3 ms·

Realistically, no, it wouldn’t be a problem for this case. I was charitably trying to come up with the strongest possible argument for the repeal bill. I think

by fwlr 3y ago

Realistically, no, it wouldn’t be a problem for this case. I was charitably trying to come up with the strongest possible argument for the repeal bill. I think it’s a decent argument in the general case - it’s not hard to see how hard-and-fast rules made by politicians serving the two masters of worker safety and popular vote could stack up to cause death by a thousand cuts. Especially if trying to repeal any of those laws gets you / your party mercilessly dunked on for wanting to kill and maim workers, as is happening in this case and would doubtless happen in any other case as well. That’s a recipe for a one-way ratchet. (Again I want to stress that I don’t think the actual motivation for the repeal is pure of heart.) I don’t know what to make of the former head of OSHA’s statements. Obviously his prior position gives him impeccable integrity but the things he’s quoted as saying just don’t make any sense. Like, OSHA absolutely does have national standards for heat-related illnesses, this is trivially verifiable, googling “OSHA heat” turns up dozens and dozens of info pages, safety posters, etc. on the matter. The only way I can make sense of his statement is by assuming there is some technicality regarding what counts as a “national standard”, or perhaps “heat-related illness” is a newly introduced category that is parallel to “heat exposure”, such that OSHA has plenty of regulations on heat exposure but none on heat-related illnesses. But that is deliberate deception, why would the former head of OSHA be deliberately deceptive about OSHA? Maybe this is one small comment mined out of a much larger conversation and the journalist is to blame? Something just doesn’t seem right about any of this, so I am going to remain skeptical of the surface-level narrative that local ordinances are reasonable and this bill is trying to screw over or even kill workers in order to save businesses some money. (Please, once again, note I am also continuing to remain skeptical of the motivations of the repeal bill as well!)

mustacheemperor 3y ago
Your assumptions are just mistaken. I got my California OSHA 10 construction safety card within the last few months, and heat related illness prevention - which is not somehow semantically separate from heat exposure - is not part of federal OSHA guidelines. It is an additional part of California’s state guidelines, and that’s probably why you see posters on google. Texas could add similar requirements at the state level, but like many states, they haven’t. I watched a whole slideshow module, and passed the quiz, specifically about how the heat safety regulations I was being certified for were California state specific! You can just check the federal OSHA regulations for yourself: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1926 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/19... I am certainly in the camp that Federal OSHA should be amended to include heat safety, but I can see how that would be challenging to do with America’s varied climates. Australia maybe and probably is different but whatever you experienced in Australia won’t be an accurate reference in the US, “OSHA” is the occupational safety and health administration of the United States. Anecdotally, I’ve heard australia has stricter construction workplace safety laws. The state bill nullifies all local ordinances that introduce mandatory breaks, and that will include ordinances requiring construction workers get water breaks.
- fwlr 3y ago
  I did some more research and it seems like we’re both right. Yes, the US OSHA (the Australian body has the same name) does not actually have a national standard for heat-related illnesses. It does however have plenty of (non-Californian) material specifically on heat-related illnesses, e.g. https://www.osha.gov/otm/section-3-health-hazards/chapter-4 https://www.osha.gov/otm/section-3-health-hazards/chapter-4. According to https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/osha-announces-program-to-protect-workers-from-heat-hazards.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/... (archive here https://archive.md/rHMQm https://archive.md/rHMQm) this is enforced under the general duty clause: > Federal OSHA enforces heat-related safety under the Occupational Safety and Health Act's general duty clause, which requires employers to provide workplaces that are "free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees." https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/osha-unveils-program-extreme-heat-workplace.html https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/osha-unveils-pr... agrees: > There is no heat-related or heat stress standard in place. Instead, federal OSHA has traditionally enforced heat-related hazards through its General Duty Clause. I will happily admit I was surprised to learn that US federal OSHA does not have specific heat-related illness regulations and have been instead making do with Commerce Clause-style general regulation to enforce heat safety instead. But I was also correct when I said there is plenty of US federal (not state-specific) OSHA material on heat-related illnesses - that osha link above has a detailed breakdown including worked examples on how to use Wet Bulb Globe Temperature testing equipment to measure heat stress risks, tables of Threshold Limit Values, etc. I also found a convincing explanation for my confusion as to why the former head of OSHA would say that OSHA does not have a national standard for heat-related illnesses when they empirically do have lots of specific material on assessing and managing heat risk: US federal OSHA is (as of October 2021) working on instituting a comprehensive national heat standard https://www.regulations.gov/document/OSHA-2021-0009-0001 https://www.regulations.gov/document/OSHA-2021-0009-0001 and that seems to be why the lack of a national standard was emphasized - it is no doubt a mammoth and expensive task, and it is the natural order of bureaucracy that any such task must be continually justified to protect from bean counter cuts.

