OSHA rarely uses the General Duty Clause (less then 2% of all citations) since they lose most of them in court. Not a slam dunk in my opinion.
S.Z. Mansdorf, PhD, CIH, CSP, QEP
Consultant in EHS and Sustainability
7184 Via Palomar
Boca Raton, FL 33433
Insurance carriers and attorneys will take up any slack, no doubt.
It will be interesting to see if anyone ultimate pursues class actions based on the OHSA General Duty Clause, particularly from early in the pandemic in places like meat processing facilities. See, for example, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-19-meat-workers-59k/ I would expect that any defendant would try to argue that not enough was known at the time to take proper measures, but that the discovery process will ultimately show otherwise.
Here's an OSHA Standard Interpretation from 2003 titled "Elements necessary for a violation of the General Duty Clause" https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2003-12-18-1
Slam dunk case in my mind.
NEW! US-Made, FDA/NIOSH surgical grade N95 https://www.safetyemporium.com/11191
NIOSH-approved N99 and N95 for $1 or less: https://www.safetyemporium.com/covid/
Safety Emporium - Laboratory and Safety Supplies
esales**At_Symbol_Here**safetyemporium.com or toll-free: (866) 326-5412
Fax: (856) 553-6154, PO Box 1003, Blackwood, NJ 08012
On Nov 4, 2021, at 9:38 AM, CHAS membership <membership**At_Symbol_Here**DCHAS.ORG> wrote:
I wonder if OSHA has an enforcement strategy for this that reflects its resource levels?
News Release from OSHA
U.S. Department of Labor | November 4, 2021
US Department of Labor issues emergency temporary standard to protect workers from coronavirus
Increases protections for 84M private sector workers
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post