OSH Act’s Private Right of Action

Eric J. Conn Leave a comment

By Megan Shaked and Eric Conn

In a case of first impression, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that a limited private right of action included in the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) is very narrow and it does not continue after the Department of Labor completes its enforcement proceedings.

The OSH Act does not provide employees or other interested parties with a private right of action against employers to enforce OSHA standards or OSH Act requirements against employers, but it does, in very limited circumstances, allow employees to sue OSHA for the agency’s failure to address workplace safety concerns under.  Historically, employees’ role in OSHA enforcement is just to observe workplace safety violations and lodge anonymous complaints with OSHA, requesting that OSHA conduct an inspection.  OSHA then makes its own independent determination whether there are grounds for safety violations; i.e., whether to issue citations.

One area where employees have a slightly more power is in the context of imminent dangers.  OSHA has authority under the OSH Act, when it identifies an imminent danger (or is informed of an imminent danger by a whistleblower-employee), to seek injunctive relief to promptly address the danger or stop work at the workplace.  In this rare circumstance—where the risk of danger in the workplace is “imminent”—employees can attempt to force their employers’ and OSHA’s hands by Continue reading →

OSHA Launches New National Emphasis Program Focused on Fall Hazards

Beeta B. Lashkari Leave a comment

By Beeta Lashkari, Mark Ishu, and Kimberly Richardson

On May 1, 2023, OSHA announced the launch of a new National Emphasis Program (“NEP”) focused on preventing fall hazards in general industry and construction, the leading cause of fatal workplace injuries and the violation that the agency cites most frequently in construction industry inspections.  The Falls NEP was signed April 24, 2023, and took effect the same day as OSHA’s announcement, on May 1, 2023.

It may have been that the Falls NEP was a long time coming.  Per OSHA’s announcement, the NEP is based on historical Bureau of Labor Statistics (“BLS”) data and OSHA enforcement history.  For example, data from BLS shows that, of the 5,190 fatal workplace injuries in 2021, 680 were associated with falls from elevations, about 13 percent of all deaths.  Additionally, data from OSHA’s annual enforcement report indicates that, of 24,333 total inspections in 2021, 7,954 had an emphasis on falls, or about 33% of all inspections.

With regard to the new Falls NEP, Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Doug Parker said:

“Considering that falls remain the leading cause of fatalities and serious injuries in all industries, the agency has determined that an increase in enforcement and outreach activities is warranted….  This national emphasis program aligns all of OSHA’s fall protection resources to combat one of the most preventable and significant causes of workplace fatalities.”

OSHA’s goal of significantly reducing or eliminating unprotected worker exposures to fall-related hazards in all industries that can result in serious injuries and deaths will be accomplished by a combination of enforcement (which includes hazard-based inspection targeting and optional locally-generated programmed targeting in construction as outlined in the Falls NEP’s Appendix A), outreach to employers, and compliance assistance.

Who is Covered by the Falls NEP?

The Falls NEP is meant to focus on reducing or eliminating fall-related injuries and fatalities for people working at heights in all industries.  Although OSHA anticipates that most inspections under the Falls NEP will occur in construction because the majority of fatal falls to lower levels each year occur on construction worksites, it is important to note that the Falls NEP is not limited to construction.

Indeed, and importantly, the Falls NEP provides that Compliance Safety and Health Officers (“CSHO”) are authorized Continue reading →

NACOSH Heat Work Group Meeting and the Next Phase of OSHA’s Heat Illness Rulemaking

Beeta B. Lashkari Leave a comment

By Eric J. Conn, Kate M. McMahon and Beeta B. Lashkari

On March 20th OSHA announced that it will hold a virtual meeting of the Heat Working Group (“Working Group”) of the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (“NACOSH”) for later this week – on Thursday, April 27, 2023.  We expect the Working Group presentation to include specific recommendations on potential elements of a Heat Injury and Illness Prevention standard.  The full NACOSH committee will meet a little later, sometime in May (date TBD), likely to receive and vote on the recommendations of the Heat Working Group about a potential heat illness standard.  NACOSH recommendations typically carry great weight with OSHA, and we expect OSHA will most certainly give them serious consideration.  Indeed, we believe OSHA has delayed the start of its SBREFA process so that it can utilize the NACOSH recommendations in formulating the rulemaking package for participants in the SBREFA (more on that below).  Accordingly, these Spring NACOSH meetings will be a major milestone in OSHA’s rulemaking process, as the recommendations from NACOSH are expected to set the foundation for OSHA to develop its proposed rule.

