Past efforts don’t bode well for OSHA proposal
The last time Clinton administration officials tried to enact a federal ergonomics standard, Congress soundly rapped them on the knuckles and suggested, rather strongly, they not try those shenanigans again. Another proposal is about to be offered, but past experience suggests occupational health professionals should not get their hopes up.
In June 1995, the much debated ergonomics proposal from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in Washington, DC, failed with a resounding thud.
The administration had been promising an ergonomics standard since 1990 and had released proposed versions of the standard, progressively weakening the proposals in response to employer protests. A 1994 draft would have covered all U.S. employers, about 6.1 million employers with 96 million employees, but the 1995 proposal would have covered only employers with evidence that hazards exist, about 2.6 million employers with 21 million employees.
Too much burden on employers?
The strongest criticism came from business leaders who felt the proposed standard would put too much of a burden on employers, even after the standard was greatly watered down. Those complaints were well-received by Congressional leaders, who exerted extraordinary pressure on OSHA.
As an executive agency, OSHA technically has the power to issue an ergonomics standard no matter how much Congress protests. But as a practical matter, Congress exerts great influence on the agency by manipulating its funding. In the 1995 squabble, Congress decisively won by threatening to cut $3.5 million from the OSHA budget — coincidentally the estimated cost to OSHA of implementing an ergonomics standard.
Soon after, Barbara Silverstein, the Clinton administration’s top official in charge of creating the ergonomics standard, resigned on the same day that OSHA director Joseph Dear issued a statement saying no standard would be forthcoming any time soon.
"In the face of Congressional intervention in OSHA standard setting, it is not now possible to publish a standard which has the breadth necessary to attack this problem," Dear said in his June 12 statement.
"Given the magnitude of the problem, OSHA must continue development of a standard which will have support from reasonable people. OSHA also will use its resources to support education, training, consultation, and enforcement activities to address this workplace epidemic," he stated.
But even at the time, most parties agreed the ergonomics proposal was not dead but merely shuffled off to a back room until it could be resuscitated. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), the House majority whip, pointed to the ergonomics proposal as a prime example of overly intrusive, costly, and unnecessary government regulations that are particularly burdensome to smaller employers, but said he expected it to return in some form.
DeLay’s spokesman in Washington, Jim Lafferty, told Occupational Health Management in June 1995 that DeLay expected "them to present the standard again and we’re prepared to fight it just as hard next time."
Both DeLay and Lafferty were unavailable for comment.
Sources
For more information on OSHA’s ergonomics proposal, contact:
• David Cochran, OSHA Special Assistant for Ergonomics, OSHA, N3718, 200 Constitution Ave. N.W., Washington, DC 20210.
• Pat Stamas, President, Occupational Health and Safety Resources, 1515 Surrey Run, Dover, NH 03820. Telephone: (603) 772-1500.
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