{"id":2854,"date":"2018-02-15T08:30:19","date_gmt":"2018-02-15T13:30:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jordanbarab.com\/confinedspace\/?p=2854"},"modified":"2022-02-23T13:07:43","modified_gmt":"2022-02-23T18:07:43","slug":"trumps-budget-undermines-worker-safety","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jordanbarab.com\/confinedspace\/2018\/02\/15\/trumps-budget-undermines-worker-safety\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump’s Worker Safety & Health Budget Again Undermines Worker Safety & Health"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Budget\"Earlier this week, President Trump submitted his Fiscal Year 2019 budget proposa<\/a>l. This is his second budget proposal and although it leaves OSHA’s budget fairly flat, it once again proposes to slash or eliminate important safety and health programs and agencies.\u00a0 And this is Trump’s second OSHA budget that has been proposed with no Assistant Secretary yet in residence.\u00a0 Scott Mugno’s nomination continues to languish in the Senate.<\/span><\/p>\n

First, the good news. With one major exception (see below), OSHA\u2019s budget<\/a> would remain mostly level– with a small $5.1 million (2.4% and 42 full time employees) increase over FY 2017 in the enforcement budget, as well as a small $3 million (4.2%) increase in compliance assistance — mostly to add Compliance Assistance Specialists who had been cut in previous years due to budget limitations, and an addition of eight staff to work exclusively on the Voluntary Protection Programs.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, in addition to trying once again to eliminate the Susan Harwood Training Grant Program and the Chemical Safety Board, the administration’s proposal also eliminates two OSHA Advisory Committees dealing with whistleblower protections and federal employee safety and health.<\/p>\n

Harwood and the Chemical Safety Board: Deja Vu All Over Again<\/b><\/h2>\n

In what can only be characterized as the triumph of hope over experience, the Trump administration has yet again proposed the elimination<\/a> of OSHA\u2019s <\/span>Susan Harwood Worker Training Program<\/b> and the independent <\/span>Chemical Safety Board<\/b> — two proposals that had about as much lift as a Butterball Turkey when the administration floated these ideas in its FY 2018 budget.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now this budget is not necessarily bad news for us bloggers. I mean, I don\u2019t have to write any new stories about how terrible the elimination of the Susan Harwood Worker Training Program would be for the safety of workers — especially vulnerable workers like the mostly immigrant day-laborers who have been rebuilding Houston after Hurricane Harvey. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

And I don\u2019t have to write much new about how pointless the elimination of the Chemical Safety Board would be for chemical plant safety — and the safety of workers at the plants and communities surrounding the plants. <\/span><\/p>\n

Because you, good readers, already know all of that. But perhaps more important, Congress already knows that. Certainly both the House and the Senate understand the importance of the Chemical Safety Board as they displayed when the relevant Appropriations bills in both houses voted to keep the CSB fully funded in the 2018 budget after the Trump administration recommended its elimination.<\/span><\/p>\n

Similarly, after being sentenced to death in the Trump administration\u2019s 2018 budget proposal (and in the House of Representatives\u2019 Labor appropriations bill), the Senate Appropriations committee voted on a bipartisan basis to ignore the Administration\u2019s proposal (and the House bill) and maintain the program.<\/span><\/p>\n

CSB and Harwood: There\u2019s no education from the second kick of a mule.<\/strong> <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But these guys aren\u2019t only irresponsible and just plain wrong; they\u2019re also lazy. You\u2019d think that after failing last year to eliminate these programs, they\u2019d at least come up with some new and improved justifications. But no. As in 2018, the 2019 budget erroneously justifies the elimination of the Harwood program on an alleged lack of \u201cevidence that the program is effective.\u201d\u00a0<\/span>And they again incorrectly justify the CSB\u2019s elimination on the the \u2018relative duplicative nature of its work,\u201d presumably assuming that the CSB duplicates the efforts of OSHA and the Environmental Protection Agency. <\/span><\/p>\n