The April meetings also will be our first opportunity to get a real glimpse at the outline and terms of what a proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule will look like.  On behalf of our Coalition, Conn Maciel Carey has registered to join the April meeting (and, once the date is confirmed and announced by OSHA, will register to the join the May meeting, as well).  We will share an update on what we learn following each meeting.

As a brief recap, OSHA initiated its rulemaking on “Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Settings” on October 27, 2021, when OSHA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“ANPRM”) in the Federal Register.  Comments on the ANPRM were due January 26, 2022.  NACOSH has played an important role Continue reading →

Announcing Conn Maciel Carey LLP’s 2023 OSHA Webinar Series!

Eric J. Conn Leave a comment

ANNOUNCING CONN MACIEL CAREY LLP’S
2023 OSHA WEBINAR SERIES

Two years into the Biden Administration, with senior political leadership now firmly entrenched at federal OSHA, the agency is making good on its promise to “use all of the tools available” in its regulatory and enforcement toolbox to protect workers.  In part, that has taken the form of increasingly aggressive enforcement (more inspections, more significant penalties, etc.), hiring more compliance officers, launching new special emphasis enforcement programs, and expanding its enforcement policies like its Severe Violator Enforcement Program.  It has also taken the form of a broad-based rulemaking agenda that includes work on a new heat illness rule, pushing out a permanent COVID-19 standard for healthcare, expanding its E-Recordkeeping requirements, among other high priority rulemakings.

Accordingly, it is more important now than ever before for employers to stay attuned to developments at OSHA.  To help you do so, ​Conn Maciel Carey LLP is pleased to present our complimentary 2023 OSHA Webinar Series, which includes monthly programs (sometimes more often, if events warrant) put on by the OSHA-specialist attorneys in the firm’s national OSHA Practice Group.  The webinar series is designed to arm employers with the insight into developments at OSHA that they need during this period of unpredictability and significant change.

​To register for an individual webinar in the series, click on the link in the program description below, or to register for the entire 2023 series, click here to send us an email request so we can get you registered.  If you missed any of our programs over the past eight years of our annual OSHA Webinar Series, here is a link to a library of webinar recordings.  If your organization or association would benefit from an exclusive program presented by our team on any of the subjects in this year’s webinar series or any other important OSHA-related topic, please do not hesitate to contact us.

2022 Year in Review and 2023 Forecast

Thursday, January 26th

 Mid–Year Review of OSHA Developments

Thursday, July 20th

Annual Cal/OSHA Update

Thursday, February 16th

OSH State Plan Update

Thursday, August 10th

Responding to Whistleblower Complaints

Tuesday, March 21st

Powered Industrial Trucks

Thursday, September 14th

Repeat, Willful, Egregious and SVEP

Thursday, April 13th

Investigations and Audit Reports

Thursday, October 5th

OSHA Rulemaking Update

Thursday, May 18th

OSHA’s PSM Standard & EPA’s RMP Rule

Tuesday, November 14th
Preparing for OSHA Inspections

Thursday, June 8th

Combustible Dust

Thursday, December 7th

See below for the full schedule with program descriptions,
dates, times and links to register for each webinar event.

Continue reading →

OSHA’s Recordkeeping, Reporting, and E-Recordkeeping Rules [Webinar Recording]

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On September 13, 2022, Lindsay A. DiSalvo and Ashley D. Mitchell presented a webinar regarding Important Nuances of OSHA’s Recordkeeping, Reporting, and E-Recordkeeping Rules.

Although OSHA’s injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting rules may seem clear on their face, there are many nuances in the applicable standards that can create challenges to accurately making and maintaining those required records and reports. And the accuracy of injury and illness records could be becoming even more essential in light of the changes OSHA has proposed to the current e-recordkeeping rule, which would increase the availability and use of injury and illness data.

