With potentially significant cost to employers, Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Dan Sullivan (R-AK) are gearing up to introduce a bill that would require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to issue an ergonomics rule. This legislation aims to address concerns surrounding workplace injuries and illnesses related to repetitive motion and ergonomic hazards.
Background: The push for an ergonomics rule isn't new. During the Clinton administration OSHA introduced and finalized a rule before Congress nixed it through a Congressional Review Act resolution in 2001. Compliance difficulties and cost were cited by opponents of the rule, which included the business community.
The proposed bill, apart from mandating the ergonomics rule, includes several notable provisions aimed at bolstering workplace safety:
- Requirement for medical professionals: Employers would be required to have medical professionals onsite to assist injured or ill workers and provide occupational medicine consultation services, potentially enhancing the quality of healthcare available to workers in various industries.
- Accelerated abatement timeline: The bill seeks to expedite the timeline for addressing willful or repeat violations of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act. This provision could lead to swifter corrective actions in cases of egregious violations.
- Changes to abatement process: The bill would streamline the process for employers seeking a stay of abatement for willful or repeat violations.
Implications for HRPA member companies: A mandated ergonomics rule could impose significant burdens for companies, both in terms of compliance costs and operational challenges. According to an estimate at by the Association’s former Employment Policy Foundation, the cost of implementation under the Clinton Administration rule was estimated to be as high as $90 billion per year. Adjusting for inflation, the cost of the current rule’s implementation is likely to be double that amount. Moreover, with the growth of virtual work, employers could be responsible for physical conditions outside the workplace, where they have limited control.
Outlook: Introduction of the legislation is imminent and there is potential for the proposal to garner traction. Yet, it's essential to recognize the constraints of the legislative calendar, particularly with elections looming on the horizon. Nevertheless, companies would be wise to pay attention to this proposal, as it may reemerge next year if not addressed in the current congressional session.
