USApedia

Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (view source)

Revision as of 00:29, 15 February 2025

965 bytes added ,  15 February 2025
m
Text replacement - "|ParentOrganization=U.S. Department of Labor" to "|ParentOrganization=Department of Labor |TopOrganization=Department of Labor"
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
m (Text replacement - "|ParentOrganization=U.S. Department of Labor" to "|ParentOrganization=Department of Labor |TopOrganization=Department of Labor")
 
(10 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Use mdy dates|date=November 2022}}
{{Organization
|OrganizationName=Occupational Safety and Health Administration
|OrganizationType=Executive Departments (Sub-organization)
|Mission=OSHA's mission is to ensure safe and healthful working conditions for workers by setting and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education, and assistance. It aims to prevent work-related injuries, illnesses, and deaths by promoting workplace safety and health.
|ParentOrganization=Department of Labor
|TopOrganization=Department of Labor
|CreationLegislation=Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
|Employees=2100
|Budget=$590 million (Fiscal Year 2024)
|OrganizationExecutive=Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health
|Services=Setting safety standards; Workplace inspections; Training and education; Enforcement of regulations; Whistleblower protection
|Regulations=29 CFR Parts 1903, 1904, 1910, 1915, 1917, 1918, 1926, 1928
|HeadquartersLocation=38.89363, -77.01442
|HeadquartersAddress=200 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20210, USA
|Website=https://www.osha.gov/
}}
{{Short description|United States federal regulatory agency}}
{{Short description|United States federal regulatory agency}}
{{distinguish|text=NIOSH, the [[National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health]]}}
{{distinguish|text=NIOSH, the [[National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health]]}}
Line 81: Line 96:


In 2000, OSHA issued an ergonomics standard. In March 2001, [[United States Congress|Congress]] voted to repeal the standard through the [[Congressional Review Act]]. The repeal, one of the first <!-- A reporting standard was blocked by Congressional Review Act in 2017:
In 2000, OSHA issued an ergonomics standard. In March 2001, [[United States Congress|Congress]] voted to repeal the standard through the [[Congressional Review Act]]. The repeal, one of the first <!-- A reporting standard was blocked by Congressional Review Act in 2017:
https://www.epi.org/perkins/congressional-review-act-resolution-to-block-the-department-of-labors-rule-titled-clarification-of-employers-continuing-obligation-to-make-and-maintain-an-accurate-record-o/ -->major pieces of legislation signed by President [[George W. Bush]], is the first instance that Congress has successfully used the Congressional Review Act to block regulation.
https://www.epi.org/perkins/congressional-review-act-resolution-to-block-the-department-of-labors-rule-titled-clarification-of-employers-continuing-obligation-to-make-and-maintain-an-accurate-record-o/ -->major pieces of legislation signed by President George W. Bush, is the first instance that Congress has successfully used the Congressional Review Act to block regulation.


Since 2001, OSHA has issued the following standards:
Since 2001, OSHA has issued the following standards:
Line 116: Line 131:
In 2020, the [[COVID-19]] pandemic caused about 1,300 workers and their families to contract the virus, with four deaths, at the [[Smithfield Foods]] packing plant in [[Sioux Falls, South Dakota]]. The governor, [[Kristi Noem]], resisted initiating and enforcing measures to protect workers and the community.<ref name=KC>[https://www.kansascity.com/news/coronavirus/article245633785.html After COVID-19 outbreak kills 4, Smithfield meat plant in South Dakota fined $13,494], ''[[Kansas City Star]]'', Chacour Koop, September 10, 2020. Retrieved September 13, 2020.</ref><ref>{{Cite news |first=Trevor J. |last=Mitchell |url=https://eu.argusleader.com/story/news/2020/05/04/south-dakota-confirms-37-more-cases-covid-19/3077130001 |title=Noem 'disappointed' Smithfield isn't sharing reopening plans |date=May 4, 2020 |newspaper=[[Argus Leader]] |language=en |access-date=September 13, 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.ontariofarmer.com/news/farm-news/smithfield-plant-linked-to-600-covid-19-cases |title=Smithfield plant linked to 600 COVID-19 cases |date=April 17, 2020 |website=Ontario Farmer |publisher=Postmedia News |language=en-CA |access-date=September 13, 2020}}</ref> The plant was fined $13,494 – the maximum allowed at the time – by OSHA for what was considered a single violation.<ref name=KC/>
In 2020, the [[COVID-19]] pandemic caused about 1,300 workers and their families to contract the virus, with four deaths, at the [[Smithfield Foods]] packing plant in [[Sioux Falls, South Dakota]]. The governor, [[Kristi Noem]], resisted initiating and enforcing measures to protect workers and the community.<ref name=KC>[https://www.kansascity.com/news/coronavirus/article245633785.html After COVID-19 outbreak kills 4, Smithfield meat plant in South Dakota fined $13,494], ''[[Kansas City Star]]'', Chacour Koop, September 10, 2020. Retrieved September 13, 2020.</ref><ref>{{Cite news |first=Trevor J. |last=Mitchell |url=https://eu.argusleader.com/story/news/2020/05/04/south-dakota-confirms-37-more-cases-covid-19/3077130001 |title=Noem 'disappointed' Smithfield isn't sharing reopening plans |date=May 4, 2020 |newspaper=[[Argus Leader]] |language=en |access-date=September 13, 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.ontariofarmer.com/news/farm-news/smithfield-plant-linked-to-600-covid-19-cases |title=Smithfield plant linked to 600 COVID-19 cases |date=April 17, 2020 |website=Ontario Farmer |publisher=Postmedia News |language=en-CA |access-date=September 13, 2020}}</ref> The plant was fined $13,494 – the maximum allowed at the time – by OSHA for what was considered a single violation.<ref name=KC/>


