Can your boss force you to work under a searing sun producing unhealthy heat levels or through the caustic smoke caused by any wildfires?

Many workers are so desperate for work that they may forgo workplace safety or remain silent about such issues.

According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, thousands of people become sick from occupational heat exposure every year; some of those cases end in fatalities.

“Most outdoor fatalities, 50 percent to 70 percent, occur in the first few days of working in warm or hot environments because the body needs to build a tolerance to the heat gradually over time,” OSHA‘s website states. “The process of building tolerance is called heat acclimatization. Lack of acclimatization represents a major risk factor for fatal outcomes.

“Occupational risk factors for heat illness include heavy physical activity, warm or hot environmental conditions, lack of acclimatization, and wearing clothing that holds in body heat.”

Here’s what workers need to know if supervisors try to force you to work through a heat wave or other hazardous weather conditions.

Can my boss force me to work through a heat wave?

There is��no specific federal temperature cutoff��at which OSHA says employers must send everyone home during a heat wave.

According to OSHA, only California, Colorado, Minnesota,��Oregon��and Washington have specific heat‑safety standards for workers. Several other states have heat guidance plans, which are not codified into law.

OSHA does identify which professions are most susceptible to heat-related illnesses — outdoor ones include construction (especially roadwork and similar work), roofing, and landscaping; indoor ones include electrical utilities, manufacturing, and warehousing.

So, your boss can make you work in hot weather, but they aren’t allowed to do it without basic protections when conditions are clearly dangerous.

What if the air is full of wildfire smoke?

For most, workers still rely on federal OSHA’s general “don’t expose people to serious hazards” rule — which usually means your boss can keep you on the schedule during smoky or sweltering days. However, your boss is supposed to monitor conditions, reduce your exposure where possible and provide appropriate protective gear.

When to report unsafe work conditions to OSHA

You can file a confidential complaint��to OSHA online any time you believe working conditions are unsafe or unhealthful��or that your employer is not following OSHA standards.

That includes serious heat or smoke situations where your employer is not providing basics like water, rest, shade or appropriate protective gear, or is ignoring symptoms that are being reported by workers.

OSHA does suggest workers raise the issue internally first to your supervisor, HR department or union, and document what’s happening. If nothing changes, you can then file a complaint.

Editor’s notes: This article first appeared in the Delaware News Journal and then was distributed on the USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect.

Also, workers can learn more about Oregon OSHA rules and guidelines concerning heat illness prevention by calling 503-378-3272 or visiting https://osha.oregon.gov/.

The post Beware of work in dangerous heat or harmful air appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By Chuck Slothower and Ethan Duran
91��Ƶ

The incoming Trump administration will have the opportunity to loosen environmental regulations affecting construction and real estate development, including draft rules not finalized by President Joe Biden before leaving office.��

Environmental regulation receded to the background of the 2024 election, overshadowed by top voter concerns such as the economy and inflation, immigration and social issues. But industry insiders expect a looser regulatory environment in the second Trump administration, which will bring both positives and potential negatives, consultants said.��

Construction executives and superintendents are watching for action on the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s proposed heat rule. In July, OSHA proposed a rule to protect 36 million workers at risk of heat injury, illness or death in the workplace. It has not gone into law.��

“Working in the heat is a big consideration for construction workers,” said Christopher Ward, a construction risk management consultant for K2 Integrity in New York City. “It’s hard for them to take breaks — they have schedules and deadlines.”��

While business groups generally favor lighter regulation, Ward said whipsawing federal rules can prove to be a larger problem.��

“Particularly in construction, a lot of these projects they take a long time to plan, a long time to design, a long time to engage with stake holders,” Ward said.��

He pointed to the Gateway rail program linking New York and New Jersey, which soon will reach into its fourth presidential administration.��

Consistent standards help contractors price their bids, Ward added. “I think it’s hard, then, when things change a lot,” he said.��

The OSHA heat rule was devised in collaboration with industry stakeholders, Ward said. “Seeing that emerge was encouraging,” he said.��

President-elect Trump is widely expected to roll back the heat rule.