The CSB, however, is not discouraged. Being an independent agency, they submitted their own $12.1 million budget request to keep the agency open. The board is currently conducting nine open investigations<\/a>: Red Mountain Operating, Arkema Inc., Didion Milling Inc., Midland Resource Recovery, Loy Lange Box Co., Packaging Corporation of America, Sunoco Logistics Partners LP, Enterprise Products Partners LP and DuPont.<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019m not going to waste scarce electrons or your valuable time explaining again why these justifications are — to put it mildly — bogus. If you want to re-read what I wrote last here about these proposals, you can start here<\/a>. \u00a0(Here is much more on the importance of the Chemical Safety Board<\/a> and the Harwood Grants.<\/a>) And I’m sure we’ll be writing more about the importance of these programs in the near future.<\/span><\/p>\n

There\u2019s a saying that there\u2019s no education from the second kick of a mule. \u00a0With a little lobbying and common sense, we can only hope that the Trump administration will get to witness that phenomenon with its 2019 workplace safety and health budget.<\/span><\/p>\n

Compliance Assistance and OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program<\/h2>\n

OSHA’s federal compliance assistance budget is slated for a 4.2% increase which will include 8 employees fully dedicated to the Voluntary Protection Program and 24 Compliance Assistance Specialists (CAS).\u00a0 OSHA once had a CAS in every one of its 70 Area Offices, but budget cuts and the hiring freeze had cut those numbers significantly.<\/p>\n

VPP, established in\u00a01982 to recognize workplaces with exemplary safety and health management systems, has always been a favorite program of Republican administrations. As we’ve discussed, however, the program has faced significant integrity and funding issues<\/a> over the past several years. Trump’s OSHA has held two stakeholder meetings to discuss problems with the program and although the outcome of those meetings have never been released by OSHA, the agency is doubling down on VPP growth. According to OSHA’s Congressional Budget Justification<\/a>,\u00a0 “with the addition of 24 CAS and 8 VPP staff, OSHA anticipates approving 155 new VPP sites and re-approving 395 sites in FY 2019.”<\/p>\n

One notable change in the Trump budget from previous budgets is the total omission of a focus in its compliance assistance program on vulnerable workers<\/strong>,\u00a0such as day laborers,\u00a0 temporary workers and workers with limited English proficiency who often work in high hazard industries and are difficult for OSHA to reach. It is a common myth that the Obama administration focused totally on enforcement to the neglect of compliance assistance. The truth is that the Obama administration conducted a major compliance assistance program, but instead of focusing exclusively on assistance for employers, the Obama administration focused compliance assistance resources on helping vulnerable workers. OSHA’s CBJ doesn’t even mention vulnerable workers or working with labor unions in its Compliance Assistance section, focusing exclusively on\u00a0broadening “its reach, assistance, and support to small businesses and other employers working to comply with OSHA requirements and protect their workers,” as well as working with more “trade associations, organizations, and employers it engages with directly through its cooperative programs.”<\/p>\n

OSHA Standards<\/h2>\n

OSHA’s Budget Justification states that it plans to issue three final rules, including one on beryllium<\/strong>, and four proposed rules. As you may recall, OSHA proposed last June<\/a> to weaken beryllium protections for maritime and construction workers.\u00a0 (The schedule for this is a bit unclear as the CBJ also states that “OSHA anticipates that this rulemaking will proceed fairly quickly with a proposal either late 2018 or very early 2019.” Given that OSHA already issued a proposal in June 2017, it’s unclear whether this statement means they’ll issue a new proposal or it’s just a result of\u00a0 lousy proofreading.)<\/p>\n

Other final standards include a minor revision addressing respirator fit-test methods, and a revision of the recordkeeping standard.\u00a0 OSHA has stated for some time that it doesn’t like parts of the Obama administration’s\u00a0electronic recordkeeping regulation<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0which requires employers to send injury and illness data to OSHA, and to prohibit retaliation against workers for reporting injuries or illnesses.\u00a0 Given that no proposal has yet appeared, it’s possible, but unlikely that a final revised rule will be issued before October 1, 2019, the end of FY 2019.<\/p>\n

The only small business (SBREFA) review mentioned is one for a cell tower standard<\/strong>. No mention of a SBREFA panel for workplace violence<\/strong>. SBREFA is the first formal step of the regulatory process.<\/p>\n

