    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                           SAFE WORKPLACES, STRONGER
                        PARTNERSHIPS: THE FUTURE OF OSHA
                             COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   Before The

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS

                                     OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE
                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                 HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 16, 2025

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 119-23

                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Workforce

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov

                                   __________

                          U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    63-266 PDF                    WASHINGTON : 2026
    =======================================================================

                      COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE

                        TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Chairman

    JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
    VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina            Virginia,
    GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania           Ranking Member
    GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
    ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
    RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
    JAMES COMER, Kentucky                MARK TAKANO, California
    BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
    LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan            MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana              LUCY McBATH, Georgia
    KEVIN KILEY, California              JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
    MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
    JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
    ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri       GREG CASAR, Texas
    RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
    MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      JOHN W. MANNION, New York
    MARK HARRIS, North Carolina          YASSAMIN ANSARI, Arizona
    MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana
    RANDY FINE, Florida

                         R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director
                  Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS

                     RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania, Chairman

    MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana             ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota,
    GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin              Ranking Member
    JAMES COMER, Kentucky                HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
    MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             GREG CASAR, Texas
    RANDY FINE, Florida                  MARK TAKANO, California

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on July 16, 2025....................................     1

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

        Mackenzie, Hon. Ryan, Chairman, Subcommittee on Workforce
          Protections................................................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     3
        Omar, Hon. Ilhan, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Workforce
          Protections................................................     5
            Prepared statement of....................................    12

                                   WITNESSES

        Williams, Chris, Executive Director, Voluntary Protection
          Programs Participants' Association.........................    14
            Prepared statement of....................................    16
        Harper, Myron, National Health and Safety Director, Cintas
          Corporation................................................    20
            Prepared statement of....................................    21
        Reindel, Rebecca L., Safety and Health Director, American
          Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
          Organizations (AFL-CIO)....................................    22
            Prepared statement of....................................    25
        Sell, Kevin, Senior Manager Corporate Development, Kwest
          Group......................................................    44
            Prepared statement of....................................    46

                             ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

        Chairman Mackenzie:
            Letter dated July 16, 2025, from the National Retail
              Federation (NRF).......................................    64
        Ranking Member Omar:
            Statement for the Record from United Steelworkers (USW)..     7

                           SAFE WORKPLACES, STRONGER
                        PARTNERSHIPS: THE FUTURE OF OSHA
                             COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE

                                  ----------

                            Wednesday, July 16, 2025

                      House of Representatives,
                 Subcommittee on Workforce Protections,
                          Committee on Education and Workforce,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in
    Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon.
    Ryan Mackenzie (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Mackenzie, Messmer, Grothman,
    Fine, Walberg, Omar, Stevens, Takano, and Scott.
        Staff present: Vlad Cerga, Director of Information
    Technology; Libby Kearns, Press Assistant; Katerina Kerska,
    Legislative Assistant; Trey Kovacs, Director of Workforce
    Policy; Campbell Ladd, Clerk; R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director;
    Danny Marca, Director of Information Technology; Brad Mannion,
    Professional Staff Member; John Martin, Deputy Director of
    Workforce Policy/Counsel; Audra McGeorge, Communications
    Director; Alexis Morgan, Intern; Daniel Nadel, Legislative
    Assistant; Kevin O'Keefe, Professional Staff Member; Ethan
    Pann, Deputy Press Secretary and Digital Director; Kane
    Riddell, Staff Assistant; Carl Rifino, Intern; Sara Robertson,
    Press Secretary; Heidi Schneider, Professional Staff Member;
    Ambrose Tierney, Intern; Ali Watson, Director of Member
    Services; Joe Wheeler, Professional Staff Member; James
    Whittaker, General Counsel; Samantha Wright, Intern; Sayda Bir,
    Minority Intern; Ilana Brunner, Minority General Counsel;
    Alexandra Walker, Minority Intern; Dhrtvan Sherman, Minority
    Research Assistant; Bob Shull, Minority Senior Labor Policy
    Counsel; Raiyana Malone, Minority Press Secretary; Brian
    Marshall, Minority Legal Intern; Kevin McDermott Minority
    Director of Labor Policy; Marie McGrew, Minority Press
    Assistant; Eleazer Padilla, Minority Staff Assistant; Veronique
    Pluviose, Minority Staff Director; Banyon Vassar, Minority
    Director of IT.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Good morning. This Subcommittee on
    Workforce Protections will come to order. I note that a quorum
    is present. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to call
    a recess at any time. Today's hearing will explore compliance
    assistance programs offered by OSHA, the Occupational Safety
    and Health Administration, and its State partners.
        We will consider ways to strengthen these Federal programs
    and learn more about the public, private, safety partnerships
    that OSHA's mission includes, with goals of protecting those
    who work hard every day to provide for their families and
    deserve to do so in safe working conditions.
        Since its establishment in 1971, OSHA has developed
    enforcement efforts and robust compliance assistance programs.
    These programs help protect the millions of Americans who work
    hard every day to provide for their families, by giving
    employers the tools and guidance they need to prevent injuries
    and illness before they occur.
        Instead of relying solely on inspections and investigations
    after a violation happens, compliance assistance programs
    encourage a proactive approach to safety, which is essential to
    any effective health and safety management system. Many of
    these programs have been in place for almost as long as OSHA
    itself.
        For example, this year marks the 50th anniversary of OSHA's
    onsite consultation program, which provides no cost,
    confidential occupational safety and health services that are
    tailored for small and medium sized businesses. In 1982, OSHA
    approved the first site for its Voluntary Protection Programs,
    which recognized workplaces with safety and health practices
    that go above and beyond legal requirements.
        In addition to OSHA's many Federal programs, there is a
    vast network of programs and initiatives conducted by states
    with their own OSHA approved State plans. As we look ahead, it
    is clear that workplaces are changing rapidly. New industries,
    emerging technologies, and evolving hazards require OSHA's
    compliance assistance programs to be more innovative,
    accessible, and adaptable than ever before.
        Updating compliance assistance programs calls for a
    collaborative approach. Strong partnerships among State
    agencies, nonprofit organizations, industry leaders, and other
    stakeholders will be vital. We will combine--we must combine
    enforcement efforts with educational opportunities for
    employers and workers who want to meet their compliance
    obligations if we are going to protect workers.
        Importantly, certain Federal programs, such as the VPP are
    discretionary programs, meaning their effectiveness can change
    dramatically year over year, and employers engaged in these
    programs are under constant threat of losing this critical
    resource. We will hear more about a solution that addresses
    this concern, and codifies the program, allowing it to perform
    more consistently.
        Today, we will also hear from individuals in their
    workplaces where these compliance assistance programs are used.
    The witnesses will offer their perspective on how these
    programs have made their workplaces safer, and they will make
    recommendations about how these programs can be improved to
    ensure worker health and safety.
        I look forward to today's hearing, and today's witnesses,
    discussing strategies to make OSHA's compliance assistance
    programs more effective and responsive to the needs of the
    workforce. With that, I yield to the Ranking Member for her
    opening statement.
        [The prepared statement of Chairman Mackenzie follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Omar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
    witnesses for being here today. Over the last 6 months, the
    Trump administration has embarked on an aggressive assault on
    worker protections. Just in the past 2 weeks, Trump's
    Department of Labor has released five dozen deregulatory
    rulemakings, two thirds of which focus on health and safety
    issues.
        These proposals target core worker protections, including
    changes to child labor rules, removing a requirement as basic
    and essential as having adequate lighting on construction
    sites, and even weakening workers' protection against asbestos.
    This spree of deregulation follows months of mass firing at the
    very agencies tasked with researching and investigating
    workplace conditions and a proposed budget that would reduce
    inspections and slash DOL's capacity to develop new safety
    standards.
        The message is clear. Workers' rights and protections are
    under attack. Compliance assistance programs, such as the
    Voluntary Protection Program, have their place, but they are no
    substitute for clear standards that are actively and
    effectively enforced. No job should ever be a death sentence.
        Workers deserve to come home to their families at the end
    of the day alive, healthy, and whole, yet according to the AFL-
    CIO, workplace hazards killed approximately 140,000 workers in
    2023, including 5,283 workers from traumatic injuries and an
    estimated 135,000 from occupational diseases.
        To protect workers from harm, Congress has passed landmark
    safety laws, and established important agencies like OSHA,
    MSHA, NIOSH, and the Chemical Safety and Hazards Investigation
    Board. When they are all allowed to do their jobs and are fully
    funded, these agencies save lives and prevent harm to workers.
        Now, the Trump administration is attempting to strip away
    safety regulations and dismantle critical agencies like NIOSH
    and CSB. In doing so, they are threatening the lives of workers
    who rely on those safeguards and the resources these agencies
    provide.
        In my own district, we are already feeling the consequences
    of these cuts. The University of Minnesota's Midwest Center for
    Occupational Health and Safety is one of just 18 NIOSH-funded
    Education and Research Centers in the Nation. It trains the
    next generation of workplace safety experts, who will help
    protect our workers in the high-risk industries. Without NIOSH,
    the invaluable research and workforce development provided by
    that center and others like it across the country will be lost.
        That means fewer trained medical and safety professionals,
    less research capacity on critical issues, such as heat stress,
    and decreased investment in innovative technologies that can
    prevent illness and injury. The Trump administration's
    deregulatory agenda will result in more injuries, more deaths,
    more grieving families, and less accountability for employers
    who put their workers in harm's way.
        Committee Democrats are committed to honoring these workers
    who have been harmed or killed on the job, not just with words,
    but with action to change the system. Later today, Ranking
    Member Scott will reintroduce a bill that will finally bring
    workers the common-sense protection they deserve against heat-
    related injuries and illness.
        I am proud to cosponsor the Asuncion Valdivia Heat Illness,
    Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act, which requires OSHA to
    finally issue an enforceable rule with the strongest feasible
    protection against heat illness, including paid rest breaks,
    access to water, shaded or cooled recovery areas, and training
    that is delivered in the language and format the workers
    understand.
        These are sensible safeguards that will save lives. Ranking
    Member Scott, Representative Courtney, and I also reintroduced
    the Protecting American Workers Act, which would make long
    overdue improvements to the enforcement of the Occupational
    Safety and Health Act. This bill would expand coverage to
    millions of workers currently excluded from the law's
    protections and strengthen whistleblower protections.
        These reforms are critical to preventing the most serious
    violations that endanger worker safety. Democrats are offering
    real solutions to the problems workers face on the job instead
    of ripping away protections. I hope that our discussion today
    can center around ensuring that workers come home safely at the
    end of the day.
        Finally, Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent to enter
    into the record a statement from the United Steelworkers about
    the compliance assistance program we will be discussing today.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Without objection.
        [The information of Ms. Omar follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Omar. Thank you, and I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Ranking Member Omar follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Mackenzie. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(c), all
    members who wish to insert written statements into the record
    may do so by submitting them to the Committee Clerk
    electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m., 14 days
    after this hearing. Without objection, the hearing record will
    remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other
    extraneous material noted during the hearing to be submitted
    for the official hearing record.
        Now, to the introduction of our witnesses for today. Our
    first witness is Mr. Chris Williams, the Executive Director for
    the Voluntary Protection Programs Participants' Association in
    Falls Church, Virginia.
        Our second witness is Mr. Myron Harper, the National Health
    and Safety Director for Cintas Corporation in Indianapolis,
    Indiana. Our third witness is Ms. Rebecca Reindel, the Safety
    and Health Director at the AFLCIO in Washington, DC. Our final
    witness is Mr. Kevin Sell, Senior Director for Corporate
    Development at Kwest Group in Alexandria, Kentucky. Mr. Sell is
    testifying on behalf of the Associated Builders and
    Contractors.
        We want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today,
    and we look forward to hearing each of your testimony. Pursuant
    to Committee Rules, I will ask that each of you limit your oral
    testimony to a 3-minute summary of the written testimony that
    you have provided as Committee members have many questions to
    ask for you.
        The clock will count down from 3 minutes. Pursuant to
    Committee Rule 8(d), the Committee practice, however, is that
    we will not cutoff your testimony until you reach the 5-minute
    mark. I would also like to remind the witnesses to be aware of
    their responsibility to provide accurate information to the
    Subcommittee, and with that I will recognize our first witness
    today, Mr. Williams. You are recognized for your testimony.

