Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (n.d.). Decisions.
\nUnit vi assignment
\nInstructions
\nThe OSHRC publishes decisions by administrative law judges and the full OSHRC on their website:
\nOccupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (n.d.). Decisions. https:\/\/www.oshrc.gov\/decisions\/
\nGo to the OSHRC decisions tab. Then, select “Final Commission Decisions” and choose a year.<\/p>\n
Select one case within the last 3 years.
\nAfter reading the case, write a paper that addresses the following areas that are listed below.
\nProvide an introduction and a brief overview of the process for contesting citations.
\nInclude a summary of the company and the citation.
\nExplain what the final decision of the OSHRC was in the case you selected, and whether or not you agree with this decision.
\nProvide a rationale for your argument.
\nYour paper should be a minimum of two pages. In addition to the case study you select from the OSHRC website, support your paper with at least one scholarly reference from the CSU Online
\nOSH 3302, Legal Aspects of Safety and Health 1
\nCourse Learning Outcomes for Unit VI
\nUpon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
\n1. Examine Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) operational processes.
\n1.1 Discuss the process for contesting OSHA citations.
\n7. Summarize legal processes related to employer criminal sanctions.
\n7.1 Explore the OSHRC webpage for prior commission decisions.
\n7.2 Essay Assignment Help – Analyze the outcome of a OSHRC case study.
\nCourse\/Unit
\nLearning Outcomes
\nLearning Activity
\n1.1
\nUnit Lesson
\nAssessment Brief Original Custom Research Essay Pro Papers Help – Chapter 15
\nUnit VI Case Study
\n7.1
\nUnit Lesson
\nAssessment Brief Original Custom Research Essay Pro Papers Help – Chapter 15
\nWebpage: \u201cJudge Upholds US Department of Labor Citations, $145K in
\nPenalties for Denver Contractor that Ignored Safety Requirements
\nRepeatedly\u201d
\nUnit VI Case Study
\n7.2
\nUnit Lesson
\nAssessment Brief Original Custom Research Essay Pro Papers Help – Chapter 15
\nUnit VI Case Study
\nRequired Unit Resources
\nThis unit will use a chapter from the following resource:
\nOccupational Safety and Health Administration. (2020). Field operations manual. U.S. Department of Labor.
\nhttps:\/\/www.osha.gov\/enforcement\/directives\/cpl-02-00-164
\nIn order to access the following chapter resource, click the chapter link below.
\nAssessment Brief Original Custom Research Essay Pro Papers Help – Chapter 15: Legal Issues
\nIn order to access the following resource, click the link below.
\nU.S. Department of Labor\u2014Region 8. (2021, August 26). Judge upholds US Department of Labor citations,
\n$145K in penalties for Denver contractor that ignored safety requirements repeatedly: Premier
\nRoofing LLC exposed emploees, subcontractors to fall hazards [News release]. Occupational Safety
\nand Health Administration. https:\/\/www.osha.gov\/news\/newsreleases\/region8\/08262021
\nUNIT VI STUDY GUIDE
\nAdjudicating OSHA Citations
\nOSH 3302, Legal Aspects of Safety and Health 2
\nUNIT x STUDY GUIDE
\nTitle
\nUnit Lesson
\nIntroduction
\nIn Unit V, we spent a lot of time talking about the purpose of requesting an informal conference after receiving
\nthe Notice of Penalties and Citations from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the
\nrules of the conference. In this unit, we are going to discuss the steps that can be taken after the informal
\nconference if a settlement cannot be reached.
\nContesting Citations
\nIf a settlement cannot be reached during the informal conference, the employer can formally contest the
\ncitations and penalties. As we have stated several times in this course, the Notice of Contest must be filed
\nwithin 15-working days after the receipt of the citations and penalties. Generally, if a Notice of Contest is not
\nfiled within the 15-working day period, the citations and penalties become final. Once an employer files a
\nNotice of Contest, informal conferences cannot be scheduled. If an employer asks for an informal conference
\nat the same time or after filing a Notice of Contest, the employer will be notified that the informal conference
\ncannot be scheduled unless the formal Notice of Contest is withdrawn. This is the reason it is important for an
\nemployer to schedule an informal conference and leave adequate time to file a Notice of Contest after the
\ninformal conference. If an employer submits a Notice of Contest after the 15-working day period, the area
\ndirector will send a notice to the employer stating that the notice cannot be accepted and explain the process
\nfor filing the late notice to the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC).
\nOccupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC)
\nThe OSHRC was created with the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act to provide
\nemployers with a method to obtain a fair and timely response to contests of citations and penalties. In order to
\nmake the process fair, the OSHRC is an independent agency, not related to the Department of Labor where
\nOSHA resides. This independence is important in making sure OSHA is honest in their dealings with
\nemployers. Contested cases are assigned to and presided over by administrative law judges (ALJs).
