OCR Text |
Show Page 6 The UTAH INDEPENDENT April 28, 1972 On Course OSHA Confusion and Discontent Rep. Tcno Roncalio (D-Wy- o.) inserted the following information and opinions in the Congressional Record Feb. 23, 1972. Roncalio is not generally considered a conservative. Mr. RONCALIO. Mr. Speaker, no single labor of the preceding 91st Congress has yielded such a harvest of confusion and discontent as the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. I was not a Member of Congress when the House took Anal action by approving the conference report on this legislation on December 17, 1970. I believe, however, that some of the ambiguities and frustrations attendant to this law may well make this issue the concern of the 92d Congress as well. In the course of 3 years, a variety of proposals were advanced to implement a national safety program, based on the universal awareness that occupational accidents have reached appalling rates. The Bureau of Statistics report on the 1970 incidence provides accidents grim confirmation: that year caused the death of 14,500 workers, the injury of 2.2 million, the loss of $1.5 billion in wages and $8 billion to the gross national product The comprehensive legislation enacted in the last Congress addressed this problem generally, and while I know that no one questions the need to Implement a national safety program, a number of our colleagues believe some perfecting amendments are in order. Mr. Thone of Nebraska has some 100 cosponsors for his amendment to require the Department of Labor to distinguish the requirements of light residential construction industry from those of the heavy construction industry in promulgating safety standards. He has observed that under this law, each house will be considered a separate construction site, multiplying the problems of small contractors. The Labor Department, for example, will require builders to put bars in front of each window opening more than 4 feet above ground until glass is installed. A fire extinguisher is supposed to be on every floor of a house under construction, and temporary handrails have to be installed before steps are finished. If a house has a second floor, the law requires that a shoot be provided for waste disposal. In this kind of blanket coverage, affording no distinctions in the magnitude of a construction project, the cost of an average residence will increase by about $1,500. In another area, roll bars are being required. While this might be in order for all new tractors, this law requires retroactive installation, which will cost the construction industry an estimated $1.2 million on equipment purchased before 1969 because frameworks on older tractors are not strong enough to hold the roll bars which must be added. The regu- ob on-the-j- ob -- WOODS CROSS REALTY & INSURANCE lation apparently will also apply to any farmer who employs one or more persons. Mr. Sebelius of Kansas has an amendment to exempt all small farmers from this act and Mr. Fisher of Texas an amendment to exempt employers with 25 or fewer employees. I also understand that Senator Curtis of Nebraska is drafting four amendments, several dealing with defense mechanisms. Under the law passed by the last Congress, an employer must seek judicial review from the Court of Appeals after conviction, and yet the . Secretary of Labor may use the District court. The cost to a small employer or farmer for appeal in the circuit court is another hidden cost in this act, and, as lawyers in Wyoming have complained, it is far easier for the Federal Government to get into court than for the ordinary farmer. This law must be amended, not to compromise safety, but to require the Secretary of Labor to precede compliance with an educational program, at least letting citizens know by example and counseling what Is expected of them and not besieging them with the maddening plethora of promulgated regulations as done under this act. Once again. Congress has legislated away its power to write law by delegating it to an administrator, this time the Secretary of Labor. To illustrate the need for counseling, consider the consternation of an employer who picks up the Federal Register of May 29, 1971, to review the nearly 400 pages of regulations. Among other items, er he will find a requirement to keep a in the lavatory. To make matters worse, the Department of Labor has unfortunately conveyed to employers the impression that enforcement of the law comes first, education afterward. There is no provision in this act for a courtesy inspection, designed to alert employers to possible hazardous equipment. Last week, I received a telephone call from a small businessman who had called the regional office in Denver, asking that a representative meet with him to explain and clarify the regulations. He was told that inspectors could visit his premises, but that there would be no warnings and that citations would be issued. Surely we can agree that such a policy breeds contempt for us all. As Herbert Manig, executive secretary of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, explained in a letter to me, the more realistic approach, inviting cooperation, would be to provide farmers, ranchers, indeed all employers, with education and assistance in comprehending this complicated law. If after the groundwork has been properly setablished and employers would not meet the standards, then enforcement should be executed. In short, the emphasis should be on education, then on enforcement. I believe a small start has been made in the scheduling of 10 regional meetings in Wyoming during this month where the Wyoming Department of Labor and Statistics will explain the impact of the law. This is an encouraging indication of the State's willingness to move ahead toward its own administration of the standards. Wyoming is working with a planning grant to develop the regulations which will be reviewed by Federal officials to insure that national standards are met. After 1 year of full operation under Federal surveillance, Wvom-ln- g will then administer its own safety and health standards through inspection and enforcement, probably achieving total rcsonsibility in 1974. The State officials in Wyoming hate coat-hang- assured employers that education and engineering are keys to their plan, stressing willingness to help operators resolve problems so that a citation can be prevented. In section 9 of the act. investigators are diverted to issue a citation in writing to any employer who he believes has violated a requirement and to set a reasonable time for abatement of the violation. Within a reasonable time after the inspection. the employer will be notified of the penalty Imposed be registered mail. As other amendments are considered, It might be appropriate to weigh the merits Inof permitting an Initial exof the for purpose of sites spection plaining the law and issuing warnings. It would go a long way toward reconciling employers to a law which at this time has aroused anger and resentment. adDuring the