CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Difference between revisions
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (view source)
Revision as of 00:18, 26 January 2025
, 26 JanuaryText replacement - "Democrats" to "Democrats"
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "Democrats" to "Democrats") |
||
| Line 161: | Line 161: | ||
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 | 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"/> | ||