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

Philosophical shift

Delaney expects OSHA to shift from an enforcement-based strategy toward more compliance assistance – the opposite of what was seen during Former President Barack Obama’s eight years in office.

“A policy example of this in action may see the Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which created OSHA’s ‘bad actor’ list, taking a back seat to the Voluntary Protection Program,” Delaney said.

In general, OSHA funding tends to increase under Democratic administrations and decrease under Republican administrations. Trump’s team also could change the way OSHA spends its money, for example, by reducing the agency’s enforcement budget. Kittaka said the new administration could decrease the number of higher-fine, repeat violations by shortening the time frame under scrutiny to three years from five years.

OSHA, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Justice have collaborated in recent years to pursue individual indictments and prosecutions related to alleged worker safety crimes. Conn said a new attorney general – combined with newly appointed U.S. attorneys – could prompt a return to the previous approach, with far fewer worker safety criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Likewise, OSHA’s strategy of “regulation by shaming” through the use of negative press releases is also likely to be reduced or eliminated. The approach was common under the previous OSHA team, which filled its website with press releases that called out violators and demanded corrective actions.

Kittaka, who represents employers, said his clients are optimistic that the Trump administration could usher a business-friendly climate in which worker safety remained a priority.

“For the most part, I think employers are trying to do the right thing,” Kittaka said. “Nobody wants to hurt their employees. You’re going to have some bad apples out there that will get hit – and should – if they really are endangering their employees. But for the most part, employers lose money because of lost-time injuries. That’s not what they want to do. Most companies are trying to produce a product. There’s no evil intent.”

Conn agreed, saying his employer clients are “cautiously optimistic” that the business environment will improve. However, he has heard from safety professionals who are worried about how Trump might affect their mission.

“A lot of safety professionals are able to use the threat of significant enforcement to get their own issues prioritized by management,” Conn said. “I suspect, and I have heard from a fair number of safety directors, safety managers, corporate safety directors, that they are concerned that safety might become less of a priority to senior management if it is less of a priority to the regulator.”

A look back

After eight years in office, Former President Barack Obama and his administrative team no longer play a role in workplace safety regulations. Workplace fatalities increased to 4,836 in 2015, which marked the highest number since Obama took office, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. OSHA’s budget has held steady at about $552 million in recent years.

President Barack Obama

During his tenure, Obama often turned to Executive Orders in order to establish new rules. President Donald Trump could use the same process to undo Obama’s actions.

Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez

Perez was sworn in as labor secretary on July 23, 2013. He was a strong proponent of paid family leave and oversaw efforts to increase civil penalty amounts for labor violations.

OSHA Administrator David Michaels

Michaels left his post in January as the longest-serving administrator in OSHA history. He pushed for rules to protect temporary workers, non-English-speaking workers and others with high rates of injury and illness.

<< Return to page 1

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"