    STATEMENT OF MR. CHRIS WILLIAMS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VOLUNTARY
     PROTECTION PROGRAMS PARTICIPANTS' ASSOCIATION, FALLS CHURCH,
                                VIRGINIA

        Mr. Williams. Chairman Mackenzie, Chairman Walberg, Ranking
    Member Omar, and members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for
    the opportunity to testify in support of OSHA's compliance
    assistance programs.
        My name is Chris Williams, and I serve as the Executive
    Director of the Voluntary Protection Programs Participants'
    Association. For 40 years, VPPPA has represented cites and
    companies involved in VPP.
        Our more than 1,400 members represent every industry, and
    collectively represent nearly 300,000 workers, union and non-
    union. More than half of VPPPA's members occur at VPP cites,
    along with the nearly 1,900 sites across the country share in
    our mission to raise the standard for workplace health and
    safety excellence.
        VPP is a program founded on collaboration. In 1979, the
    California Building Trades Council, a National Constructors
    Association and Cal/OSHA came together to develop the
    Cooperative Self Inspection Program. It was aimed at preventing
    injuries and illnesses during construction of the San Onofre
    Nuclear Power Plant. Led by labor, and with a full management
    buy-in, and oversight by Cal/OSHA, this resulted in levels of
    cooperation previously unseen and laid the foundation for the
    program that we see today.
        OSHA's VPP has maintained this bedrock commitment to
    employee involvement, management commitment, and regulatory
    oversight, working together to foster a culture of continuous
    improvement. The proof is in the numbers. According to OSHA
    data, VPP sites maintain an average injury and illness rate 53
    percent below BLS industry averages.
        To put that in perspective, the average American workplace
    sees nearly three injured workers per 100 fulltime employees.
    For VPP sites, that number is closer to one, and that is the
    one too many because VPP fosters a culture where safety is the
    core value on which every decision is made. It is why VPP works
    and saves.
        VPP's impact goes beyond participants. It is felt across
    the more than 10 million workplaces in the United States
    through countless process innovations and best practices. It's
    felt by OSHA, through the Special Government Employee program,
    with VPP companies committing their own personal and resources
    to work alongside OSHA developing new ideas that are routinely
    adopted and improved.
        Simply put, VPP is a shining example of what labor,
    management, and government can do when working together toward
    a shared vision of what can be, yet VPP remains a discretionary
    program, it can be eliminated at any time for any reason by any
    party. Make no mistake, it has been under threat before.
        That is why we are pleased to see the introduction of H.R.
    2844, the Michael Enzi Voluntary Protection Program Act. This
    bill's aim is simple, to make VPP a permanent program within
    OSHA, require that a percentage of OSHA's budget bet set aside
    to fund VPP, and to create a pathway for every American
    workplace to reach VPP level performance.
        VPP enjoys broad support, democrats and republicans,
    management and labor. In fact, VPP was built by labor, nearly
    500 locals or signatories to VPP agreements, among them were
    the 380 AFL-CIO affiliated unions. VPP is the gold standard of
    safety and health management systems, and the only one
    available free to every workplace willing to commit to, and
    abide by, its stringent ongoing requirements.
        Participants know that protecting workers is not
    proprietary. It is not a union or non-union issue. It is about
    sending our loved ones home in the same or better condition
    than which they arrived every day. Thank you for your time, and
    I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you, Mr. Williams. Next, we have
    Mr. Harper, and I recognize you for your testimony.

