Addressing Worker Safety and Health Through the Lens of Strategic Enforcement-Part 2.

Ensuring the safety and health of workers in this country, who are employed at millions of workplaces presenting a dizzying array of hazards, is beyond daunting. And yet, it is exceptionally important, because the lives and well-being of countless workers, and their families, hang in the balance. Every day, workers are maimed or die of their workplace injuries or occupational illnesses. These outcomes are unacceptable. Agencies must use all the means at their disposal to keep workers safe and healthy in their workplaces. This paper addresses this challenge through the lens of strategic enforcement, with the goal of maximizing enforcement effectiveness to save lives and limbs.First, we examine how, under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, federal and state enforcement schemes are designed to interact. Next, we dive into the impressive array of strategic enforcement tools that are available to federal, state, and local enforcers, and we observe that many of them are either unrecognized or underutilized. We emphasize that these are all significant, because, given our limited enforcement resources, we need to use every tool we can muster-from strategic targeting, to enterprise-wide enforcement, to heightening deterrence through more robust penalty assessments and publicity, to valuing and making the most of partnerships and coenforcement efforts with a wide range of organizations and agencies. And we need to engage in a process of continual evaluation and improvement of our tools and assets, always striving to maximize our enforcement leverage in aid of worker safety and health. Finally, we examine an impressive list of initiatives state and local governments have taken, beyond what the OSH Act mandates, in their efforts to go the extra mile for the safety of the workers in their states and cities. These examples are intended to inspire federal, state and local agencies to do the same, or, hopefully, even better. The stakes are high. Workers deserve to work in safe and healthy environments. This paper is intended to provide practical ways in which state and local agencies can better-and potentially far better-satisfy that obligation.

Revisiting the Occupational Health Impact of Right-to-Work Laws: A Research Note.

This research note reevaluates the occupational health impact of right-to-work (RTW) legislation, incorporating recent developments in causal inference techniques. In an era marked by an uptick in the adoption of anti-union legislation and increases in workplace fatalities and injuries, it is particularly urgent to examine the extent to which RTW laws affect workers' health. Using a state-year-level dataset spanning 28 years and collected from multiple data sources, we apply an innovative generalized synthetic control method to overcome several limitations of the traditional two-way fixed-effects approach to examine the effect of RTW laws on occupational fatal injuries as well as various other health outcomes. Robustness checks were conducted using a wide range of alternative methods for two-way fixed-effects adjustments. In contrast with findings from previous studies, we found null effects on occupational fatal injuries, as well as on all other health outcomes. Overall, our results indicate that findings from previous studies are based on very thin empirical evidence, with potentially underestimated standard errors and unobserved confounders. Our results highlight the importance of revisiting research questions using updated methodological tools.

Addressing Worker Safety and Health Through the Lens of Strategic Enforcement-Part One.

Ensuring the safety and health of workers in this country, who are employed at millions of workplaces that present a dizzying array of hazards, is daunting. Every day, workers are maimed or die from workplace injuries or occupational illnesses. Hence, government agencies must use all available means to ensure the laws intended to keep workers safe and healthy in their workplaces are maximally effective in accomplishing that purpose. This paper addresses this challenge through the lens of strategic enforcement. It examines how federal and state authority are designed to interact to ensure worker protection in this space, and focuses on what tools for deterring violations - many unrecognized or underutilized by worker safety agencies - are available to leverage the limited resources that inevitably constrain the agencies' reach. The forthcoming Part II will, among other things, showcase a number of noteworthy state and local initiatives that exceed the federal standard.

Investigation of the status of rest facilities at industrial sites and awareness of relevant laws and regulations of South Korea.

South Korea has faced many social issues due to long working hours, lack of rest areas, and poor rest facility environments for cleaners, security guards, department store workers, etc. Discussions have been ongoing about mandating the installation of rest facilities. From August 18, 2022, Article 128-2 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, concerning the installation of rest facilities, was enforced. Consequently, employers in all industries are required to install rest facilities, and laws have been established to ensure these facilities meet certain standards. Accordingly, this study investigated the current status of rest facility installations and the awareness of the law's enactment in Korean industrial sites. The results, analyzed by gender, age, managerial status, industry, and size of the business, indicated that younger people were less satisfied with the rest facilities. Managers were more knowledgeable about the legal regulations than workers. In the service industry, compared to other industries, smaller businesses were less likely to have rest facilities and were less aware of the legal regulations. The results of this study are expected to be used as basic data to help establish the rest facility installation laws in Korea.

Assessing the impact of authorisation process as a regulatory tool in the European REACH regulation: A study on improving occupational safety for applying companies.