OSHA carries out its enforcement activities through its 10 regional offices and 85 area offices.<ref name="Commonly Used Statistics" /> OSHA's regional offices are located in [[Boston]], [[New York City]], [[Philadelphia]], [[Atlanta]], [[Chicago]], [[Dallas]], [[Kansas City]], [[Denver]], [[San Francisco]], and [[Seattle]].
OSHA carries out its enforcement activities through its 10 regional offices and 85 area offices.<ref name="Commonly Used Statistics" /> OSHA's regional offices are located in Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, [[Atlanta]], Chicago, [[Dallas]], [[Kansas City]], [[Denver]], San Francisco, and Seattle.


==Record keeping requirements==
==Record keeping requirements==
Line 147: Line 162:
Much of the debate about OSHA regulations and enforcement policies revolve around the cost of regulations and enforcement, versus the actual benefit in reduced worker injury, illness, and death. A 1995 study of several OSHA standards by the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) found that OSHA relies "generally on methods that provide a credible basis for the determinations essential to rulemaking." Though it found that OSHA's findings and estimates are "subject to vigorous review and challenge", it stated that this is natural because "interested parties and experts involved in rulemakings have differing visions."<ref>{{cite web|title=Gauging Control Technology and Regulatory Impacts in Occupational Safety and Health: An Appraisal of OSHA's Analytic Approach|url=http://ota.fas.org/reports/9531.pdf|website=US Government, Office of Technology Assessment|publisher=US Government Printing Office|date=September 1995}}</ref>
Much of the debate about OSHA regulations and enforcement policies revolve around the cost of regulations and enforcement, versus the actual benefit in reduced worker injury, illness, and death. A 1995 study of several OSHA standards by the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) found that OSHA relies "generally on methods that provide a credible basis for the determinations essential to rulemaking." Though it found that OSHA's findings and estimates are "subject to vigorous review and challenge", it stated that this is natural because "interested parties and experts involved in rulemakings have differing visions."<ref>{{cite web|title=Gauging Control Technology and Regulatory Impacts in Occupational Safety and Health: An Appraisal of OSHA's Analytic Approach|url=http://ota.fas.org/reports/9531.pdf|website=US Government, Office of Technology Assessment|publisher=US Government Printing Office|date=September 1995}}</ref>


OSHA has come under considerable criticism for the ineffectiveness of its penalties, particularly its criminal penalties. The maximum penalty is a misdemeanor with a maximum of 6 months in jail.<ref name="OSHA Bulletin">{{cite web|title=OSHA Administrative Penalty Information Bulletin|url=https://www.osha.gov/dep/administrative-penalty.html|access-date=March 22, 2015|archive-date=April 2, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402095323/https://www.osha.gov/dep/administrative-penalty.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{Dubious|Maximum Penalties Issued By OSHA|date=February 2010}} In response to the criticism, OSHA, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, has pursued several high-profile criminal prosecutions for violations under the Act and has announced a joint enforcement initiative between OSHA and the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) which has the ability to issue much higher fines than OSHA.  Meanwhile, Congressional [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democrats]], [[labor unions]], and community safety and health advocates are attempting to revise the [[Occupational Safety and Health Act|OSH Act]] to make it a felony with much higher penalties to commit a willful violation that results in the death of a worker. Some local prosecutors are charging company executives with [[manslaughter]] and other felonies when [[criminal negligence]] leads to the death of a worker.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://onlineehssupply.com/2017/02/10/possible-legal-consequences-circumventing-occupational-safety/|title=The Possible Legal Consequences of Circumventing Occupational Safety}}</ref>
OSHA has come under considerable criticism for the ineffectiveness of its penalties, particularly its criminal penalties. The maximum penalty is a misdemeanor with a maximum of 6 months in jail.<ref name="OSHA Bulletin">{{cite web|title=OSHA Administrative Penalty Information Bulletin|url=https://www.osha.gov/dep/administrative-penalty.html|access-date=March 22, 2015|archive-date=April 2, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402095323/https://www.osha.gov/dep/administrative-penalty.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{Dubious|Maximum Penalties Issued By OSHA|date=February 2010}} In response to the criticism, OSHA, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, has pursued several high-profile criminal prosecutions for violations under the Act and has announced a joint enforcement initiative between OSHA and the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) which has the ability to issue much higher fines than OSHA.  Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats, [[labor unions]], and community safety and health advocates are attempting to revise the [[Occupational Safety and Health Act|OSH Act]] to make it a felony with much higher penalties to commit a willful violation that results in the death of a worker. Some local prosecutors are charging company executives with [[manslaughter]] and other felonies when [[criminal negligence]] leads to the death of a worker.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://onlineehssupply.com/2017/02/10/possible-legal-consequences-circumventing-occupational-safety/|title=The Possible Legal Consequences of Circumventing Occupational Safety}}</ref>


