OSHA Delays Enforcement Date For New Workplace Injury And Illness Reporting Rule

SS
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Contributor

With more than 900 lawyers across 18 offices, Seyfarth Shaw LLP provides advisory, litigation, and transactional legal services to clients worldwide. Our high-caliber legal representation and advanced delivery capabilities allow us to take on our clients’ unique challenges and opportunities-no matter the scale or complexity. Whether navigating complex litigation, negotiating transformational deals, or advising on cross-border projects, our attorneys achieve exceptional legal outcomes. Our drive for excellence leads us to seek out better ways to work with our clients and each other. We have been first-to-market on many legal service delivery innovations-and we continue to break new ground with our clients every day. This long history of excellence and innovation has created a culture with a sense of purpose and belonging for all. In turn, our culture drives our commitment to the growth of our clients, the diversity of our people, and the resilience of our workforce.
After a lawsuit was filed against OSHA challenging its May 2016 retaliation and recordkeeping rule, OSHA announced a three month delay in the rule's effective date.
United States Employment and HR
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Seyfarth Synopsis: After a lawsuit was filed against OSHA challenging its May 2016 retaliation and recordkeeping rule, OSHA announced a three month delay in the rule's effective date.

OSHA announced yesterday that it has delayed the effective date for enforcement of its new rule to Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses (Rule), 81 Fed. Reg. 29624 (May 12, 2016). "Originally scheduled to begin Aug. 10, 2016, enforcement will now begin Nov. 1, 2016."

We had blogged about the OSHA's new rule on drug-testing, retaliation claims, and accident reporting. Then in response to the new rule, and which we blogged yesterday, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and others brought a suit alleging that OSHA's new rule goes too far. TEXO ABC/AGC, et al. v. Thomas, et al., No. 3:16-CV-1998 (N.D. TX July 8, 2016).

In its announcement, OSHA claims that it is delaying enforcement of the anti-retaliation provisions "to conduct additional outreach and provide educational materials and guidance for employers." No mention is made of the lawsuit, but obviously the timing of OSHA's announced delay on the heels of the lawsuit is curious.

In the TEXO ABC/AGC lawsuit, the complainant alleges that OSHA is "putting a target on nearly every manufacturer in this country by moving this regulation forward. Not only does OSHA lack statutory authority to enforce this rule, but the agency has also failed to recognize the infeasibility, costs and real-world impacts of what it preposterously suggests is just a mere tweak to a major regulation."

The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment finding that the rule is unlawful to the extent that it prohibits or otherwise limits incident-based employer safety incentive programs and routine mandatory post-accident drug testing programs.

We will keep you updated as this issue develops.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More