by fwlr 3y ago

mustacheemperor 3y ago

Your assumptions are just mistaken. I got my California OSHA 10 construction safety card within the last few months, and heat related illness prevention - which is not somehow semantically separate from heat exposure - is not part of federal OSHA guidelines. It is an additional part of California’s state guidelines, and that’s probably why you see posters on google. Texas could add similar requirements at the state level, but like many states, they haven’t. I watched a whole slideshow module, and passed the quiz, specifically about how the heat safety regulations I was being certified for were California state specific! You can just check the federal OSHA regulations for yourself: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1926 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/19... I am certainly in the camp that Federal OSHA should be amended to include heat safety, but I can see how that would be challenging to do with America’s varied climates. Australia maybe and probably is different but whatever you experienced in Australia won’t be an accurate reference in the US, “OSHA” is the occupational safety and health administration of the United States. Anecdotally, I’ve heard australia has stricter construction workplace safety laws. The state bill nullifies all local ordinances that introduce mandatory breaks, and that will include ordinances requiring construction workers get water breaks.

fwlr 3y ago
I did some more research and it seems like we’re both right. Yes, the US OSHA (the Australian body has the same name) does not actually have a national standard for heat-related illnesses. It does however have plenty of (non-Californian) material specifically on heat-related illnesses, e.g. https://www.osha.gov/otm/section-3-health-hazards/chapter-4 https://www.osha.gov/otm/section-3-health-hazards/chapter-4. According to https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/osha-announces-program-to-protect-workers-from-heat-hazards.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/... (archive here https://archive.md/rHMQm https://archive.md/rHMQm) this is enforced under the general duty clause: > Federal OSHA enforces heat-related safety under the Occupational Safety and Health Act's general duty clause, which requires employers to provide workplaces that are "free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees." https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/osha-unveils-program-extreme-heat-workplace.html https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/osha-unveils-pr... agrees: > There is no heat-related or heat stress standard in place. Instead, federal OSHA has traditionally enforced heat-related hazards through its General Duty Clause. I will happily admit I was surprised to learn that US federal OSHA does not have specific heat-related illness regulations and have been instead making do with Commerce Clause-style general regulation to enforce heat safety instead. But I was also correct when I said there is plenty of US federal (not state-specific) OSHA material on heat-related illnesses - that osha link above has a detailed breakdown including worked examples on how to use Wet Bulb Globe Temperature testing equipment to measure heat stress risks, tables of Threshold Limit Values, etc. I also found a convincing explanation for my confusion as to why the former head of OSHA would say that OSHA does not have a national standard for heat-related illnesses when they empirically do have lots of specific material on assessing and managing heat risk: US federal OSHA is (as of October 2021) working on instituting a comprehensive national heat standard https://www.regulations.gov/document/OSHA-2021-0009-0001 https://www.regulations.gov/document/OSHA-2021-0009-0001 and that seems to be why the lack of a national standard was emphasized - it is no doubt a mammoth and expensive task, and it is the natural order of bureaucracy that any such task must be continually justified to protect from bean counter cuts.