This 2024 edition of “Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect” marks the 33rd year the AFL-CIO has produced a report on the state of safety and health protections for America’s workers. The Occupational Safety and Health Act, promising every worker the right to a safe job, has been in effect for more than 50 years, and nearly 690,000 workers now can say their lives have been saved since the passage of the OSH Act. 

Over the last 50 years, there has been significant progress toward improving working conditions and protecting workers from job injuries, illnesses and deaths. Federal job safety agencies have issued many important regulations on safety hazards and health hazards like silica and coal dust, strengthened enforcement and expanded worker rights. These initiatives undoubtedly have made workplaces safer and saved lives, but much more progress is needed. 

Over the years, progress has become more challenging, as employers’ opposition to workers’ rights and protections has grown, and attacks on unions have intensified. Big corporations and many Republicans have launched an aggressive assault on worker protections. They have used their power and influence to attempt to deregulate the work environment, shift the responsibility to provide safe jobs from employers to individual workers, and undermine the core duties of job safety and health agencies. The unnecessary political polarization of critical issues like climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic have exacerbated and introduced new challenges to longstanding problems of heat and infectious diseases exposures in the workplace, but these real threats from existing and emerging hazards need to be addressed under the duties of the OSH Act. Other real, everyday threats like workplace violence and job fatality rates for workers of color are only getting worse.

But our job safety agencies have been flat-funded for years, not even keeping up with inflation. Meanwhile, these agencies’ responsibilities have grown with increasing employment and emerging hazards. There needs to be a renewed focus and commitment to these agencies from both lawmakers and the public. 

The Biden and Trump administration’s records on worker safety and health differ drastically. The Biden administration’s job safety agencies have had to repair and rebuild after four years of decimation rife with understaffing, repeal of worker safety laws, limits on public access to information and the inability to issue even the most basic of long-overdue protections. Instead, the Biden administration has improved transparency of information about loved ones lost on the job to honor them and to prevent these tragedies for other families, bolstered enforcement initiatives to hold accountable the employers who violate the law and put workers in danger, strengthened policies to protect vulnerable workers with the greatest risks of dying on the job and facing retaliation, and issued milestone regulations to save workers’ lives and improve their livelihoods.

Just recently, the Biden administration used the first action under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act to ban current uses and imports of chrysotile asbestos, after decades of weak laws and inaction that have put the United States behind other countries; issued a rule to protect communities from facilities that store, use or manufacture chemicals; clarified the rights of workers to choose their own representation during inspections; issued a rule to protect mineworkers from silica exposure; issued a rule to require large employers to fall in line with other-sized employers on injury reporting to OSHA and anti-retaliation measures for workers who report injuries; and worked across agencies to protect immigrant workers whose employers are involved in a workplace safety and health investigation. 

The nation must remain committed to protecting workers from job injury, disease and death and to ensure Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) investigations have access to all of the relevant facts and witnesses that often are blocked by employers. We must prioritize preventing injury, illness and death at work in order to restore dignity and justice to working people, improve livelihoods, and reduce burdens on families and communities. Employers must meet their responsibilities under the law to protect workers and be held accountable if they put workers in danger. Only then can we fulfill the promise of good jobs to include a safe and healthy job for all of America’s workers. There is much more work to be done to ensure the fundamental right to a safe job is a reality for all.

The High Toll of Job Injuries, Illnesses and Deaths

In 2022:

• 344 workers died each day from hazardous working conditions.
• 5,486 workers were killed on the job in the United States.
• An estimated 120,000 workers died from occupational diseases.
• The job fatality rate increased again to 3.7 per 100,000 workers. 
• Workers of color die on the job at a higher rate: Black and Latino worker job fatality rates are disproportionate compared with all other workers and are continuing to increase. 
• Employers reported nearly 3.5 million work-related injuries and illnesses, an increase from the previous year.
• 43 workers died from heat on the job; fatal and nonfatal data are an undercount of the real problem.
• Workplace homicides and workplace suicides increased 9% and 13%, respectively, from 2021 to 2022.
• Separately, unintentional overdoses at work increased 13% from 2021 to 2022. 
• The rate of serious workplace violence injuries has increased to 4.3 per 10,000 workers.
• Musculoskeletal disorders from repetitive motion injuries continue to be a major problem, accounting for 28% of all serious work-related injuries and illnesses in private industry.
• Underreporting of all workplace injuries and illnesses is widespread—the true toll of work-related injuries and illnesses is 5.6 million to 8.4 million each year in private industry. 
• Chemical exposures continue to plague working people, leading to debilitating, life-threatening diseases that are totally preventable.

The cost of job injuries and illnesses is enormous, estimated at $174 billion to $348 billion a year—an undercount of the real impact on society, families and communities. 

States with the highest fatality rates in 2022 were:

• Wyoming (12.7 per 100,000 workers)
• North Dakota (9.8 per 100,000 workers)
• Mississippi (6.9 per 100,000 workers)
• New Mexico (6.8 per 100,000 workers)
• West Virginia (6.8 per 100,000 workers)
• Louisiana (6.4 per 100,000 workers)

Industries with the highest fatality rates in 2022 were:

• Agriculture, forestry, and fishing and hunting (18.6 per 100,000 workers)
• Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction (16.6 per 100,000 workers)
• Transportation and warehousing (14.1 per 100,000 workers)
• Construction (9.6 per 100,000 workers)
• Wholesale trade (5.4 per 100,000 workers)

Black and Latino workers are more likely to die on the job. In 2022:

• Black workers’ job fatality rate was the highest it has been in nearly 15 years—4.2 per 100,000 workers. 
• 734 Black workers died on the job—the highest number in at least 20 years.
• Latino workers’ job fatality rate increased again to 4.6 per 100,000 workers—meaning they continued to face the greatest risk of dying on the job than all workers at 24% higher than the national average; the rate marked a 24% increase over the past decade.
• The number of Latino worker deaths increased again to 1,248. Of those killed on the job, 60% were immigrants.

Older workers and minors are at serious risk. In 2022:

• More than one-third of workplace fatalities occurred among workers ages 55 and older. 
• Workers 65 and older have 2.4 times the risk of dying on the job as other workers, with a job fatality rate of 8.8 per 100,000 workers.
• Many older workers are injured from falls on the same level.
• Many children, mostly migrants, have become the focus of stark exploitation, working in dangerous conditions. 
• 19 workers younger than 18 years and 400 workers between 19 and 25 years old died on the job. 

Job Safety Oversight and Enforcement

The Biden administration has stepped up enforcement through several targeted enforcement initiatives: 

• OSHA has clarified the importance of the participation of all workers to choose their representatives during OSHA inspections.
• OSHA has reinstated the collection of employer injury data for large employers to better inform inspection and prevention measures.
• OSHA has instituted instance-by-instance citations for high-gravity violations, maximizing the penalty for employers who violate the law.
• OSHA has signed a joint agreement with the National Labor Relations Board to strengthen information-sharing for whistleblower cases. 
• OSHA has instituted targeted enforcement programs and awareness campaigns on heat, silica, COVID-19, falls in construction, combustible dust, injuries in the poultry industry and warehousing.  
• The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has reinstated impact inspections, focusing on mines with a poor history of compliance with MSHA standards, high numbers of injuries, illnesses or fatalities, or other indicators of unsafe mines.

OSHA resources in FY 2023 still are too few to be a deterrent:

• There are 1,875 inspectors (853 federal and 1,022 state) to inspect the 11.5 million workplaces under the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s jurisdiction. 
• Federal OSHA has 47 fewer inspectors than in FY 2022— only enough to inspect workplaces once every 186 years—and state OSHA plans have 51 additional inspectors compared with FY 2022.
• There is one inspector for every 80,014 workers.
• The current OSHA budget amounts to $3.93 available to protect each worker. 

Penalties in FY 2023 still are too weak:

• The average penalty for a serious violation was $4,597 for federal OSHA.
• The average penalty for a serious violation was $2,406 for OSHA state plans. 
• The median penalty for killing a worker was $14,063 for federal OSHA.
• The median penalty for killing a worker was $7,000 for state OSHA plans.
• Only 137 worker death cases have been criminally prosecuted under the Occupational Safety and Health Act since 1970.

Much Work Remains to Be Done

Workers need more job safety and health protection, not less. 

Action needed from job safety agencies:

• Fully enforce OSHA, MSHA and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) job safety and health protections to hold employers accountable for not following workplace safety and health laws.
• Strengthen federal OSHA oversight of state OSHA plans.
• Increase attention to the significant safety and health problems faced by Latino, Black, immigrant and aging workers, and those under nontraditional work arrangements. 
• Strengthen anti-retaliation protections and worker participation rights.
• Issue an OSHA workplace violence standard for health care and social service workers.
• Issue an OSHA heat illness and injury prevention standard to protect indoor and outdoor workers from dangerously hot working conditions.
• Issue an OSHA infectious disease standard to protect workers from growing biological threats.