       STATEMENT OF MR. MYRON HARPER, NATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
          DIRECTOR, CINTAS CORPORATION, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA

        Mr. Harper. Good morning, Chairman Mackenzie and Ranking
    Member Omar, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for
    holding this hearing, and for the opportunity to testify on the
    importance of the Voluntary Protection Program. My name is
    Myron Harper. I am a Director of Health and Safety for Cintas
    Corporation.
        Cintas is dedicated to helping more than one million
    businesses of all types and sizes across the United States get
    ready to open their doors with confidence by providing a wide
    range of products. Cintas employs approximately 47,000 employee
    partners in our workforce today, and our overarching goal is to
    ensure everyone returns home safely at the end of the day.
        We accomplish this through our Cintas Health and Safety
    Management System, which is modeled after our OSHA Voluntary
    Protection Program. Since the certification of our first site
    in 2010, 139 additional Cintas facilities nationwide have
    achieved VPP Star certification.
        Achieving VPP Star certification is a rigorous process. Our
    locations must show that all employee partners work together to
    prevent workplace injuries and incidents. I also serve as a
    special government employee through OSHA's Voluntary Protection
    Program. As a special government employee, I had the
    opportunity to engage with peers through multiple educational
    opportunities, mentoring, and by participating in onsite
    evaluations.
        Even though OSHA works together with sites to find
    solutions and give feedback, we are held to an even higher
    standard and are still subject to audits and evaluations post-
    certification, and this remains critical to the success of this
    program today.
        I would like to thank Congresswoman Diana Harshbarger and
    Congressman Mike Thompson, the bipartisan cosponsors of H.R.
    2844, the Michael Enzi Voluntary Protection Program Act.
    Passage of this legislation would ensure the long-term success
    of this great program in keeping all employees engaged,
    healthy, and safe.
        Thank you again to the Subcommittee for the opportunity to
    testify. I will look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Harper follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next I will recognize Ms.
    Reindel for your testimony.

        STATEMENT OF MS. REBECCA L. REINDEL, SAFETY AND HEALTH
                  DIRECTOR, AFL-CIO, WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Ms. Reindel. Good morning, Chairman Mackenzie, Ranking
    Member Omar, and members of the Subcommittee. I appreciate the
    opportunity to testify today on behalf of the AFL-CIO about
    protecting worker health and safety.
        I want to start by saying that the magnitude of work-
    related fatalities, injuries, and illnesses is enormous for
    American workers, and it's totally unacceptable in this
    country. Each year in the U.S., more than 5,000 workers die on
    the job from traumatic injury, and an estimated 135,000 die
    each year from work related disease.
        The families of these workers suffer the consequences, and
    these are devastating, and they are preventable. What we are
    talking about today are not just numbers and goals and
    achievements, they are people's lives.
        The job safety enforcement agency for most work places,
    OSHA, has been starved by budget cuts and hampered by staffing
    reduction, and low penalty structures that keep it from
    carrying out its core responsibilities entrusted to it by
    Congress, even before the Trump administration's recent efforts
    that will reduce these resources even more.
        Between 1991 and 2024, OSHA's budget decreased 8 percent.
    In the last 35 years we have seen a 19 percent reduction in all
    of OSHA's staff, including at headquarters, and with a whopping
    35 percent decrease in enforcement staff alone. Meanwhile,
    employment has grown 43 percent and workplaces have grown 82
    percent.
        Overall, this is a 38 percent reduction in the amount the
    agency has to protect each worker it is responsible for. Now
    only $3.92 for each worker.
        We do a calculation each year in our report on the number
    of years it would take OSHA to inspect each workplace and its
    jurisdiction once, based on its resources. Since 1991, that
    number has gone from once every 84 years to once every 185
    years. Under the President's budget proposal for fiscal 1926,
    that number would be the worst on record, once every 266 years.
    They have proposed to reduce the number of OSHA inspections by
    nearly 30 percent.
        Meanwhile, 8 million public sector workers have no OSHA
    coverage, a number that has increased 10 percent in the last 35
    years.
        All of this means that the budget appropriated by Congress
    is not enough for the agency to carry out even its core
    responsibilities of setting standards and enforcing them. A
    quick reminder, the two duties in the OSH Act are for employers
    that must, one, maintain a workplace free from recognized
    hazards and, two, comply with the standards promulgated by the
    agency. Recent firings of the health and safety agency staff,
    like at NIOSH, and new policies by the Trump administration
    will only make things worse for America's workers.
        Right before the Fourth of July, the administration just
    proposed to rescind and weaken dozens of worker health and
    safety rules, including removing training and medical
    evaluation requirements for PPE to function properly, removing
    employer requirements on reporting illnesses, and removing
    OSHA's general duty to keep workers safe.
        Meanwhile, OSHA has not been able to issue many standards
    in recent years, and when they do it can take up to 20 years to
    get one out the door.
        Compliance assistance has always been part of the OSHA
    model, but compliance assistance is just that, assistance to
    aid employers with understanding and complying with the law.
    OSHA has many compliance assistance programs. Examples are
    resources for businesses to better understand the standards
    they need to follow, guidance on specific hazards and ways to
    correct them, and recommendations on systemic issues to keep
    those hazards corrected. Lower penalties, just like inspection
    exemptions, incentives to under report injuries, and a lack of
    meaningful worker and union participation, all undermine the
    credibility of any voluntary program.
        Resources are not distributed evenly. For years OSHA has
    consistently spent more than ten times the amount of money on
    employer compliance assistance than it has on worker safety and
    health training. Now, the President has proposed to zero out
    worker health and safety training altogether in OSHA's budget.
    OSHA's few resources are not a reason to spend more money on
    the voluntary approaches. Compliance assistance is an important
    part of the OSHA model, but only as an aid to support the
    mandate the agency was given by Congress, not a replacement for
    it.
        Thank you for inviting me to testify, and I would be happy
    to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Reindel follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Last, I will recognize Mr.
    Sell for your testimony.