“Given the anti-regulatory orientation of a second Trump administration OSHA, we anticipate OSHA bringing the heat illness rule-making process to a screeching halt,” wrote Seyfarth Shaw LLP attorneys Matthew A. Sloan, Daniel R. Birnbaum and Adam R. Young in a December blog post.��

The proposed rule would require employers to develop an injury and illness prevention plan to mitigate excessive heat hazards. Employers would be required to evaluate heat risks and, when necessary, implement requirements for drinking water, breaks and control of indoor heat. It would also require a plan to protect new or returning workers unaccustomed to working in high heat.��

The rule would be triggered when employees are exposed to temperatures of 80 degrees or more for more than 15 minutes in any given 60-minute period.��

The proposed rule comes as summers grow hotter. Scientists expect 2024 will be the hottest year on record globally, and intense heat has come to more unlikely regions, including the 2021 heat dome in the Pacific Northwest that shattered records, caused at least two highways to buckle and shut down Portland’s TriMet MAX train system.��

The public comment period for the heat rule ended Dec. 30, and Biden may not have time to publish the rule before Trump takes office on Jan. 20, 2025, the Seyfarth Shaw attorneys wrote.��

More broadly, the construction industry is optimistic about accelerating pre-construction environmental reviews, including remediation projects, said Brian Turmail, the vice president of public affairs and workforce for the Associated General Contractors of America.��

“The Biden administration made some historic investments in infrastructure and construction projects,” Turmail said. “The irony is a lot of those projects won’t begin until the Trump administration, because the administration didn’t act on some of the environmental streamlining measures that Congress enacted during the Biden administration.”��

The measures wouldn’t have changed the standard for what passed environmental reviews but would have moved plans along faster, Turmail noted.��

While the Biden administration made many funding announcements for highway and bridge projects, those jobs will likely be stuck in red tape for the next year or two, Turmail said. He pointed to the Brent Spence bridge between Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky, still under the review process.��

“When I worked at the Department of Transportation we were doing news conferences in front of the Brent Spence bridge in 2004 about the need to replace it,” Turmail said recently. “Here we are, it’s almost 2025.”��

Energy efficiency programs, such as Energy Star, are likely to endure, said Chris Fisher, a managing principal at consultant Ducker Carlisle.��

“(Programs) are multiyear in development,” Fisher said. “It would be very difficult for the new administration to come in and drastically change something. It wouldn’t create a more favorable environment. And the process of improving environmental outcomes in the construction industry often takes time, because you’re trying to create change of either buyer behavior, design behaviors, specification or installation behaviors. All of which takes significant amounts of education, testing and training.”

The post Construction industry prepares for regulatory changes appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By Dan Heilman
91��Ƶ Newswires

Rule changes proposed by the U.S. Department of Labor would seek to clarify the personal protective equipment (PPE) standard for the construction industry. The proposed change would clarify that PPE must fit each employee properly to protect them from occupational hazards.

As it now stands, the standard does not state clearly that PPE must fit each affected employee properly — as general industry and maritime standards from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) do.

The proposed rule clarifies the existing requirement, which states that protective equipment “shall be provided, used, and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition wherever it is necessary.”

Local observers applauded the proposed changes with some reservations. While the Labor Department says that OSHA does not expect the change to increase employers’ costs or compliance burdens, Polly Friendshuh, academic dean of construction sciences and business with Dunwoody Institute, wonders how that’s possible.

“As a woman who has worked in the field, I can say that having better-fitting equipment would be huge,” she said. “But looking at the flip side, I can see the economics of it. For owners, there’s an added cost, including manufacturing. You can’t eliminate those things. There are some unintended consequences to the proposal.”

OSHA’s cost analysis of the proposal said that the one-time cost of it to the construction industry, attributable to potential changes in employer behavior, would be around $545,000.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, of the approximately 7.7 million people employed in the U.S. construction industry, about 14% are female. An announcement of the proposed revisions noted that failure of standard-sized PPE to protect physically smaller workers properly, as well as problems with access to properly fitting PPE, have long been a source of safety and health concerns.

“The choice of PPE is as important as how the PPE fits,” said Matt Semerad, director of safety services and education at Associated General Contractors of Minnesota. “Much of the equipment that we bring to the job site for personal protection, if it doesn’t fit correctly, it doesn’t protect the employee.”

One potential hang-up pointed to by Semerad is enforcement of any new rules. The Construction Industry Safety Coalition has noted in the past that in many cases, whether PPE properly fits would be hard for employers to assess.

“[T]he subjective nature of this standard would greatly increase the potential for enforcement actions without giving employers fair notice of what is required,” CISC wrote to OSHA in 2017.