Action needed from Congress:

• Increase funding and staffing at job safety agencies for both standard-setting and enforcement, modernizing the flat-funded budget that has prevented agencies from fulfilling their obligations. 
• Pass legislation on heat and workplace violence to ensure OSHA develops and issues strong standards on these major problems.
• Pass the Protecting America’s Workers Act to extend the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s coverage to workers currently excluded, strengthen civil and criminal penalties for violations, enhance anti-discrimination protections, and strengthen the rights of workers, unions and those who have been injured or made ill because of their jobs.
• Oppose attempts by corporations to weaken protections under the guise of regulatory “reform” that actually would make it more difficult—or impossible—for agencies to issue needed safeguards.

Action needed to restore and improve injury and illness data:

• Enhance access to timely injury and illness information by providing the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) with additional resources to publish annual detailed nonfatal injury and illnesses data.
• Improve and restore the collection and reporting of demographic, cause, nature and other descriptive data for workers killed on the job through agreements and policies that allow BLS to publish more comprehensive and descriptive worker fatality data. 
• Refocus and align data collection and analysis efforts with emerging worker safety and health issues, and with an equitable lens needed to support the tracking and understanding of these key areas.
• Develop a national occupational disease surveillance system to determine and illuminate the true toll of occupational illnesses from workplace exposures, and inform prevention efforts to reduce chronic illnesses.

Workers need to be able to fully exercise their rights to a workplace free from recognized hazards, including the ability to report injuries and illnesses without retaliation, raise unsafe working conditions, be able to fully utilize stop work authority, come home unharmed at the end of the workday and be fully compensated when the job has injured or made them ill. 

This requires refocused national attention, energy and action on the enormous role and impact job safety and health agencies play to provide workplace oversight and prevent the disease, injuries and death that plague working people across the country. There must be new dedication and leadership to substantially increase their resources to protect workers, and address ongoing and emerging safety and health problems. Employers and elected leaders must recognize that employment is a significant determinant of health and take leadership to make workplaces safer. 

Congress continues to fund job safety at stagnant levels, allowing an OSHA budget that still only amounts to $3.93 to protect each worker covered by the OSH Act. Existing and emerging hazards continue to grow the portfolio and responsibilities of OSHA and other job safety agencies, without increased funding, not even to match inflation. At these levels, the agencies continue to have a paltry number of staff to write standards, analyze data, conduct inspections, conduct needed research on important hazards and respond to emerging threats.

Our regulatory protective systems have been weakened over decades and still are under threat. Job safety agencies need to be rebuilt, not only restored to the pre-Trump era, but in ways that reflect a modern approach to creating data-informed policy, issuing strong standards to address longstanding and emerging hazards, increasing transparency and information access, and eliminating barriers to workers reporting injuries. The whistleblower program needs significant improvement; there is still a major backlog of cases and new initiatives have not made a dent in the program’s significant issues. OSHA can make changes to more timely reach out to complainants and their co-workers in order to identify problematic workplaces, but the whistleblower law has also significantly limited the agency and needs to be strengthened.

Severe inequities in dangerous working conditions have created unacceptable disparities in those who face the largest burdens of disease, injury and death because of their jobs, especially as our nation’s demographics are changing. Initiatives to address the safety and health risks posed by changes in the workforce and employment arrangements must take more prominence, and workplace safety and health regulations must be seen as a significant intervention to impact people’s lives in a meaningful way. We need to continue to elevate initiatives that address the increased risk of fatalities and injuries faced by workers of color, immigrant workers, aging workers and young workers who are often exploited, and enhance efforts to protect temporary and contract workers.

Workplace violence is a growing and serious threat, particularly to women workers and those in the health care and social services sectors. OSHA must issue a workplace violence standard, and issue rules on heat illness prevention, emergency response and infectious disease. More attention and resources are needed to address health hazards in the workplace. OSHA standards for chemical hazards are obsolete and must be updated. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must continue to fully implement the new toxic chemicals reform law and coordinate with OSHA and NIOSH, taking action to address the risks to the public and to workers. New initiatives are needed to address musculoskeletal disorders and combustible dust.

Job safety agencies need to fully enforce their standards and other workplace safety laws by developing a proactive enforcement plan across industries, fully investigating complaints, performing on-site inspections, issuing violations and penalties that reflect the size and scope of the real problem and deter other employers, and ensure workers’ rights to report unsafe working conditions and refuse dangerous work. Workers and their representatives must be able to fully participate in the workplace inspections as employers and their representatives do. 

In mining, MSHA must continue initiatives to focus increased attention on mines with a record of repeated violations and stronger enforcement action against mines with patterns of violations. Congress must strengthen job safety laws to prevent tragedies like the Massey Upper Big Branch mining disaster, which killed 29 miners in West Virginia. Improvements in the Mine Safety and Health Act are needed to give MSHA more authority to shut down dangerous mines and to enhance enforcement against repeat violators.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act now is more than 50 years old and is out of date. Congress must pass the Protecting America’s Workers Act (H.R. 2998) to extend the law’s coverage to workers currently excluded, strengthen civil and criminal penalties for violations, and strengthen the rights of workers and their representatives. Improvements to update and strengthen the OSH Act’s anti-retaliation provisions are particularly needed, so workers can report job hazards and injuries, and exercise safety and health rights without fear. 

The nation must remain committed to protecting workers from injury, disease and death. Preventing injury, illness and death at work to restore dignity, save lives, improve livelihoods, and reduce burdens on families and communities must be a high priority. Employers must meet their responsibilities to protect workers and be held accountable if they put workers in danger. Only then can the promise of safe jobs for all of America’s workers be fulfilled.

Workers need to be able to fully exercise their rights to a workplace free from recognized hazards, including the ability to report injuries and illnesses without retaliation, raise unsafe working conditions, be able to fully utilize stop work authority, come home unharmed at the end of the workday and be fully compensated when the job has injured or made them ill. 

This requires refocused national attention, energy and action on the enormous role and impact job safety and health agencies play to provide workplace oversight and prevent the disease, injuries and death that plague working people across the country. There must be new dedication and leadership to substantially increase their resources to protect workers, and address ongoing and emerging safety and health problems. Employers and elected leaders must recognize that employment is a significant determinant of health and take leadership to make workplaces safer. 

Congress continues to fund job safety at stagnant levels, allowing an OSHA budget that still only amounts to $3.93 to protect each worker covered by the OSH Act. Existing and emerging hazards continue to grow the portfolio and responsibilities of OSHA and other job safety agencies, without increased funding, not even to match inflation. At these levels, the agencies continue to have a paltry number of staff to write standards, analyze data, conduct inspections, conduct needed research on important hazards and respond to emerging threats.

Our regulatory protective systems have been weakened over decades and still are under threat. Job safety agencies need to be rebuilt, not only restored to the pre-Trump era, but in ways that reflect a modern approach to creating data-informed policy, issuing strong standards to address longstanding and emerging hazards, increasing transparency and information access, and eliminating barriers to workers reporting injuries. The whistleblower program needs significant improvement; there is still a major backlog of cases and new initiatives have not made a dent in the program’s significant issues. OSHA can make changes to more timely reach out to complainants and their co-workers in order to identify problematic workplaces, but the whistleblower law has also significantly limited the agency and needs to be strengthened.

Severe inequities in dangerous working conditions have created unacceptable disparities in those who face the largest burdens of disease, injury and death because of their jobs, especially as our nation’s demographics are changing. Initiatives to address the safety and health risks posed by changes in the workforce and employment arrangements must take more prominence, and workplace safety and health regulations must be seen as a significant intervention to impact people’s lives in a meaningful way. We need to continue to elevate initiatives that address the increased risk of fatalities and injuries faced by workers of color, immigrant workers, aging workers and young workers who are often exploited, and enhance efforts to protect temporary and contract workers.

Workplace violence is a growing and serious threat, particularly to women workers and those in the health care and social services sectors. OSHA must issue a workplace violence standard, and issue rules on heat illness prevention, emergency response and infectious disease. More attention and resources are needed to address health hazards in the workplace. OSHA standards for chemical hazards are obsolete and must be updated. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must continue to fully implement the new toxic chemicals reform law and coordinate with OSHA and NIOSH, taking action to address the risks to the public and to workers. New initiatives are needed to address musculoskeletal disorders and combustible dust.

Job safety agencies need to fully enforce their standards and other workplace safety laws by developing a proactive enforcement plan across industries, fully investigating complaints, performing on-site inspections, issuing violations and penalties that reflect the size and scope of the real problem and deter other employers, and ensure workers’ rights to report unsafe working conditions and refuse dangerous work. Workers and their representatives must be able to fully participate in the workplace inspections as employers and their representatives do. 

In mining, MSHA must continue initiatives to focus increased attention on mines with a record of repeated violations and stronger enforcement action against mines with patterns of violations. Congress must strengthen job safety laws to prevent tragedies like the Massey Upper Big Branch mining disaster, which killed 29 miners in West Virginia. Improvements in the Mine Safety and Health Act are needed to give MSHA more authority to shut down dangerous mines and to enhance enforcement against repeat violators.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act now is more than 50 years old and is out of date. Congress must pass the Protecting America’s Workers Act (H.R. 2998) to extend the law’s coverage to workers currently excluded, strengthen civil and criminal penalties for violations, and strengthen the rights of workers and their representatives. Improvements to update and strengthen the OSH Act’s anti-retaliation provisions are particularly needed, so workers can report job hazards and injuries, and exercise safety and health rights without fear. 