        STATEMENT OF MR. KEVIN SELL, SENIOR MANAGER, CORPORATE
             DEVELOPMENT, KWEST GROUP, ALEXANDRIA, KENTUCKY

        Mr. Sell. Thank you, Chairman Mackenzie, Ranking Member
    Omar, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the
    invitation to testify this morning and for the opportunity to
    discuss Voluntary Protection Programs, and the future of
    Occupational Safety and Health Administration's compliance
    assistance.
        Again, my name is Kevin Sell, I currently serve as the
    Senior Manager of Corporate Development at Kwest Group. We are
    a 100 percent employee-owned company founded in 2003. Kwest
    Group has grown from its roots in Port Clinton, Ohio to become
    a trusted partner across the United States.
        Today Kwest Group is licensed in nearly 40 states, with
    seven regional offices, and two craft education facilities.
    Today I am testifying on behalf of Associated Builders and
    Contractors, a national trade association with 67 chapters,
    representing more than 23,000 member companies, and millions of
    craft professionals.
        I began my career as a firefighter, and later shift
    commander, and that helped me launch a career in construction.
    Before Kwest Group, I contributed to the significant growth of
    Century Construction and United Group Services through safety
    quality programs and workforce development solutions from 1990
    to 2004.
        I have also held leadership roles on both the Kentucky
    Workers' Compensation Funding Commission, and I chaired the
    Kentucky Occupational Safety Health and Review Commission.
    Aside from my education, I hold several certifications in the
    health and safety field.
        The area offices of OSHA provide employees and employers
    with valuable expertise and support through the compliance
    assistant specialist, and their challenge program that is a
    path to VPP.
        By having a partnership with the area office, you gain non-
    enforcement support, so you can work with OSHA to get better
    and reduce risk to your entire team. This is especially
    important for construction as many of us have mobile workforce
    that moves around a lot, and this presents its own set of
    challenges that are far different and more complex than most
    general industry sites.
        In 1999, we met with then Region 5 administration Mike
    Connors, who challenged us to take the ABC's STEP, which is
    Safety Training Evaluation Process and challenge program to a
    construction version of the Voluntary Protection Program, or
    VPP. We started that demonstration program in 2001.
        VPP in every industry allows employers, employees and labor
    to apply for an audit that leads to the VPP designation. Many
    of us call the VPP, OSHA's seal of approval. The VPP makes the
    work environment better, safer, and even supports business
    growth and job security.
        It is also important to note that positions like the
    compliance assistance specialist in VPP allow OSHA to focus on
    the bad employers and use their VPP partners as subject matter
    experts and resources.
        OSHA standards are minimum standards, and it is far better
    for employees to be protected by a VPP employer. It is also
    important to mention a bit more about ABC STEP Program. This
    process gives you a position of where your health and safety
    program is at, and how to get better, based on levels like
    gold, platinum, diamond.
        When I mentor construction companies applying for VPP, I
    always ask them for their STEP level, or have them start this
    process. STEP was a key factor in creating VPP in construction,
    and I still find it of high value to that application process.
    STEP has also evolved to add something of great importance to
    all of us in every industry, and that is mental health and
    suicide prevention.
        Together, with all other aspects, we now focus on total
    human health. I look forward to discussing this important issue
    with the Subcommittee today and hopefully provide insight into
    the successful programs. Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Sell follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Under Committee Rule 9, we
    will now ask questions of the witnesses under the 5-minute
    rule, and I will be recognizing myself for the first series of
    questions. Mr. Williams, your written testimony noted that the
    mission of the Voluntary Protection Program is to send workers
    home from work in safe or better condition than when they
    arrived.
        How do OSHA's compliance assistance programs, like VPP,
    complement the enforcement side of OSHA's work in achieving
    this goal?
        Mr. Williams. Thank you for your question. Quite simply,
    VPP is an efficiency tool for OSHA in that it supplements
    personnel from VPP sites in the form of special government
    employees who go out and conduct audits, can review
    applications in some regions, and the like. It does free up
    those resources, potentially for enforcement efforts.
        It also allows VPP itself, the performance of those
    companies and sites in the program. It allows OSHA to focus on,
    as the witness stated, the truly bad actors who for reasons
    incomprehensible to the moral mind, refuse to comply with OSHA
    requirements.
        We know the VPP sites from a performance standpoint are
    well above beyond compliance, and they are well above beyond
    their performance, their peers, so VPP sites also commit to
    that pay it forward model, where their resources, their best
    practices, are openly shared amongst industry, amongst their
    peers, not as proprietary, but in order to help send those
    workers home safe every day.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Well, I appreciate that response, and
    it actually sets up my next question perfectly. Mr. Harper, you
    highlight in your written testimony the opportunities given to
    you as a special government employee, or an SGE. As an SGE you
    are able to offer your knowledge and experience to smaller
    businesses just starting out, and businesses in need of
    strengthening their current safety practices.
        How has your work as an SGE benefited smaller businesses?
        Mr. Harper. With the small businesses, we have been able to
    partner with them through SGE initiatives, through Voluntary
    Protection Program by going out visiting both sites, directly
    partnering with them, sharing those best practices with them,
    as well as inviting them to our sites to partner with them.
        It is a great benefit to those smaller sites, as well as to
    our site to partner with other businesses that may have the
    same issues that we have faced before, and we are able to help
    identify those solutions directly, so there will be businesses
    and community involvement together to send every employee home
    safe and sound.
        Chairman Mackenzie. We appreciate the work you do helping
    small businesses there. I think that is fantastic. How does
    that benefit your organization, Cintas?
        Mr. Harper. With Cintas, especially with the customers that
    we have, we have been able to partner with those small
    businesses to help them with their initiatives and help us as
    far as a company to build that relationship with that site. If
    they continue to build and grow that helps us long run on our
    side as well, but helps us with our knowledge, sharing best
    practices from those sites, and things that we are able to
    benefit-from that with the SGE evaluations and tools that we
    get from those sites.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Fantastic. My final question is for Mr.
    Sell. By having the Voluntary Protection Program in place, OSHA
    gains industry Ambassadors who enthusiastically offer their
    expertise to industry safety efforts, as we just heard. OSHA
    may also exempt VPP sites from programmed inspections, which
    allows the agency to allocate resources toward expanding
    outreach, or when needed, enforcement.
        Having participated in the VPP, can you highlight the
    benefits an employer and its employees receive from the
    program?
        Mr. Sell. Certainly, and thank you for the question, Mr.
    Chairman. As the employer of the group, the company, the
    benefits received is that you are starting that--it is not just
    a partnership. I would argue that it is a relationship, and you
    are in regular communication with your respective area office.
        Getting to know those people and what they do also gives
    you a--more access to standards that are coming out, more
    input. The employees understand that they are working for a
    company and with a company where they are engaged in the
    voluntary protection process, and where they look at OSHA as a
    partner.
        They do not look at them as the occupational police, which
    I am not saying that is not needed, I am just saying in the VPP
    setting, that it is a cooperation, it is engagement, it is
    collaboration with the agency, which is I think we all would
    welcome more collaboration with Federal agencies that actually
    benefit employees.
        Chairman Mackenzie. I appreciate that answer. Thank you.
    With that, I will conclude my questioning, and next I will
    recognize the Ranking Member for 5 minutes of questioning.
        Ms. Omar. Ms. Reindel, thank you so much for joining us
    today. Just this week OSHA announced a major policy change
    related to the monetary penalties for workplace safety
    violations. Under current law, what is the maximum penalty OSHA
    can seek for a serious violation?
        Ms. Reindel. Excuse me, the maximum penalty is $16,550, so
    it is roughly $16,000.
        Ms. Omar. What if a worker is killed?
        Ms. Reindel. If a worker is killed, it depends on the type
    of violation. It could also be a maximum of $16,000 if it is a
    serious violation.
        Ms. Omar. Just to be clear, these are only the maximum
    penalties, right?
        Ms. Reindel. These are maximum penalties. They are often
    much, much lower. In our annual report we do look at this, and
    for Federal OSHA the average serious penalty that OSHA issues
    is $4,000 for a serious violation of the OSH Act.
        Ms. Omar. Now, can you briefly tell us what OSHA announced
    this week, and what are the consequences of this decision, and
    will workers' lives be at risk?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. OSHA announced on Monday a new policy
    change related to its penalty structure and related to reducing
    penalties for businesses when they are cited by OSHA. OSHA has
    always, long-term, has had four categories for good faith
    penalty reduction, history (lack of a history of violations),
