Paint and Coatings Industry News

Main News Page

OSHA Takes Turn as Target of Drive to ‘Rein in’ Regulations

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

More items for Good Technical Practice

The EPA isn’t the only target of congressional initiatives aimed at cutting federal spending and curbing “job-killing” regulations.

OSHA is high on the hit list of the new Republican-controlled House of Representatives as well.

A report aired Monday on National Public Radio said Republicans in control of the House are looking to cut OSHA’s budget by 20%. “Republicans say OSHA enacts expensive rules without regard to their effect on business,” NPR reported on its “All Things Considered” news program, in a segment by correspondent Brian Naylor.

“They've proposed cutting its budget this year by 20%, a reduction the director says would be devastating to the agency's efforts to protect worker safety.”

The report quoted OSHA Administrator David Michaels as saying the cutback would actually amount to a 40% reduction, in that the fiscal year is half over. “It would really have a devastating effect on all of our activities.”

Peg Seminario, the safety and health director of the AFL-CIO, agreed. “We now have a much bigger workforce than we had 40 years ago when OSHA was started,” she said.

“But they would propose to slash the agency, slash enforcement, slash standards-setting, leaving the agency essentially crippled and unable to do its job to protect workers.”

Rep. Tim Walberg Michigan Republican

Republican House members, meanwhile, say OSHA's stepped-up enforcement threatens jobs, the NPR report said. At a recent hearing, the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, Michigan Republican Tim Walberg, said OSHA “has become an administration more focused on punishment than prevention.”

Walberg added: “Our goal should be to prevent workplace accidents before they happen, not simply shame an employer once a tragedy has occurred on the job site."

The Obama administration has proposed increasing spending on OSHA in the next fiscal year by a bit more than 4%, NPR said.

The NPR report can be read and heard at OSHA Budget Cut Plan.

Rep. Walberg, part of the Republican tsunami that swept into office in the November elections and gave control of the House to the GOP, is making action on “job-destroying regulations” a top priority of his agenda. Walberg last month introduced a bill to “rein in” the EPA—the Defending America’s Affordable Energy and Jobs  Act. The measure would prevent EPA from regulating greenhouse gases without Congressional approval and “stop Washington bureaucrats from implementing a cap-and-trade program that will drive up energy prices on families and businesses.”

Walberg’s bill is a companion to a measure offered in the U.S. Senate by Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo.

Flashpoint: Ergonomics

The NPR report said a key point of contention has been ergonomics standards. In 2000, in the final weeks of the Clinton administration, OSHA issued an ergonomics rule to set standards for workplaces for repetitive-motion injuries such as carpal tunnel syndrome. The next year, the GOP-controlled Congress repealed the standard.

“Now the two sides are scrapping over ergonomics again,” the NPR report said. “This time, OSHA wants employers to record instances of repetitive motion injuries, in a log most businesses already keep.”

OSHA Administrator Michaels said the repetitive-motion proposal has been “misunderstood” adding that the agency has decided to further explain the requirement before implementing it. He said OSHA always considers the cost of complying with its rules and invites comments on proposals before implementing them. He told NPR that OSHA can protect jobs and workers at the same time.

“We believe we can do both,” he said. “We know that OSHA doesn't kill jobs. It stops jobs from killing workers. When employers embrace safety, they actually save money. We know that's true. They often don't believe it, but we show them. And we have consultants who provide that information for free.”

Comment from Lloyd Freyer, (3/3/2011, 8:44 AM)

20 years in construction, I saw (1) OSHA inspector. I don't think that's overbearing. If the only legitimate government function is protection of its citizens, worker protection should be a top priority. I fail to understand how anyone working for an hourly wage would support Republican efforts to expose us to unsafe working conditions, dirty air, polluted water, limited job choices due to non-portable health insurance.

Comment from tom golibart, (3/3/2011, 9:15 AM)

The government needs to have watch dogs; however, the only effective watch dog is the employer and the worker. If it takes twenty years for an inspector to show up on one contractor’s job site, something is not working. I agree if the only legitimate government function is the protection of its citizens. Then for all the good contractors bidding jobs with safety as the top priority, the violators who put people in harms way should be the ones paying fines high enough to keep those inspectors in their jobs and keeping people safe.

Comment from anthony sorosky, (3/3/2011, 10:02 AM)

I have been traveling to construction sites for 10 years from one end of the country to the other as a tradesman and I have never seen an OSHA inspector. That doesn't mean something is not working. Every contractor I have worked with wants to know that I understand and comply with all OSHA regs before I set foot on their job site. The only people I have ever seen ignoring saftey standards are the workers. Regulations are often inconvenient and some people just don't bother. I'm glad OSHA is defining reasonable saftey standards and the employers and workers do police each other. It's working.