The nation must remain committed to protecting workers from injury, disease and death. Preventing injury, illness and death at work to restore dignity, save lives, improve livelihoods, and reduce burdens on families and communities must be a high priority. Employers must meet their responsibilities to protect workers and be held accountable if they put workers in danger. Only then can the promise of safe jobs for all of America’s workers be fulfilled.

Throughout this report, there are notations where data have been restricted compared with past reporting. This has impacted the public’s understanding of key issues, worsening problems and attention needed to control hazards in the workplace. Annual reporting of these data helped employers, workers, advocates and the government analyze and evaluate trends in the workplace.

In 2020 (starting with 2019 data), the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) updated its disclosure methodology policy on fatalities, resulting in significantly fewer descriptive data than had been published previously under the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries. This has led to much less descriptive information published for work-related deaths in the United States, i.e., less information on the nature, events and sources of worker fatalities. Detailed occupation, country of origin and other information no longer are available for Latino immigrants and many other immigrant workers, despite fatalities among all foreign-born workers continuing to be a serious problem. It no longer is possible to stratify deaths in one occupation by certain demographics like country of origin or gender, workplace homicides by type of weapon used or by perpetrator, unintentional overdose deaths by different industries; many other analyses have been limited as well. Therefore, we are not able to analyze and update our report’s data on some of these important topics this year. On his first day in office, President Biden issued the Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.,  More can be done to align this equitable lens with identification and reporting on occupational safety and health data that are leading to preventable injuries, illnesses and deaths. 

It is not just the publication of work-related fatality data that now is limited. 

Data policies also have changed on the reporting of injuries that result in days away from work (DAFW), days with job transfer or restriction (DJTR) and days away, restricted or transferred (DART, the combination of DAFW and DJTR). Through its annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII), BLS previously collected and reported detailed information (i.e., stratifying industry cases by other factors such as exposure, nature, source, demographics) for DAFW cases annually, but BLS recently ended this pilot program. This decision has resulted in serious injuries reported only biennially (every two years) instead of annually, but including more detail for these cases, i.e., now reporting detailed information for DJTR and DART, in addition to DAFW. This could provide insights into a more complete understanding of the impact and nature of injuries among different worker populations, and better inform safety resources and return-to-work strategies, but it makes it difficult to compare with previous years.

BLS made these changes after a 60-day request for comment on its information collection requests for workplace injuries and illnesses, and with the intention to remain resource neutral for the collection and reporting of data, and burden neutral for employers who report this injury and illness information. 

The first biennial publication of these case and demographic estimates for DAFW, DJTR and DART cases (with the same level of detail previously for DAFW) began with combined data from reference years 2021 and 2022 that were published in 2023 and are presented in this report. However, every other year, we will not be able to provide information for nonfatal injuries and illnesses on worker characteristics, selected natures, parts of the body, events or exposure or occupation; this includes data on key topics like musculoskeletal disorders and serious injuries from workplace violence or heat overexposure. Instead, we only will be able to include the DAFW, DJTR and DART rates and numbers, overall and by detailed industry. 

In recent years, BLS also has restricted data access to researchers. BLS is governed by the Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act (CIPSEA) and must report to the Office of Management and Budget on the implementation of CIPSEA.

In 2022, 5,486 workers lost their lives on the job as a result of traumatic injuries, a continued increase from 2021, according to fatality data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The rate of fatal job injuries in 2022 was 3.7 per 100,000 workers, an increase from 2021 and a return to the fatality rate in 2008. Each day in this country, an average of 15 workers die because of job injuries—women and men who go to work, never to return home to their families and loved ones. 

This does not include workers who die from occupational diseases, estimated to be 120,000 each year. This number does not include those who died from being exposed to COVID-19 at work. Chronic occupational diseases receive less attention and place little accountability on employers because most are not detected until years after workers have been exposed to toxic chemicals and other agents, and because occupational illnesses often are misdiagnosed and poorly tracked. There is no national comprehensive surveillance system for occupational illnesses. In total, about 344 workers die each day due to job injuries and illnesses. 

In 2022, agriculture, forestry, and fishing and hunting continues to be the most dangerous industry (18.6 deaths per 100,000 workers), followed by mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction (16.6 per 100,000 workers), transportation and warehousing (14.1 per 100,000 workers)—largely from the transportation industry—construction (9.6 per 100,000 workers) and wholesale trade (5.4 per 100,000 workers).

Since 1992, the first year this report was issued, the job fatality rate in most significantly dangerous industries (manufacturing, construction, agriculture and mining) has decreased, except in transportation and warehousing, which has increased 8.5%, from 13.0 per 100,000 workers in 1992. 

Transportation incidents, in particular roadway collisions, continue to be the leading cause of workplace deaths, responsible for 2,066 or 38% of all fatalities in 2022, followed by deaths from falls, slips and trips (865, or 16%), violence (849, or 15%) and exposure to harmful substances or environments (839, or 15%), including 525 unintentional overdoses. The increase in unintentional overdoses occurring in the workplace is a series high since 2012 and mirrors the unintentional overdose crisis seen outside of workplaces, in the overall population across the nation. In 2021, 80,411 individuals in the overall population died from all opioid overdoses, a sharp increase from 68,630 in 2020, 47,600 in 2017 and 21,089 in 2010. In 2022, 51,435 individuals in the overall population died from an unintentional overdose (opioids and other drugs), an increase from 48,232 in 2020. Unintentional overdoses now constitute nearly 10% of workplace fatalities. Opioids have commonly been prescribed to treat the pain caused by occupational injuries, which can be prevented.

The job fatality rate for all self-employed workers—a group that lacks OSHA coverage—continues to remain high at 10.7 per 100,000 workers, more than triple the rate among wage and salary workers (3.2 per 100,000). In 2022, 885 contract workers died on the job—a number that has decreased since 2012, and constitutes 16% of all worker deaths. BLS had begun reporting details on fatalities that involve workers employed as contractors in 2012 in response to concerns about safety and health issues among these workers. Fatality data in 2019 and forward no longer report other details of contractor deaths due to a 2020 BLS policy on disclosure methodology and reduction in publishable data—pulling back on transparency of details among contract worker deaths. 

States with the overall highest fatality rates include Wyoming (12.7 per 100,000 workers), North Dakota (9.8 per 100,000 workers), Mississippi (6.9 per 1000,000 workers), New Mexico (6.8 per 100,000 workers), West Virginia (6.8 per 100,000 workers) and Louisiana (6.4 per 100,000 workers). In 2022, the job fatality rate increased in more than half the states (29 states) since 2021, including by 97% in Mississippi, 32% in Delaware, 31% in West Virginia, and 22% in Wyoming. 

Workplace Injuries and Illnesses are Underreported and Costly

In 2022, more than 3.5 million workers across all industries, including 2.8 million in the private sector, had work-related injuries and illnesses that were voluntarily reported by employers. In 2022, state and local public sector employers reported a combined injury rate of 4.9 per 100 workers, 81% higher than the reported rate of 2.7 per 100 workers in the private sector. Among the industries with the greatest reported injury and illness rates in 2022 were nursing and residential care facilities and hospitals.

Due to limitations in the current injury reporting system and widespread employer underreporting of workplace injuries and illnesses, these numbers understate the problem. The true toll in the private sector alone is estimated to be two to three times greater—or 5.6 million to 8.4 million injuries and illnesses a year. In addition, since the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses is voluntary, some states do not report.

The number of all reported work-related illnesses in 2022 in the private industry increased to 460,700. This is a decrease from 544,600 in 2020, but an increase from 365,200 in 2021—both years that were affected by larger amounts of reported COVID-19 illness. BLS does not produce close to a true count of occupational COVID-19 illness or any occupational illness. This true toll is unknown, but enormous based on ongoing studies and other reports. 

One measure of severity of reported injuries and illnesses are measured by cases that lead to days away from work and cases with job transfer or restriction (DART). In 2022, the incidence rate of injury and illness cases that lead to days away from work increased to 1.2 per 100 workers even though it has generally decreased over time. The incidence rate of injury and illness cases that lead to job transfer or restriction in 2022 remained the same as 0.6 per 100 workers in 2021.

Of the 3,379,220 DART cases in 2022, 29.6% were from overexertion and bodily reaction, 23.1% were from objects and equipment, 19.5% were from exposure to harmful substances and 12.3% were from falls on the same level. 