“As I read the proposal, I think of not only gloves, but also respiratory protection, hearing protection, hard hats and safety vests,” said Semerad. “There are different degrees of severity among violations, and I don’t know how they’ll be punished.”

Semerad said he couldn’t cite figures reflecting how often poorly fitting equipment leads to injuries but could anecdotally recall such instances from his days on the job.

Likewise, Friendshuh said that at least once her ears were rubbed raw by an ill-fitting hard hat, to the point where one employer special-ordered a hat that would fit her.

“I know that when I would show up at a shop, they would have mainly medium, large and XL,” she said. “People come in so many different shapes and sizes. You’re less apt to wear equipment that doesn’t fit right.”

Despite misgivings about the details, Semerad said he supports the proposed changes.

“It’s important that we look at this thing,” he said. “I’ve seen video of people with loose safety vests getting caught in machinery, which is terrifying. It should be acknowledged that safety equipment that doesn’t fit properly can create a hazard. I’m on board with it; I’m just not sure exactly how it’s going to pan out.”

Those concerned have until Sept. 18 to submit comments and hearing requests via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, and are asked to refer to Docket No. OSHA-2019-0003 l. The entire proposal can be seen at .

“We look forward to hearing from stakeholders on this issue as we ensure that construction workers of all genders and sizes are fitted properly with safety gear,” stated Doug Parker, assistant secretary for occupational safety and health at the Labor Department.

The post Proposed rule change could bring better fits for construction PPE appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Violating Occupational Safety and Health Administration rules will come at a higher cost now that the Department of Labor has increased fines. The newly increased penalties went into effect on Tuesday.

OSHA‘s maximum penalties increased from $14,502 per violation to $15,625 per violation for serious and other-than-serious violations, the DOL stated. Penalties for failing to abate increased to $15,625 per day beyond the abatement rate from $14,502. The maximum penalty for purposeful or repeated violations rose from $145,027 per violation to $156,259 per violation.

Minimum fines for willful violation increased from $10,360 to $11,162, according to the final rule of federal civil penalties adjusted for the cost of living in 2023.

Legislation that Congress passed in 2015 required agencies to publish “catch-up” rules that increase civil fines and adjust for inflation by Jan. 15 every year, officials stated.

“In 2015, Congress passed the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act to advance the effectiveness of civil monetary penalties and to maintain their deterrent effect,” OSHA stated. “Under the Act, agencies are required to publish “catch-up” rules that adjust the level of civil monetary penalties and make subsequent annual adjustments for inflation no later than January 15 of each year.”

Because the date this year fell on Sunday and Monday was a federal holiday, officials launched fine increases on Tuesday.

The post Federal OSHA increases penalty amounts appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

SNOHOMISH, Wash. (AP) — The owner of a Washington state framing company is facing nearly $400,000 in fines for allegedly allowing crew members to work high above the ground without fall protection, according to the state Department of Labor and Industries.

Genesis Framing Construction owner Cecilio Solorio faces the fines for nine violations, The Daily Herald reported. Solorio told the newspaper he will appeal.

Solorio has been cited and fined for the same violation 15 other times in the past, according to the Labor and Industries Department.

When the agency reviewed Snohomish-based Genesis Framing’s inspection history, it found Solorio had previous willful and repeat fall protection violations for two other businesses he operates: Chilos Builders and Solorio’s Framing.

Thirty workers employed by those businesses were hurt from 2016 to 2020, the agency reported in 2020.

Inspectors who visited a worksite at a Seattle home in August found a worker using a handmade scaffold and another employee walking on a steep roof without fall protection while a foreman watched, among other problems, the agency said.

“Business owners like Mr. Solorio, who knowingly and repeatedly put workers at risk, are the reason Labor & Industries focuses greater scrutiny on severe and repeat violators,” said Craig Blackwood, assistant director for the agency’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health.

In the most severe cases, repeat violators can be referred to the state prosecuting attorney for criminal charges.

The post Contractor fined $400K for repeat fall protection violations appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon OSHA has fined Beaverton-based ATC Construction LLC $42,520 for violating multiple job safety standards during a residential roofing project. The willful violation of allowing workers’ exposure to potential falls that could seriously injure or kill them was a repeat offense.

