Respirators

OSHA Expands “Instance by Instance” Citation Policy: A Game Changer for OSHA Enforcement

Eric J. Conn Leave a comment

By Eric J. Conn and Darius Rohani-Shukla

On January 26, 2023, OSHA revealed to the public two enforcement memoranda that it had issued to its field offices and all of the State OSH Plans that will substantially sharpen OSHA’s enforcement teeth and increase the pain OSHA can inflict on employers across the country.  Specifically, OSHA dramatically expanded the circumstances when it can issue “instance-by-instance” citations to employers, and also discouraged the grouping of similar citations under a single penalty.

Instance-by-Instance (IBI), or per-instance enforcement is one of OSHA’s most powerful tools to ratchet up civil penalties.  It is essentially a multiplier for OSHA citations based on a “unit-of-violation” set by OSHA standards that require individualized duties; i.e., train each employee, guard each machine, require a hard hat for each employee, etc.  As a result, rather than a single citation with a single penalty for an employers’ failure to ensure that all employees wear a hard hat at a construction site, per-instance enforcement allows OSHA to instead issue ten citations with ten separate penalties for each of the ten employees observed without a hard hat.

Historical Per-Instance Enforcement

OSHA’s IBI enforcement policy was first memorialized in 1990 in an enforcement directive called “Handling of Cases to be Proposed for Violation-By-Violation Penalties.”  This policy came to be known as OSHA’s Egregious Enforcement Policy because OSHA’s policy was to use it only in circumstances involving conduct found by OSHA to be worse than just willful.  Specifically, under this long-standing willful-plus standard, OSHA issued per-instance citations when violations were found both to be willful and also to meet one of the following criteria: Continue reading →

Fed OSHA’s COVID-19 ETS: What You Need to Know About Health Screening and Medical Management

Beeta B. Lashkari 1 Comment

By Conn Maciel Carey’s COVID-19 Task Force

Today’s topic on the Fed OSHA COVID-19 ETS is health screening and medical management.

29 C.F.R. Section 1910.502(l) sets forth employee screening, employer/employee notification, medical removal, medical removal protection benefits, and return-to-work requirements.  This summary describes those requirements of the ETS.

A. Employee Screening

Employers have discretion in choosing whether to implement self-monitoring and/or in-person screening.  Employers who choose to have employees self-monitor for COVID-19 symptoms can assist employees in that effort by providing them with a short fact sheet to remind them of the symptoms of concern.  Employers may also consider posting a sign stating that any employee entering the workplace certifies that they do not have symptoms of COVID-19, to reinforce the obligation to self-screen before entering the workplace.

Employers who choose to conduct in-person employee screening for COVID-19 symptoms may use methods such as temperature checks and asking the employee if they are experiencing symptoms consistent with COVID-19.  Employers should conduct this screening before employees come into contact with others in the workplace, such as co-workers, patients, or visitors.

To the extent employers choose to conduct onsite screening, there are important safety considerations to take into account.  Continue reading →

Cal/OSHA Introduces Proposed Amendments to its COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard

Eric J. Conn Leave a comment

By Conn Maciel Carey’s COVID-19 Task Force

On Friday, May 7th, Cal/OSHA finalized and published a proposed amended version of its COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard (the “ETS”), which the Cal/OSH Standards Board will consider for readoption at the Board’s upcoming May 20, 2021 meeting.  The revised sections of the ETS include a series of changes sought by the regulated community, and quite a few that our

Cal/OSHA’s Proposed Amended COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard Sent to the Standards Board

California Employers COVID-19 Prevention Coalition specifically advocated for, but the rule is still a bear.

It bears emphasizing that the proposed updated ETS is coming more than five months after the Board unanimously adopted the ETS, and during that span, Cal/OSHA has been busy considering potential changes, due in large part to the lack of opportunity by the regulated community to consider and comment in the rush to issue the emergency regulation back in November.  Indeed, when the ETS was first adopted, the regulated community struggled to understand and implement the regulation.  And while Cal/OSHA issued numerous FAQs in January, February and March, many questions remained unanswered.

In February, the Division convened an Advisory Committee about the ETS consisting of members from business and industry, labor and community groups, public agencies, and the health sciences to provide input on possible changes to the ETS.  As you know, Conn Maciel Carey, on behalf of the California Employers COVID-19 Prevention Coalition (the “Coalition”), participated in the three-day (February 11, 12 and 16) Advisory Committee meetings.  On March 2, the Coalition submitted written comments to the Chief of the Division addressing a variety of concerns and suggesting, among other recommendations, that the Division:

  • Clarify the scope of the ETS;
  • Clarify various requirements under the ETS to be consistent with guidance the Division has provided in its FAQs;
  • Create more flexibility in the standard to account for the vastly different operations covered by the ETS;
  • Address the evolving science and public health guidance on COVID-19 and the vaccines; and
  • Clarify and align notice requirements under the ETS with other California requirements.

The good news is, the agency Continue reading →