Reported Cases Understate the Problem

Over the last decade, there has been significant research showing that the BLS survey fails to capture a large proportion of work-related injuries and illnesses—one-third to two-thirds of work-related injuries and illnesses are missed by the survey. Studies comparing injuries captured by the BLS survey with injuries reported to workers’ compensation or other injury-reporting systems have found that the BLS survey missed 33% to 69% of work-related injuries., , ,  A 2018 study of injury reporting in the mining industry found a similar result. Two-thirds of the injuries among miners in Illinois that were reported to workers’ compensation were not reported to MSHA by mine operators as required by the law. A study that compared state fatality rates in the construction industry with rates of injuries that result in lost time or job restriction found little correlation between the two, and in some cases there was a negative correlation. The study observed that multiple factors impacted the reporting and recording of injuries, and concluded that fatality rates are a much more valid measure of risk. 

Some of the undercount in the BLS survey is due to injuries excluded from the BLS survey’s scope, e.g., injuries among self-employed individuals, and the design of the survey. But other factors, including employees’ reluctance to report injuries due to fear of retaliation, incentive programs that penalize workers who report injuries and drug testing programs for workplace injuries, suppress reporting. In addition, there are disincentives for employers to report injuries, which include concern about increased workers’ compensation costs for increased reports of injuries; fear of being denied government contracts due to high injury rates; concern about being targeted by OSHA for inspection if a high injury rate is reported; and the promise of monetary bonuses for low injury rates. A 2020 BLS study investigating additional causes of underreporting indicated that keeping of injury and illness logs was not widely prevalent, and that small establishments were less likely than mid-sized and large establishments to keep records.

BLS also has recognized the need to make changes in its program in order to collect more complete and accurate injury and illness statistics. It launched a pilot of a Household Survey on Occupational Injuries and Illnesses to collect information on work-related injuries and illnesses through interviews with workers. The results showed that the survey needed improvements to reduce respondent burden, to improve survey completion and to identify OSHA-recordable injuries, but it has potential to be a supplement to the existing employer-based injury and illness survey. BLS will continue to work on improvements to the survey. A 2018 report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine on occupational safety and health surveillance strongly endorsed BLS conducting this new household survey. Hopefully, if the survey is improved, Congress will provide the necessary funding to continue and expand this important work. 

Cost of Occupational Injuries and Deaths

The cost of occupational injuries and deaths in the United States is staggering.

The 2023 Workplace Safety Index, published by Liberty Mutual Insurance, estimated the cost of the most disabling workplace injuries to employers at more than $58 billion a year—more than $1 billion per week. The top five injury causes that account for 62.7% of the total cost burden were: overexertion involving outside sources (handling object), falls on the same level, falls to a lower level, struck by object or equipment (being hit by objects), and other exertions or bodily reactions (awkward postures). The top 10 injuries amounted to $48.15 billion in direct workers’ compensation costs. Because the data were based on 2020 data, COVID-19 costs were included in exposures to other harmful substances, which were $3.35 billion.

This analysis, based on 2020 data from Liberty Mutual, BLS and the National Academy of Social Insurance, estimated direct costs to employers (medical and lost-wage payments) of injuries resulting in cases involving five or more days of lost time. If indirect costs also are considered, the overall costs are much higher. Based on calculations used in a previous Liberty Mutual Safety Index, the data indicate that businesses pay between $174 billion and $348 billion annually in direct and indirect (overtime, training and lost productivity) costs on workers’ compensation losses for the most disabling injuries (indirect costs are estimated to be two to five times direct costs). It is important to note that the safety index excludes a large number of injury cases (those resulting in less than five days of lost time). In addition, Liberty Mutual bases its cost estimates on BLS injury data. Thus, all the problems of underreporting in the BLS system apply to the Liberty Mutual cost estimates as well.

A 2011 signature, comprehensive study examined a broad range of data sources, including data from the BLS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Council on Compensation Insurance and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), to determine the cost of fatal and nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses in 2007. This study estimated the medical and indirect (productivity) costs of workplace injuries and illnesses at $250 billion annually, more than the cost of cancer. A follow-up analysis found that workers’ compensation covered only 21% of these costs, with 13% borne by private health insurance, 11% by the federal government and 5% by state and local governments. Fifty percent of the costs were borne by workers and their family members.

In 2021, the National Safety Council also performed an economic impact analysis of workplace injuries using some of the same data sources, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) cost estimates, HCUP, and BLS fatal and nonfatal injury data. It estimated the total cost of work injuries in 2021 to be $167 billion and 103 million lost work days. However, this analysis also utilizes the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses data, and therefore includes underreporting issues in the estimates.

A 2015 report by OSHA—“Adding Inequality to Injury: The Costs of Failing to Protect Workers on the Job”—outlined how work-related injuries have devastating impacts on workers and their families. According to the report, workers who are injured on the job suffer great economic loss. Even after receiving workers’ compensation benefits, injured workers’ incomes are, on average, nearly $31,000 lower over 10 years than if they had not suffered an injury.

One of the major contributors to the severe loss of income is the gross deficiencies and inequities in the workers’ compensation system, which continues to be governed by 50 different state laws. A 2015 multipart series by ProPublica and National Public Radio exposed the failure of the workers’ compensation system to provide fair and timely compensation for workers hurt on the job. The series—“Insult to Injury: America’s Vanishing Worker Protections”—was based on a yearlong investigation, which found that over the previous decade there had been a systematic effort by insurers and employers to weaken workers’ compensation benefits for injured workers. 

Since 2003, legislators in 33 states have passed legislation reducing benefits or limiting eligibility. The benefits provided to workers vary widely. For example, at the time of the investigation, the maximum compensation for loss of an eye was $261,525 in Pennsylvania, but only $27,280 in Alabama. In many states, employers have great control over medical decisions. 

Workers are not allowed to pick their own doctors, and employers can demand review by “independent medical examiners” picked by employers who can challenge medical determinations regarding the work-relatedness of the condition, the degree of disability and prescribed treatment. According to ProPublica, all of these factors have contributed to the demolition of the workers’ compensation system and left injured workers and their families, and society at large, bearing the costs of their injuries.

Women Workers 

In 2022, 445 women died on the job, compared with 5,041 men, who often work in more dangerous industries. However, in 2022, a larger percentage of women died from work-related homicides (18% of all workplace fatalities for women compared with 9% for men). This number has increased. 

Due to the new BLS policy explained in the “Data Reporting, Transparency and Equity” section of this report, these data were not reported last year. This restriction of reporting detailed demographic data cross referenced with workplace exposure data also has limited the ability to identify and track domestic violence in the workplace and the magnitude of nonfatal, serious injuries, both disproportionately borne by women. In 2022, 24 workers were killed in the workplace by a relative or domestic partner. BLS data no longer report this breakdown by gender; however, women often bear this burden disproportionately, and previous years of this report showed that women were 50% more likely than men to be killed by a relative or domestic partner at work.

According to detailed 2021‒2022 data published by BLS, women face a significant number of serious injuries that lead to days away from work, job transfer or restriction in health care and social assistance (616,090)—the highest category for women—and in retail trade (253,020). Men face high risks in transportation and warehousing (283,720) and retail trade (274,220). The median number of days away from work, job transfer or restriction for women is 11 and for men is 13, compared with the median for all cases of 12. 

Aging Workers

Workers 65 and older have 2.4 times the risk of dying on the job than all workers, with a fatality rate of 8.8 per 100,000 workers in 2022. Workers ages 55–64 also are at increased risk, with a fatality rate of 4.6 per 100,000 workers. In 2022, 35% of all fatalities (1,936 deaths) occurred in workers ages 55 years and older, with 761 of these deaths occurring in workers ages 65 years and older. People are working longer, and by 2031, all baby boomers will be 66 years and older, and one in five individuals older than 65 will still be working.

Minors, Young Adult Workers and Child Labor

Young workers are at an increased risk of injury on the job, with workers ages 15–24 experiencing higher rates of work-related injuries than adults ages 25–44 years. In 2022, 419 workers younger than 25 died on the job (compared with 350 the prior year), including 19 workers younger than 18. The number of workers killed on the job at ages 20–24 increased 12% to 323 fatalities in 2022 from 289 fatalities in 2020. Young workers are at elevated risk due to limited or no prior work experience, lack of workplace safety and health training and supervision, and limitations in strength or cognitive ability needed to perform certain tasks. They are also less likely to recognize and voice safety concerns or be aware of their legal protection and worker protection agencies.

The past year has brought public attention to employers’ illegal use of child labor, even in dangerous industries such as meatpacking, commercial baking, auto manufacturing and construction. Migrant children have been particularly exploited, hired in hazardous industries through staffing agencies, as the children seek income to support themselves, their families in other countries, and often to pay smuggling fees, rent and living expenses to sponsors.,  

On Feb. 17, 2023, DOL announced it fined a contractor that had employed 31 children, ages 13 to 17, systematically across eight states to clean dangerous machinery in meat and poultry plants; some of the children reported suffering injuries. The investigation began in August 2022. The Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) enforces child labor laws under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). On Nov. 28, 2023, the WHD issued a Field Assistance Bulletin explaining changes to its process to assess civil money penalties for child labor law violations. Previously, the WHD considered whether these penalty assessments were appropriate based on the size of the business and gravity of the violation. 