Already, e-recordkeeping data is collected by OSHA and used in developing and executing its Site-Specific Targeting (“SST”) Program based on an employer’s 300A Summary. Per the changes proposed in the current rulemaking effort, OSHA intends to expand who is required to submit recordkeeping data, what data is collected, and what data is shared with the public. This would result in more employers’ injury and illness data being under the microscope and incorporated into OSHA’s enforcement efforts. Indeed, as COVID-19 recordkeeping continues to drive up DART rates for a number of employers due to the need for COVID-19 positive employees to isolate, more may be pulled in OSHA’s SST Program. Thus, it is important for employers to understand the changes possibly to come in e-recordkeeping, as well as what those changes could mean in the context of evaluating and recording/reporting injuries and illnesses.

Participants in this webinar learned about: Continue reading →

OSHA Updates Its Severe Violator Enforcement Program to Sweep In Exponentially More Employers

Eric J. Conn 3 Comments

By Eric J. Conn and Ashley D. Mitchell

On September 15, 2022, OSHA announced a significant set of updates to its dreaded Severe Violator Enforcement Program (“SVEP”), the first update to the program in over a decade. In a Press Release accompanying the update, Doug Parker, the Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, explained:

The Severe Violator Enforcement Program empowers OSHA to sharpen its focus on employers who – even after receiving citations for exposing workers to hazardous conditions and serious dangers – fail to mitigate these hazards . . . . Today’s expanded criteria reflect the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to ensuring OSHA has the tools it needs to ensure employers protect their workers or hold them accountable when they fail to provide safe and healthy workplaces.

Two of the three SVEP-qualifying criteria have not changed, and they are:

  1. Fatality/Catastrophe Criterion – A fatality/catastrophe inspection where OSHA finds at least one willful or repeated violation or issues a failure-to-abate notice based on a serious violation directly related either to an employee death or three or more employee hospitalizations.
  2. Egregious Criterion – All egregious enforcement actions (i.e., per-instance citations).

But historically, the principal way that employers “qualified” into SVEP was by enforcement actions that included 2+ willful or repeat violations related to a particular set of standards that represented “high emphasis hazards.” Indeed, that criteria has accounted for more than 70% of all SVEP-qualifying citations. Those “high emphasis hazards” essentially reflected the subjects of OSHA’s active enforcement National Emphasis Programs, including:

  • Fall Hazards in all industries
  • Amputation Hazards covered by Lockout/Tagout and Machine Guarding standards
  • Combustible Dust Hazards
  • Crystalline Silica Hazards
  • Lead Hazards
  • Grain Handling Hazards
  • Excavation/Trenching Hazards

The most important change in the updated SVEP is that Continue reading →

[Webinar] OSHA’s Recordkeeping, Reporting, and E-Recordkeeping Rules

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 1 p.m. EST, join Lindsay A. DiSalvo and Ashley D. Mitchell for a webinar regarding Important Nuances of OSHA’s Recordkeeping, Reporting, and E-Recordkeeping Rules.

Although OSHA’s injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting rules may seem clear on their face, there are many nuances in the applicable standards that can create challenges to accurately making and maintaining those required records and reports. And the accuracy of injury and illness records could be becoming even more essential in light of the changes OSHA has proposed to the current e-recordkeeping rule, which would increase the availability and use of injury and illness data.

Already, e-recordkeeping data is collected by OSHA and used in developing and executing its Site-Specific Targeting (“SST”) Program based on an employer’s 300A Summary. Per the changes proposed in the current rulemaking effort, OSHA intends to expand who is required to submit recordkeeping data, what data is collected, and what data is shared with the public. This would result in more employers’ injury and illness data being under the microscope and incorporated into OSHA’s enforcement efforts. Indeed, as COVID-19 recordkeeping continues to drive up DART rates for a number of employers due to the need for COVID-19 positive employees to isolate, more may be pulled in OSHA’s SST Program. Thus, it is important for employers to understand the changes possibly to come in e-recordkeeping, as well as what those changes could mean in the context of evaluating and recording/reporting injuries and illnesses.

Participants in this webinar will learn about: Continue reading →

[Webinar] A Deep Dive Into Periodic Lockout/Tagout Inspections

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 1 p.m. EST, join Aaron R. Gelb and Beeta B. Lashkari for a webinar regarding A Deep Dive Into Periodic Lockout/Tagout Inspections.