This study looks into the effectiveness of the authorisation procedure as a regulatory instrument within the framework of the European REACH regulation. It highlights its impact on enhancing occupational safety and health for both applicants and companies utilising the substances. This procedure encompasses manufacturers, importers, and downstream users of substances, as well as representatives of foreign manufacturers who are also eligible to seek authorisation. When applying for authorisation, the ECHA Risk Assessment Committee (RAC) assesses the risks associated with the intended uses of the substance, including the appropriateness and effectiveness of the Occupational Conditions (OCs) and Risk Management Measures (RMMs) described in the application and the risks posed by potential alternatives. If the RAC determines that the OCs/RMMs are inadequate for managing or controlling the risk, or if the measures to protect workers are deemed insufficient, it may recommend additional measures to enhance occupational safety and health or environmental protection. The 398 processed Applications for Authorisation (AfA) that have been submitted to date were examined to determine these recommended measures, categorised as Conditions for use, Monitoring arrangements, and Recommendations for Review Reports. Overall, a significant improvement concerning occupational safety and health seems necessary, as indicated by the large number of measures recommended by the ECHA Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) and ECHA Committee for Socio-economic Analysis (SEAC) or supplemented by the European Commission. In addition to the proposed measures, a short assessment provided by the committees as to whether the operational conditions and risk management measures are adequate in controlling the risks is also included in the study.

The role of European chemical manufacturing companies in promoting effective communication of conditions of safe use by workers.

In 2006, the revised chemicals management legislation mandated that manufacturers of hazardous chemical substances conduct risk assessments for the entire substance life cycle. Additionally, they must communicate use-specific safe handling advice (exposure scenarios) to their customer, as annex to the Safety Data Sheet (SDS). Despite significant efforts to develop workable solutions for chemical mixtures, this goal has not yet been fully achieved. Therefore, a Cefic research project (LRI B23) was commissioned on how to ensure meaningful health risk communication for workers across supply chains. The research project determined that risk-based safe use advice generated by manufacturers, often does not reach the intended end-user and was seen as not tailored to specific user needs. Recipients of the advice are also not prepared to act based on information developed by suppliers. From an industry perspective, the complexity of supply chains and substance life cycles are considered major barriers for effective safe use communication. Exposure scenarios for substance use in industrial work environments are often perceived as adding little value compared to existing safe use arrangements required by other health, safety, and environmental legislation applicable to employers and duty-holders. To attain meaningful use-specific safe handling advice for workers, including those at non-industrial premises who may benefit most from such advice, knowledge transfer and close collaboration between manufacturers and formulators remain key elements, supported by enhanced regulatory appreciation.

Can COVID-19 infection be considered an occupational disease or injury? Analysis to fill up regulatory gaps.

BACKGROUND: Although the pandemic is nearing its end, the question of whether COVID-19 infection will be considered a work-related or occupational disease remains a legal issue. Therefore, this study aims to provide clarification on this matter. OBJECTIVES: Since the International Labour Organization (ILO) serves as the primary authority on work-related matters, this study is focused on analyzing the ILO's policies regarding the acknowledgment of COVID-19 infections as occupational diseases. It also investigates how States can recognize COVID-19 as such a disease while delving into the connection between the disease or injury and the occupation itself. METHODOLOGY: This study utilizes a doctrinal methodology, focusing on legal research. This approach employs an applied (expository) research method and discusses the topic from a professional constituency perspective, as proposed by Arthurs in 1983. RESULT: The findings indicate that the ILO does not explicitly mention the pandemic or COVID-19 infection as an occupational disease in its list. However, it does include "infectious-related diseases" or "work that carries a particular risk of contamination" as occupational or work-related diseases, which can logically be interpreted as encompassing COVID-19 infection as an occupational or work-related disease. RECOMMENDATION: As the ILO sets guiding principles for its member States, this study recommends that the ILO should establish clear and comprehensive guidelines for member States to recognize COVID-19 infections or any future pandemics as occupational diseases. CONCLUSION: This study will serve as a valuable resource for policymakers who intend to enact or amend national legislation to align with the ILO. Furthermore, it will assist relevant stakeholders in taking necessary actions based on the study's findings.

Chapitre 4. L'accident du travail chez soi.

The widespread use of teleworking during the health crisis reduced the flow of occupational accident claims by 20%. This applies to commuting accidents, as well as claims related to « immediate » or “deferred” risks (Rapp. annuel 2020 de l’Assurance maladie - Risques professionnels : Eléments statistiques et financiers, déc. 2021, p. 2 and 113). On the basis of these figures, working at home could be analyzed as a means of preventing occupational risks and improving workers’ health. In reality, however, these figures should not obscure the fact that telecommuting is a major occupational hazard. This is all the more the case given that, while telecommuting was not very widespread before the pandemic, it is now popular with employees and is being developed by many companies as a source of productivity (Rapp. CNP, May 16 2022). We therefore need to keep a close eye on the development of workplace accident legislation in this area, its adaptability to the specific claims experience of teleworkers and its perfectibility, not forgetting the thorny question of the possible recognition of the employer’s inexcusable fault in the event of the accident being covered by professional legislation.

Chapitre 2. Le télétravail et la prévention des risques professionnels.

