Plastics firms push against proposed OSHA heat rule

An Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposal requiring employers to develop plans to control heat hazards in the workplace is getting pushback from business groups that call it overreach but support from labor groups that say it's long overdue.

OSHA released a proposal on July 2 that the agency said would require employers to implement requirements for drinking water, rest breaks and controlling indoor heat, as well as having training and procedures in place for handling heat emergencies.

"Workers all over the country are passing out, suffering heat stroke and dying from heat exposure from just doing their jobs, and something must be done to protect them," said Doug Parker, OSHA head and an assistant secretary of labor, in an OSHA news release.

Supporters of the proposal pointed to rising temperatures from climate change and said a federal standard could reduce the average of 40 heat-related workplace deaths and 34,000 heat-related workplace illnesses annually over the last decade.

But business groups and their allies questioned the need for federal regulations, which would cover both primarily indoor work like manufacturing and outdoor-focused work like construction.

One lawyer for businesses told a July 24 congressional hearing before the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections that OSHA's nearly 1,200-page proposal doesn't give employers enough room to tailor to individual needs.

"Ultimately, OSHA has developed a prescriptive rule that despite the agency's assurances to the contrary, allows little flexibility for employers," said Felicia Watson, a senior counsel with Littler Mendelson PC in Washington. "Working in hot conditions is not new. OSHA has failed to do a thorough analysis of the options available, in order to push this standard through quickly."

She said OSHA missed an opportunity to develop industry-specific standards.

As well, the National Association of Manufacturers noted plastics product manufacturing companies were among those arguing to a recent OSHA small business advisory committee that a national heat rule was not needed, in their case, to deal with heat from molding operations. They cited their own good safety records as an argument against a federal standard, NAM said in written comments to OSHA.

Additionally, a plastic and metal industrial packaging group told OSHA it would be happy with heat-related checklists from the agency but said it opposes federal mandates.

The Reusable Industrial Packaging Association said its small sector, which has many firms with fewer than 20 employees that are often run by owner-operators, would be overburdened by federal requirements.

RIPA, whose members make and recondition plastic drums, steel drums and composite intermediate bulk containers, said about one-third of its members operate furnaces to burn off residue on the reusable containers. It said companies can manage their own heat issues.

"With relatively small staffs and engaged owner-operators, these businesses can respond quickly and flexibly to any emerging risk of dangerous heat," RIPA told OSHA. "Additionally, as with other OSHA mandates, a federally enforceable standard could lead to many inflated claims of neglect by unhappy workers."

Labor groups and others that support an OSHA heat standard said climate change is making federal action more urgent.

Jordan Barab, an OSHA deputy administrator under President Barack Obama, noted in testimony at the July 24 congressional hearing that 2023 was the hottest year on record since global temperatures began to be documented in 1850.

Barab said funding and resource shortages at OSHA have kept the agency from developing a heat standard sooner.

In response to a question from Rep. Alma Adams, D-N.C., who asked why OSHA rejected a petition to write a heat standard when Barab was one of the agency's leaders, Barab said that was a painful decision made because of limited agency resources.

"We were petitioned during our administration, and we rejected that petition," Barab said. "That was a very painful step. We always believed heat should be a priority. Unfortunately, due to OSHA's funding, our pipeline is just not very wide."

He said the agency at the time was working to finish new workplace exposure standards for beryllium and silica.

Barab said it took OSHA 20 years to finish those standards, while nearly 14,000 people died from workplace exposure to those two chemicals in that time.

He also said lawmakers should be skeptical of business claims that new safety standards will be a significant economic burden, pointing in his written testimony to OSHA's vinyl chloride monomer standard enacted in the 1970s.

"When OSHA reduced the vinyl chloride exposure limit from 500 ppm to 1 ppm to prevent additional cases of hepatic angiosarcoma, industry spokespersons issued dire predictions of job loss and plant closures," Barab wrote. "However, in less than two years, virtually all U.S. manufacturing plants were able to meet the new standard while maintaining rapid growth of sales volume."

The National Council of Occupational Safety and Health, an employee-oriented group, called a federal heat standard a "vital" step and said it welcomed the emphasis on preventative steps like water breaks and rest periods.

"Heat-related illnesses are preventable, and no worker should endure unsafe conditions," said Marcy Goldstein-Gelb, co-executive director of the National COSH. "This rule provides a clear framework for promoting a culture of safety and responsibility."

OSHA expects to begin taking written comments on its proposal and plans a public hearing later.