Search

This lecture--now an article--is about the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on the health and safety of essential frontline workers. (3) This larger story includes several important themes: the complexity [...]

I. Introduction In October 2022, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Surgeon General of the United States, released a major report, The U.S. Surgeon General's Framework for Workplace Mental Health & Well-Being {Surgeon [...]

Employers face great obstacles in learning the details of the allegations that OSHA is making against them; to do so, they must pursue expensive and often unsuccessful discovery. A provision of the Occupational Safety and Health Act was supposed to prevent this problem by requiring that violations be described 'with particularity.' The provision has, however, been construed into insignificance. The courts have held that OSHA's allegations need provide only 'fair notice' and thus that ambiguities in allegations may be cured during discovery or even at the hearing. No court has ever examined whether such holdings are consistent with the plain meaning of 'particularity' or with case law construing a similar requirement for fraud allegations in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). Under that case law, particularity in allegations must be provided in the complaint, not in discovery or at trial. This article urges that the wholly independent agency charged with adjudication of OSHA cases revitalize the particularity requirement by adopting an interpretive rule stating that henceforth it will be applied as written and that it will be construed as is Federal Rule 9(b)., TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE PROBLEM 714 II. SECTION 9(A) OF THE OSH ACT: THE REQUIREMENT FOR 'PARTICULARITY' 715 III. FED. R. CIV. P. 9(B) AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICULARITY [...]

Introduction 594 I. Background 594 II. Employment Drug Laws and Policies 596 A. Federal Level 596 1. Drug-Free Workplace Act 597 2. Occupational Health and Safety Act 599 3. Other [...]

Introduction 150 I. The Relationship Between Productivity Quotas and Employee Injuries 153 II. Enabling Factors of the High Employee Injury Rates at Amazon Warehouses 157 A. Unrestricted Employee Surveillance 157 [...]

I. THE ALARP REQUIREMENT A. The Meaning of ALARP B. The Value of ALARP II. GENERAL DUTIES IN THE UNITED STATES IN RELATION OF WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY A. The [...]

The proportion of all nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses in the United States that resulted in job transfer (the injured worker continues to be at work but performs a different [...]

This section of the Review presents the principal statistical series collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics: series on labor force; employment; unemployment; labor compensation; consumer, producer, and [...]

Occupational injuries and illnesses require a context to be best understood. Falls, for example, account for more than 10 percent of fatal work injuries and more than 20 percent of [...]

Estimates of nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses covering nearly 19 million State and local government workers show that these public sector employees experienced a significantly higher incidence of work-related injuries [...]

INTRODUCTION The events of the past year, which included several high-profile and deadly workplace accidents, have highlighted the fact that even in 21st century America, employees face unsafe working conditions [...]

I analyze how stock prices reacted to the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) of 1970. Previous studies focus on accounting measures or actual OSHA violations, and my work complements the literature by examining how shareholders expected OSHA to affect firm profitability. Returns fell around the OSH bill's release to the House floor and its eventual passage, and average market value dropped by $1.5 million over the 3 days surrounding House Rules Committee release. Durable manufacturing and mining industries were hardest hit in OSH passage, losing $2.6 million and $5.7 million in average market value, respectively. I also find that larger firms with poorer working conditions sustained more negative returns, and market power, not union density, explains variation in expected profitability. Furthermore, future penalties appear unrelated to shareholder expectations about compliance costs. Keywords Stock returns * Occupational Safety and Health Act * Safety

Industry experts agree that the use of computer-based technology in today's manufacturing facilities is changing the nature of many manufacturing tasks. This trend may provide unique opportunities for employment of people with disabilities. However, occupational hazards in a manufacturing environment have the potential for serious safety and health consequences, and federal law makes it the responsibility of the employer to ensure a safe work environment for their employees. This paper presents information outlining the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) regulation and enforcement structure and suggests ways that vocational rehabilitation professionals can help prospective manufacturing employers address these concerns appropriately for employees with disabilities., The disappointing level of unemployment among people with disabilities is a well known fact among vocational rehabilitation (VR) professionals. The National Health Interview Survey conducted from 1994 to 1995 revealed [...]

In 1995, similar bills were proposed in both the House and the Senate to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. The words health and safety are prominent in their tides. Yet, why has labor lobbied so hard and effectively to slow their passage and why has President Clinton pledged to veto either attempt at the OSH Act's reform? It is not that labor opposes legislation to improve health and safety on the job or that President Clinton objects to reforming the Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA. Instead-and despite idealistic rhetoric and a thinly veiled pursuit of reform and innovation--these GOP initiatives support business at the expense of workers' health and safety. This article examines the bills' major provisions and discusses the positions held by special interest groups and labor. The authors conclude with a brief commentary on OSHA's efforts and these legislative attempts to change the future course of OSHA., Introduction 'To assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources' was Congress' lofty goal [...]

The article focuses on labor law as the primary barrier in hiring contingent employees, defined as employees who do not have a long-term employment contract or whose work hours vary nonsystematically. Topics include the Fair Labor Standards Act, tax policy, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, workers' compensation and licensing requirements.

Agriculture's status as one of the nation's most hazardous occupations has been an impetus for a reexamination of the federal role in agricultural safety and for various proposals to make farming safer. During the 1970s congressional debate and farm group testimony that led to agriculture's current exemption from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's enforcement efforts, regulation foes made use of the 'Agrarian Myth.' The myth portrays farmers as the bedrock of democracy, suffering so that society may prosper and living a natural life away from the artificiality and evils of cities. Despite the inaccuracy of its images, the myth is a potent symbol in American culture, and its influence could arise again in current policy debates. This paper examines specific issues that may be obscured by the myth but that must be addressed in any agricultural safety policy debate. It then recommends that responses to agricultural safety be carefully considered and that value judgments about what the issues are, who would benefit, and who would bear the costs be explicitly discussed during debate. (Am J Public Health. 1994;84:1171-1177), Policies designed to lower injury and death rates in agriculture should be carefully designed to specify who is covered, what goals are desired and who will pay for implementation of new regulations. In 1976, agriculture was exempted from the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. The act outlined federal safety guidelines designed to protect all employees. Agricultural interests seeking exemption from the act based their appeals on the myth of the American farmer as honest and self-reliant and as doing a hard, tiring job. Because of this myth, many believe society owes a debt to farmers. However, while injury and death rates have declined dramatically in fields such as mining and construction they have dropped only slightly in agriculture. It appears that it is time to reassess the need for federal regulation of farm safety policies.