Close this Advertisement

The OH&S Wire

Blog archive

MIOSHA in Jeopardy?

OSHA recently took a hard look at state plans, sending audit reports to them that some criticized. Now that state legislatures are desperately looking for budgetary savings, the OSH community may need to raise their voices to save these programs. The American Society of Safety Engineers' president, Darryl C. Hill, Ph.D., CSP, e-mailed a Feb. 24 letter to Michigan state Sen. Mark Jansen (SenMJansen@senate.michigan.gov) telling him that the association – celebrating its 100 birthday this year – opposes his bill, SB 14, that would eliminate the Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Agency (MIOSHA).

I can’t think of a worse proposal. If you'll read his letter, available here, I feel sure you'll agree. Hill argues persuasively that federal OSHA cannot be as responsive to Michigan employers' concerns as MIOSHA. Who could disagree?

"A good example of MIOSHA's effectiveness in responding to Michigan's needs is its March 2009 Memorandum, 'Penalty Considerations During Economic Downturn,' under which MIOSHA granted an additional 10% reduction in penalty during the settlement process for those items abated during the inspection or during the settlement negotiation process," Hill wrote. "In total, an employer could receive up to a 60% penalty reduction for all abated hazards. Michigan needed that kind of regulatory response in a time of deep economic problems. Federal OSHA could not similarly be as responsive to this state's needs."

MIOSHA has been fair and balanced. Its enforcement has been even handed, in my opinion, and it readily recognizes and publicizes the achievements of high achievers in safety, as its January 2010 press release about the Rising Star Award for workplace safety and health excellence given to Detroit Edison's River Rouge Power Plant attests.

MIOSHA's benefits to the state exceed its budget, Hill wrote, and "for the most recent five years of data, with MIOSHA assistance Michigan's decreases in injury, illness, and fatality rates have equaled or surpassed national averages.

"Reducing state expenditures is a laudable goal. The elimination of MIOSHA may be one in a long list of remedies to the state's budgetary dilemma. MIOSHA's absence will however have long term consequences well beyond the short term budgetary fix. While we understand in these difficult times there is pressure to eliminate state programs, keeping MIOSHA is cost-effective and a strategic way to ensure that our workers and Michigan's businesses are treated in a way that helps them achieve safety and health for Michigan workers without being overly burdened with inflexible regulatory oversight."

Hear, hear. I hope safety professionals in Michigan and beyond will contact Sen. Jansen to enlighten him about this agency.

Jansen, by the way, chairs the Michigan Senate Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on retirement and serves on the new Department of Labor and Economic Growth Subcommittee. MIOSHA is part of the state Department of Energy, Labor, and Economic Growth.

Posted by Jerry Laws on Feb 26, 2011


Comments

Sun, May 15, 2011 ohs audit http://www.oshemsolutions.com.au/

Wonderful step by MIOSHA by granting an additional 10% reduction in penalty during the settlement process for those items. In this way we can say that MIOSHA has been fair and balanced. Then why there was a question of eliminating MIOSHA?

Tue, Apr 12, 2011 J E Sikora Brownstown MI

Getting rid of ANY State OSHA plan would be a terrible mistake. Federal air contaminant PELs have been basically unchanged since 1971. I did a small comparison between CO, NO2, and SO2 here http://goo.gl/Wv *** If anything, get rid of the Federal OSHA, and let every state run their own. I have a proposal I'm going to submit to my Congress people that I'm going to unveil in the coming months, that would efficiently, quickly update the Federal PELs.

Sun, Mar 6, 2011 Roher Risner Wyoming, MI

If we don't look at ourselves for continual improvement who will? I have had my problems getting MIOSHA CET to understand why a subcontractor should complain. In my own city we have Electric Gates at our Public Yard Waste that are missing the required OSHA 1910.147(c)(2)(iii) or MIOSHA Part 85. (c)(2)(iii) "isolation device."

But in defense of MIOSHA CET, I have always found them to listen and say at this time the public cannot file a public complaint. They were always concerned and willing to help as much as they could help. The public may get behind MIOSHA if they added "Public Complaints for review."

Keep up the good work, review safety issues for the public sector, as we have to use these places.

Thanks for any help on this issue,
Rog 616 318-9033 Roger@Gate-Tek.com

PS after reading CalOSHA's 87-88 problems with Fed. OSHA maybe We can get it RIGHT. Again KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

Fri, Mar 4, 2011

Roger you can file a complaint on the MIOSHA website if you have serious conserns for employee safety at www.michigan.gov/miosha

Wed, Mar 2, 2011 Barry Cole Denver, CO

Part 2. Now, two years later, they attack the states, to UPGRADE them? They have accused the states of lots of things, but the largest criticism is that A) Not high enough fines when measured against the Fed. HUH????, they just went on a tear to raise them ... no measure of EFFECT ON SAFETY in the fed regulated areas. NO costs to the enforced public for spurious citations. B) Not enough inspections or not enough hazards cited per inspections. (This despite the fact that federal agents spend an average of nearly 40 HOURS per one inspection and almost no state inspector does. The Fed is not using number of inspections per worker, or number of inspections per the size of the state, number of employers, or any other RATE, simply a numbers game -- clearly unprofessional analyses of any operation. C) Not severe-enough evaluations of "other" (too many "OTHER" citations - should be more serious in ratio to "other" per inspection), (i.e., states should escalate seriousness, just because, hell that's what the Fed did!). Most states have better safety records than most federally covered jurisdictions, and most federal areas have more employees. And most states have better settlement rates, and better voluntary compliance after settlements are done fairly and with consideration to the employer's capacity (intellectually and financially). Read Wyoming's evaluation -- they have huge success in post-citation improvements, and they got blasted for reducing fines for people that want to get into the voluntary help program. HUH? That's outreach and support of our nation's employers? The goal of the Fed is to reduce injury and death. For the money they get, there is little to be said for that goal. Nowhere in the Act does it say to increase fines. The pitiful amount they spend on outreach and training, and the enormous amount spent on enforcement, is the result of the rather dismal effect over the last 3 or 4 decades. If safety professionals had that little impact daily or yearly in industry, for that kind of money, we'd all be fired. Most state plans do have the enforced public (which by the way is BOTH labor and Management - employees are part of the enforcement too, just not cited and just not fined - they have duties under paragraph 5(b) of the Act). The Fed needs to completely re-examine itself, and get it together when measuring what is good and what works in this country. The dollars and cents and numbers game evaluation of the states recently is one good example of a bad example being set by the Fed.