Comment from William Gusnard, (3/3/2011, 10:26 AM)

I worked on a construction site in Michigan about 15 years ago and we never had an OSHA inspector on site unitl someone complained about only having cold water in the bathrooms. The inspector came and cehcked us out. He said that only cold water was acceptable since we were a construction site. However, once he was on site, he was free to walk around and site us for whatever he could find. He wrote us up on not having the permanent U-drain in place yet and gave us 5 days to fix it or else face a $50,000 per day fine. As I said, we were in construction and the grating had not even been fabricated yet so it took lots of scrambling to get grating to the job site and installed in five days. OSHA regulations are there for a purpose but we were using non-union labor in a labor state so this was instigated as a means of getting back at us by the Unions working thru OSHA. Our lawyers said that we were following all siad construction guidelines but they appreciated me going out of my way to appease OSHA. By the way, we endered up replacing most of the grating as it got damaged during construstion. WE never had an accident at the site and the only reason OSHA even visited the site was because of no hot water in the restrooms. I do not understand these kind of OSHA regs as they have nothing to do with safety.

Comment from S.R. jordan, (3/3/2011, 11:06 AM)

I have been working as a J/Site Inspector with a engineering consulting firm for State Government where there are health risk & safety risk for over two years and have come from a military back ground where EPA & OSHA guidelines are strickley complied with. It is vital that worker safety/health is the top priority; however for the govn to expand authority/control is not in the best intrest for the common good. Regulatory guidence has already been established by the EPA & OSHA to control J/Site health/safety risk. It is incumbent on the contractor's to insure that these compliance factor's are in-plact and monitored. Contract's are not awarded if they do not have these programs in place. Regulations in-place already enforce the govn requirements or contractor's dont get contract's. It appears that EPA & OSHA is expanding their control over construction creating a larger influeance/control & budget in a sector of our economy (construction/building) that has process's put in place by EPA/OSHA that create's multiply levels/steps of govn. This will impact business on a couple of fronts. 1. This will greater cost's to contract's. 2. This will increase spending in labor which will impact project cost's. 3. This will reduce the labor force due to lack of qualifyed labor to select from. There are other factors that will force hardship on contractor's and public sector's that will extend the time lines of contract compleation. Govn control needs to take into acct that additional burdens cause additional cost's, time & material. I voted to put into office those who should monitor the govn and the trends that govn expansion will do to & how it impacts American economy. Govn law's need to be both for the safe guarding of the public and economic commerce.

Comment from peter matelyan, (3/3/2011, 11:41 AM)

As a painting contractor in most regulated state in the nation I look forward to a healhty and responsible roll back of several job killer regulations, starting with the newest RRP rule.i believe in and pratice safe lead abaitment procedures to protect not only the enviroment, customers and workers . The newest enforcement is not only costly to the customers, but scares away protention customers due to fear of lawsuits from neigbors who are looking way to sue for a quick buck.And the costs related to the procedures raise the prices 20 percent for both labor amd materials costs.It leaves honest licenced contractions out in the cold when competeing againist unlicenced illegal so called 'contractors'.If Osha/epa wants to help in job site safety , try enforcing thru cities agencies to weed out unlicenced contractors. Thereby makeing all involved of creating construction jobs and those they employed successfully safe. I intend to contact the congressman. Pete Matelyan Painting Contractor, Long beach California

Comment from Otis Hale, (3/3/2011, 4:01 PM)

There will be lots of dead and damaged people as a direct result of an OSHA funding cut. As it now stands, everyone is subject to he same regulations, and the playing field is pretty level. The Fly-by-night, low-balling, corner-cutting contractors will have a field day without having to worry about OSHA oversight.

Comment from Liz Callahan, (3/3/2011, 8:58 PM)

7 Fish and Wildlife Inspectors for every 1 OSHA inspectors....says it all.

Comment from Catherine Brooks, (3/7/2011, 10:06 AM)

The comments about many of you rarely seeing any OSHA staff, regardless if inspector or contractor educator, indicates to me that OSHA is not out there doing too much control. Rather, they are spread too thin; they cannot get enough time in the field to protect workers. Sure, any new costs beyond the expenses we are all used to paying will hurt in the short run. In the long run, we adjust our bids accordingly. The workforce health and safety needs resulted in OSHA laws; it was not liberals trying to increase government control of businesses. Unfortunately, we humans sometimes get so focused on the bottom line that we forget that healthy, skilled workers are the ones who keep operational any line at all.