By Brent I. Clark and Meagan Newman
OSHA’s request for enterprise-wide relief was denied in a recent ALJ ruling. This new decision is the first to deny a request from OSHA to extend the employer’s obligation to abate alleged violations at locations other than those cited. Enterprise-wide relief has been a part of OSHA’s more aggressive enforcement posture in recent…
Continue Reading OSHA’s Request for Enterprise-wide Relief Denied by First Court to Rule on the Issue
By James L. Curtis and Craig B. Simonsen
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recently released its preliminary “Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries.” The findings show an increase of twenty-three percent in the oil and gas extraction industries, a fourteen percent increase in the mining sector, and a five percent increase in the construction industry.
By James L. Curtis and Craig B. Simonsen
Consistent with its threats to aggressively pursue employers who expose employees to workplace hazards, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited an Illinois metal fabricator for twelve alleged violations, including one willful and six serious citations, and issued a $317,000 penalty under the national and regional emphasis program on primary metal …
Continue Reading Metal Fabricator Gets Willful Citation and Put Into OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program
By James L. Curtis and Craig B. Simonsen
In order to prove an OSHA violation the Secretary of Labor must show that the employer had “knowledge” of the violation. Often that is established through supervisors because a supervisor’s knowledge can be imputed to the company.
However, what do you do when the supervisor is the one engaged in the wrongful…
Continue Reading Employer Liable for Supervisor Actions? Well, Not Always
By Brent I. Clark, Meagan Newman, and Craig B. Simonsen
Employers are reminded of a difficult lesson by a recent administrative law judge decision on “excusable neglect.” Secretary v. Progressive Interest, Inc., OSHRC No. 12-1805.
According to the administrative law judge the citation in this matter was issued to the company on July 30, 2012, received by certified…
Continue Reading Don’t Be Late — Review Commission Law Judge Finds Notice of Contest Filed Late Was Inexcusable Neglect
By Brent I. Clark, Meagan Newman, and Craig B. Simonsen
The DC Circuit has just remanded a case to the Mine Safety and Health Review Commission because the Commission failed to explain its departure from its own precedent.
Failure to Contest Proposed Penalties Not Fatal
In this case the mine operator had contested an MSHA citation, but not the…
Continue Reading MSHRC Failed to Explain Departure From Its Precedent
By James L. Curtis and Craig B. Simonsen
Consistent with its threats to aggressively pursue employers who allegedly expose employees to hazardous chemicals and respiratory hazards, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited a Wisconsin iron foundry for twenty-eight health violations, including three repeat citations, under the national and regional emphasis program on primary metal industries.
OSHA also unilaterally…
By Stephanie Christiansen-LaRocco and Craig B. Simonsen
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has published for the first time a Directive on Inspection and Citation Guidance for Roadway and Highway Construction Work Zones (October 16, 2012, CPL 02-01-054). The Directive covers any construction activity on and near roadways or highways, such as “road, highway, sidewalk, or utility construction, where…
By James L. Curtis and Craig B. Simonsen
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has just published a Guidance on removing employers from the Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP). As we noted in a previous blog, since the SVEP has been in effect over 300 employers have been designated as severe violators. However, until now, there has not…
Continue Reading Procedures for Removal from the OSHA Severe Violator Enforcement Program List
Applying the Commission’s existing single employer test, it was agreed that all the facilities shared a common president, chief executive officer, and chief financial officer. It was also agreed that the facilities did not share a common worksite. So, a key element under review was whether the entities had interrelated and integrated operations. The Court upheld the Commission’s conclusion that the parent company could exercise control over the facility but that, “in practice, local personnel supervised safety matters at the facility.”…
Continue Reading Federal Appellate Court Finds that Different Facilities Were Not a Single Employer