After a series of investigative press reports and in order to address the rise in unchecked child labor exploitation, particularly impacting migrant children, the Biden administration created an interagency task force to improve collaboration on child labor investigations and scrutiny in the sponsor-vetting processes, and to implement education and training initiatives in relevant communities. In fiscal year 2023, the department investigated 955 cases with child labor violations involving 5,792 children nationwide, including 502 children employed in violation of hazardous occupation standards, assessing more than $8 million in civil monetary penalties (CMPs). 

The FLSA authorizes assessment of CMPs under two provisions, permitting penalties on a per-child basis up to $15,138 for child labor violations and an enhanced penalty up to $68,801 for child labor violations that cause the death or serious injury of an employee younger than 18. However, the new bulletin no longer focuses penalties on a per-child basis, but rather a per-violation basis. In other words, employers now may be assessed separate penalties for the same child for each violation (such as multiple hazardous order violations and multiple recordkeeping violations). In calculating the penalty amount, the agency utilizes the statutory maximum (currently $15,138) and increases or decreases the amount based on the following factors: willfulness; number of minors employed; age of minors; hazardous work; resultant injury; duration of illegal employment; and the hours of employment. In addition to the factors above, the penalty amount is subject to reductions based on (1) the number of employees; (2) annual sales volume; and (3) amount of capital investment and financial resources relative to the size of the business. 

In March 2024, DOL obtained a federal consent judgment that required a Tennessee manufacturer of outdoor power equipment components for major companies including John Deere, Toro and Yamaha to stop employing children illegally and to follow federal child labor laws in the future. After months of investigation and identifying 10 children—as young as 14 years old— employed in dangerous jobs at Tuff Torq, DOL investigators observed a child operating a power-driven hoisting apparatus, an occupation prohibited for workers younger than 18. As a result, the department objected to the shipment of goods from the facility, citing the Fair Labor Standards Act’s “hot goods” provision, which prevents employers from shipping goods produced by oppressive child labor. DOL issued a $296,951 civil money penalty and required the employer to set aside $1.5 million as disgorgement of 30 days’ profits related to its use of child labor; these proceeds paid by Tuff Torq will be used for the benefit of the children employed illegally. The agreement with the employer included unannounced and warrantless searches of its facility for three years, but did not appear to utilize the agency’s deferred action tool for these workers.

However, in conflict with federal law, some states are opening the door for employers to expand the use of child labor as part of a multi-industry effort to expand employers’ ability to exploit low-wage labor. States have introduced legislation to increase the hours of work for minors, increase the number of industries and hazardous tasks minors can work, and reduce employer liability, many under the guise of youth employment training programs. As of Feb. 21, 2024, at least 61 bills to weaken child labor protections have been introduced across 29 states since 2021. Seventeen bills were enacted in 13 states—Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia. Two additional bills were enacted in Michigan and Wisconsin but were vetoed by the governors of those states, and at least 29 bills are pending in 19 states. 

In 2023, three states passed legislation to weaken child labor laws: Arkansas (HB 1410), Iowa (SF 542) and Tennessee (HB 1212), while two states passed legislation to strengthen child labor statutes: Colorado (HB 23-1196) and Montana (HB 112). On May 26, 2023, the Iowa governor signed the most comprehensive bill weakening child labor protections, extending the hours that teens can work and the establishments where they can be employed. On April 10, 2024, the Iowa House and Senate passed a bill that would authorize the issuance of restricted work licenses to children ages 16 to 18.

On March 22, 2024, the Florida governor signed a bill that permits minors younger than 15 years old to work more than 15 hours when school is not in session, and removes certain work restrictions for 16- and 17-year-olds, such as limiting work to no more than six consecutive days. The Florida Senate amended the House version by maintaining daily and weekly work hour limits when school is in session, but allowed for parental or school waivers. 

Black and Latino workers are dying on the job at alarming rates.

In 2022, 734 Black workers died on the job—up from 653 in 2021, 541 in 2020 and 634 in 2019—and the highest number in at least 20 years. Black workers’ job fatality rate is the highest it has been in nearly 15 years—4.2 per 100,000 workers. This is now the fifth year in a row the fatality rate for Black workers is greater than the overall job fatality rate.

In 2022, similar to all other workers, transportation incidents (278) was the top cause of fatalities among Black workers. The industries where many Black workers died were truck transportation (166), administrative and support service (78) and food service and drinking places (55). Within the transportation and warehousing industry for Black workers, 166 died in truck transportation (138 in 2021, 116 in 2020, 120 in 2019); 25 in transit and ground passenger transportation (15 in 2021, 15 in 2020, 19 in 2019); 16 as couriers and messengers (17 in 2021, from 6 in 2020, 19 in 2019); 15 in support activities for transportation (21 in 2021, 21 in 2020, 12 in 2019); and 14 in warehousing and storage (12 in 2021, 3 in 2020). The number of Black worker deaths due to violence on the job (199) increased from 155 in 2021 and 125 in 2020, and exceeds the highest number in the past decade—160 in 2019. The third-leading cause of death was from exposure to harmful substances or environments.

In 2022, 111 Black workers died from exposure to harmful substances or environments, including 72 unintentional overdoses; 204 Latino workers died from exposure to harmful substances or environments, including 104 unintentional overdoses; and 480 White workers died from exposure to harmful substances or environments, including 313 unintentional overdoses. Compared with 2021, this is a 22% increase for Black workers, 11% increase for Latino workers and a 6% for White workers for whom these numbers have been high and on the rise for many years. White workers continue to make up 60% of all unintentional overdose deaths.

The job fatality rate for Latino workers—also higher than the overall job fatality rate—increased again, now 4.6 per 100,000 workers. This job fatality rate has increased 24% over the past decade and is 24% higher than the overall job fatality rate of 3.7 per 100,000 workers. The job fatality rate for Latino workers peaked in 2001 at 6.0 per 100,000 workers. In 2022, 1,248 Latino workers died on the job, an increase from 1,130 in 2021 and 1,072 in 2020—a 48% increase in the last 20 years. The No. 1 cause of fatalities among Latino workers was transportation incidents, followed by falls, slips or trips, then exposure to harmful substances. Latino workers continue to make up approximately 14% of total reported injury and illness cases.

The number of Latino worker fatalities continue to be greatest in California (252), Florida (104) and Texas (269).

Of the Latino workers killed on the job, 60% were born outside of the United States. The recent bridge collapse tragedy in Baltimore was responsible for the deaths of six Latino immigrant laborers who were doing roadwork on the bridge at the time of collapse. This incident underscores the dangerous work immigrants do every day to provide for people in the United States and the toll it takes on their families and communities when workplaces are not safe. Another contributing factor to workers of color facing a disproportionate risk of dying on the job is workers having the ability to be able to speak out about unsafe working conditions without fear of retaliation by their employer.

A recent North Carolina study found that segregation by race into more dangerous industries and occupations played a substantial role in driving mortality rate disparities, particularly Latino workers in construction and Black workers in food manufacturing. These disparities were greatest for workers 45 and older, and Latino workers who died on the job lost a median 47 life-years, compared with 37 among Black workers and 36 among White workers.

Targeted OSHA enforcement and training programs in workplaces and industries with greater density of Latino and immigrant workers have been effective at reducing job fatalities and improving working conditions. These programs were established under the Obama administration and halted by the Trump administration. The Biden administration enhanced its website on worker rights and protections, and has developed a workers’ rights card that OSHA inspectors, unions, advocates and workers can hand out, informing workers of their rights to speak out about safety and health issues and what to do when those rights are violated. The administration also has taken more interagency initiatives to elevate equity issues and done more to accommodate language justice.,  

Twice a year, the president publishes a regulatory agenda for each agency to set its regulatory priorities for the next six months. The most recent agenda was published by the Biden administration in December 2023. 

For OSHA, workplace violence in health care and social assistance, heat injury and illness prevention, process safety management, blood lead levels for medical removal and mechanical power presses update all remain in the pre-rule stage because proposals were not expected yet, and none have been issued to date. Proposed rules slated on the agenda included infectious diseases, cranes and derricks in construction, communication tower safety, emergency response, lock-out/tag-out, tree care, welding in construction confined spaces, personal protective equipment (PPE) in construction, powered industrial trucks design, walking working surfaces, silica medical removal protection and worker walkaround representatives. Significant final rules slated in the agenda included an update to the hazard communication standard, COVID-19 in health care, and tracking injuries and illnesses. The musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) column, table 1 for silica and powered industrial trucks all remain on the long-term agenda with no proposed date for completion. The MSD column refers to a column on OSHA injury and illness logs that has received little attention by the agency despite accounting for the largest percentage of all serious nonfatal workplace injuries this year (28%) and historically. The agency issued a proposed rule on this in 2010, but withdrew it in 2011. Initially, the 2001 final recordkeeping rule had included an MSD column, but OSHA later deleted that column before the provision became effective. 

For the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), final rules slated on the agenda included silica and surface mobile equipment, both which have been finalized. On April 18, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a final rule protecting mineworkers and construction workers in mines from silica exposure. 

So far, this administration has issued final worker safety and health rules from several agencies: two from OSHA, two from MSHA (above) and two from EPA. 