Year in and year out, OSHA’s Lockout/Tagout (Energy Control) standard is one of the most frequently cited standards. With the National Emphasis Program on Amputations continuing in 2022, employers are subject to inspections focusing on their LOTO programs and practices even if there are no serious injuries or complaints made about them. With increased scrutiny comes a greater risk of citations—particularly repeat violations—which can lead to employers being placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program. Despite being such an important standard, OSHA’s LOTO rule continues to be one of the least understood. This webinar will take a deep dive into arguably one of the most confusing (not to mention, one of the most frequently cited) aspects of the LOTO rule – periodic inspections.

Participants in this webinar will learn about: Continue reading →

OSHA Launches an Enforcement National Emphasis Program For Outdoor and Indoor Heat Illness Prevention

Beeta B. Lashkari 1 Comment

By Beeta Lashkari and Eric Conn

Last week, on April 12, 2022, OSHA announced that it has launched an enforcement National Emphasis Program (“NEP”) for Outdoor and Indoor Heat-Related Hazards.  The Heat Illness NEP applies to both indoor and outdoor workplaces, including general industry, construction, maritime, and agriculture.  The NEP is already in effect – as of April 8th – even before OSHA made its April 12th announcement, and will remain in effect for three years unless canceled or extended by a superseding directive.

Secretary of Labor Walsh, joined by Vice President Harris, announced this new enforcement program at a speech at the Sheet Metal Workers Local 19 Training Center in Philadelphia with these remarks:

“Tragically, the three-year average of workplace deaths caused by heat has doubled since the early 1990s. These extreme heat hazards aren’t limited to outdoor occupations, the seasons or geography. From farm workers in California to construction workers in Texas and warehouse workers in Pennsylvania, heat illness – exacerbated by our climate’s rising temperatures – presents a growing hazard for millions of workers….  This enforcement program is another step towards our goal of a federal heat standard. Through this work, we’re also empowering workers with knowledge of their rights, especially the right to speak up about their safety without fear of retaliation.”

Below is an analysis of the mechanics of OSHA’s Heat Illness NEP: Continue reading →

Washington’s New Safety Standard for Protecting Temporary Workers

Beeta B. Lashkari Leave a comment

By Aaron R. Gelb & Beeta B. Lashkari

Last Spring, Washington governor Jay Inslee signed into law Substitute House Bill (SHB) 1206, creating new duties for staffing agencies and worksite employers to protect the safety of temporary workers.  The law, codified at Revised Code of Washington (“RCW”) 49.17.490, went into effect on July 25, 2021, but received scant attention from the media or safety professionals—no doubt, in large part, due to an ongoing focus on the COVID-19 pandemic.  Nonetheless, given the extent to which many employers rely on temporary workers to staff their operations, this new law is one that covered employers should pay attention to and develop a plan to help ensure compliance.  Below is a summary of the scope and requirements of the new standard, as well best practice tips for covered employers.

Who Is Covered by the New Standard?

The new standard generally applies to staffing agencies and worksite employers, as defined by the standard:

  • A “staffing agency” is an employer as defined in Chapter 49.17 of the RCW and North American industry classification system (NAICS) 561320 and means an organization that recruits and hires its own employees and temporarily assigns those employees to perform work or services for another organization, under such other organization’s supervision, to:
    • (i) [s]upport or supplement the other organization’s workforce;
    • (ii) provide assistance in special work situations including, but not limited to, employee absences, skill shortages, or seasonal workloads; or
    • (iii) perform special assignments or projects.
  • “Worksite employer” is an employer as defined in Chapter 49.17 of the RCW and means an individual, company, corporation, or partnership with which a staffing agency contracts or otherwise agrees to furnish persons for temporary employment in the industries described in sectors 23 and 31 through 33 of the North American industry classification system.

Importantly, per the definition of “worksite employer” Continue reading →

OSHA’s 2021 Year in Review and 2022 Forecast [Webinar Recording]

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On January 12, 2022, the Partners in Conn Maciel Carey’s national OSHA Practice Group on presented the kickoff event in Conn Maciel Carey’s 2022 OSHA Webinar series.  This first program of the year, as is tradition, was OSHA’s 2021 Year in Review and 2022 Forecast.

As we kickoff Year 2 of the Biden Administration, it is time to look back and take stock of what we learned from and about OSHA during the very eventful year that just concluded.  And more importantly, it is time to look ahead and assess what to expect from OSHA now that OSHA’s full senior leadership team is in place and ready to put its stamp on the agency.

