DCHAS-L Discussion List Archive
From: Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA issues emergency temporary standard to protect workers from coronavirus
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 17:18:31 +0000
Reply-To: Monona Rossol <actsnyc**At_Symbol_Here**CS.COM>
Message-ID: 2055038553.1232405.1636046311284**At_Symbol_Here**mail.yahoo.com
In-Reply-To <00fa01d7d18d$b5f78350$21e689f0$**At_Symbol_Here**bellsouth.net>
We often end up with General Duty Clause rulings because the entertainment industry does a lot of things for which are are no OSHA rules. For example, there is no rule under the rigging standards for suspending a worker on an almost invisible airplane wire, swinging him over the audience and dropping him back on the stage. Fortunately, hitting the ground at a rapid rate of speed is a "recognized hazard," so the Spiderman production could be cited.
Monona
-----Original Message-----
From: mansdorfz**At_Symbol_Here**BELLSOUTH.NET
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU
Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2021 11:07 am
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA issues emergency temporary standard to protect workers from coronavirus
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.
Zack
S.Z. Mansdorf, PhD, CIH, CSP, QEP
Consultant in EHS and Sustainability
7184 Via Palomar
Boca Raton, FL 33433
561-212-7288
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU> On Behalf Of Info
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 10:17 AM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA issues emergency temporary standard to protect workers from coronavirus
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.
Employers can be cited for violation of the General Duty Clause if a recognized serious hazard exists in their workplace and the employer does not take reasonable steps to prevent or abate the hazard. The General Duty Clause is used only where there is no standard that applies to the particular hazard. The following elements are necessary to prove a violation of the General Duty Clause:
- The employer failed to keep the workplace free of a hazard to which employees of that employer were exposed;
- The hazard was recognized;
- The hazard was causing or was likely to cause death or serious physical harm; and
- There was a feasible and useful method to correct the hazard.
Slam dunk case in my mind.
I wonder if OSHA has an enforcement strategy for this that reflects its resource levels?
- Ralph
https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOL/bulletins/2fab063News 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
