Republicans Hold
Government Hostage
Over Ergonomics Standard
UE News, November 2000
By David Kotelchuck
Remember just a few years ago when Rep. Newt Gingrich (R.,
Ga.) threatened to shut down the U.S. government unless he got his way. During
the recent election, the Republicans said in many different ways that it
realized this was a mistake and they wouldn’t try to do this again.
Well, they just have. Just a week before the November
election, Republican Congressional leaders scuttled an agreement to pass the
federal budget for the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services (HSS)
for fiscal year 2001. The reason: They wanted to prevent the federal
government from enacting an ergonomics standard to protect workers from
repetitive strain injuries on the job.
And so the Congressional Republican leadership is willing to
shut down a major part of the U.S. government in order to block such a
standard. As a result Congress is going to have to convene a lame-duck session
after the elections, and try again to pass this budget.
This is how the legislative impasse came about. Earlier this
year the House and Senate passed the FY2001 Labor-HSS Appropriations bill, but
with an amendment prohibiting OSHA from issuing its final ergonomics standard
for yet another year. This was done despite major studies by NIOSH and the
National Academy of Sciences showing that musculoskeletal disorders in
workers, such as back injuries and carpal tunnel syndrome, are caused by
ergonomic hazards at work. (See UE NEWS,
October, 1998.) President Clinton promised to veto this anti-worker budget
measure.
DOUBLE-CROSS
On Sunday, Oct. 31, negotiators from the White House and
Republican and Democratic Congressional Appropriations leaders agreed to a
compromise that would have permitted OSHA to issue the final standard, but
would have delayed enforcement and compliance requirements until June 1, 2001.
This agreement would allow the Clinton Administration to act, but would give
the next Administration the opportunity to make a determination if the rule
should be implemented. The AFL-CIO would have preferred no rider, but agreed
to this compromise since it would make the standard a matter of record, and
put the burden on the next Administration to modify or withdraw it, according
to AFL-CIO Health and Safety Director Margaret Seminario.
But the next day, President Clinton was informed that
Congressional leaders, at the behest of Rep. Tom Delay (R., Texas), the
right-wing majority whip, refused to stand by the agreement. The lame duck
session is now planned for December.
STANDARD IMPLEMENTED
Meanwhile, the Administration, living up to its promise to
labor leaders, implemented the ergonomics standard on its own on Monday, Nov.
13. This standard is very similar to the one the Administration announced on
Nov. 22, 1999 (UE NEWS,
December 1999).
The standard is a very moderate one. "What it basically requires is that when a plant has an ergonomics hazard and a musculoskeletal injury is
reported, the employer must enact an ergonomic program.
This is what OSHA requires of any employer ergonomics program:
-
Management leadership
— Establish a system to report and respond to signs and symptons of
musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).
-
Employee participation
— Workers must have access to information about the program, and input
in developing, implementing and evaluating all program elements.
-
Job hazard analysis controls
— Employers must uncover and eliminate or reduce all ergonomics hazards.
-
Worker training —
Employers must provide initial and then periodic training to all affected
employees (at least once every three years).
-
MSD management —
Employers must provide access to a health-care professional for injured
workers, and maintain workers’ pay while on work restriction.
-
Program evaluation and review
— Programs must be evaluated and reviewed at least once every three
years.
It doesn’t tell management what kind of a reporting system
it must develop. It doesn’t tell them how many hours of training affected
workers must receive, or what the content of the training must be. And it
doesn’t tell them how workers must be involved in planning, just that
workers must in some way be involved.
BOSS ENRAGED, WORKERS MAIMED
Does this sound as if government is trying to run a plant from
Washington? Hardly! Yet on Nov. 8, the Wall Street Journal headlined
its article on the standard: "New OSHA Proposal Enrages Business."
This is about an ergonomics proposal that doesn’t even cover workers using
computers unless someone both suffers and reports their injury!
This is what the UE NEWS said about the ergonomics
standard a year ago:
"...we can expect no-holds-barred employer opposition to
continue, aided by their Congressional allies. They don’t want to see this
standard become law, even with its obvious limitations and limited worker
coverage. Labor and its allies will have to fight hard to protect what is good
about the proposed standard and expand its coverage to all affected
workers." (UE NEWS,
December 1999.)
This is as true after the standard has been enacted as before.
Editor's Note: This article has been
altered slightly from the version which appeared in print. This version
clarifies when an employer would have to enact an ergonomics program.
