California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) standards board members are grudgingly accepting that the agency will not restore “exclusion pay” requirements in its long-term COVID-19 worker-safety standard, after staffers told them inserting the benefit would delay the rule by at least seven months -- which would leave no coronavirus standard in place as of Jan. 1.
Employer attorneys are touting what they say are California’s extensive worker pay and job protections in defense of Cal/OSHA’s proposal to drop “exclusion pay” requirements from its final COVID-19 safety standard, after labor groups and their allies -- including members of the agency standards board -- have pushed to restore those mandates.
Late changes to a proposed final rule by California OSHA (Cal/OSHA) updating first-aid kit requirements for general industry and construction firms are drawing substantial pushback from employer representatives, who argue that companies now face extremely costly and onerous reviews and upgrades of all their kits.
OSHA is again attacking South Carolina’s lawsuit targeting the requirement for OSH Act state plans to match the federal agency’s maximum penalty amounts, arguing ahead of a Nov. 16 hearing that the state’s arguments against that mandate are untethered from the “four corners” of its case and thus should be summarily rejected.
California OSHA (Cal/OSHA) officials are providing more explanation for their insistence that “exclusion pay” be omitted from the agency’s long-term COVID-19 worker-safety standard -- in part by telling Inside OSHA that adding it would unacceptably delay adoption of the rule -- amid a fiery backlash from unions and members of the agency’s standards board.
California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) standards board is demanding that agency staff add “exclusion pay” requirements into a pending final long-term COVID-19 worker-protection standard, further escalating the controversy over the decision by top officials in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) administration to cut those mandates over unions’ objection.
California OSHA (Cal/OSHA) has released its potential final COVID-19 worker-protection rules, including revisions to the prior draft’s controversial definition of “close contact” but maintaining the removal of mandatory “exclusion pay” for employees -- a move already drawing fire from labor unions that urged officials to reinstate the provision.
A federal appeals court has overturned a district judge’s ruling that invoked OSHA’s “primary jurisdiction” over workplace protections from COVID-19 to preempt Amazon warehouse workers’ suit accusing the retailer of violating New York pandemic safeguards, setting a narrow precedent for using that doctrine to limit suits over state policies.
California OSHA (Cal/OSHA) officials are advancing stringent new lead-exposure safety rules for the construction and general industry sectors, including a dramatically stricter exposure “action level” that triggers a suite of required actions by employers to protect workers, just as federal OSHA is eyeing the state rule as a possible model, sources say.
South Carolina is defending its lawsuit seeking to block OSHA’s mandate that state plans match federal maximum penalties for OSH Act violations, saying that the agency has shown scant justification for the requirement in either statutory text or its own rules and offered “no response” to arguments that the law explicitly gives states “flexibility” on penalties.