    penalty reduction, quick-fix penalty reduction, and size-based
    penalty reductions.
        What this policy did here was it changed the criteria, and
    it is letting more employers into the penalty reduction space,
    and that includes large employers, not just small businesses.
    It also increases the penalty reductions to 70 percent, so you
    get fined by OSHA you can have up to a 70 percent penalty
    reduction now, or 80 percent for willful violations.
        If you have not had an inspection in 5 years, you actually
    can have a reduction in penalties. What it used to be was that
    you had to have an inspection in the last 5 years without any
    serious violations in order to achieve that.
        Ms. Omar. Wow. What message does it send when this
    administration is willing to make it cheaper to break the law?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. This new policy just creates incentives
    for employers to take the low road, and to not follow the law.
    If you know that, you know, we already know that OSHA does not
    show up to workplaces because of its resources that it cannot
    make it to so many workplaces every year, and further now we
    know that if they will show up to employers can expect, you
    know, penalties that are much too low to be a deterrent for
    violating our Nation's safety and health laws.
        Ms. Omar. In May, Secretary Chavez-DeRemer told this
    Committee that she would double-down in addressing child labor,
    and yet her Labor Department recently sent a draft rule to OMB
    on child labor, which has not been made public, that may
    actually weaken child labor protections.
        With child labor violations rising across the country, we
    need to make our child labor laws stronger, not weaker. I hope
    everyone here can agree with that because potential rollback is
    very troubling. Ms. Reindel, if this new DOL rule increases
    hours that children can work, or exposes them to more dangerous
    jobs, what exactly is the Trump administration doubling down
    on?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. Yes, we have not seen this rule in full
    yet, but it is by title about hazardous occupations for
    children to work in, so we actually have seen these things
    before in the first Trump administration where they have
    attempted to lower the age that children could work in
    dangerous occupations and having them work at different hours
    for long time periods.
        Right now, for decades our Nation has, you know, prevented
    children from working in certain hazardous occupations. We have
    had many violations of this over the years, and child labor
    violations are a very clear indicator of other health and
    safety violations that are going on in workplaces.
        Ms. Omar. Thank you. With that, I yield back.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next, we will go to the
    Chairman of the Full Committee, Mr. Walberg from Michigan.
        Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for
    holding this hearing, and thanks to the panel for being here.
    Mr. Williams, you indicated that in your written testimony that
    an estimated 1,900 worksites participate in the Voluntary
    Protection Program. What percentage of those sites are
    unionsites?
        Mr. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. While there is no
    accurate data put out by OSHA in terms of worksite affiliation,
    labor, non-labor, or union, non-union, in looking through the
    list of unions that are signatories to VPP agreements, and with
    those sites, a conservative estimate would be 15 percent. I
    would put that above 20 percent of VPP sites that are union
    worksites.
        I say that because the data is incomplete to some extent.
    For example, in California, 61 percent of VPP sites are union
    affiliated.
        Mr. Walberg. Okay. What additional requirements are there
    for worksites who are represented by a union and want to join
    VPP, and then if you could also respond what kind of feedback
    have you received from the unions about these sites?
        Mr. Williams. Certainly. Any site that employs union labor
    must have every trade that is represented on that site sign off
    on any VPP agreement. If even one declines, then there is no--
    then we do not proceed. The VPP process stops.
        Labor maintains a critical role, and a critical oversight
    role in terms of if at any point labor looks at that VPP
    agreement, looks at that site and says you are not upholding
    your end of the bargain, management. We can withdraw our
    signature, and the site is out of VPP.
        In terms of feedback from local labor affiliates, it has
    been overwhelmingly positive, just simply based on the number
    of local signatories that I cite in my opening statement, but I
    want to give you a statement in their own words. This is from
    Jack Griffith, who works at the Central Plateau Cleanup Company
    out in Richland, Washington.
        He is a member of the Hanford Atomic Metal Trades Council,
    and Local 1951 of the International Association of Machinists
    and Aerospace Workers. He is a full-time union safety
    representative VPP coordinator. He has been involved in VPP for
    almost 30 years now and in his words, and I quote, ``VPP is not
    a flavor of the month program.
        It requires a management commitment with employee
    involvement. Unionized sites must endorse their commitment, or
    the application will not be accepted by OSHA. Attaining VPP
    Star recognition is not easy for companies. They must have
    implemented an effective safety and health management system.
    Fostering a culture of safety and continuous improvement can
    take time.
        I have seen where the safety culture needed to change to
    meet the rigorous requirements of going above and beyond the
    basic OSHA requirements to demonstrate exemplary safety and
    health management systems. On a VPP site, every employee has
    the right to stop work without fear of retaliation when
    identifying anything that was not covered.''
        Mr. Walberg. It is not surprising that he would State that.
    That is just common sense, and what the program is, is a high
    standard program that you have to voluntarily commit to, to
    keep the job. Thank you. Mr. Harper, there is a misguided
    belief that by participating in VPP, employees scoot their
    compliance obligations.
        However, your written testimony states that VPP worksites
    are held to an even higher standard than non-participants
    through the program, audits, and evaluation process. Could you
    briefly explain why that is, and do you believe this high
    standard has had a direct impact on employee recruitment,
    retention, and growth there at Cintas?
        Mr. Harper. Thank you for your question. When it comes to
    the high level of importance for safety at Cintas, and within
    our facilities, partnering with our employees has definitely
    helped to further the importance of safety. When it comes to
    audits that happens with OSHA, we have to make sure that we
    hold to a high standard with the OSHA on an annual basis. We
    have got to submit our records of where we are for continuous
    improvement, and then every so often they have to come back and
    re-reevaluate our site to make sure that we are held to that
    standard.
        In addition, when submitting our applications, we have to
    be lower than the industry average, lower or at the industry
    average based on the BLS rate, and so our incident rates has to
    be below, so they are also looking at our involvement from our
    employees and leaders, as well as our numbers.
        It has definitely helped us with the accountability side,
    as far as having OSHA there to help partner with us, and
    continue our efforts, sending partners home every day safe to
    their families, and so it helps with our programs initially.
        Mr. Walberg. Thank you. Not much time left, but Mr. Sell,
    yes or no, has the participation in VPP and other compliance
    assistance program shifted the culture of your workplace to
    prioritize safety?
        Mr. Sell. Yes, it has.
        Mr. Walberg. That is all I wanted to hear. Thank you. I
    yield back.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Fantastic. Next, we are going to go to
    Mr. Takano from California.
        Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
    witnesses for being here. Ms. Reindel, the National Institutes
    for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, is the only
    Federal agency that conducts research on workers' safety and
    hazardous health matters.
        As you describe in your testimony, NIOSH researches which
    chemicals could shorten their workers' lifespan, how future
    accidents can be prevented, and the application of life-saving
    interventions that protect workers and employers, among other
    things. Is it true that the staff of NIOSH was gutted this
    week, depriving the agency of enough staff to function?
        Ms. Reindel. Thank you for the question. In the spring, the
    Trump administration fired two-thirds of the staff of NIOSH,
    and even though some of them have been returned, more than a
    third of the agency is still out, and those are people who do
    critical work around researching.
        Mr. Takano. Critical work, these are the trained
    researchers, people with advanced degrees?
        Ms. Reindel. That is right. They are uniquely skilled. This
    is not--this is a small field with a very high level of
    expertise, and a very unique level of expertise to do
    occupational safety and health.
        Mr. Takano. Can you give me a number, an estimated number
    of staff that will be affected?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. We still have more than 400 staff who
    are out of NIOSH, and these are people who do critical mining
    safety and health research, critical research on warehouses,
    and many other, you know, studies and industry partnerships.
        Mr. Takano. What might be the immediate consequences of
    these staff cuts? Do you have some ideas in mind?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. You know, for instance in the mining
    sector at NIOSH, they do long-term studies, but they also do,
    you know, they test explosive environments. They have very, you
    know, critical state-of-the-art facilities where you can test
    explosive environments, for instance, or in mines, prevent roof
    collapses. You also have partnerships with the fishing
    industry, with the construction industry.
        These are a lot of the industries that are still--the
    research is highly impactful, and it is also research that is
    applied, and it is immediate, so it is understanding why