A ''New York Times'' investigation in 2003 showed that over the 20-year period from 1982 to 2002, 2,197 workers died in 1,242 incidents in which OSHA investigators concluded that employers had willfully violated workplace safety laws. In 93% of these fatality cases arising from wilful violation, OSHA made no referral to the [[U.S. Department of Justice]] for criminal prosecution.<ref name="Barstow">David Barstow, [https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/22/us/us-rarely-seeks-charges-for-deaths-in-workplace.html?mcubz=1 U.S. Rarely Seeks Charges For Deaths in Workplace], ''New York Times'' (December 22, 2003).</ref> The ''Times'' investigation found that OSHA had failed to pursue prosecution "even when employers had been cited before for the very same safety violation" and even in cases where multiple workers died. In interviews, current and former OSHA officials said that the low rates of criminal enforcement were the result of "a bureaucracy that works at every level to thwart criminal referrals. ... that fails to reward, and sometimes penalizes, those who push too hard for prosecution" and that " aggressive enforcement [was] suffocated by endless layers of review.<ref name="Barstow"/>
A ''New York Times'' investigation in 2003 showed that over the 20-year period from 1982 to 2002, 2,197 workers died in 1,242 incidents in which OSHA investigators concluded that employers had willfully violated workplace safety laws. In 93% of these fatality cases arising from wilful violation, OSHA made no referral to the [[U.S. Department of Justice]] for criminal prosecution.<ref name="Barstow">David Barstow, [https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/22/us/us-rarely-seeks-charges-for-deaths-in-workplace.html?mcubz=1 U.S. Rarely Seeks Charges For Deaths in Workplace], ''New York Times'' (December 22, 2003).</ref> The ''Times'' investigation found that OSHA had failed to pursue prosecution "even when employers had been cited before for the very same safety violation" and even in cases where multiple workers died. In interviews, current and former OSHA officials said that the low rates of criminal enforcement were the result of "a bureaucracy that works at every level to thwart criminal referrals. ... that fails to reward, and sometimes penalizes, those who push too hard for prosecution" and that " aggressive enforcement [was] suffocated by endless layers of review.<ref name="Barstow"/>


OSHA has also been criticized for taking too long to develop new regulations. For instance, speaking about OSHA under the [[George W. Bush]] presidency on the specific issue of combustible dust explosions, [[Chemical Safety Board]] appointee Carolyn Merritt said: "The basic disappointment has been this attitude of no new regulation. They don't want the industry to be pestered. In some instances, the industry has to be pestered in order to comply."<ref>{{cite news |first=Scott |last=Pelley |title=Is Enough Done To Stop Explosive Dust? |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-enough-done-to-stop-explosive-dust/ |work=60 Minutes |publisher=CBSnews.com |date=June 8, 2008 |access-date=June 9, 2008 }}</ref>
OSHA has also been criticized for taking too long to develop new regulations. For instance, speaking about OSHA under the George W. Bush presidency on the specific issue of combustible dust explosions, [[Chemical Safety Board]] appointee Carolyn Merritt said: "The basic disappointment has been this attitude of no new regulation. They don't want the industry to be pestered. In some instances, the industry has to be pestered in order to comply."<ref>{{cite news |first=Scott |last=Pelley |title=Is Enough Done To Stop Explosive Dust? |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-enough-done-to-stop-explosive-dust/ |work=60 Minutes |publisher=CBSnews.com |date=June 8, 2008 |access-date=June 9, 2008 }}</ref>


== Directors ==
== Directors ==
Retrieved from ‘https://openusaproject.com/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/21732...28912’