40 years of workers’ rights
by Anjali Dixit
On Nov. 4, students and faculty at the Mailman School of Public Health celebrated the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as part of the federal government. Dr. David Michaels, a graduate of Columbia University and current Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, presented the annual Isidore I. Benrubi lecture, focusing on the challenges facing OSHA over the next few decades.
OSHA’s formation in 1970, through the Occupational Safety and Health Act, marked a profound change in workers’ rights and public health in the United States. It showed that the government recognized its important role in protecting workers’ health, particularly in light of the 14,000 deaths per year due to workplace hazards in the post-World War II industrial era.
When OSHA was launched, Congress authorized it to adopt occupational health and safety standards; OSHA in turn took many of its rules from those already in use in certain industries. Because it implemented so many different standards, OSHA became known as “nit-picky,” and some small business owners were bothered by the government’s encroachment on their established work environments.
However, Michaels asserted, “OSHA has been tremendously successful in saving lives over the past 40 years.”
Thus, OSHA has always been a symbol of the struggle between allowing industries to operate freely to maximize profits and protecting the rights of those in disadvantaged positions who may have no choice but to work in hazardous conditions.
While it has prevented thousands of deaths, OSHA has faced obstacles in instituting standards for conditions and substances that affect workers slowly and subtly. For example, the chemical exposure standards are “outdated,” according to Michaels, and “many of them were outdated even in 1970.”
It is difficult to comb through the thousands of chemicals in use today in order to create new standards for each of them.
“We have a huge number of workers exposed to chemicals that we have no or inadequate standards for, and we have really no hope of establishing standards for them,” Michaels said.
Some racial or ethnic minorities, such as Latinos, may be disproportionately affected by this dearth of standards, because of the uneven distribution of workers within certain industries.
Additionally, OSHA is at a disadvantage in terms of prosecuting companies that perpetuate unsafe working conditions. It does not have as much political or financial clout as larger federal institutions such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Those who violate OSHA standards often get a slap on the wrist, while those who violate EPA standards may be fined millions of dollars.
“As we look forward,” Michaels said, “we must keep in mind that safety health works when workers have power.”
Even if OSHA does not have as much sway as other federal agencies, workers who have the ability and confidence to approach supervisors to demand safe conditions will raise the standard for everyone. OSHA is attempting to facilitate communication between employers and employees through electronic forums and phone lines where individuals can submit complaints, brainstorm ways to improve conditions and speak with one another anonymously. Interpreters allow Spanish-speaking workers to contribute as well.
Dr. Michaels ended his lecture with a request to the academic community: “Over the years, OSHA hasn’t tried to evaluate their standards. Does our approach work? What is the effect of different penalty levels? There isn’t much evidence or empirical work on how OSHA standards affect working conditions, and these are very important issues that require an alliance between academia and those working to create and enact OSHA standards.”
Published in RightsNews
Volume 29, no. 2, February, 2011.
Download issue as PDF