    employers or employees are not adopting safety practices and
    helping them.
        Mr. Takano. Great, thank you. My district contains one of
    the largest logistics hubs in the world. In the Inland Empire,
    more than 200,000 people are employed by the warehousing
    industry. Warehousing work has among the highest rates of
    serious injury of any industry in the country. Workers suffer
    life-long injuries from overexertion and repetitive stress,
    which can permanently destroy an employee's back, wrists, and
    other joints.
        Heavy objects and equipment that mean a collision or a fall
    could be deadly, and that has resulted in hundreds of worker
    fatalities per year. As online shopping booms, so does the
    safety risk associated with that industry. A 2024 Senate report
    indicated that one Amazon Prime Day, just one Prime Day at
    Amazon, led to a rate--a rate of 45 injuries per 100 workers.
    That is nearly a 50 percent injury rate.
        Ms. Reindel, researchers at NIOSH's Western States Division
    were conducting research into making warehouse work safer.
    Their staff was just eliminated. How will cuts at NIOSH affect
    my constituents?
        Ms. Reindel. Absolutely. The Western States Division is a
    smaller office out in the Western states that is incredibly
    efficient, and they affect warehouses because they do important
    work on ergonomics, which you were just talking about, and
    preventing musculoskeletal disorders from repetitive stress
    injuries, and also on fatigue.
        I mean warehouses have extreme issues with workers working
    long hours, fatigue issues, transportation issues related to
    the logistics industry, so we can expect without NIOSH that
    injuries and illnesses will go up, fatalities will go up, and
    this is going to harm generations to come.
        Mr. Takano. I just--we just passed this Big, Ugly Bill, 160
    billion dollars to do immigration enforcement. A budget that is
    bigger than like several defense budgets put together. There is
    a tradeoff here. We are going to eliminate an office, a small
    office, that could make warehouse work safer for my
    constituents, so I am seeing a tradeoff here, Ms. Reindel, and
    I am very, very alarmed by it. I yield back.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next, we will go to Mr.
    Messmer from Indiana.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the
    witnesses for being here today, especially my fellow Hoosier,
    Mr. Harper. Mr. Harper, compliance assistance programs are a
    proactive approach that results in reduced costs for both OSHA
    and the participating employers. Can you explain to our
    Subcommittee how these programs reduce costs for both OSHA and
    the employers?
        Mr. Harper. Thank you for your question. With the
    assistance programs, especially with the SGEs, we are able to
    have multiple people go to a site, or partner with other sites,
    versus having one personnel from OSHA in one area, one region,
    supporting thousands of sites. By helping other businesses
    partner with other businesses through VPP has absolutely helped
    partner with other sites, build that relationship, especially
    with the government--special government employee program.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you. You also ran a successful VPP
    program, and those worksites require buy-in from all parties
    involved. What role does employee involvement play in a
    successful VPP worksite?
        Mr. Harper. Thanks again for your question. With the
    employee involvement one cannot get a VPP site. You cannot go
    through certification without having that involvement, without
    having that engagement from your employes. This is not built
    on--our safety system is not built on one person, but it is all
    the employees at that site, in multiple sites, so that is buy-
    in from everyone at that site to get everyone home safe and
    sound.
        That is very important to the success of this program and
    VPP.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you. OSHA has found significantly lower
    injury and illness rates among the VPP participants. Mr.
    Williams, would you say that that employee buy in creates a
    culture of safety within your organization by being a VPP
    participant?
        Mr. Williams. Absolutely, sir. It is a culture that, as I
    mentioned before, safety is the core value on which every
    decision is made, and where employees, frontline workers, are
    empowered to stop work in that program.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you. Mr. Williams, critics of VPP will
    claim that by passing H.R. 2844, we will take away from OSHA's
    ability to enforce safety standards, keep workers safe, even
    though legislation dedicates--this legislation dedicates 5
    percent of OSHA's annual funds to continuation of the program.
    What would you say in response to that claim?
        Mr. Williams. I would look at it from the standpoint of VPP
    funding alone, we know that that number is significantly lower.
    It is less than 1 percent of OSHA's overall budget at present.
    That 5 percent number represents growth in the program that we
    know has been successful, and I would relate that as well from
    the standpoint of we look toward what VPP accomplishes in the
    scheme of--we talk about enforcement, enforcement will always
    have a need within OSHA and will always be part of its core
    mission.
        Enforcement results in an inspection that may be on a site
    one, two, 3 days. The other 362 years ago, what compliance
    assistance programs like VPP tackled. It is creating that
    environment, the conditions and the culture at a worksite, so
    that employees are empowered to work safe, empowered to own the
    program, management commits to that, and the regulatory
    oversight as the other witnesses have talked about from their
    personal perspectives, is the fact that there is no self-
    evaluation in that audit.
        A VPP site is going to see OSHA on their site every three
    to 5 years. They openly welcome them.
        Mr. Messmer. Okay. Thank you. I yield back the rest of my
    time.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next, we will go to Ms.
    Stevens from Michigan.
        Ms. Stevens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
    Ranking Member as well, and of course our witnesses. We all
    know that OSHA plays an incredibly vital role in making sure
    Americans across the country are safe at work. As a daughter of
    a small business owner who was a landscaper, and employed a lot
    of people, we know a thing or two about workplace safety in my
    family.
        As someone who has visited over 200 manufacturers in my
    time in Congress, through my Manufacturing Monday Program, I
    see those safety standards in play. I want to focus my
    questions certainly on Michigan, but I also just do not want to
    leave out the assault on our Federal workforce, and decades of
    underfunding at OSHA, that has been mentioned, that leave
    workers more exposed than ever.
        That combined with catastrophic Medicaid cuts in the
    Reconciliation Bill that came down, makes it very difficult for
    workers at this time, and particularly for folks who I hear
    from a lot in Michigan. An AFL-CIO report found that OSHA has
    just $3.92 per worker that it is responsible for protecting,
    and that is down from $6.36 in 1991.
        The number of OSHA inspectors per million workers has
    fallen from 9.7 to 6.1, so Ms. Reindel, you served at OSHA, you
    mentioned that, how does this consistent and worsening under-
    resourcing of the agency that leaves workers exposed to
    increased safety risks on the job?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. You know, the--I think in short, just to
    say, that you have the fox guarding the hen house, right? You
    have fewer inspections, fewer presence in the--lesser presence
    in the workplace by OSHA by an independent--by an external
    third party. You also do not have an avenue for workers to
    reach out to an external party. We know there is a lot of fear
    right now in the U.S. generally speaking, and without the
    ability for OSHA to show up and to talk to workers, this has a
    severe, dampening effect on how we actually can measure what is
    going on.
        I also want to say that enforcement has been effectively
    evaluated by many studies to look at OSHA enforcement and OSHA
    standards, and how those have saved lives, and been effective,
    and actually greater than the standards even predict, so we
    have effectiveness of OSHA enforcement that's been shown
    through many, many studies.
        I think a lot of my colleagues are talking about VPP. This
    program still has not been critically evaluated, and where it
    has there have been big problems with those evaluations to show
    that they are actually effective. What we really want to do is,
    you know, make sure employers are following the law.
        Ms. Stevens. Yes, and how about attraction, so when we
    think about growing our manufacturing sector we also need to
    think about the talent that we are bringing in. I am curious if
    we are--when we are ripping away regulatory frameworks, and the
    things that protect people on the job, if it is going to make
    it easier or harder to attract the talent?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. I know there is definitely an emphasis
    on domestic manufacturing, but how do you do that if workplaces
    are not safe? I think that, you know, we have also heard today
    about OSHA being a critical part of the VPP Program. I will say
    there are a lot of onsite consultation programs and industry
    partnerships and resources, and compliance assistance are all
    very important, but OSHA and VPP actually does not do audits,
    until once every three to 5 years, so that is a long time.
        Ms. Stevens. Yes. One other quick one as well, when you
    talk about the valuable role that NIOSH plays in keeping
    workers safe, and what American workers will miss out on, how
    does this upheaval affect that?
        Ms. Reindel. NIOSH is really our major--our only source in
    the government for critical research on health and safety
    issues. It also already has a lot of industry partnerships, a
    lot of academic partnerships, real implementation on the ground
    of preventing workplace injuries and illnesses practically in
    real time, and also conducting surveillance, so we actually
    know what is going on in workplaces throughout the states.
        Ms. Stevens. Well, thank you so much, and I yield back my
    time.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next, we are going to go to
