Federal agencies Leadership

OSHA under Trump: A closer look

Legal experts are predicting significant changes for worker safety regulation under the new administration

Donald Trump
Photo: Michael Vadon

A new presidential administration almost certainly will mean a new direction for OSHA, legal experts agree. Regulations could be undone. Funding could decrease. Strategies for worker safety could shift 180 degrees.

How soon will changes arrive? Which objectives will take priority? Who will next be chosen to lead OSHA? Those decisions ultimately lie with President Donald Trump and his team as they settle into the White House.

Kittaka
“Even if it wasn’t Trump, just having a Republican in office would have been a substantial change by itself,” said Mark Kittaka, a partner and administrator of the Labor and Employment Law Department at Barnes & Thornburg LLP in Fort Wayne, IN. “Because it’s Trump, it’s going to be even more. It definitely will change.”

On the campaign trail, Trump touted his belief in smaller government with fewer rules and more freedoms. He vowed to eliminate two regulations for every new one enacted. He promised to ease the burdens on big businesses and blue-collar workers alike by stimulating the economy and creating jobs.

Workplace safety did not take center stage as a campaign issue for Trump or any other presidential candidate. But Trump’s limited-regulation stance, coupled with his experience in construction and other industries, suggest to some that he will steer OSHA more toward compliance assistance and away from enforcement.

Trump offers the unprecedented case of an incoming commander-in-chief who has been fined multiple times by OSHA for safety violations at his worksites. His businesses also have relied on contractors and subcontractors who have been hit with major penalties. One of his contractors was fined $104,000 after a construction worker fell 42 stories to his death in 2008 at the Trump SoHo hotel condominium in New York City. The penalty was later reduced to $44,000.

Conn
“Typically, OSHA is not the highest priority agency or one of the agencies that gets a lot of attention early in an administration,” said Eric J. Conn, a founding partner of Washington-based Conn Maciel Carey LLP and chair of the firm’s OSHA Workplace Safety Practice Group. “I think this could be a unique new administration that does pay some amount of attention to OSHA in the early days because he’s familiar with it.”

Once Trump turns his attention toward OSHA, what specifically could change?

Regulations in jeopardy

The injury and illness electronic recordkeeping rule could be among the first items that Trump targets, according to Conn. The rule requires many employers to electronically submit injury and illness data, which may then be published on OSHA’s website. Anti-retaliation protections also are included in the rule, which prohibits employers from discouraging workers from reporting an injury or illness.

The rule has drawn sharp criticism from some employers, who claim it is burdensome and unnecessary. In July, eight industry groups – including the National Association of Manufacturers and Associated Builders and Contractors – filed a legal challenge to block the rule, claiming the anti-retaliation provisions unlawfully banned or limited safety incentive programs and post-incident drug testing. A judge denied the motion in November.

“I could easily see, at the very least, a Trump administration curbing the publishing of that data,” Conn said. “And the other side of that same rule is the anti-retaliation elements that would prohibit some post-incident, post-injury drug testing and safety incentive programs. I could see that rule being curbed.”

A formal rulemaking process often requires years to enact change, but Trump could turn to faster, existing methods. OSHA could issue new guidance documents or letters of interpretation that reopen the door for drug testing and safety incentive programs, for example. Or the administration could pursue a budget rider that says OSHA shall not spend any funds on implementing the electronic recordkeeping database or in collecting or reviewing employers’ injury and illness data submitted pursuant to the rule – effectively invalidating its existence. Depending on the timing, some rules could be changed under the Congressional Review Act.

The silica rule published in March 2016 could be on the chopping block, Conn said, but as of press time it is set to go into effect in the construction industry in June and for general industry in 2018. The rule reduces the permissible exposure limit for respirable crystalline silica to 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged during an 8-hour shift – half the previous limit for general industry and five times lower than the previous limit for construction.

Also in jeopardy is the so-called “blacklisting rule” published in August, which requires firms seeking to do business with the federal government to report previous labor-law violations. Meanwhile, ongoing but incomplete efforts such as the combustible dust rule and process safety management reform are unlikely to advance during the Trump administration.

However, not every regulation will be scrapped.

Delaney
“Worker safety regulations as a general matter are not likely to disappear – OSHA and its regulations have been around for a long time and have survived administration changes,” said Aimee Delaney, a partner specializing in labor and employment at Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP in Chicago. “Additionally, Trump’s victory was in no small part due to his appeal to the Rust Belt, blue-collar workers, so taking too aggressive an approach may conflict with the pro-employee message that helped win the election.

“However, less regulation is certainly something Trump campaigned on, and OSHA presents an area with a great deal of regulation.”

How soon could changes take place?