The Covid-19 pandemic has spurred the development of telecommuting in many companies, which are now tending to make it a permanent fixture for activities that lend themselves to it. Despite its advantages, however, telecommuting does not exclude all occupational risks when carried out from the employee’s home. Under these conditions, the employer must guarantee the protection of teleworkers’ health by virtue of his safety obligation. But the implementation of a preventive approach is severely challenged by a private space that is beyond the employer’s control. What are these difficulties? How can we proceed? The ANI of November 26, which clarifies the legal framework for telecommuting, offers a few clues, and suggests a form of empowerment for employees and their managers.

Chapitre 3. La prévention des risques psychosociaux en contexte de télétravail : des questions (encore et toujours) en suspens.

For a long time, telecommuting was an atypical and little-used form of work organization. But the health crisis has changed all that. The rise of telecommuting has led to a radical transformation of the professional landscape. Its impact on the health of teleworkers is both major and little-known. In particular, the psychosocial risks induced by this work organization are difficult to grasp. What’s more, the law applicable to the protection of health in the workplace has not been adapted. All these circumstances call into question the need to create a common set of rules specific to telecommuting.

Banning Engineered Stone: A Landmark Australian Public Health Law Reform.

Union activism, medical lobbying and occupational health and safety prosecutions led to a major public health initiative in Australia - the banning from 1 July 2024 of work with engineered/artificial stone, including manufacturing, supplying, processing and installing it. This editorial contextualises within the history of regulation of workers' exposure to risks of contracting silicosis the growing international awareness of the dangers posed by working with engineered stone, particularly in relation to making and installing kitchen and bathroom benchtops made from engineered stone. It argues that the Australian initiative is an important public health decision that has a sound justification, is likely to save many lives and should be emulated internationally.

Changes needed to reduce risk of musculoskeletal disorders.

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are the main contributor to disability levels, which are rising as populations age. Workplace hazard exposures are a major source of this problem, and current workplace risk management practices require substantial changes to tackle it more effectively. Most importantly, the current focus of risk management on "manual handling" tasks must broaden to encompass the whole job. This is necessary because a wide range of psychosocial hazards, most of which operate across the whole job rather than particular tasks, are significant contributors to risk. To ensure that risk-control actions are effective, a recurring risk management cycle that includes worker participation and addresses risk from both biomechanical and psychosocial hazards will be essential. Legislation that mandates workplace management of psychosocial hazards would be helpful. Amendment by regulatory bodies of MSD-related guidance and codes of practice so that they reflect current research evidence would also be helpful in communicating the need for change to workplace stakeholders.

Agricultural Worker Perspectives on Climate Hazards and Risk Reduction Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of agricultural workers during periods of heat and wildfire smoke exposure and to support the development and implementation of protective workplace interventions. METHODS: Using community-engaged research and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) framework for policy evaluation, a qualitative descriptive study was conducted with current and former agricultural workers in Central Washington (WA). Twelve participants answered semi-structured questions via interviews or by attending a focus group. Interviews and focus groups were conducted in Spanish, recorded, transcribed, and translated into English; one interview was conducted in English. RESULTS: Using Braun and Clarke's Reflexive Thematic Analysis, five themes were identified among workers from various worksites: 1) Extreme weather and working conditions are becoming increasingly hazardous to worker health, 2) Employers and supervisors lack training and education on current labor laws, and health and safety rules, 3) Employers and supervisors use intimidation and retaliation to ensure productivity and to evoke feelings of replaceability among workers, 4) Workers do not trust regulatory agencies to enforce rules or hold employers accountable, 5) Solutions to climate-driven problems in the agricultural industry need to value worker health and safety, not just productivity. Participants reported experiencing adverse health symptoms related to heat and smoke exposure at work. Workers proposed solutions including improving education, training, and communication, and increased enforcement of existing and forthcoming occupational health and safety rules. CONCLUSION: The agricultural workforce is essential for ensuring a robust food supply and is facing extreme weather events due to climate change. Western states impacted by wildfires and heat are working to develop and implement occupational health and safety rules. Developing effective policies and interventions inclusive of worker perspectives is critical to adapt to a changing climate, retain a stable workforce and promote optimal health.

Fetal Protection Policies and Corporate Liability of the US Vinyl Chloride Industry, 1974-1991.

In the late 20th century, fetal protection policies barred women from hundreds of thousands of industrial jobs on the pretext that if women became pregnant, their fetuses might be harmed by workplace exposure to toxic chemicals. Beginning in the 1970s, these policies set off a decades-long contest between the chemical industry, government agencies, and the judicial system over how to balance the uncertain reproductive health risks against sex discrimination. This article revives the subject of reproductive health and workplace protections through a historical case study of fetal protection policies at Firestone Plastics, a leader in the postwar vinyl chloride industry. I use formerly secret industry documents to argue that Firestone used scientific uncertainty and gender essentialism to skirt new regulatory pressures and minimize corporate liability. Ultimately, fetal protection policies stymied innovative regulatory efforts to protect all workers-not just women-from reproductive hazards in the workplace. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(2):271-276. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306539).