In addition to numerous guidance products, OSHA plans to use its standards funding to throw a bone to its industry friends by conducting “retrospective reviews to revise and update existing standards in ways that will better protect workers and, where possible, reduce burden on employers.” Don’t expect much there. A thorough review of a standard or regulation takes years and generally confirms that the original standard protected workers more effectively, and at a lower cost than OSHA had originally predicted.<\/p>\n

NIOSH<\/h2>\n

As it did last year, the Trump administration proposes to whack NIOSH, continuing to show its disdain for evidence-based practice that is supported by real research.\u00a0 Trump is again proposing to cut NIOSH job safety research by $135.2 million (40%), and proposes to eliminate educational research centers, agriculture, forestry and fishing research centers and external research programs.<\/p>\n

Then it gets weird. Trump is proposing to take NIOSH out of CDC and then possibly combine it at a later date with other parts of the National Institutes of Health.\u00a0 Section 22 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act established the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in the\u00a0Department of Health and Human Services to “conduct research,experiments, and demonstrations relating to occupational safety and health.”\u00a0 NIOSH is currently part of the Centers for Disease Control, which is also part of HHS.\u00a0 How this envisioned reorganization will work with the OSHAct that establishes a separate institute specifically for Occupational Safety and Health remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the World Trade Center Health Program (administered by NIOSH director by law) would remain at CDC.<\/p>\n

MSHA<\/h2>\n

Fifteen coal miners died on the job<\/a> in 2017, compared with only 8 in 2016, but Trump apparently sees those troubling numbers as a reason to cut\u00a0coal enforcement by $3 million. the overall budget for the agency will increase by $2 million, with\u00a0funding for metal\/non-metal enforcement increasing by $2.5 million<\/p>\n

Advice? We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Advice<\/h2>\n

OSHA has several advisory committees comprised of outside experts intended to advise, consult with and make recommendations to OSHA and DOL leadership about how to improve worker safety and health.\u00a0 The agency currently has five advisory committees:\u00a0 The National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH), the Maritime Advisory Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (MACOSH), and the Advisory Committee for Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH), the Federal Advisory Council on Occupational Safety and Health (FACOSH) and the Whistleblower Protections Advisory Committee (WPAC.)\u00a0 \u00a0NACOSH and ACCSH were established by law and the others by the Secretary of Labor and the White House.<\/p>\n

Trump wants to eliminate two OSHA Advisory Committees and none have met in over a year<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The committees are populated with national experts representing labor, management and public agencies who rotate every few years. Advisory committees traditionally meet two or three times a year, but none have met in the first 13 months of this administration.<\/p>\n

Trump’s\u00a0OSHA budget proposes to eliminate two of the agency’s five advisory committees: FACOSH and WPAC.\u00a0 WPAC is the newest advisory committee and was established<\/a> in 2012 to\u00a0help OSHA “improve the fairness, efficiency, effectiveness, and transparency of OSHA’s administration of whistleblower protections.” WPAC was one of the many initiatives undertaken in the Obama administration to improve the operation of OSHA’s troubled Whistleblower Program, including creating a separate directorate and a separate budget item.\u00a0 Achievements of the committee include the publication of\u00a0the first-ever Recommended Practices for Employers for Addressing and Preventing Retaliation<\/em><\/a>\u00a0which assists employers in creating workplaces in which employees can voice their concerns without fear of retaliation.<\/p>\n

Federal employees are not covered under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, but were provided protections by Executive Order\u00a012196<\/a> which requires each federal agency to “Furnish to employees places and conditions of employment that are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm.”\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong>Executive Order 11612<\/a>, issued by Richard Nixon, established FACOSH in order to “advice on how to reduce and keep to a minimum the number of injuries and illnesses in the federal workforce and how to encourage each federal Executive Branch department and agency to establish and maintain effective occupational safety and health programs.” Federal OSHA can cite, but not fine federal agencies and has uncovered and corrected a number of serious safety and health problems in the nation’s military bases, hospitals, prisons, hospitals and other federal facilities.<\/p>\n

Elsewhere:<\/strong><\/h2>\n

In related news, Trump’s budget\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n