    Mr. Fine from Florida.
        Mr. Fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all of
    you for being here to talk about this important topic.
    Obviously, we want to make sure that all of our workers are
    safe and do not get injured, or even worse, get killed. I have
    a couple questions. I am going to start with Mr. Sell.
        The argument in favor of compliance assistance programs is
    that it reduces costs by seeking to prevent injuries and
    accidents, as opposed to dealing with them afterwards. There
    may also be additional cost savings as well, and that is where
    I am. How can we do things cheaper.
        How do OSHA's compliance assistance programs reduce the
    compliance burden for employers?
        Mr. Sell. That is a great question. Thank you for that. The
    compliance assistance specialist acting in a non-enforcement
    capacity can actually work with every employer. It really
    benefits small employers that do not have those types of
    resources, but every employer is entitled to that service.
        Whether it is program development risk assessment or just
    trying to figure it out what is the best way to protect your
    employees from a particular risk. That is where they come into
    play. That is where they have the expertise. Where they save
    money, quite frankly to a business, is the output of that.
        If they are helping the employer on the front end, then
    there is no risk, or there is reduced risk on the back end. You
    also see that come through, at least in my opinion, you have a
    greater reduction to capacity of your worker's comp insurance,
    which is based on hours worked.
        Your general liability goes down, so the company becomes
    better financially because that compliance assistance
    specialist in fact is saving them money. They also, if they are
    working in that partnership, and this is an indirect output,
    employers want employees to work for them, and employees,
    especially, America's workers, want to work for employers of
    choice.
        They want to go somewhere where they are protected and
    treated well, and a compliance assistance specialist helps that
    because they see them there, and they know the employer cares.
        Mr. Fine. Okay. Well, thank you for that. My next question
    is for Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams, your written testimony
    expresses support for H.R. 2844, the Michael Enzi Voluntary
    Protection Program Act. This bill would require OSHA to
    dedicate 5 percent of its annual budget to funding the VPP.
        A version of this bill has been introduced in previous
    Congresses, long before I got here, but so that is why I want
    to know. What were past concerns with this legislation, and how
    does H.R. 2844 address those concerns?
        Mr. Williams. Thank you for the question. I will touch on a
    couple potential issues that may have been stumbling blocks in
    previous sessions. First and foremost is that it is in the
    language from a funding standpoint in previous versions, the
    legislation would have been considered open ended.
        I think there is some concern from both parties that it was
    a blank check, and carte blanche from the Secretary of Labor,
    whoever that may be at any given time to fund as much or as
    little or VPP like systems. I think that 5 percent rider
    addresses that, whether OSHA's budget is 500 million or 50
    million, it would still be 5 percent of the amount.
        Second, would be that I think in looking from the
    standpoint we talked of that budget number, and if there has
    also been a misconception that the program is pro one party or
    the other, pro-labor, pro non-labor and non-union. I think this
    legislation in the past has suffered from that misconception
    that one side or the other supports it.
        It is a bill for everyone. It is a bill that has had
    bipartisan support in previous sessions, including this one. It
    is a simple piece of legislation. It aims to make a program
    that has been so successful reducing workplace injury and
    illnesses, and engaging employees in workplace safety and
    health. It simply makes it better. I think there has been a
    little bit of misconception from the standpoint of one side, or
    the other is going to get a victory here.
        This is a victory for all of American workers.
        Mr. Fine. Thank you. Thank you all for being here, and that
    answers my questions. I yield back Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next, we will go to the
    Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Scott from Virginia.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Reindel,
    the Department of Labor released dozens of new rule notices,
    which reverse worker protections. Can you describe and comment
    on some of those initiatives?
        Ms. Reindel. Sure. Thank you for the question. I am happy
    to just--I mentioned in my testimony just before the Fourth of
    July, dozens of these rules--actions, I should say, were
    issued.
        Many are proposals, and there are, you know, most of them
    are attempts to weaken existing safety and health protections,
    and also to roll back some altogether, so very basic, but very
    important items like adequate lighting in workplaces, or using,
    you know, safety colors to detect, you know, caution, you know,
    very important things.
        There are--there is a proposal to remove OSHA's general
    duty protections to certain occupations because they are
    ``inherently risky,'' and we see this as problematic, and
    really a problem for many workers across the U.S., not just the
    occupations that they named in the proposal, but setting a
    precedent for doing that going forward, and thinking that, you
    know, employees somehow should assume the risk in their
    workplaces. That is where employers should be controlling
    hazards.
        One other area is going after the respiratory protection
    requirements, and we know that in order for respirators and
    other PPE to work properly in workplaces, and protect workers,
    it must fit, and we must medically evaluate people in order to
    ensure that they are safe when they are wearing those
    protections.
        Mr. Scott. Are independent contractors covered by OSHA?
        Ms. Reindel. Independent contractors are not covered.
        Mr. Scott. You responded to a question about the relatively
    low penalties to businesses. Usually, accountability can be
    achieved by lawsuits, but if an employee is covered by OSHA,
    covered by workers' comp, is it true they cannot sue for
    negligence?
        Ms. Reindel. Yes, under OSHA law there is no private right
    of action. Workers do not have other recourse.
        Mr. Scott. In the voluntary plans, what should we look for
    to ensure that the plans are actually working as intended?
        Ms. Reindel. Right. These voluntary--so, I will just say
    the compliance assistance has many types of programs at OSHA. I
    know we are talking a lot about VPP today, and that is just one
    of the programs. Onsite consultation is already a program that
    exists for small businesses, and that is a free and a
    confidential service that OSHA already offers to small
    businesses.
        VPP tends to benefit large corporations. Those are
    employers that are already paying attention to safety because
    they have to do that in order to get into the program. They
    have to have low injury and illness rates to maintain to stay
    in their program, and where we have seen pressure to maintain
    low injury and illness rates, we also see policies and pressure
    for workers to not raise and report injuries and illnesses.
        There is also a significant problem of every VPP employer
    having inspection exemptions, so for voluntary programs we
    should not be exempting OSHA from having inspections. It is
    sort of a backward way of thinking. If you are doing your best,
    and you are having the best employers who should be going above
    and beyond OSHA standards, they should pass inspections without
    problem, but we do have--we have seen many willful violations
    and fatalities at VPP sites-.
        I am not saying all, and I am not saying that there are
    not, you know, good VPP programs in some workplaces with some
    employers, but the problem systematically, or the program
    systematically has problems.
        Mr. Scott. Mr. Williams, how can we be confident that
    violations are actually reported, and can that be legally
    enforced?
        Mr. Williams. Absolutely Mr. Scott, I would address the
    concern about the program inspection exemption with this. VPP
    does not exempt sites, the program does not exempt sites from
    inspections for imminent dangers, from whistleblower actions,
    so VPP sites are still required, and are still subject to those
    inspections.
        From a validation standpoint, I would also like to mention
    that VPP--the GAO, issued a report in 2009 that offered up
    recommendations to improve the program from an internal
    standpoint at OSHA.
        I do want to thank previous Secretary of Labor Dr. Michaels
    and Assistant Secretary Jordan Barab, because under their watch
    they implemented the changes that GAO recommended to improve
    and strengthen the program, and so I want to thank them for
    their support of VPP, and also for making the program better
    and validating that it is successful.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. Next, we will go to Mr.
    Grothman from Wisconsin.
        Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Give Andrew your expertise. In
    your written testimony, you say at the 150 Cintas sites are
    currently participating in the Voluntary Protection Program,
    making you the largest VPP participant by total number of
    worksites. Can you share any data or success stories showing
    how VPP has helped reduce injuries?
        Mr. Harper. Yes, sir. Thank you for your question. The VPP
    Program has tremendously helped Cintas in improving their
    employee engagement, their culture, and making sure everyone
    returns home safe at the end of the day.
        Building more of a great system that we have, our health
    and safety management system together, not just with one
    person, or one department, but with all employees there reduced
    our instant rates, as well as helped with partnering with other
    businesses outside of Cintas to help with our best practice of
    being able to implement within our four walls.
        It is rare that the answer is found just within our four
    walls, so partnering with other successful companies with great
    management systems has been a benefit for us.
        Mr. Grothman. Oh, just a plus, plus, plus. Okay. Mr. Sell,