In this webinar, the Partners in Conn Maciel Carey’s national OSHA Practice Group reviewed OSHA enforcement, rulemaking, and personnel developments from 2021. We also discussed the top OSHA issues employers should monitor and prepare for in the New Year.

Participants in this webinar learned about: Continue reading →

Conn Maciel Carey’s 2022 OSHA Webinar Series

Theresa Green Leave a comment

ANNOUNCING CONN MACIEL CAREY’S
2022 OSHA WEBINAR SERIES

A full year into the Biden Administration, the senior leadership team at federal OSHA is set, the agency’s new regulatory agenda has been revealed, and the enforcement landscape has begun to take shape, revealing a dramatic shift in priorities, including stronger enforcement, higher budgets and more robust policies protecting workers, and a renewed focus on new rulemaking. Following an Administration that never installed an Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, relied almost exclusively on the General Duty Clause to enforce COVID-19 safety measures, drastically curtailed rulemaking, and declined to issue an emergency COVID-19 standard, the pendulum swing at OSHA has already been more pronounced than during past transitions. Accordingly, it is more important now than ever before for employers to stay attuned to developments at OSHA.

Conn Maciel Carey LLP’s complimentary 2022 OSHA Webinar Series, which includes monthly programs (sometimes more often, if events warrant) put on by the OSHA-focused attorneys in the firm’s national OSHA Practice Group, is designed to give employers insight into developments at OSHA during this period of unpredictability and significant change.

To register for an individual webinar in the series, click on the link in the program description below, or to register for the entire 2022 series, click here to send us an email request so we can get you registered.  If you missed any of our programs over the past seven years of our annual OSHA Webinar Series, here is a link to a library of webinar recordings.  If your organization or association would benefit from an exclusive program presented by our team on any of the subjects in this year’s webinar series or any other important OSHA-related topic, please do not hesitate to contact us.

2022 OSHA Webinar Series – Program Schedule

Continue reading →

Process Safety Update: The Latest with OSHA PSM & EPA RMP [Webinar Recording]

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On Tuesday, November 16, 2021, Micah Smith and Beeta Lashkari presented a webinar regarding Process Safety Update: The Latest with OSHA PSM & EPA RMP.

After the Obama/Biden Administration’s efforts to “modernize” the way the federal government regulates chemical process safety, we saw much that rolled back, stalled, or amended as the Trump Administration implemented a de-regulatory agenda. As the regulatory ping-pong ball bounces back the other direction, the regulated community is left in limbo to see what will become of OSHA’s and EPA’s plans for process safety.

As the Biden Administration begins to make its mark in this arena, we are tracking rulemaking and enforcement from OSHA, EPA and the CSB, and whether and how far these agencies will go back to the previous policies to modernize the applicable regulations.

This webinar reviewed Continue reading →

OSHA’s COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard Set to Issue Imminently

Eric J. Conn 6 Comments

By Conn Maciel Carey LLP’s COVID-19 Task Force

OSHA’s COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing emergency temporary standard is expected to be released imminently, likely Wednesday or Thursday of this week.

OMB Has Concluded Its Review of the ETS:

This morning, OMB’s website updated again, but this time, it was not to add more EO 12866 stakeholder meetings to the calendar, it was to declare OMB’s review of the ETS “concluded.”  Here are two screenshots from OMB’s website.  The first shows the list of active DOL rulemakings at OMB for some form of review, and it identifies the status for the COVID-19 vaccination and testing ETS as “Concluded.”

The second one provides a little more detail, including these notes about the ETS:  “Received Date: 10/12/2021” and “Concluded Date: 11/01/2021.”

The Dept. of Labor Gives Some Clues About What to Expect in the ETS:

Additionally, a Department of Labor spokesman shared this statement this morning:

“On November 1, the Office of Management and Budget completed its regulatory review of the emergency temporary standard. The Federal Register will publish the emergency temporary standard in the coming days. [OSHA] has been working expeditiously to develop an emergency temporary standard that covers employers with 100 or more employees, firm- or company-wide, and provides options for compliance…. Covered employers must develop, implement, and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, unless they adopt a policy requiring employees to choose either to get vaccinated or to undergo regular COVID-19 testing and wear a face covering at work. The ETS also requires employers to provide paid time to workers to get vaccinated and paid sick leave to recover from any side effects.”