On April 4, 2024, OSHA finalized a rule clarifying workers’ right to designate their own representation during OSHA inspections, i.e., walkaround representation. Further clarifying this right will help level the playing field to ensure workers have access to representation as employers do throughout an OSHA investigation. On July 21, 2023, OSHA issued a final rule on electronic injury reporting, which restored requirements for large employers to submit detailed injury log information to OSHA, which was revoked by the Trump administration in 2019 (other employers were already required to report). This year’s deadline for employers to submit injury and illness data to OSHA was March 2, 2024, and they will report annually. The Injury Tracking Application with these data is now publicly available., 

In a significant move, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a final rule to ban and phase out current uses and imports of chrysotile asbestos in March 2024 after decades of efforts— this was the first rule issued under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). A final rule expected to ban and phase out methylene chloride is thought to be imminent; it just cleared review by the White House Office of Management and Budget on April 18, 2024. In February 2024, the agency also reinstated the Risk Management Program rule that will protect communities near facilities that store, use or manufacture chemicals; this rule was repealed under the Trump administration and now includes improved worker participation and stop-work authority provisions that are critical to improving community safety.

This administration also has issued proposed OSHA rules on emergency response and PPE fit in construction, has completed the small business review for OSHA rules on workplace violence in health care and social assistance and heat, and has proposed and completed risk evaluation and risk management rules under EPA risk evaluation for different chemicals under the amended TSCA.

Regulatory Reform

Over the years, there have been processes to both improve the regulatory process and to weaken or decimate it. Regulatory “reform,” or deform, bills have been a problem over the years, introduced by conservatives. Despite the name, these bills would make it more difficult or impossible for federal agencies to issue needed safeguards in a timely manner, if at all. The current Republican-controlled House has introduced and voted on a host of these bills this past year. Bills that have been passed include: 

The Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2023 (REINS Act, H.R. 277), creates a congressional approval process for a major rule and, if it became law, would prevent the implementation of a major rule unless it received congressional approval. Other regulatory reform bills would require unnecessary, redundant requirements to current rules and the rulemaking process. Over the years, OSHA’s standard-setting process has become unduly burdensome and lengthy. According to a congressional report, it takes OSHA between 4.3 and 11.5 years to issue a new standard―an average of eight years. The longest amount of time OSHA has taken to complete the rulemaking process was 19 years each for the two most recent chemical standards—silica and beryllium.

The regulatory process needs to be strengthened, not weakened, for effective regulations that make our communities safer. Understanding the weak areas of our current regulatory system, the Biden administration has issued an executive order, a rule for public comment and revisions to its Circular A-4 guidance to modernize the regulatory review process to improve public participation, transparency, efficiency and inclusivity in developing regulations.,  The Stop Corporate Capture Act (H.R. 6107) offers a comprehensive blueprint for modernizing, improving and strengthening the regulatory system to protect the public and workers more effectively.

Enforcement is a cornerstone of the Occupational Safety and Health Act and always has been a major part of the OSHA program. However, different administrations have placed different levels of emphasis on enforcement. In general, Democratic administrations have favored strong enforcement, supplemented by compliance assistance and voluntary programs, while Republican administrations have placed a greater emphasis on compliance assistance and lesser on enforcement. But all administrations face deficiencies and weaknesses in OSHA’s statutory enforcement authority, and significant resource constraints that have greatly limited the agency’s ability to meet its responsibilities.

The Biden administration has a fully staffed head office, including Douglas L. Parker as the confirmed assistant secretary of occupational safety and health as of Oct. 25, 2021. This is a significant change from the entire four-year term of the Trump administration, when OSHA did not have a confirmed head of the agency.

The Biden administration’s OSHA has focused on rebuilding the agency’s internal staff capacity, training and expertise, including standards writing and enforcement capacity, while also responding to major workplace disasters. Under the Trump administration, the number of onboard OSHA inspectors declined significantly—to the lowest number since the doors of the agency opened—due to President Trump’s federal hiring freeze and the failure to fill vacant positions. The Biden administration has made hiring new inspectors and filling other important vacant agency positions a priority, and initiated several national emphasis programs to address complicated hazards and hold bad-acting employers accountable. 

OSHA Inspections

Federal OSHA’s ability to provide protection to workers has greatly diminished over the years. When the AFL-CIO issued its first “Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect” report in 1992, federal OSHA could inspect workplaces under its jurisdiction once every 84 years, compared with once every 186 years under current staffing and inspection records. This figure is a significant improvement from previous years, when OSHA did not conduct as many inspections during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the agency still has not reached pre-pandemic levels and is worsening over time given the disparity between its responsibility and its resources.

In FY 2023, federal OSHA conducted 34,249 inspections, and the state OSHA programs combined conducted 34,894 inspections. This was a 7% increase for federal OSHA and 3% increase for state OSHA programs compared with the previous year.

In FY 2023, federal OSHA conducted 887 inspections in federal agencies, including 324 inspections at the Department of Defense, 116 at the Department of the Interior, 101 at the Veterans Administration, 88 at the Department of Agriculture and 73 at the Department of Homeland Security.

There has been a decline in enforcement activity involving significant and complicated cases that began during the Trump administration and that can be seen in the data from OSHA’s Enforcement Weighting System (EWS)—a protocol implemented under the Obama administration that gives greater weight to more time-intensive inspections than to shorter-duration routine inspections, and under the OSHA Weighting System (OWS)—a protocol initiated under the Trump administration that downgrades complex health inspections with significant importance and impact, and increases the weight of quick inspections related to four fatal safety hazards (falls, caught in, struck by and electrical hazards). 

Both systems assign different weights to different types of inspections performed by OSHA compliance safety and health officers. The change to the newer OWS system during the Trump administration masked the significant decrease in these inspections.

Under the EWS, in FY 2019, OSHA reported 42,825 enforcement units (EUs) for inspections and investigations, compared with 42,900 EUs in FY 2016, despite more inspections being conducted in FY 2019 (33,401, up from 31,948). From FY 2016 to FY 2019, the number of inspections for significant cases declined, from 131 to 100 (a 24% decline); the number of inspections for ergonomic hazards declined 55%, from 69 to 31; the number of inspections for workplace violence declined 29%, from 49 to 35; the number of inspections for process safety management declined 26%, from 234 to 172; and the number of inspections for combustible dust declined 24%, from 491 to 372. 

In FY 2023, OSHA reported 63,273 EUs for inspections and investigations, compared with 59,686 EUs for inspections and investigations in FY 2022. These cannot be compared with the EWS EUs; however, a critical examination of the OWS EUs shows the difference is striking. Under the OWS, approximately half of EUs result from inspections related to the fatal four safety hazards—31,689 of 63,273 EUs in FY 2023. However, EUs resulting from inspections from ergonomics, heat, non-PEL (permissible exposure limit) overexposures and workplace violence combined only accounted for 972 of 63,273 EUs in FY 2023. This is a significant increase from FY 2022, largely due to a significant increase in heat inspections (164 EUs in FY 2022 to 824 EUs in FY 2023) and double the workplace violence inspections (48 EUs in FY 2022 to 96 EUs in FY 2023). However, this system will continue to mask the significance of health inspections completed and disincentivize inspectors from completing these time-intensive and complex inspections—the opposite intended effect of the original weighting system. 

Unprogrammed Enforcement Activity

OSHA refers to enforcement activity that isn’t due to an enforcement directive as unprogrammed activity. This includes enforcement activity due to complaints, referrals, employer-required severe injury reports, and fatality and catastrophe investigations. These data have been requested since FY 2021.

Individuals can file a complaint with OSHA that an employer is not providing a safe workplace. The agency considers a complaint as “formal” if it is made by a current employee or representative that asserts imminent danger or a violation of the OSH Act or a standard. Formal complaints must be written or use OSHA’s complaint form, and must be signed. Other complaints that do not meet that criteria are considered “informal.” In FY 2023, federal OSHA received 8,993 formal complaints and 24,413 informal complaints, with workers filing 35% and 2% more complaints than FY 2022, respectively. Federal OSHA inspected the workplace in 40% of formal complaints and 20% of informal complaints. State OSHA plans received 9,741 formal complaints, inspecting 57%, and 22,908 informal complaints, inspecting 18%, an increase of 16% and a decrease of 10% respectively in worker complaints filed with state OSHA plans. Complaints that did not receive an inspection resulted in the agency doing a “phone/fax investigation.” When conducting a phone/fax investigation, the agency telephones the employer, describes the alleged hazards in the complaint and then follows up with a letter. The employer must respond within five days, identifying in writing any problems found and noting corrective actions taken or planned. If OSHA determines the response adequate, an on-site inspection is not conducted. Phone/fax investigations were formerly only conducted in response to an informal complaint, but this practice changed during the COVID-19 pandemic to allow inspectors to conduct phone/fax investigations for all types of unprogrammed activity.