first 6 months of the DeLabor the of this law, ministration partment announced that 8,165 inspections were made, resulting in the discovery of 18,699 violations, which gave rise to the issuance of 5,308 citations and the assessment of $349,375 in penalties. Therefore, although Wyoming employers are being advised that the only personnel in the field are taking a sampling, the report indicates that inspections are being conducted in other areas. Although the volume of citations seems to vindicate a policy of enforcement first, I would suggest that many of the violations during this confusing interim period might be of a minor nature and could have been reduced if greater stress had been placed on informative measures. I know that the Department of Labor is aware of the need to provide promotional literature and I would urge an intensified effort. I am pleased to note that the Department is contemplating a special advisory committee on agricultural standards which would include representatives of the major farm organizations. I believe the greater the involvement of operators in determining workable regulations, the greater the compliance, avoiding the issuing of thousands of citations and the possibility of placing an even greater strain on the courts in handling appeals. At a time when the ordinary citizens finds himself increasingly alienated from a Federal Government whose operations he imperfectly understands and whose officials seem remote and indifferent, the Department of Labor could perform an invaluable service by intensifying its instructional groundwork with a view to helping employers understand the law that they might not violate it. I would ask my colleagues to give serious considerations to an amendment specifying that the Department accelerate educational programs and permit field personnel to visit sites for a firsttime review and counseling session without hsuiug cit.it ions. With this shift in priorites from enforcement before education to education before enforcement, the Department could case the transition to the time when the law will be administred by the States. I know that in Wyoming, the Occupational Health and Safety Commission is a rcsixmsive body, sensitive to the requirements for safety and eager to do everything possible to provide for safe and humane conditions for all who labor there. If the groundwork of counseling has been properly laid, the Commissions' task will be far easier, and the results fur more satisfying. Eggs What We Really Sell Is Service AVAILABLE DAILY AT WHOLESALE PRICES Closed Sundays Since 1932 426 W. 500 So. Bountiful, Utah 84010 Fertile also available. Frozen for restaurants and bakeries. Tyranny: OHSA on Snow White 2952381 Blueprint for 539 West 3900 South Salt Lake City (801)262-545Opan 7 4 ct.rn.-- 4 BUY BY THE CASE AND SAVE p.m. UTAH FORUM for the AMERICAN IDEA presents Mm Sfang speaking on Our Schools Under Assault Sat. May 13 Granite Park Junior High - 430 E. 3700 South - Salt Lake City, Utah Time: 8:00 p.m. Students $1.30 at the door, series $4.00. Adults $2.00 at the door I I i I I I I i i Joe H. Ferguson 1 Tyranny by any other name is still tyranny. This time it has come to America under the pretense of interest in safety and under the name of the Occupational Health and Safety Act of 1970, or the Williams-SteigAct. When the veneer of pretended condem for safety is stripped away, the true purpose of this act is clearly raw and unrestrained dictatorial power over revealed both businessmen and workers of America. er - Wake Up, Americans In America, we have taken our freedom so much for granted that we too often fail to recognize the insidious advance of tyranny. All Americans should understand and be able to recognize tyranny. The precise legal definition of tyranny as found in Blacks Law Dictionary is; Arbitrary or despotic government; the severe and autocratic exercise of sovereign power , either vested constitutionally in one ruler, or usurped by him by breaking down the division and distribution of governmental powers. Some might think the definition of tyranny perfectly fits the administration of this act only, by mere coincidence, and that its implementation will not produce such undesirable results. Even in the early stages of its implementation, however, this hope has been dispelled. Experience has proven that where raw, unrestrained power is available to government bureaucrats, it will be used to its fullest. Ads Tell Us How to Think Tax-Pai- d The bureaucrats know full well that the Americans are likely to rebel against this oppressive law. Consequently, they have begun a mass advertising campaign (better described in this case as to convince the public of the the next time necessity of this nonsense. Dont forget you see a piece of literature or a television ad praising the glories of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), it is paid for by your tax monies being spent to tell you how to think! Penalties Imposed Without Due Process of Law mind-conditionin- g) On November 5, 1971, in Riverton, Wyoming, a safety inspector arbitrarily imposed a fine of S 800.00 on Chopping Chevrolet for alleged violations of OHSA. On another day, if you had been out of gas in Rawlins, Wyoming, you would have been out of luck. All of the service stations had been arbitrarily closed down by an OHSA inspector. There are many other cases, but the important point is that since the OHSA inspector serves as both accuser and judge, the business operator is left without the means to defend himself. The OHSA inspectors consider that all citizens are guilty until proven innocent, and they refuse to consider any evidence that conflicts with their predetermined opinions. Even if the businessman is able to get the case into a competent court, the cost of legal fees is exhorbitant because the OHSA statutes or so voluminous and ambiguous that they are both a lawyers nightmare and heyday. A nightmare for understanding them but a heyday for using research time to run up a heavy bill. At any rate, the accused business operator is practically at the mercy of the bureaucrats, and they have no mercy. OHSA Inspectors Unreliable To begin with, even the OHSA inspectors dont understand the provisions of the act. At a meeting of the Utah Contractors Association last fall, the inspectors could not give any direct answers to any of the questions. When pinned down by some of the contractors regarding certain provisions of the act, the inspectors promised that they would work with the contractors so that no undue burden would be imposed. This was proven to be a lie when an OHSA inspector visited a job on which an employee of ABC Welding was working on a welding job. The welder was using a leather safety belt and the safety inspector told him that he would have to use a nylon one. The welder explained that nylon bums easily and is impractical for welding operations. The inspector said that the code required nylon belts and ordered the' worker to cease operations. Will OHSA Really Improve Safety? |