The DOL statement provides some useful insight about what will be in the final rule and when we will see it.  First, OSHA did stick with the 100-employee threshold that the President identified in his announcement and new COVID-19 Action Plan from September 9th.  There was always a chance that OSHA would  scrapped that employee-count trigger as they wrote the rule and instead made it apply to everyone.  We also see in this DOL statement that, as expected, the 100-employee count will be Continue reading →

Update on Fed OSHA’s COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Rulemaking

Eric J. Conn 27 Comments

By Conn Maciel Carey LLP’s COVID-19 Task Force

Although it has only been 10 days since OSHA delivered a proposed COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing emergency temporary standard (ETS) to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), a lot has happened.  We have seen bizarre attempts by groups of individuals to try to muck up the OMB review process.  The US Department of Labor sent letters to certain states informing them that federal OSHA is considering revoking their approved status to operate their State OSH Plans.  And, President Biden’s nominee to Head OSHA, Doug Parker, is scheduled to be confirmed early next week.  Here is a summary of what we’ve been seeing and where we are now.

When Will the Vaccination and Testing ETS be Issued? 

The stakeholder input process at OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is well underway.  OMB’s website reflecting the schedule of Executive Order 12866 meetings is normally only updated once per day, making it hard to nail down when OMB intends to conclude its review of the proposed ETS.  As of the end of last week, we heard that OMB might conclude its review process as early as last Friday, October 12th, but every day, OMB’s website updated to include more and more stakeholder meetings.  As of this morning (Friday, October 22nd), the OMB website updated again, and it did add some new scheduled OIRA EO 12866 stakeholder meetings (now up to 68 meetings), but all of the new meetings have been scheduled to be completed today by 3 PM.

It is beginning to look to us like OMB will have “completed” its review of the ETS by the end of the day today, so at this point, we think OSHA could release the pre-publication package revealing the regulatory text and the preamble of the final ETS, as early as the close of business today.

We have also been hearing Continue reading →

New York HERO Act: COVID-19 Designation as Highly Contagious Communicable Disease Extended Until October 31, 2021

Beeta B. Lashkari Leave a comment

As we previously reported, on September 6, 2021, the New York State Commissioner of Health issued a designation determining COVID-19 to be “a highly contagious communicable disease that presents a serious risk of harm to the public health in New York State.”  Such designation triggered requirements on employers to activate their airborne infectious disease exposure prevention plans in accordance with the New York Health and Essential Rights Act (“HERO Act”).

The New York State Department of Labor (“NYDOL”) issued the HERO Act Standards and model plan, which set forth the minimum requirements employers must provide to address exposure to airborne infectious diseases in the workplace.  As explained in our prior blog post, those requirements include:

  • employee health screenings;
  • employee face coverings;
  • personal protective equipment;
  • workplace hand hygiene stations and protocols, which includes adequate break times for employees to wash their hands;
  • cleaning and disinfecting shared equipment and frequently touched surfaces and high-risk areas;
  • social distancing;
  • complying with mandatory or precautionary orders of isolation or quarantine issued to employees;
  • air flow, exhaust ventilation, or other special engineering design requirements;
  • designation of one or more supervisors with the responsibility to ensure compliance with the prevention plan and any applicable federal, state, or local laws, rules, or guidance on preventing the spread of an airborne infectious disease;
  • notice to employees; and
  • verbal review of the infectious disease standard, employer policies, and employee rights under the NY HERO Act.

Employers were required to adopt a model plan Continue reading →

OSHA Launches Regional Emphasis Program Focused on Storage Tank Cleaning Operations

Eric J. Conn Leave a comment

By Aaron R. Gelb

On August 2, 2021, OSHA announced a new Regional Emphasis Program (“REP”) focused on transportation tank cleaning operations in the rail and truck shipping industries.  This is the second REP launched in Region 5 in less than a month; on June 14, 2021, OSHA commenced an REP to address hazardous noise levels in the Midwest. Employers who perform tank cleaning operations in Region 5, which covers Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Indiana, would be well-advised to dust off their copy of Conn Maciel Carey LLP’s OSHA Inspection Toolkit and take the necessary steps to ensure they are ready for the inspections that will begin before the end of the year.

