Home office debacle shows OSHA flaws
The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s efforts to regulate home offices reveal serious flaws in the agency’s structure and performance, says Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond (R-MO).
Bond says an investigation of OSHA’s attempt to bring home offices under the thumb of agency inspectors shows that the Department of Labor’s (DOL) internal process for responding to employer inquiries for guidance is "seriously flawed." He called on the secretary of labor to adopt reforms recommended by DOL’s inspector general.
"This report paints a picture of an agency completely adrift in its mission to help employers understand their responsibilities to comply with regulations," says Bond, chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business. "The Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that OSHA’s own procedures for answering employers’ inquiries through letters of interpretation, known as LIs, were not followed. As a result, the home workplace letter, which would have forced traditional workplace safety regulations on stay-at-home workers, was inadequately supervised and set the stage for a national fiasco.
"This is more than a case of the left hand of bureaucracy out of touch with the right," Bond adds. "This is a breakdown that further weakened a shaky public confidence in OSHAs ability to give employers essential guidance on how to comply with workplace regulations."
The investigation was conducted by the OIG at the request of Bond and Sen. Susan Collins, (R-ME), chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. The request came as a result of Congress’ concern that OSHA was attempting to expand its regulatory reach to include home offices, which now enable millions of Americans to telecommute for work.
Prior to serving in the Senate, Collins worked extensively on small business issues. "The needless confusion that resulted from this sequence of events must be avoided in the future, and unelected officials in the executive branch of government must understand how seriously we look upon the capricious issuing of unacceptable edicts," adds Collins.
In a letter to Labor Secretary Alexis Herman, Bond and Collins called on DOL to implement the OIG’s recommendations as quickly as possible to avoid another overreaching interpretation of OSHA regulations being issued to employers. The letter requested a response on DOL’s plan to address the OIG report by May 15, 2000.
These were some findings of the OIG report:
• No written OSHA procedures specifically govern preparation and processing LIs.
• OSHA’s own policies concerning the use of LIs are inconsistent and conflicting.
• No common rules exist to guide OSHA staff in providing LIs as a means to interpret the "Occupational Safety and Health Act."
• Not all documents and comments relevant to the "Home Workplace Letter" were shared among OSHA employees responsible for clearing it for public release.
• No one involved in clearing the letter was charged with evaluating the policy ramifications of its contents.
In each of the five instances, the OIG recommended a specific procedural change in DOL/ OSHA internal processes to guard against similar failures in the future.
LI leads to controversy
The home workplace inspection fiasco erupted after OSHA issued an LI on Nov. 15, 1999. The letter was posted on OSHA’s Web site and, apparently, went unnoticed until news of the sweeping policy made national headlines on Jan. 4, 2000.
It indicated employers would be responsible for ensuring that their telecommuting employees comply with OSHA regulations and for making sure that the employees had a safe and healthful work environment. The letter was withdrawn by Secretary Herman one day after the news broke.
Specifically, the "Home Workplace Letter" held employers accountable for "reasonably foreseeable hazards created by their at-home employment." It also suggested that "reasonable diligence may necessitate an on-site examination of the working environment by the employer" and that employers would have to take steps to "reduce or eliminate any work-related safety or health problems they become aware of through on-site visits or other means."
You have reached your article limit for the month. Subscribe now to access this article plus other member-only content.
- Award-winning Medical Content
- Latest Advances & Development in Medicine
- Unbiased Content