Industry Groups File Suit Against OSHA's Ergonomics Rule

Nov. 15, 2000
Labor and industry agree on one point: "OSHA's final ergonomics standard is the most important worker \r\nsafety action developed in the agency's history."


Labor and industry have been fighting one another for years over OSHAs ergonomics standard, but when it finally came out the two sides managed to agree on one point: OSHAs final ergonomics standard is the most important worker safety action developed in the agencys history.

So said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney in a statement three days before the rule was issued on Nov. 14.

Mike Baroody, senior vice president for policy at the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), spoke similar words at a Nov. 13 press conference. But the real purpose of the press conference was not to give a history lesson, it was to announce that a coalition of business groups have mounted a legal challenge to the final rule that could tie it up in court indefinitely.

For years the war over ergonomics has been fought mainly on Capitol Hill, but now that OSHA has issued the final rule the principal battleground shifts from politics to law. Foes of the rule have few other weapons left.

On the critical issue of whether opponents of the rule would seek a stay that would block OSHAs enforcement of the rule during litigation, industrys chief counsel Baruch Fellner was non-committal. Were not asking for a stay now -- we need to evaluate it more, he said.

There is time for opponents to make up their minds. The new rule is effective Jan. 16, 2001, but its provisions will not become enforceable until Oct. 14, 2001, when employers must begin to distribute information on the standard to employees and begin receiving and responding to reports of repetitive motion injuries.

After that, the standards other provisions will gradually kick in until Jan. 18, 2005.

At the press conference Fellner outlined four grounds for the legal challenge to the ergonomics standard: it has no scientific support, it is too vague, it rests on fatally flawed economic analysis, and in its rush to promulgate the rule OSHA engaged in serious procedural violations. Of course OSHA knew all along the rule would be challenged in court. In order to improve the final standard -- and the chances of winning in court -- the agency made a number of significant changes to the proposed rule issued last year. In a Nov. 13 interview, Charles Jeffress pointed to four major changes in the final rule:

  • The final standard applies in the same way to all general industry, whereas in the proposal it applied only to manufacturing and manual handling jobs, plus jobs with a reported musculoskeletal disorder (MSD).
  • In response to the charge that the proposal was too vague, the final rule provides a screen to tell employers which jobs have to be fixed and which do not. Jeffress said the final rule also has some very specific job hazard analysis tools so employers can determine when they have done enough to fix a job.
  • The grandfather clause has been modified to make it easier for companies to qualify: the main change here is to delay the requirement of an MSD management policy until Jan. 16, 2002.
  • Restrictions on using the Quick Fix option have been loosened: employers can now use it so long as there is not more than one MSD incident in a job and no more than two in an establishment within 18 months.

Jeffress did not mention one other major change: the much-criticized work restriction protection has been cut back from six months of benefits to 90 days.

Although it appears as though most of the major changes were responses to industry concerns -- and the need to defend against a lawsuit -- OSHA was evidently listening to labor complaints also.

The final rule requires more employee involvement in the process and a second medical opinion on reported MSDs. OSHA estimates the new rule will cost employers $4.5 billion annually, up slightly from the $4.2 billion price tag of the proposal.

There was no evidence at the NAM press conference that OSHAs changes to the final rule had mollified its industry opponents, who bitterly accused the Clinton-Gore administration of using a politicized OSHA to pay its debts to organized labor.

This is not a health and safety standard, said Baroody, its a political pay-off.

By James Nash

About the Author

EHS Today Staff

EHS Today's editorial staff includes:

Dave Blanchard, Editor-in-Chief: During his career Dave has led the editorial management of many of Endeavor Business Media's best-known brands, including IndustryWeekEHS Today, Material Handling & LogisticsLogistics Today, Supply Chain Technology News, and Business Finance. In addition, he serves as senior content director of the annual Safety Leadership Conference. With over 30 years of B2B media experience, Dave literally wrote the book on supply chain management, Supply Chain Management Best Practices (John Wiley & Sons, 2021), which has been translated into several languages and is currently in its third edition. He is a frequent speaker and moderator at major trade shows and conferences, and has won numerous awards for writing and editing. He is a voting member of the jury of the Logistics Hall of Fame, and is a graduate of Northern Illinois University.

Adrienne Selko, Senior Editor: In addition to her roles with EHS Today and the Safety Leadership Conference, Adrienne is also a senior editor at IndustryWeek and has written about many topics, with her current focus on workforce development strategies. She is also a senior editor at Material Handling & Logistics. Previously she was in corporate communications at a medical manufacturing company as well as a large regional bank. She is the author of Do I Have to Wear Garlic Around My Neck?, which made the Cleveland Plain Dealer's best sellers list.

Nicole Stempak, Managing Editor:  Nicole Stempak is managing editor of EHS Today and conference content manager of the Safety Leadership Conference.

Sponsored Recommendations

Free Webinar: ISO 45001 – A Commitment to Occupational Health, Safety & Personal Wellness

May 30, 2024
Secure a safer and more productive workplace using proven Management Systems ISO 45001 and ISO 45003.

ISO 45003 – Psychological Health and Safety at Work

May 30, 2024
ISO 45003 offers a comprehensive framework to expand your existing occupational health and safety program, helping you mitigate psychosocial risks and promote overall employee...

DH Pace, national door and dock provider, reduces TRIR and claims with EHS solution

May 29, 2024
Find out how DH Pace moved from paper/email/excel to an EHS platform, changing their culture. They reduced TRIR from 4.8 to 1.46 and improved their ability to bid on and win contracts...

Case Study: Improve TRIR from 4+ to 1 with EHS Solution and Safety Training

May 29, 2024
Safety training and EHS solutions improve TRIR for Complete Mechanical Services, leading to increased business. Moving incidents, training, and other EHS procedures into the digital...

Voice your opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of EHS Today, create an account today!