OSHA inspectors, other federal, state or local government agencies, discrimination or whistleblower complaints or the media can refer a case to OSHA. In FY 2023, federal OSHA received 4,249 referrals and responded with an inspection for 72% of cases after referral. State OSHA plans received 5,728 referrals and followed up with an inspection in 72% of those. 

In 2015, OSHA began requiring employers to report all severe work-related injuries, defined as an amputation, in-patient hospitalization or loss of an eye, to the agency. In response to these reports, the agency conducts either an inspection or rapid response investigation (RRI). An RRI does not involve an on-site inspection, and requires the employer to conduct its own investigation into the incident and share its findings with OSHA. In FY 2023, federal OSHA received 10,775 severe injury reports (SIRs) and conducted an inspection in 32% of cases, and OSHA state plans received 3,437 SIRs and conducted an inspection in 44% of cases. Federal OSHA received reports of 2,395 fatalities and catastrophes on the job in FY 2023 and investigated 48% of the cases. State OSHA plans combined received reports of 7,580 fatalities and catastrophes and investigated 45% of them.

OSHA Violations and Penalties

Penalties for OSHA violations have always been relatively low, due to statutory limitations and enforcement policies that prioritize the settlement of cases to achieve more expedient abatement of hazards, rather than imposing the maximum fines.

In recent years, administrative and statutory changes have resulted in an increase in OSHA penalties. A revised penalty policy implemented during the Obama administration in 2010 resulted in a doubling of fines for serious violations. Passage of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, which extended the coverage of the Inflation Adjustment Act to OSHA, further increased penalties for OSHA violations. Under the 2015 law, OSHA was authorized to raise maximum penalties by approximately 80%, the amount of inflation since the last time OSHA penalties were raised in 1990, and to regularly update penalties to account for future inflation. This statutory increase in federal OSHA penalties took effect Aug. 1, 2016. The latest adjustment, effective Jan. 11, 2024, increased the maximum penalty for serious violations to $16,131, and for willful and repeat violations to $161,323.,  State OSHA plans also are required to raise their statutory maximum penalties to be as effective as the federal OSHA program, but many states that cover private sector workers have not yet complied. As of April 15, 2024, six state OSHA plans still have not adopted 2022 penalties: Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Tennessee, South Carolina and Puerto Rico. Indiana intends to wait on legislation before adopting the maximum penalties; it now is more than six years overdue. State OSHA plans are not required to impose monetary penalties on state and local government employers.

In FY 2023, the average penalty for a serious violation under federal OSHA was $4,597, compared with an average penalty of $4,354 for serious violations in FY 2022. In FY 2023, the average penalty for a serious violation for state OSHA plans combined remained lower, at $2,406; in FY 2022, it was $2,221. 

The number of willful violations cited by federal OSHA in FY 2023 was 544, an increase from FY 2022. The average penalty per willful violation was $68,306 in FY 2023, compared with $68,062 in FY 2022 and $61,750 in FY 2021. The average penalty per repeat violation was $19,174 in FY 2023, compared with $14,690 in FY 2022. In states with state-run OSHA plans, in FY 2023, there were 289 willful violations issued, with an average penalty of $47,790 per violation, and 1,911 repeat violations issued, with an average penalty of $6,662 per violation. 

In FY 2023, federal OSHA issued 1,357 violations to federal agencies, including two willful violations and 112 repeat violations. Federal OSHA does not issue monetary penalties because of violations to federal agencies.

For FY 2023, federal OSHA reported that the agency brought 113 “significant” enforcement cases. This is more than FY 2022 (94) and more than the first year of the Trump administration, FY 2017 (53). It is unclear how significant enforcement cases may have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and reduction in enforcement activity during FY 2020 and 2021.

The median current penalty issued per fatality investigation conducted in FY 2023 was $14,063 for federal OSHA and the median current penalty was $7,000 for the state OSHA plans combined. This is an increase for federal OSHA from FY 2022, which had a median of $12,063, while state plans remained the same at $7,000. These data include enforcement cases that still are under contest, and some cases that still are open. Increased penalties in FY 2023 may be attributed to a combination of Congress tying maximum penalties to inflation annually and new enforcement initiatives described below. 

Averages can distort the real picture of fatality penalties in situations in which large cases with very high penalties raise the averages substantially. Using median penalties that capture the point where half of the penalties are below and half the penalties are above the median provides a more accurate picture of the typical penalties in cases involving worker deaths. According to OSHA inspection data, the average total penalty in a fatality case in FY 2023 was $20,996 for federal and state OSHA plans combined. 

OSHA Enforcement Initiatives and Policies

Federal OSHA under the Biden administration has taken a strong enforcement approach, using various tools available to an agency with few resources to do its job. The agency has issued national emphasis programs (NEP) to enhance enforcement on certain targeted areas: combustible dust, falls while working from heights in construction, heat injury and illness, and warehousing and distribution centers. OSHA regions have issued their own local emphasis enforcement programs. In August 2023, following mounting pressure about the epidemic of silica-related disease among engineered stone workers, the agency updated its silica NEP to better target these small countertop fabrication shops. The Biden administration also had issued several enforcement directives and national emphasis programs to address urgent COVID-19 issues to help protect workers while the administration was considering other actions; these are still in effect., , 

The Biden administration also has continued Obama-era programs and policies to address high-hazard employers and industries and to respond to changes in the workforce and employment relationships. These include the Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP), launched in 2010, to focus on and provide enhanced oversight of the most persistent and egregious violators; the Temporary Worker Initiative (TWI) to help prevent injuries and illnesses among temporary workers by holding both staffing agencies and host employers jointly responsible; and the Severe Injury Reporting and Investigation Program, discussed in the section of this report on unprogrammed enforcement activity.

In September 2022, OSHA expanded the SVEP criteria for inclusion to more employers—those with repeat violations and with more hazards. According to OSHA, there are currently 175 cases on the SVEP log, dating back to 2012. This includes 16 cases added to the log in FY 2023. The TWI helps prevent injuries and illnesses among temporary workers who are employed by staffing agencies but who work for different host employers. Under OSHA’s temporary worker policy, both host employers and staffing agencies may be held jointly responsible for complying with safety and health rules. In FY 2023, OSHA conducted inspections at 155 host employers and 56 staffing employers under this initiative. 

The new rule clarifying the rights of workers to choose their own representation during OSHA walkaround inspections demonstrates this administration’s recognition that worker participation is essential to an accurate inspection. While this was an existing right for union workers, that right had been eroded in practice by employers. This rule clarifies this right for all workers—union and nonunion—so that inspections can be more thorough and so that workers can trust inspectors in the process. The Trump administration did not support the right of workers to have a designated representative, and at the urging of business groups, revoked a 2013 letter of interpretation that clarified this right under the law; a court required OSHA to undertake rulemaking to clarify this right, which it did. 

Understanding that penalties have been too low to be a deterrent for many egregiously behaved employers, the agency has used field directives. On Jan. 26, 2023, OSHA announced a new enforcement policy to make its penalties more effective in stopping employers from repeatedly exposing workers to life-threatening hazards or failing to comply with certain workplace safety and health requirements. Under existing authority, OSHA has directed inspectors to issue “instance-by-instance citations” when “high-gravity” serious violations of specific OSHA standards occurs, including lockout/tagout, machine guarding, permit-required confined space, respiratory protection, falls, trenching and for cases with other-than-serious violations specific to recordkeeping. Additionally, the policy encourages violations not to be grouped when there is evidence that worksite conditions giving rise to the violations are separate and distinct, or where different conduct gave rise to the violations. The goal of this policy is to deter employers from flagrantly disregarding their responsibilities and repeatedly violating the law.

Through expanded use of corporatewide settlements, OSHA is addressing business practices that conflict with good health and safety practices, incentivizing companies to address the root causes of recurring hazards by seeking correction of recurring violations and hazards across all of the corporation’s facilities. As detailed above, OSHA overall has increased the number of OSHA inspectors since the rollbacks during the Trump administration, has increased inspections with more weight (more complex, more impactful), and has increased the issuance of willful and repeat violations.

The Biden administration also resumed the practice of issuing press releases on significant enforcement cases to focus public attention on employers with serious, willful or repeated violations of the law. OSHA had always issued press releases on important enforcement cases, but under the Biden and Obama administrations, it has been a specific OSHA policy to issue a press release on all enforcement cases with significant total proposed penalties and significant violations of the general duty clause, and federal OSHA encourages local OSHA officials to engage in active outreach to the press. A recent study found that one OSHA press release was the equivalent of 210 inspections, an essential compliance assistance tool given limited agency resources. The business community strenuously objected to the issuance of these press releases, and when the Trump administration took office, the issuance of OSHA press releases on enforcement cases was suspended. Several months later, from public pressure, the agency again issued some press releases for some major enforcement cases, but there no longer was a policy or practice to institute the issuance of press releases on all significant enforcement cases.

The Biden administration also has improved transparency, providing information to the public that had been rolled back by the Trump administration, particularly on worker fatalities and significant enforcement cases. A list of names of workers who have died on the job and information on every fatality investigation, including the circumstances surrounding the death and the employer, has returned to the OSHA website homepage. The posting of this information, initiated in 2010, is used to honor fallen workers and provide information to help prevent workplace deaths. This action was praised by families of workers killed on the job who had objected to the change by the Trump administration, which instead promoted initiatives the agency was taking to cooperate with employers.