“During the George W. Bush administration, it was two or three years before you saw the ship really turn in a very significant way from the Clinton administration,” Conn said. “I don’t think you’re going to see overnight a dramatic change in the way OSHA operates, but by the end of four years, you will see a markedly different approach by the agency with a different set of tools than we’re seeing at the end of the Obama administration.”

NEXT PAGE: Philosophical shift from enforcement to compliance assistance>>

Post a comment to this article

Safety+Health welcomes comments that promote respectful dialogue. Please stay on topic. Comments that contain personal attacks, profanity or abusive language – or those aggressively promoting products or services – will be removed. We reserve the right to determine which comments violate our comment policy. (Anonymous comments are welcome; merely skip the “name” field in the comment box. An email address is required but will not be included with your comment.)

Title

Jill
January 20, 2017
WOW, it is quite clear where the authors of this article stand politically. How about suggestions as opposed to your negative connotations or just reporting facts. Lets see what happens with this administration before you start initiating negativity throughout the industry. We have enough in our communities.

Title

KevinBey
January 21, 2017
It was a good readings.

Title

Randy
January 22, 2017
As a safety professional, I thought the article was very well written and not negative, but based on reality. Throughout my career I have seen some severe abuses in regards to employee safety. Some companies are good, but there are also a lot of companies out there that don't give two cents about employees. They will say they do, but if it costs money, they will weigh the risk of getting caught rather than spending the money to make the workplace safer. I have sat in more than one boardroom and had those same arguments with executives. If the risk of punishment is not significant enough, they will take the risk. Most see it as a business decision and many employees have been injured or have died over the years due to those same business decisions. Over the last few years, some of the new rules we have seen come out are exactly the types of rules needed in order to get the bad apples to do the right thing more often. For instance, electronic reporting, if your bad numbers are out there for the world to see (including your customers), you might think twice about not spending the money for proper machine guarding. I suspect that a lot of the new legislation will be rolled back simply because it is an easy target for the new administration and they have expressed more than once they are going to eliminate regulations. This will make workplaces less safe as well as make safety professional's jobs harder.

Title

Tanya
January 26, 2017
Thank you for this article! Interestingly enough, I'm a safety professional and do see the benefits of compliance assistance vs. enforcement. In my experience, working with my local OSHA representatives to review policies, ask questions, and complete inspections has been highly beneficial. I understand that supportive management is a key in this, but with compliance assistance, there are free resources to get things right vs. scrambling to hide the fact that there are questions. Additionally, if you are working with compliance assistance and they note a particular important finding that upper-level management refuses to address, they can still work with enforcement. To be comfortable with OSHA compliance is a huge benefit to any organization's safety program. The efforts to shift focus from enforcement to compliance would create an atmosphere where important questions can be asked and information shared. I hope this would help re-brand OSHA from the bad guy, to a great resource. At least it provides more potential for communications both ways, rather than communication only during reprimand.

Title

Andy
January 31, 2017
Very good and pertinent article. We must all realize, as the article stated in other ways, that this administration is far different than any other and will make changes. I disagree that this will take 2 - 3 years, as our new President has demonstrated that he moves quickly when he believes he has an ax to grind and a regulation or two or three that need pruning. I also feel that we should be prepared for the manner in which all this will occur, as no doubt he will turn to big business to advise him on how exactly they have achieved success in safety, feeling that OSHA has not, or does not understand the real drivers of this type of success. We could be in for an interesting ride!

Title

Dennis Richardson
January 31, 2017
The article is filled with "What If's". We are going to have to wait to see the direction taken by the new administration. I'm in the construction industry and it appears that it will become increasing active. The new administration needs to have a chance

Title

Jim
January 31, 2017
It is interesting that in discussions like this often the entrenched positions are just revisited. Lets try something different and start with what OSHA has said about "negative consequences" hindering the reporting of injuries by the workers (like getting drug tested). If "negative consequences" cause under-reporting why is OSHA surprised when contractors don't report injuries. Recently I had an owner come in and look at our event log which covers unsafe acts, near misses and hazard recognition. He was dismayed at the high numbers until I explained that our workers were expected to report everything and that we even celebrated following that process in our monthly lunches. Based on this we were able to get ahead of trends and avoid injuries (we are trying for Zero Unsafe Conditions or Actions). Once he learned that he said that he believed that his other contractors were probably under-reporting. Back now to how could OSHA operate. I believe that if they came in and looked at the leading indicators rather than the trailing indicators on a project and graded them on how well they were doing on identifying high risk activities and putting plans in place to mitigate the hazards that they would be much farther along than only using enforcement. Using positive reinforcement would yield better numbers and be a better indicator for owners. If OSHA worked on this with contractors especially small or midsized they could have a huge impact on the safety in the workplace. It will be interesting to see if we continue to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

Title

Sos
January 31, 2017
I agree with Tanya. Over the course of my career I have effectively worked with the consulting (compliance assistance) arm of OSHA. I fail to see any value in the electronic recordkeeping rule.