Wed, Mar 2, 2011 Barry Cole Denver, CO

It takes quite a few hours of dedicated time for a busy safety professional to see what is happening between the Fed and the States. First the Fed has managed to erase years of good will that was engendered between compliance programming and enforcement, in years prior to Bush II. The indifference and highbrow empire-building that was OSHA in the last 10 years, is embarrassing to safety professionals. OSHA, which used to be led by safety experts, became led by lawyers, and their subject matter experts have all been relegated to retirement or subordinated under bureaucrats. Then, enemies of business, academicians with no safety management experience, other then to write about it, and criticize it, and no business or real-world work experience, have been appointed to the leadership, and their goal has been to criminalize and expand enforcement fines. Not enforcement, but the fines associated with it. So, they set out to increase fines, and I have dozens of clients that are victims of it. Situations that by OSHA's own definition that are "equally safe practices" or de minimis and which carried no significant injury or death potential are being cited willy-nilly under the new mandate to get more fines, more citations, and more severity found. Inspectors are better educated, just compelled to see things differently, and adjust to the site and circumstances not at all. Then office management (area directors) are compelled to fight like hell for every citation, or risk the wrath of the "home office." This citations-centric management was outlawed, essentially, by President Clinton's executive order. They are ignoring this, apparently. So the outcome is, the agency only surrenders their poorly written citations to the reality when they are threatened with a hearing, at the ALJ or higher level.

Wed, Mar 2, 2011 Terry Keenan Minnesota

I'm all for cutting the waste and stupid spending in the federal and state governments, but elimination of our state OSHA departments is a big mistake! Have you been watching the direction that federal OSHA, MSHA, and the DOL have been taking? NOT GOOD! I'll work with my "like minded" safety professionals at MNOSHA any day! The state programs still have employee safety in their scope & focus of their operations. The federal agencies only see business as the enemy, and a source of revenue from fines. PLEASE - fight to keep the state plans! Thanks!

Tue, Mar 1, 2011 California

In California we have a long history of operating a State run Occupational Safety and Health program. This program has been operating since about 1911, but for a short period from about October 1987 through 1988, when then Governor Deukmejian defunded the CalOSHA program, that was soon thereafter restored by popular vote. In the interim period Federal OSHA mobilized in California to fill the gap and perform private sector enforcement. Businesses throughout California were eager to return to the State Plan program after only a very short time under the federal program. The largest factors mediating for the reinstatement of the State Plan was accessibility and accountability to Stakeholders. The CalOSHA program has been thoroughly, if not fairly, criticized by the Federal overwatchers in their recent rounds of the 25 state and territorial operated programs known as EFAME or enhanced federal annual monitoring and evaluation. Your attention is dierected to the report on the California program and the State agencies response to the reported findings of the federal evaluation. The bottom line is that the States would be sorely remiss in my estimation to abandon their own programs in favor of letting the fed osha program take over. Decide for yourself, while you have a choice.

Mon, Feb 28, 2011 Roger Risner United States

I think if the public knew how much danger MIOSHA has left un-checked, case in point: City of Wyoming's Public Yard Waste I just hope we don't have some child Killed like in Toledo last summer by the Electric Gates, sure have lost faith in my own Risk Management Supervisor and CSP's if they are a sleep at the switch. I know it can't be all of them but where is the Professional when we need one? Thanks for listening, Roger Risner 616 318-9033 Roger Risner

Mon, Feb 28, 2011

Excellent article! Thank you for sharing this information.

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above

Related Blogs

Articles

Whitepapers

Follow Us

Join OH&S Magazine on SafetyCommunity!
Join us on SafetyCommunity!

Upcoming Webinars

5/24: It's Not Just the SAMHSA 5 Anymore: K2/Spice, Bath Salts and Emerging Drug Trends
Which drugs should employers test for? Synthetic drugs like K2 and Spice, as well as seemingly harmless products like Bath Salts, have become as popular as the illegal drugs they try to mimic. These questions and more will be explored in this enlightening webinar.

5/30: An Introduction to Machine Safety
A common sense look at the regulatory framework of machine safety, best practices and practical solutions to ensuring a safe machine and workplace.

5/31: IAQ is Critical to Earning LEED Points, Green Building and a Healthy Workplace
This is an informative webinar on the role of high performance buildings in workplace health and safety.

6/14: OHSAS Guidance for Small Businesses: Protect and Grow Your Business
OHSAS 18001:2007 Certification offers more than just a globally recognized Health and Safety System. It can also help your business.

6/27: The Different Forms of Machine Safeguarding and When to Use Them
Some of the topics include: the different forms of safeguarding and when to use them. Safety devices to be reviewed may include: interlocking devices, light curtains, safety mats, safety scanners, two hand control units, and safety strips.

Spotlight

For May, OH&S puts the spotlight on: