[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 52 (Thursday, April 15, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E661]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E661]]



                   INTRODUCTION OF OSHA REFORM BILLS

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. CASS BALLENGER

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 15, 1999

  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing five bills, each 
targeted specifically to a needed reform of the Occupational Safety and 
Health Act.
  Over the past several years, we have made progress in redirecting and 
refocusing OSHA, from an agency that was too often focused on 
enforcement ``for enforcement's sake'' to one that has begun to 
recognize the importance and effectiveness of cooperative efforts and 
consultation programs, and of encouraging the voluntary efforts of 
employers and employees.
  When we began this effort, the Clinton administration claimed that 
any change in OSHA's focus on enforcement would lead directly to 
increased injuries and deaths. In fact, just the opposite has occurred. 
The Department of Labor has reported in recent months that both 
workplace fatalities and workplace injury rates have again declined and 
are at the lowest levels since those records have been maintained. 
Those record low levels have been achieved even though we are the midst 
of a tight job market, a time in which, historically, injury rates 
increased.
  My goal is to continue to push for changes that will further reduce 
injuries and fatalities by encouraging voluntary action and cooperative 
approaches. Where regulation and enforcement is imposed, it should be 
fair and the benefits should justify the costs. Unfortunately, there 
are still far too many instances in which OSHA's enforcement and 
regulation is neither.
  The five bills that I am introducing cover the following areas. I 
welcome my colleagues' support for these bills.
  Audit Protection: Safety and health audits are an important aspect of 
a company's efforts to ensure that their workplaces are safe. Most 
employers, particularly in hazardous industries, do some type of safety 
and health audit. Those with good lawyers then either destroy the 
records or disclose it only to their lawyers, neither of which is the 
most effective way to improve safety and health. The reason companies 
do so is that OSHA inspectors routinely use the audit to penalize the 
employer. OSHA's enforcement policy is counterproductive to employee 
health and safety. I believe we should encourage employers to conduct 
audits, not discourage them. My bill provides limited protection for 
audits, and at the same time, encourages employers to conduct audits 
and to fix the hazards found during those audits.
  Whistleblower Protection: The OSH Act provides important legal 
protection for employees who raise concerns about safety or health 
hazards. However, the current process for handling those complaints is 
neither effective nor fair. Complainants sometimes wait years for the 
Department of Labor to decide whether to seek relief in court. I am 
proposing that the OSH Act be amended to provide an administrative 
private right of action so that the complainant is assured opportunity 
for an administrative hearing and timely decision. Encouraging safety 
and health audits and assuring timely adjudication of whistleblower 
complaints by employees are important steps that Congress must take to 
support and encourage voluntary safety and health efforts by employers 
and employees.
  Safety Meetings: As a result of a December 1998 decision by the 
National Labor Relations Board, employee safety committee are illegal, 
except: (1) where a union is involved and the safety committee is 
negotiated with the union, or (2) the safety committee has no real 
responsibility for safety and health. For years we have argued over 
what employee involvement the law allows or does not allow. At least 
now, in the area of safety, it is clear that, for most workplaces, 
current law permits very little employee involvement. It is time to fix 
the law. My bill addresses only safely committees; it does not open up 
the National Labor Relations Act. It would allow employees to 
participate, through safety committees, in evaluating safety conditions 
and safety rules and policies--responsibilities that are now prohibited 
in the majority of workplaces.
  Rulemaking Reform: In my view, a relatively simple reform would make 
OSHA standards-setting more fair and lead to more practical regulation. 
When OSHA proposes a standard, it should clearly indicate which 
industries will be regulated, and its risk assessments and cost 
analysis regarding the standard should relate specifically to those 
industries. Neither of these steps is new. OSHA has identified specific 
industries in some rulemakings, and the courts have frequently required 
OSHA to reconsider standards because it failed to conduct ``industry 
specific'' analyses. Putting these changes in statute will ensure that 
both are consistently part of the rulemaking procedure, thereby 
providing greater fairness in future OSHA rulemakings.
  SBREFA Implementation: The 1996 Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Act (SBREFA) required all federal regulatory agencies to establish 
policies to provide for reduction and waiver of penalties for non-
serious violations by small employers. OSHA has maintained that its 
existing penalty policy was an adequate response. However, the existing 
policy allows a maximum 35 percent reduction for most small businesses, 
and conditions even that reduction on meeting additional, non-
regulatory requirements. My legislation will direct OSHA to adopt a 
specific waiver of penalties policy for non-serious violations, if 
those violations are corrected within a timeframe set by OSHA.

                          ____________________