Title

Thomas VH
February 1, 2017
Enough second guessing out their these days. Lets take the wait and see approach.

Title

Gary Glader
February 6, 2017
With 38 years experience in safety and safety consulting, I have seen the agency transition from a necessary and effective regulatory body to one with a clear political agenda. Their back door strategy to regulate post-injury drug testing, and memo indicating post-injury testing for alcohol only, is a disgrace to safety in the workplace. Also, the poorly fashioned silica in construction standard could subject affected workers to numerous chest x-rays because of the transient nature of construction work and the fact no thought was given to how workers might be provided with some type of certification to take from employer to employer. The agency needs to focus resources on the bad actors who need to be inspected and penalized as opposed to creating regulation that is contrary to sound safety principles. There will always be a need for enforcement, but the agency's DC administration is beholden to the left and public/private trade unions.

Title

Name
February 9, 2017
Safety professionals should be focused on the insurance premium savings generated by positive performance. The benefits of no/low worker injuries work to consistently remind senior managers of the benefit of worker safety. It is positive financial reinforcement that can be pointed out to frugal managers. Another benefit of positive safety results is the increase in production due to a more positive worker morale. The workers represent a large resource of great and profitable ideas and the happier they are the more profitable they become. The safe worker does not only do more work, but better quality work. They can feel that management has genuine concern for them. If you have sold the theory of safety solely on the threat of fines then you have doomed not only yourself to fail but also your safety program to fail. The threat of possible OSHA fines becomes a sour point to managers who fail to see the financial benefits of money spent on safety. They become complacent to "What might happen." It also leaves management in a place where the Safety Department is disliked. Both the management and the workers learn to hate the "Safety Guy". Injuries are happening and premiums are increasing. The program based on the negative will die a negative death.

Title

Rex Hunter
February 9, 2017
Saying "During the George W. Bush administration, it was two or three years before you saw the ship really turn in a very significant way from the Clinton administration" totally ignores the fact that Bush killed 29CFR1910.900 on his first day in office.

Title

David
February 10, 2017
How it is safe OR healthy to dwell on speculation and negativity? Sheesh. What a poorly written and ill-conceived article that is overflowing with political bias. Here are some what-ifs ... what if President Trump improves worker safety? What if OSHA becomes more effective and efficient under a Trump administration? Why not explore some positives if all you're going to do is make up stuff as you go along? How this awful article made it past this rag's editors is beyond me.

Title

jay
February 18, 2017
Not one OSHA News Release since the inauguration. (and they had news releases regularly prior to that) What are the odds that this is merely a coincidence?

Title

Lockout India
February 20, 2017
It’s not something that can be changed overnight. Also, it’s very unlikely that all of the regulations would be scraped or modified. We can only speculate the changes.

Title

Margo
April 3, 2017
About time OSHA gets reigned in. For too long they have had a lot of power and abuse of that power. I have read quite a few negative articles about Trump and OSHA. And as some posts have previously stated, the articles point to negative thoughts, theories and conjecture. I found it almost laughable that this article mentioned a philosophical change on OSHA's part. Sad that they have to change their way of thinking and enforcement when they should have never been given the kind of power over employers to fine at will. Their point has been to beat the employers into submission; do what we say or else. Now that this administration is making them accountable for their actions and their own regulations, they are crying foul! Safety leaders are crying foul! How about crying ' about time, now OSHA will have to do what they should have been doing all a long - train, teach, guide, coach'. Reigning in OSHA will be a good thing in the short and long run.

Title

Bob
June 23, 2017
Well said Jill, thank you.

Title

Xavier
November 8, 2018
Just goes to show that if a company has potential unnecessary costs, they will take the easy way out and avoid regulations. Trump has shown over the 2 years of his presidency that he cares more about instant results and less about regulations.

Title

Crandall Clark
April 28, 2019
It just seems with the philosophy of undoing obama era executive OSHA safety orders, there have been more1) chemical spills Texas and fracking earthquakes, ammonia, gas leaks ( Boston and others) crane collapses inside and outside hurricane zones train crossing accidents tour bus accidents school bus accidents maybe related to drug testing easing. Trump has a personal bad track record for worker falls and other osha related things a terrible record in atlantic county nj fires in his hotels the list really goes on and on Can all of these things oh yes more train wrecks with high fatalaties including the one with the congressmen on a little while back In his search for makingamerica ggeat again with dergulations Does MAGA mean we tremble to walk our city streets more due to poor attitudes at OSHA and EPA among other agencies I say its side shoot is MADA make america dangerous again also gun laws via high school shooting, some news writer should really formalize the "statistics of neglect"