This e-version of The Leader is provided courtesy of <strong>VPPPA</strong> for members only. For reprint permission, please contact the editor at Communications@vpppa.org. Capitol Watch comPiled by Korey belAnger >> goVernment AffAirs & communicAtions sPeciAlist, <strong>VPPPA</strong>, inc. S. 3257 versus fee-based program proposal Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) and Senator Landrieu (D-La.) have introduced Senate Bill 3257 (S. 3257) to codify the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP). The bill would reauthorize the VPP initiative, expand its coverage to include more small businesses and secure direct federal funding, eliminating the need for a fee-based program as proposed by Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.). “No program has been more successful in creating such a culture of safety in the workplace than VPP,” stated Senator Enzi. “The bipartisan support for VPP continues into this Congress. Last week, the Senate Budget Committee unanimously approved an amendment to preserve VPP budget authority and Chairman Conrad notes that the program actually saves taxpayer dollars.” The senator went on to explain that even with bipartisan support, this bill is needed to ensure OSHA’s funding for the program without introducing a fee-based system. “Such a proposal [a fee-based system] is simply not workable and completely counterproductive … a fee-based system simply destroys the credibility and integrity of VPP participation for employees.” 6 the leAder >> sPring 2010 VPP sites have already started voicing their opinion to their congressional representatives in support of S. 3257. To express your support of VPP and concerns of a fee-based program, please visit www.vpppa.org/GovAffairs/VPPSupport.cfm for information and sample letters. proposed Changes to oSha reform bill Causes Concern A package of proposed changes to the Protecting America's Workers Act (H.R. 2067, S. 1580) has caused some alarm among employer groups and industry attorneys. The draft revised bill sent to the House Education and Labor Committee would change the mental state requirement necessary for criminal prosecution of an employer. Instead of the current willful standard, which “requires proof that an employer knew not only that its actions were wrong, but that they were unlawful as well,” the proposed requirement would reduce to proving that the employer only “knew” of a violation, making it easier to provide proof for criminal prosecution. The director of Labor Law Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Marc Freedman, believes this bill would increase the range of what would be considered criminal violations. He stated, “Not only is 'knowing' a weaker level, but making this change will create tremendous confusion among employers and [Occupational Safety and Health Administration] OSHA inspectors as they struggle to figure out what this means. The only way this will be resolved is in the courts, which will not be to either OSHA's or employers’ advantage.” Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels, however, stated his support for the changes during his testimony before the subcommittee. He noted that the change “would ease the burden of proof currently required for a criminal violation under the OSHA Act, because it is easier to prove a knowing violation than to establish willfulness under current cases.” Titus and Woolsey Seek increased oversight of State programs House Education and Labor Committee member Dina Titus (D-Nev.) has introduced a bill that calls for an ongoing Government Accountability Office review of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) oversight of state plans and would provide federal OSHA more opportunities to assert concurrent jurisdiction over deficient state programs. The legislation could be considered an amendment to OSHA reform legislation. The legislation would provide OSHA authority to claim concurrent jurisdiction over a state plan that fails “to comply substantially with any provision of the State plan.” Once an initial determination is made by federal OSHA to assert concurrent jurisdiction, a state program would have 15 days to hold a public hearing. Within 30 days of the hearing, a decision would be made on whether to continue or reverse the concurrent jurisdiction action. The agency could also decide to withdraw a state program, which also calls for the opportunity of a hearing. Titus has received support for the bill from Chair of the House Education and Labor Committee George Miller (D-Calif.) and Chair of the Subcommittee on Workforce Protection Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.). Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels also indicated his interest in the concepts included in the bill, stating, “for [OSHA] to have effective oversight of state plans, we need additional tools … so anything that helps us get there would be very welcome.” H
This e-version of The Leader is provided courtesy of <strong>VPPPA</strong> for members only. For reprint permission, please contact the editor at Communications@vpppa.org. Glove Guard LP Mfr. of simple tools with unique designs
Change language