Why Is OSHA Targeting Tank Cleaning Operations?

In the REP and accompanying press release, OSHA places a special emphasis on the dangers posed by the exposure to toxic fumes from cleaning chemicals or stored products that can build up inside a storage tank, as well as risks of fire or explosion when a worker must handle volatile materials in confined spaces.  Additionally, OSHA warns that the workers cleaning these tanks may “face many serious and potentially deadly hazards caused by toxic fumes from chemicals, decaying crops, waste and other substances that can expose workers to suffocation, fires and explosions.” OSHA also highlighted several fatal accidents that occurred in the Midwest, noting that Region 5 has investigated 23 worker deaths and 97 incidents in the transportation and tank cleaning industries since 2016.  According to OSHA, the hazards most often found during these inspections involved the failure to prevent the inhalation of harmful substances and to follow procedures for permit-required confined space requirements.

Which Employers Will Be Targeted? Continue reading →

NY State Health Commissioner Designates COVID-19 as a Highly Contagious Disease That Presents Serious Risk, Prompting Employers’ HERO Act Plans to be Activated

Beeta B. Lashkari Leave a comment

By Conn Maciel Carey’s COVID-19 Task Force

On Labor Day, the New York State Commissioner of Health designated COVID-19 as a highly contagious communicable disease that presents a serious risk of harm to public health.  Under the New York HERO Act, employers must either adopt the New York State Department of Labor’s (“NYDOL”) model prevention plan or develop and establish an alternative prevention plan that equals or exceeds the requirements in the NYDOL’s model plan.

The NYDOL issued the HERO Act Standards and model plan, which set forth the minimum requirements employers must provide to address exposure to airborne infectious diseases in the workplace, on July 7, 2021.  As explained in our prior blog post, those requirements include:

  • employee health screenings;
  • employee face coverings;
  • personal protective equipment;
  • workplace hand hygiene stations and protocols, which includes adequate break times for employees to wash their hands;
  • cleaning and disinfecting shared equipment and frequently touched surfaces and high-risk areas;
  • social distancing;
  • complying with mandatory or precautionary orders of isolation or quarantine issued to employees;
  • air flow, exhaust ventilation, or other special engineering design requirements;
  • designation of one or more supervisors with the responsibility to ensure compliance with the prevention plan and any applicable federal, state, or local laws, rules, or guidance on preventing the spread of an airborne infectious disease;
  • notice to employees; and
  • verbal review of the infectious disease standard, employer policies, and employee rights under the NY HERO Act.

Employers were required to adopt a model plan or develop an individualized plan that met the Act’s requirements by August 5, 2021 and to provide the plan to employees by September 4, 2021.  Implementation of the plan, however, is only required whenever the Commissioner of Health designates an airborne infectious disease as a highly contagious communicable disease that presents serious risk of harm to public health.  As such, implementation of HERO Act plans is a bit of a moving target that employers must constantly monitor.  With total cases reaching an all-time low during the pandemic earlier this summer, the NYDOL clarified that the Commissioner of Health had not (yet) designated COVID-19 as such a disease, thus making the HERO Act Standards unenforceable.  That decision, however, has since changed as the highly transmissible Delta variant rages on and over 97% of US counties are now at substantial or high levels of community transmission.

Since the Commissioner of Health has made a designation, employers must now activate their written airborne infectious disease plans.  The HERO Act Standards detail additional steps employers must take when implementing their airborne infectious disease exposure prevention plan, including immediately reviewing their current plan; updating the plan to incorporate current information, guidance and any mandatory requirements, as appropriate; and finalizing the plan.  Employers are also required to conduct a “verbal review” of the plan’s protocols and employee rights under the Act, which is akin to a training requirement.  Finally, employers must distribute the plans to employees, post a copy of the plan in the workplace, and ensure that a copy of the plan is accessible during all work shifts.

Although it is unclear whether employers will be provided some leeway/time to ensure that their plans are reviewed, updated, and implemented in the workplace, employers should promptly take steps to comply with the Act.  As the Delta variant continues to surge throughout America, there will almost certainly be updated guidance regarding these plans from the NYDOL in the near future.

Fed OSHA’s COVID-19 ETS: What You Need to Know About Face Masks, Respiratory Protection and Other PPE

Beeta B. Lashkari 4 Comments

Today’s topic on the Fed OSHA COVID-19 ETS is face masks, respiratory protection, and other personal protective equipment (“PPE”)…what is required and when.

