State Actions

Officials in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) administration are insisting that California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) pending final COVID-19 standard not require employers to provide “exclusion pay” to employees who cannot work due to infections, even though the chairman and at least two other members of the agency’s standards board support such a revision, according to sources.

Employers’ attorneys and labor groups are offer contrasting legal and other strong objections to California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) proposed long-term worker safety standards for COVID-19, setting up an imminent debate for the agency’s standards board on what changes -- if any -- to adopt in a final rule.

California construction industry representatives are attacking an informal proposal by California OSHA (Cal/OSHA) to adopt federal fall-protection safety standards for residential frame construction that the employers argue are less protective than the state’s existing policy, and are seeking a meeting with federal OSHA, Cal/OSHA, labor and other stakeholders.

Staff at California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) standards board are facing pressure from worker-safety advocates and members of the panel itself to more fully explore the potential impacts from a proposed long-term COVID-19 safety rule that would eliminate exclusion pay and redefine the definition of “close contact” from the current, temporary policy.

South Carolina is asking a federal district court to block what it says is an unlawful campaign by OSHA to require states to increase their maximum work-safety penalties to at least the federal maximum, claiming that the agency is going far beyond what Congress allowed under the OSH Act mandate for state plans to be “at least as effective” as its program.

California’s plan to list nail products containing toluene as a “priority product” under its green chemistry program is drawing fire from labor and health groups, who charge its use of an industry-backed “alternatives analysis threshold” (AAT) will expose too many salon employees to unsafe levels of the chemical.

Two groups representing employers and industry are laying out detailed objections to California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) proposed workplace violence standard for “all industries,” including over a perceived lack of input from law enforcement, incident-logging requirements, employee privacy, enforcement and definitions of key terms -- including violence.

California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) standards board plans to address concerns among board members, employers and others about “ambiguous” definitions in the agency’s draft long-term COVID-19 worker-safety regulation -- primarily what will be considered a “close contact” in “shared indoor airspace” -- even after officials released new guidance on the subject.

California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) proposed workplace violence-prevention standard for “all industries” is coming under fire from state-level labor groups that say it is far narrower and less stringent than the agency’s existing rule that applies to healthcare facilities.

Labor union representatives are attacking California OSHA’s (Cal/OSHA) proposal to remove “exclusion pay” requirements from its proposed long-term COVID-19 worker-safety regulation, saying that if the state drops its existing requirement to pay infected workers for time away from their duties many will come to work sick and further spread the virus.