Masonry Magazine June 1996 Page. 9
OSHA REFORM
legislation prohibit agencies from creating more inconsistent laws and over reaching into the operation of a business such as OSHA ergonomics standards and creating new fall protection standards. Still others would rescind laws that do not allow employers to meet with employees to discuss workplace issues of concern.
With a U.S. Congress, especially the House, sensitive to small business concerns and eager to reduce the heavy interference of government in the work place, there are several new reform laws being proposed that will reshape the workplace.
LABOR & EMPLOYMENT
Labor and employment relations are being closely examined in the new Congress and should receive many revisions. Special Preference legislation, in the House of Representatives H. R. 2128, which has been introduced by Congressman Charles Canady (R-FL) and Senate bill 1085 introduced by Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS) will prohibit the use of racial and gender-based preferences by the federal government in contracts, hiring and programs. It also aims to bar the government from requiring or encouraging contractors to use such preferences. "I do not believe in any type of special preference, and would prefer job opportunity on merit and merit alone. Being a woman business contractor for over 25 years and recognizing we have a process that demands the best bid, and after that, the least amount of mistakes." said Susan Hansen of Architectural Constructors in San Antonio, Texas. Hansen goes on to state that the psychology of special preferences probably has an adverse effect on her and the company. "The only way I really survive in today's competitive market is to stay focused on the bottom line and not through set asides. Special preferences bring the whole standard down and has an adverse effect on the whole industry."
Since its creation in 1970, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration was formed within the Department of Labor to pass safety regulations and to insure safe workplaces. Many would suggest that OSHA has failed to make the work place safe, even after several
H.R. 1834 would also require OSHA to perform risk assessment, economic analysis, and cost/benefit analysis before issuing any new safety or health standards. Allow written warnings for non-serious (no threat to safety/health) OSHA violations, and prohibit citations for
MCAA member Dick Felice meets with Senator Charles Grassky (R-IA) to discuss compensable travel and to thank the Senator for past support of OSHA reform
billion dollars are spent by business to comply with OSHA's rules.
Two major pieces of legislation have been introduced to change how contractors must deal with OSHA. H.R.-1834 which was introduced by Congressman Ballenger, (R-NC) and S-1423 introduced by Senator Kassebaum (R-KS) which has been passed by the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee and should be brought up for a vote by summers end.
Both bills have similarities and differences. Congressman Ballenger's reform bill on OSHA would require 50% of OSHA's budget to go towards safety, education, training, technical assistance, and outreach programs. It would exempt companies from OSHA inspections if there is a safety consultation provided by either OSHA, a qualified person certified by OSHA, or a safety committee in which certified employees participate in improving workplace safety and health.
violations of OSHA's general duty clause. Senate Bill 1423 is similar to H.R. 1834, in that, it creates incentives for safety inspections, allows for non-union safety teams, changes the employee complaint procedures, codifies the small exemption, creates employer defenses and reduces penalties for non-serious violations of the OSHA Act.
Critics of this OSHA Reform effort have suggested that Congressman Ballenger's bill would eliminate OSHA's enforcement authority, require employees to contact their employer before approaching OSHA on filing complaints, not accurately keeping employee Records and Reporting and eliminate OSHA's ability to cite general duty clause to employers as double standards. The practical impact to all these points is that the Ballenger bill restores common sense to an enforcement process that has more often than not penalized employers who in good faith were trying to provide for the safety and
MASONRY-MAY/JUNE, 19969