29 C.F.R. Section 1910.502(f) of the ETS establishes the personal protective equipment (“PPE”), including respiratory protection, requirements that must be implemented at covered facilities.  This summary describes these requirements.

Face Masks

The standard does not mandate that all employees wear N95 or other higher-level respiratory protection at all times.  Rather, it allows employees who work at covered facilities but do not have exposures to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 persons to wear face masks, defined as “surgical, medical procedure, dental, or isolation mask[s] that [are] FDA-cleared, authorized by an FDA EUA, or offered or distributed as described in an FDA enforcement policy.”  Face masks must be worn on all employees indoors or when in a vehicle with another person (for work purposes).  The face masks must be provided at no cost to the employee, and the employer must ensure that employees change their masks at least once per day (or when they are soiled, damaged or for other patient-care related reasons).

Certain exceptions to the requirement to wear face masks are allowed under the ETS, including when employees:

  • Are alone in a room
  • Are eating or drinking (and remain 6 feet from others or are separated by a physical barrier)
  • Have a medical condition, disability or religious beliefs that prevents use
  • Would risk serious injury or death by their use (in other words, where mask use poses a greater hazard)
  • Need to see another’s mouth when communicating (e.g., deaf employees)

In the above situations (except when alone or eating/drinking), the employer must ensure that employees are provided with and use Continue reading →

Fed OSHA’s COVID-19 ETS: What You Need to Know About Cleaning and Disinfecting

Eric J. Conn 1 Comment

By Conn Maciel Carey’s COVID-19 Task Force

Today’s topic is cleaning and disinfecting…when cleaning/disinfecting is required and what needs to be cleaned/disinfected.

29 C.F.R. Section 502(j) of the ETS establishes the cleaning and disinfecting requirements that must be implemented at covered facilities. This summary describes these requirements.

In patient care areas, resident rooms, and for medical devices and equipment, the employer must follow standard practices for cleaning and disinfection of surfaces and equipment in accordance with CDC’s “COVID-19 Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations” and CDC’s “Guidelines for Environmental Infection Control,” both of which the ETS incorporates by reference.  Under the ETS and CDC Guidance, cleaning refers to removal of dirt and germs using soap and water or other cleaning agents while disinfecting means using an EPA-registered, hospital-grade disinfectant included on EPA’s “List N” in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions.

Most healthcare settings have been following this CDC Guidance throughout the pandemic, so OSHA’s incorporation of these requirements into the ETS likely requires nothing new to be done when cleaning and disinfecting.  Some of the more fundamental requirements Continue reading →

Fed OSHA’s COVID-19 ETS: What You Need to Know About Physical Distancing

Eric J. Conn 5 Comments

By Conn Maciel Carey’s COVID-19 Task Force

Today’s topic is physical distancing…when distancing is required and ways to maintain distance.

29 C.F.R. Section 1910.502(h) establishes the requirements employers covered by the ETS must follow regarding physical distancing.  Employers must ensure that each employee is separated from all other people by at least 6 feet when indoors, unless the employer can demonstrate that it is not feasible to remain distant to accomplish a specific activity (e.g., hands-on medical care).  This summary describes the physical distancing requirements of the ETS.

To determine when and where physical distancing is necessary in the workplace, employers must rely on the results of their hazard assessments.  Places and times where people may congregate or come in contact with one another must be identified and addressed, regardless of whether employees are performing an assigned work task or not.  For instance, it is typical that employees congregate during meetings or training sessions, as well as in and around entrances, bathrooms, hallways, aisles, walkways, elevators, breakrooms or eating areas, and waiting areas.  All of these areas must be identified and addressed as part of the hazard assessment.

After identifying potential areas where employees may congregate and therefore where concern regarding workplace exposure is heightened, employers must develop and implement policies and procedures to comply with the 6 feet physical distancing requirements.

The ETS establishes several exceptions to the physical distancing requirements of the standard. Physical distancing is not required for employees who are fully vaccinated when those employees are in well-defined areas where there is no reasonable expectation that any person with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 will be present.  (Face masking and physical barriers also are not required in this situation.)

The physical distancing requirement also does not apply Continue reading →