The citation resulted from an inspection Oregon OSHA launched in response to a complaint about work at a Tigard multistory house where ATC Construction was a subcontractor. The inspection found that over the course of two days no fall protection was used against potential falls to the ground of at least 10 feet while workers were in plain view of ATC Construction’s on-site supervisor and owner. In one instance, an employee was allowed to wear a fall protection harness that the employer knew was not connected to the personal fall arrest system, according to the Oregon OSHA inspection.

This was the second time since September 2021 that ATC Construction violated the same fall protection standard, Oregon OSHA stated.

“Getting the job done and following clear and time-tested safety standards are not mutually exclusive activities,” Oregon OSHA administrator Renee Stapleton stated in a press release. “Employees have a right to a safe workplace, and employers must provide it. That includes making sure fall protection systems are in place and in use when employees are expected to work at heights. Knowingly allowing employees to perform such work with no safeguards is indefensible.”

In addition to the $40,625 penalty for failure to implement a fall protection system when employees are exposed to a potential fall of 6 feet or more, ATC Construction was fined: $185 for failure to protect employees from tripping in, or stepping into or through skylights, $935 for use of a ladder to reach a roof without at least three feet of side-rail extended past the upper landing, $375 for failure to provide workers appropriate eye or face protection during work involving a nail gun (a repeat violation), $200 for failure to prepare a written record of fall protection training for workers (a repeat violation), and $200 for failure to document, make available and keep for three years a written record of certain safety meetings (a repeat violation).

Under Oregon OSHA’s rules, penalties multiply when employers commit repeat offenses. The citation given to ATC Construction included a standard penalty reduction based on the company’s small size.

A voicemail left with ATC Construction requesting comment on the citation was not immediately returned. The company is eligible to appeal within 30 days of receiving the citation.

The post Beaverton-based contractor fined for safety violations appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Responding to a steep increase in deaths from trenching accidents, federal officials are planning to go after negligent contractors with referrals for criminal prosecutions and other increased penalties.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration also announced last week that it will conduct more than 1,000 inspections of excavation sites throughout the U.S. States like Oregon that run their own OSHA agencies will also be encouraged to review the penalties they have at their disposal and consider referring negligent contractors for criminal prosecution.

OSHA said in a release Thursday that the enforcement plans are coming in response to a 68 percent increase in the number of deaths from trenching accidents in the first half of 2022. Twenty-two people died in such accidents in the first half of this year. The total for all of 2021 was 15.

“Every one of these tragedies could have been prevented had employers complied with OSHA standards,” said Doug Parker, assistant secretary for occupational health and safety, in a statement. “There simply is no excuse for ignoring safety requirements to prevent trench collapses and cave-ins, and leaving families, friends and co-workers to grieve when the solutions are so well-understood.”

A cubic yard of soil weighs as much as a small car

According to some estimates, a single cubic yard of soil can weigh as much as 3,000 pounds, equal to the weight of a compact car. OSHA’s trenching standards require protective systems to be installed in any trench deeper than 5 feet and that soil and other materials be kept at least 2 feet from the edge of a trench. Additionally, trenches must be inspected, be kept free of standing water and atmospheric hazards and offer a safe means of entrance and exit.

The post OSHA responds to increase in trench deaths with call for criminal referrals appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Oregon Occupational Health and Safety Administration will hold public hearings about the new excessive heat and wildfire smoke rules currently proposed.

At the start of the month, OSHA released the final draft rules on the excessive heat and wildfire smoke. The rules are now within the public comment period that will close on March 18.

Public hearing dates are:

• ; and
• .

During the upcoming hearings, a coalition that includes the Oregon AFL-CIO, Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste, The Oregon Environmental Council, Northwest Workers’ Justice Project, and Climate Jobs PDX will testify on the changes they want to see made to the final sets of rules.

Among removing loopholes in the rules, the coalition would like to set the trigger for the respirator requirement at an Air Quality Index of 201 instead 250, as well as the removal for the ��exemptions when the work is considered “light.” It would also like to close a loophole for protecting workers from excessive heat in farmworker housing so that all farmworkers are well protected.

The post Oregon OSHA to host excessive heat, wildfire smoke rules public hearings appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon OSHA has fined Seaside-based contractor Synergy Construction Group more than $15,000 for violating job safety standards during a residential roofing project. All three violations were repeat offenses, including one that exposed workers to potential falls that could seriously injure or kill them.

The citation stems from an inspection the division launched in response to a complaint about a lack of fall protection for employees at a multi-story house in Seaside.

