Enzi: Ergo's Work Restriction Provision Won't Work

May 10, 2000
Sen. Mike Enzi's Subcommittee on Employment, Safety and Training recently held hearings on the proposed ergonomics rule's controversial worker restriction protection.

For many in industry, topping the list of their least favorite provisions in OSHA''s ergonomics proposal is a requirement that employers compensate injured employees at virtually the same rate whether or not they show up for work.

Sooner or later, it was all but inevitable that a subcommittee somewhere in the Republican-controlled Congress would hold hearings on the rule''s controversial work restriction protection (WRP).

Sen. Mike Enzi''s Subcommittee on Employment, Safety and Training took the first whack at WRP April 27. The Wyoming Republican observed that, after reading the ergonomics proposal, he could understand why it has gone nowhere for more than a decade.

"This hearing will focus on one small part of the rule," he continued, "but give a flavor for failure." According to Enzi, WRP should be re-named WCR for workers'' compensation repeal.

Surprisingly, most of OSHA Administrator Charles N. Jeffress'' testimony at the hearing had nothing to do with WRP, but was a repetition of the standard agency argument -- "real solutions" for "real people" -- as to why an ergonomics rule is necessary.

Jeffress eventually made the case that early reporting of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) is critical to preventing the ailment and protecting workers. Unlike other OSHA standards designed to prevent workplace hazards, the ergonomics rule only kicks in for most employers after an employee reports an MSD.

"If employees are reluctant to report MSDs in their early stages," he said, "serious MSD hazards in that job could go uncontrolled; placing every employee in that job at increased risk of harm."

Jeffress received strong support for his position from Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., the lone Democrat on the subcommittee to show up for the OSHA head''s testimony.

The ergonomics proposal gives employees who have been removed from the workplace due to a work-related MSD 90 percent of their net earnings and all of their benefits. The WRP provision requires that those on restricted work activity be paid the same amount they received before going on restricted work.

WRP opponents argue that Section 4(b)4 of the OSH Act bars OSHA regulations from superseding or "affecting in any manner" state workers'' compensation laws.

Paul Mattera, vice president and assistant general counsel at Liberty Mutual Group, gives three reasons why his company strongly opposes WRP.

Workers'' compensation is supposed to be an "exclusive remedy," Mattera said in an interview, and he believes WRP adds a new liability, thereby "eviscerating" the notion of exclusive liability.

"Second, we think it harms, if not totally destroys, return-to-work incentives imbedded in workers'' compensation laws," he argued, because it pays workers almost 100 percent of after-tax wages.

Liberty Mutual appears so concerned about WRP that, if it fails to persuade OSHA to drop or modify the provision, a court battle may result. "We styled our comments on WRP in the form of a legal brief," Mattera said. "That was done intentionally."

Opinions differ on whether the rule''s WRP conflicts with workers'' compensation.

"Implementation of the WRP would leave New York''s and, as far as we have been able to discern, other state''s workers'' compensation schemes wholly in tact as a legal matter," said Patricia Smith, assistant attorney general for the state of New York.

In fact, where you come out on the legalities of WRP often appears to have more to do with where you stand on the rule as a whole.

By the end of the hearing, it appeared that few minds were changed by the arguments aired, least of all Enzi''s.

"What was compelling about Mr. Jeffress'' testimony, and his responses at the hearing, was what he did not address: the enormous drain on OSHA''s resources the WRP will cause," an Enzi spokesperson said. "It is troubling that these questions remain unanswered by OSHA."

by James L. 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

Ensuring a Safer Workplace through a Comprehensive Contractor Qualification Framework

March 13, 2025
Avetta is a leader in contractor management, and with over 15 years of industry experience, we can help you establish a robust contractor pre-qualification program that aligns...

EQT Private Equity to Acquire Avetta from WCAS

March 13, 2025
EQT commits to supporting Avetta in its ongoing growth and innovation journey.

Guide to OSHA Workplace Lighting Requirements

March 13, 2025
Learn OSHA workplace lighting requirements to enhance safety, productivity, and quality. Discover standards, compliance benefits, and risks of non-compliance.

What is the difference between Tier 1, 2, and 3 suppliers and why do they matter?

March 13, 2025
From raw materials to final products, each supplier tier poses risks and liabilities that can impact your organization. Avetta's supply chain management software offers peace ...

Voice your opinion!

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