Search form

House of Representatives Votes to Block OSHA Recordkeeping Rule

By Carla J. Gunnin
  • March 15, 2017

The House of Representatives has voted to block a new Occupational Safety and Health Administration recordkeeping rule implemented in the last weeks of the Obama Administration. “Clarification of Employer’s Continuing Obligation to Make and Maintain an Accurate Record of Each Recordable Injury and Illness” was published in the Federal Register on December 19, 2016, and became effective on January 18, 2017.

OSHA issued the rule in response to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s AKM LLC d/b/a Volks Constructors v. Secretary of Labor. (For details, see our article, OSHA Recordkeeping Violations Subject to Six-Month Limitations; Continuing Violation Theory Rejected.) The Court held that because of the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s six-month statute of limitations, OSHA could not cite an employer for failing to record an injury or illness when the obligation to record that injury or illness exceeded the limitation period.

Despite this holding, OSHA engaged in rulemaking to overturn the decision, attempting to “clarify” through added language in the regulatory text that employers have a continuing obligation to record injuries and illnesses. This includes, in OSHA’s view, a requirement for employers to record injuries and illnesses even if they failed to initially comply with an OSHA recordkeeping requirement at the time the injuries or illnesses occurred.

On February 21, 2017, House Republican lawmakers introduced H.J. Res. 83 to repeal the rule, spurred by widespread concern that the rule was an attempt to overturn the plain language of the OSH Act through regulation. On March 1, 2017, the House voted for the legislation, 231-191. The vote was split mostly along party lines, with 227 Republicans and four Democrats supporting the bill, and 185 Democrats and six Republicans against the bill.

The bill was received by the Senate on March 2, 2017, where it is pending action.

Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to assist employers in understanding legislative developments and its implications for operations.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

August 16, 2017

Mine Safety Agency Issues Alert on Wire and Hoisting Ropes

August 16, 2017

Saying new testing on wire and hoisting ropes showed they “no longer met MSHA’s in-service standards,” despite previously passing tests and inspections, the Mine Safety and Health Administration has issued a new safety alert on wire and hoisting ropes. MSHA said that, although it had previously conducted wire rope nondestructive... Read More

August 16, 2017

Need OSHA Action on Ammonium Nitrate and Healthcare Workplace Violence, Government Monitor Urges

August 16, 2017

Focus is needed on two safety and health priorities: healthcare workplace violence and high-risk facilities that handle hazardous substances such as ammonium nitrate, chief of the Government Accountability Office Gene L. Dodaro has urged Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta in a letter. In the letter, dated June 27, 2017, Dodaro, the... Read More

August 11, 2017

Federal Law Does Not Preempt Connecticut Medical Marijuana Law Employment Discrimination Prohibition

August 11, 2017

Federal law does not preempt the Connecticut medical marijuana statute’s prohibition on employers’ firing or refusing to hire qualified medical marijuana patients, even if they test positive on an employment-related drug test, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut has held. Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., LLC,... Read More

Related Practices