\nStates who have established a state-run OSHA program will have their own OSHRC. For example, Kentucky
\nhas an approved state OSHA program. Contested citations and penalties are heard by the Kentucky OSHRC
\n(KOSHRC), which is an independent agency established by state law KRS 338.071 (KOSHRC, n.d.).
\nContested citations and penalties issued by Kentucky OSHA are heard by ALJs from the KOSHRC instead of
\nthe OSHRC. The rules of law, however, are the same.
\nRules of the Hearing
\nThe rules of law associated with hearings are similar to other administrative cases. Unlike the informal
\nconference, during the formal contest of citations, each side is allowed to discover what evidence the other
\nside has by asking them to produce documents, send questions to the other side (called interrogatories), and
\nconduct depositions of potential witnesses. Depositions are a process during which potential witnesses for
\none side can be asked questions related to the case while under oath. Depositions are very common,
\nespecially if one or both sides are using expert witnesses. The deposition allows attorneys for each side to
\nOSH 3302, Legal Aspects of Safety and Health 3
\nUNIT x STUDY GUIDE
\nTitle
\nevaluate the strength of the other side\u2019s case. In some instances, settlement agreements are reached after
\nthe depositions and prior to a formal hearing.
\nThe ALJ will hold a formal hearing if an agreement is not reached. The hearing will be scheduled in a location
\nclose to where the citations and penalties were issued. The rules of the hearing are similar to the rules in
\nother administrative courts. Witnesses are sworn in, a transcript is recorded by a court reporter, and a
\nrepresentative for both sides (typically an attorney) has the ability to question each witness. The ALJ may
\nexclude testimony based on the rules of law. For example, the Daubert test is sometimes used to exclude the
\ntestimony of a witness. The Daubert test says that if an expert is rendering an opinion, he or she must be
\nqualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, and the opinion must meet certain criteria.
\nThe testimony must be based on sufficient facts or data. The testimony has to be based on reliable accepted
\nscientific principles. The witness has to apply the scientific principles reliably to the facts of the case (Daubert
\nv. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 1993). – – One purpose of the Daubert test was to keep what is considered junk
\nscience out of the court proceedings. Therefore, opinions have to meet the criteria of current scientific
\nknowledge and testing, peer review, and be considered acceptable in the scientific community. Some tests
\nperformed by so-called experts that are not accepted practice in the field are generally not allowed to be
\npresented in court. An example would be a safety and health expert who develops his or her own sampling
\nand analytical method that has not been validated using OSHA or NIOSH criteria and is not widely accepted
\nby other safety and health professionals. The results of sampling using that method would typically not be
\nallowed in the OSHRC proceedings.
\nTypes of Hearings
\nThe OSHRC has two types of hearings available, the full hearing or a simplified proceeding. The full hearing
\nis what was discussed above. For smaller, less complicated cases, the ALJ may use simplified proceedings.
\nSimplified proceedings are used for cases with less than $20,000 to $30,000 in total aggregate penalties.
\nSimplified proceedings cannot be used if there are willful or repeat citations or if a fatality has occurred. The
\nmain differences between the full hearing and the simplified proceedings are that there are no pleadings and
\nno discovery, including depositions. OSHA is required to provide the employer with certain documents within
\n12 to 30 days after the case has been designated, depending on the type of document (OSHRC, 2010a). The
\nhearings are also less formal, and the ALJ will sometimes render an opinion at the end of the hearing instead
\nof days or weeks later as is common with formal hearings. The decisions of the ALJ in both full and simplified
\nproceedings become final 30 days after the decision is published.
\nDecisions
\nThe decisions of an ALJ may or may not be reviewed by the entire OSHRC. The chief ALJ chooses some
\nopinions to review without any request. However, OSHA, the employer, or an employee may also request a
\nreview of a decision. The party must file a petition for discretionary review with the ALJ or the executive
\nsecretary of the OSHRC. The OSHRC will typically request each party to file a brief explaining their position
\nOSH 3302, Legal Aspects of Safety and Health 4
\nUNIT x STUDY GUIDE
\nTitle
\non the decision (OSHRC, 2010b). The OSHRC may also request that each party present some oral
\narguments in front of the commission. If the OSHRC reviews a decision, the decision may be changed or
\ntotally vacated. If the OSHRC issues a decision, the ruling becomes final 60 days after being issued. Even
\nthat decision is not the final step. Due process allows any of the parties to appeal the decision of the OSHRC.
\nAn appeal of an OSHRC would be heard by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision of the U.S. Circuit
\nCourt of Appeals becomes final when it is issued.
\nThe OSHRC publishes decisions reached by ALJs and reviews by the OSHRC. State OSHRCs will also
\npublish decisions by ALJs and the state OSHRCs on their websites.