    do you have anything to add to that or your experience?
        Mr. Sell. Well, certainly from the construction application
    since 2001 it has been extremely helpful because you know in
    construction we have our own set of issues, so it has addressed
    a lot of issues that we have had over the years with respect to
    working with OSHA. It has always been our desire to do that,
    and VPP has enabled that.
        I would like to add just kind of off topic for a second, we
    were talking about compliance assistance specialists, and I
    think it is good to know if just using Region 5, there is only
    four compliance assistance specialists, one in Ohio, three in
    Illinois, which also means none in Wisconsin, and I wish Ms.
    Stevens would still be here. It means there is none in Michigan
    either.
        There is a severe lack of that that we are not reaching out
    and partnering with employees, employers. Thank you.
        Mr. Grothman. Okay. I guess you kind of brought this up,
    but I will followup with a question anyway. How could OSHA
    better support industry-led safety initiatives and
    partnerships, rather than pursuing policies that appear more
    focused on headlines than really improving safety?
        Mr. Sell. Well, that is a great question, and it seems to
    be the hot topic currently. Clearly----
        Mr. Grothman. New day, new day.
        Mr. Sell. Love it. Certainly the 5 percent funding of
    Voluntary Protection Programs will be a step in the right
    direction, as well as getting these area offices their
    compliance assistance specialists back, so they can work with
    the people that want to improve health and safety in the lives
    of their workers and enable the businesses to grow.
        You know, we are all trying to grow in a way that is
    healthy, safe and smart, to provide workers, you know, a
    quality of life, and to provide this great country with a
    future.
        Mr. Grothman. Okay. Mr. Williams, I will finish up with
    you. Could you tell us how VPP helps your business improve
    safety without the threat of penalties or adversarial
    enforcement?
        Mr. Williams. I can certainly speak from the perspective of
    our 1,400 members of which more than half are current VPP
    sites. It is quite frankly a culture change. I come from a
    construction background, a construction kid, grew up with the
    industry, and my dad was a contractor.
        I have seen firsthand 30-40 years ago, when I was much
    younger and not gray, what safety culture was back in--I will
    call them the old days, the bad, old days. What VPP has from an
    effect standpoint is increased that T change in culture, where
    we move from there's acceptable risks to, we will not perform a
    task if it is not completely safe.
        We will work with our employees. We will ask our frontline
    workers what they need to function safely, to go home at the
    end of the day in the same or better condition in which they
    arrived. That culture change is a direct result of VPP, and the
    stringent requirements not just from the application and
    certification process, but every year at the annual self-
    evaluation.
        Every three to 5 years, with that audit when OSHA comes on
    that site with their SGEs, and they will pick apart that site,
    and our VPP sites, our members welcome that, they want that
    because that is an outside third-party audit that they are
    going to gain a better perspective than what they see on their
    own.
        There is that compliance portion of it, and the direct
    positive effect, not just from a business standpoint because
    safety pays, VPP works and saves, but also from an employee
    morale standpoint, and an employee well-being standpoint.
        Mr. Grothman. Can you give us an example of some of the
    negative grandstanding that you may have gotten in the past
    from OSHA, or that you are familiar with?
        Mr. Williams. I can tell you that there has been threats to
    the program from the standpoint of--it is usually from the
    enforcement. As I said earlier before, enforcement is always
    going to be a core function for the Occupational Safety and
    Health Administration. When you look at enforcement, and
    comments here today we have heard some of them.
        Enforcement inspections are similar to a speeding ticket.
    Police officer pulls you over, gives you the ticket, you go on
    your way. The short-term impact is very positive. You are most
    likely going to get a good look at--you are not going to speed,
    but over time you regress to going back over the speed limit,
    you are creating that hazard.
        Compliance assistance, education, from a speeding ticket
    standpoint going to a driver's ed course or remedial course to
    talk about the impact that someone speeding has on a victim of
    an accident that is caused by speeding, for example. The
    similar comparison with VPP compliance assistance. Compliance
    assistance goes over those other 363 days when the Inspector is
    not onsite and helps make that site safer.
        It is that long-term education and value component that
    prevents that fatality, prevents that catastrophic injury.
        Mr. Grothman. Okay. Thank you.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. That concludes questioning
    from members, and I want to thank all the members for
    participating today. With that, we are going to go to closing
    remarks, and I would like to recognize the Ranking Member for
    her closing statement.
        Ms. Omar. Thank you Chairman and thank you once again to
    all of our witnesses for speaking with us today. Today's
    discussion has made one thing abundantly clear. The future of
    workplace safety depends not on weakening protections, but on
    strengthening partnerships between OSHA, employers, and
    workers.
        Compliance assistance should be about empowering everyone
    to work together to identify hazards before they cause harm and
    not about providing loopholes that allow dangerous conditions
    to persist. We have seen--what we have seen from the Trump
    administration is a systematic effort to deregulate, defund and
    dismantle the very institutions that keep workers safe.
        The human cost of this deregulatory agenda will be
    devastating. From slashing capacity at NIOSH, to gutting OSHA
    enforcement, to zeroing out the Chemical Safety Board, this
    administration's reckless decisions would lead to more deaths,
    more injuries, and more families broken by preventable
    tragedies.
        We need strong enforceable standards, not voluntary
    programs that lack accountability or budget and staffing cuts
    that risk more worker lives. Good employers understand that
    safety is both a moral duty, and an essential for business
    success.
        The bills introduced by Ranking Member Scott, myself, and
    some of my other colleagues, like the Protecting American
    Workers Act, and the Heat Illness Prevention Act, offer
    practical solutions to close coverage gaps and strengthen
    enforcement, and address deadly risks like heat stress.
        As we conclude, I urge all members of this Committee to
    remember the stakes. Every regulation we weaken, every resource
    we cut, means more workers at risk of injury or death. Every
    worker deserves to return home safe and healthy, regardless of
    the industry or job.
        Let us commit to building safer workplace through robust
    standards, effective enforcement, and stronger partnerships,
    because no worker's life should ever be threatened as
    expendable. Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.
        Chairman Mackenzie. Thank you. I would like to thank all of
    our witnesses for joining us here today for this important
    conversation about ways that we can keep workers safe in their
    workplaces. Voluntarily Protection Programs can be one
    important component of workplace safety, and we heard in the
    testimony today about how we can actually prevent accidents
    before they occur by creating that culture for safety that
    exists throughout the entire year for workers, not just a
    snapshot in time when an enforcement official shows up for OSHA
    for a day or 2 days, and they get to see and experience what is
    going on in that workplace.
        I think again, we all want to have that preventative
    maintenance going on, that preventative safety, and I think
    Voluntary Protection Programs help aid and assist workers in
    having that culture of safety in their workplaces. We also had
    a broader discussion about the reforms that are going on at the
    Department of Labor.
        I think they are critically important because I think we
    saw during the last administration, the absolute failings of
    the Biden administration and democrats to hold them accountable
    for workplace safety. We saw that during the last
    administration in the spike of child labor violations that went
    on around this country, 100fold increases, multiple 100fold
    increases in child violations.
        All the regulations that they want to talk about, all the
    people that were at the Department of Labor during the last
    administration, they did nothing to keep children in this
    country safe. Absolutely nothing. To sit here and say that we
    need no reforms and no changes is absolutely absurd.
        We want to work hand in hand with the Trump administration
    to make sure that we are keeping workers safe in all
    environments, and that is what we are going to do. The
    administration is making critical reforms that are so
    important, and we are going to work with them as a legislative
    body to make sure that workers across this country are kept
    safe.
        Again, I cannot believe that we sit here and hear from the
    other side about how they want to keep workers safe in this
    country when they did nothing for years to keep those children
    safe in their workplaces. Absolutely nothing. That is an
    outrage, and it should be on the record that they did nothing.
    They said nothing, and now they want to sit here and try to
    take the moral high ground for workers.
        Absolutely absurd. With that, I would again like to thank
    our witnesses for being here today, I look forward to working
    with all of you, and everybody across the aisle in a bipartisan
    fashion, to find ways that we can keep workers safe in this
    country, whether it is in a voluntary fashion, or in a
    regulatory fashion. We all share that same goal, and I want to
    thank you again for being here. With that, this meeting is
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [Additional submissions from Chairman Mackenzie follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               [all]