The inspection found two employees working on the roof with no protection against potential falls to the ground of up to 22 feet. It was a violation of a basic fall protection rule requiring employers to implement protective systems – such as a personal fall restraint system – when employees are exposed to a hazard of falling six feet or more to a lower level. This is the fourth time Synergy Construction Group has violated the standard since February 2020, according to a news release from the Oregon Department of Consumer & Business Services.

“Repeatedly violating workplace safety standards – standards that are proven to protect workers against fall hazards – serves only one purpose: to increase the risk to employees of serious harm or death,” said Julie Love, interim administrator for Oregon OSHA, in the release. “And there is absolutely no excuse for it.”

Oregon OSHA cited Synergy Construction Group for the following violations and proposed penalties totaling $15,850: Failure to provide fall protection systems where workers were exposed to a hazard of falling six feet or more to a lower level, with a total proposed penalty of $15,000; failure to provide documentation of fall protection training for the employees doing the roofing job, carrying a proposed penalty of $500; and failure to document, make available, and maintain for three years a written record of safety meetings addressing such issues as hazards related to tools, equipment, the work environment, and unsafe work practices, carrying a proposed penalty of $350.

Under Oregon OSHA’s rules, penalties multiply when employers commit repeat offenses. The citation issued against Synergy Construction Group included a standard penalty reduction based on the small size of the company. Synergy has appealed the citation.

The post OSHA cites contractor for jobsite safety violations appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By Nate Beck
91��Ƶ Newswires

Federal officials are requiring contractors and subcontractors to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Dec. 8 under a mandate President Joe Biden issued in early September.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration last week issued guidance for contractors after Biden signed an executive order on Sept. 9 requiring all executive branch workers to get the vaccine, including contractors. OSHA‘s memo stipulates that employees of contractors must be fully vaccinated to do business with the federal government, except in “limited cases” where an employee can legally claim an exemption.

OSHA’s guidance requires federal agencies to include a clause in contracts requiring employees of firms competing for work to be vaccinated — a stipulation that could begin to appear in bid solicitations as soon as Oct. 15. The agency is implementing the requirement through its Emergency Temporary Standard, or ETS, process, which allows OSHA to bypass its own lengthy rulemaking process. The rules would apply to firms with more than 100 employees.

Jason Miller, deputy director for management of the Office of Management and Budget, said in a statement last week that the new rules are aimed at getting more people vaccinated. Miller said the requirement would “decrease worker absence, reduce labor costs, and improve the efficiency of contractors and subcontractors performing work for the federal government.”

The Associated Builders and Contractors, a mostly nonunion trade group, said while it encourages contractors and their employees to get vaccinated, the new requirement would exacerbate a skilled workforce shortage in the industry and lead to compliance costs for companies.

In a statement Monday, Ben Brubeck, ABC National’s vice president of regulatory, labor and state affairs, called the new rules the “most far-reaching standard” ever issued by OSHA. The trade group this week sent a letter to OSHA officials asking the agency to seek input and consider questions before issuing its ETS.

“Despite the efforts of a range of stakeholders, vaccine hesitancy remains an ongoing, complicated reality in countless industries,” Brubeck said. “How the ETS is crafted will have significant, lasting impacts by driving workers away from larger firms and disrupting construction projects without raising the vaccination rate.”

According to guidance from OSHA’s Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, contractors will be required to collect documentation showing their workers are vaccinated — whether or not an employee works remotely. The guidance also leaves it up to contractors to determine if an employee’s request for an exemption from the rules is legitimate.

Firms must designate a coordinator to oversee compliance with OSHA’s mandates.

“The contractor is responsible for considering, and dispositioning, such requests for accommodations regardless of the covered contractor employee’s place of performance,” according to the memo.

Contractors may be able to claim a limited, 60-day exemption for showing their workers are fully vaccinated if an agency has an “urgent mission-critical need” for employees to work on a particular project.

OSHA’s guidance also requires federal contractors to follow masking rules in areas with high transmission of COVID-19 — including requiring workers to wear masks indoors and practice social distancing.

Federal officials are expected to publish the clause requiring vaccines by Oct. 8. OSHA’s guidance directs agencies to begin including the clause in bid solicitations beginning Oct. 15, and include the language in contracts issued after that date.

The post OSHA requires federal contractors, subs to be fully vaccinated by Dec. 8 appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.