\nConclusion
\nAs you can see, the OSHA inspection process can be rather lengthy. There are many steps an employer can
\ntake once receiving the Notice of Citations and Penalties. – – One important thing to remember is timing is key! It
\nis important to submit the required documentation in the designated amount of time.
\nReferences
\nDaubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
\nKentucky Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (n.d.). KOSH Review Commission.
\nhttps:\/\/koshrc.ky.gov\/Pages\/index.aspx
\nOccupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (n.d.) Decisions. https:\/\/www.oshrc.gov\/decisions\/
\nOccupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (2010a). Subpart M — simplified proceedings.
\nhttps:\/\/www.oshrc.gov\/rules\/subpart-m-simplified-proceedings\/
\nOccupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (2010b). Subpart F — posthearing procedures.
\nhttps:\/\/www.oshrc.gov\/rules\/subpart-f-posthearing-procedures\/
\nSuggested Unit Resources
\nIn order to access the following resources, click the links below.
\nThis standard provides additional information on the powers of the administrative law judge.
\nAdministrative Law Judge; Powers and Duties. 29 U.S.C. \u00a7 1955.12, (1970). Occupational Safety and Health
\nAdministration.
\nhttps:\/\/www.osha.gov\/pls\/oshaweb\/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=11216
\nThis standard provides procedures for the OSHA Review Commission.
\nPurpose, 29 CFR \u00a7 2200.200. (1970). Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
\nhttps:\/\/www.osha.gov\/laws-regs\/regulations\/standardnumber\/2200\/2200.200
\nThe following links provide additional information on the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
\nOccupational Safety and Health Administration. (n.d.). SEC. 12: The Occupational Safety and Health Review
\nCommission. https:\/\/www.osha.gov\/laws-regs\/oshact\/section_123366
\nOccupational Safety and Health Administration. (n.d.). Settlement procedure, 29 CFR \u00a7 2200.120. U.S.
\nDepartment of Labor.
\nhttps:\/\/www.osha.gov\/pls\/oshaweb\/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=11457<\/p>\n
Introduction
\nThe Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) provides employers with the opportunity to contest citations and penalties issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). If an employer is not able to reach a settlement during the informal conference, the employer can file a Notice of Contest and request a formal hearing before an administrative law judge. In this paper, we will review a case from the OSHRC Final Commission Decisions from 2020 and analyze the outcome.<\/p>\n
– Summary of the Company and the Citation
\nThe case reviewed is Secretary of Labor v. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, OSHRC Docket No. 19-0475 (2020). The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center is an academic medical center in Columbus, Ohio. The citation was issued after an employee of the medical center suffered an injury after being exposed to hazardous chemicals during a work-related activity. The citation alleged that the medical center violated 29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1) of the Hazard Communication standard by failing to provide the employee with appropriate personal protective equipment, failing to ensure that the employee had received adequate training, and failing to maintain a written hazard communication program.<\/p>\n
Final Decision of the OSHRC
\nAfter reviewing the case, the OSHRC Administrative Law Judge affirmed the citation issued by OSHA. The medical center was ordered to pay a penalty of $9,639. The judge found that the medical center had not taken adequate measures to protect employees from hazardous chemicals and had not provided the necessary training and personal protective equipment. The medical center failed to maintain a written hazard communication program, and the judge ruled that the citation was warranted.<\/p>\n
Do I Agree with the Decision?
\nI agree with the decision of the OSHRC Administrative Law Judge. The medical center had a responsibility to ensure that their employees were trained on the appropriate handling of hazardous chemicals and provided with personal protective equipment. The medical center failed to maintain a written hazard communication program, which is an essential element in protecting employees from hazardous chemicals. This lack of communication and training exposed employees to unnecessary risks and resulted in an employee injury. The citation issued by OSHA was appropriate, and the penalty assessed was reasonable.<\/p>\n
Rationale for My Argument
\nThe Occupational Safety and Health Act was created to ensure that employees are provided with a safe and healthy workplace. Employers have a responsibility to provide training, personal protective equipment, and written hazard communication programs to protect employees from hazards in the workplace. The medical center in this case failed to provide these essential elements and exposed employees to unnecessary risks. The citation and penalty assessed were appropriate and serve as a reminder to employers of their responsibilities to protect their employees. In conclusion, the decision of the OSHRC Administrative Law Judge was reasonable and just, and serves as a reminder to all employers to prioritize employee safety and health.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. (n.d.). Decisions. Unit vi assignment Instructions The OSHRC publishes decisions by administrative law judges and the full OSHRC on\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1936,1939],"tags":[2442,2405],"class_list":["post-4689","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-occupational-safety-and-health-assignment-examples","category-essay-samples-on-occupational-safety-and-health-osha","tag-occupational-safety-and-health-review-commission","tag-write-my-healthcare-thesis"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4689","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4689"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4689\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4691,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4689\/revisions\/4691"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4689"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4689"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4689"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}