Vulnerable workers and equity have been a key area of emphasis for the Biden administration, including on working conditions. It has instituted equity considerations in its cost-benefit analysis when developing a regulation to ensure that women and vulnerable workers are treated equally with other regulated communities. OSHA and the Wage and Hour Division at the Department of Labor have done more to work together on child labor violations and enforcement to prevent the exploitation of vulnerable workers and children in dangerous work settings. The administration has instituted status protections through prosecutorial discretion and certification of U and T visas for immigrant workers who are victims of workplace health and safety violations or crimes.

The Biden administration also has begun important conversations on artificial intelligence to prevent it from undermining worker rights, worsening job quality, encouraging undue worker surveillance, lessening market competition, introducing new health and safety risks, or causing harmful labor force disruptions.

State Plan Oversight

The OSH Act excluded many workers from coverage, including workers covered by other safety and health laws, and state and local public employees in states without a state OSHA plan. Over the years, there have been efforts to expand coverage. But today millions of workers—many state and local public employees—still lack OSHA coverage and are at serious risk of being injured on the job.

The OSH Act permits federal OSHA to grant approval to states that want to manage their own workplace safety and health program and cover public sector workers in their states. On Aug. 18, 2022, Massachusetts became the sixth state to receive approval for its own OSHA plan that covers more than 430,000 state and local government employees. The plan is in effect and will undergo review for final approval in the coming years. Other states that only cover public employees, while federal OSHA retains private sector jurisdiction, are Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey and New York, as well as the Virgin Islands. There are 21 other states and Puerto Rico with approved state OSHA plans that cover both public and private sector employees.

One stipulation for approval, however, is that the states’ safety standards are “at least as effective” as federal standards. State standards can be stricter than federal OSHA’s standards but not weaker. When states are clearly not fulfilling their duty to be at least as effective as federal OSHA, there are limited options for federal OSHA to step in. 

Federal OSHA’s main tool is to remove the state’s OSHA state plan approval. The process to approve or revoke a state plan requires a lengthy rulemaking process, including public comment. This also has two significant side effects. If federal OSHA went through with revoking a state plan, federal OSHA would be in charge of all enforcement in the state, adding to its responsibilities without additional resources, and public employees would lose OSHA coverage provided to them through their state plan.

The state of Arizona, as its most recent malfeasance in a long history, never adopted the COVID-19 ETS for health care, leaving many workers unprotected. Federal OSHA sent “courtesy letters” to the state plans that were slow to adopt the COVID-19 ETS. On April 21, 2022, OSHA issued a proposal to revoke the approval of Arizona’s state plan due to years of not operating as least as effectively as federal OSHA and to move the state plan back to initial approval status, which would result in joint federal and state OSHA jurisdiction in the state. Due to this action, Arizona OSHA adopted three outstanding final rules, increased minimum penalties to match federal penalties and annual penalty level adjustments, passed a state law to authorize adoption of an emergency temporary standard (ETS) when either the Industrial Commission of Arizona or OSHA deems the grave danger criteria met, and adopted record-keeping and log requirements for COVID-19. On Feb. 15, 2023, federal OSHA withdrew its proposal to revoke Arizona’s plan approval.

OSHA has had other successes in ensuring state plans adopt rules or run programs at least as effective as federal OSHA. During the Obama administration, federal OSHA threatened to withdraw South Carolina’s state plan when the state announced it was going to eliminate its OSHA whistleblower program. The state finally relented, largely at the urging of South Carolina’s business community. However, the state plan still remains problematic. On April 4, 2023, the Union of Southern Service Workers, Service Employees International Union (USSW-SEIU) filed a complaint to the Department of Labor’s Civil Rights Center stating South Carolina OSHA has violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and of the Department of Labor’s anti-discrimination regulations, 29 C.F.R. § 31.3(b)(2), for racial discrimination by disproportionately excluding black workers from its programmed inspections and exposing them to inequitable risk of injuries and illnesses. On Dec. 7, 2023, USSW-SEIU filed a petition with federal OSHA to revoke the South Carolina OSHA plan for failure to maintain an effective enforcement program.

OSHA Criminal Enforcement

Throughout OSHA’s history, criminal enforcement under the Occupational Safety and Health Act has been rare and dependent on political will. According to information provided by the Department of Labor, since the passage of the act in 1970, only 137 cases have been referred for prosecution under the Act. During this time, there were approximately 435,000 workplace fatalities. DOL referred six cases for criminal prosecution in 2023, compared with 13 in FY 2022, nine cases in FY 2021, seven cases in FY 2020, four cases in FY 2019 and 11 cases in FY 2018., ,  There have been four cases referred so far in 2024. 

By comparison, the Environmental Protection Agency opened 199 criminal cases in FY 2023 under federal environmental laws—and in 74% of the criminal cases charged, an individual defendant was prosecuted, and those prosecutions generated a total 100% conviction rate. The aggressive use of criminal penalties for enforcement of environmental laws, and the real potential for jail time for corporate officials, serve as a powerful deterrent.

The criminal penalty provisions of the OSH Act are woefully inadequate. Criminal enforcement is limited to those cases in which a willful violation results in a worker’s death, or where false statements in required reporting are made. The maximum penalty is six months in jail, making these cases misdemeanors. Criminal penalties are not available in cases where workers are endangered or seriously injured, but no death occurs. This is in contrast to federal environmental laws, where criminal penalties apply in cases where there is “knowing endangerment,” and the law makes such violations felonies. Due to the weak criminal penalties under the OSH Act, the Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutes few cases under the statute. Instead, in some instances, DOJ will prosecute OSHA cases under other federal statutes with stronger criminal provisions if those laws also have been violated. 

In response to the OSH Act’s severe limitations, over the years there have been a number of initiatives to expand criminal enforcement for safety and health hazards by utilizing other statutes for prosecution. These include the DOJ Worker Endangerment Initiative, launched in 2005 and expanded in 2016, that focuses on companies that put workers in danger while violating environmental laws, and prosecutes such employers using the much tougher criminal provisions of environmental statutes., ,  Under this initiative, DOJ has significantly enhanced its criminal prosecutions for worker safety and health, successfully bringing cases that have resulted in convictions and significant jail time for defendants. During the Obama administration, the Department of Labor (DOL) stepped up criminal enforcement efforts, referring more cases for criminal prosecution to the DOJ and U.S. attorneys. In addition, DOL expanded assistance to local prosecutors in the investigation and prosecution of cases involving worker deaths and injuries. 

While criminal enforcement of job safety violations at the federal level remains quite limited, in a number of states and localities, prosecutors are pursuing criminal charges against employers and individuals in cases involving job deaths and injuries. In Philadelphia, the district attorney successfully prosecuted the general contractor and crane operator for deaths of six individuals in the 2013 Salvation Army building collapse, winning convictions for involuntary manslaughter and jail time. In New York City, the Manhattan district attorney won a manslaughter conviction against the general contractor, Harco Construction LLC, for the 2015 trenching death of a young undocumented immigrant construction worker. The foreman for the excavation company, Sky Materials Corp., was convicted of criminally negligent homicide and reckless endangerment, and sentenced to one to three years in jail. In both cases, unions and local safety and health activists worked with prosecutors to provide assistance and to educate the community about the job safety crimes. In 2023, a Colorado contractor was charged with felony manslaughter after three workers were buried in a trench collapse, resulting in the death of a 20-year-old immigrant worker, after a pattern of unsafe behavior for months leading up to the fatal incident and for at least another month after the fatality. 

OSHA Coverage

For FY 2023, the OSHA law still did not cover 7.9 million state and local government employees in 23 states and the District of Columbia, although these workers encounter the same hazards as private sector workers and, in many states, have a higher rate of injury than private sector counterparts. Similarly, millions who work in the transportation and agriculture industries and at Department of Energy contract facilities lack full protection under the OSH Act. These workers theoretically are covered by other laws, which in practice have failed to provide equivalent protection. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) covers many underground and surface mine workers under its own law, which is stronger than the OSH Act.

In 2013, OSHA coverage was extended to flight attendants when the Federal Aviation Administration rescinded a longstanding policy and ceded jurisdiction to OSHA on some key safety and health issues, in response to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (PL 112–95). This policy action was the culmination of decades of effort by the flight attendant unions to secure OSHA protections. Specifically, the FAA issued a policy that extended OSHA regulations and jurisdiction on hazard communication, bloodborne pathogens, hearing conservation, recordkeeping, and access to employee exposure and medical records for cabin crews.

One of OSHA’s key responsibilities is to enforce the anti-retaliation provisions under section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. In addition, OSHA has the responsibility to enforce the whistleblower provisions of 24 other statutes, ranging from the Federal Rail Safety Act to the Sarbanes–Oxley finance law. Many of these statutes deal with safety and health matters, but others do not.

The total number of cases, under all statutes, received by OSHA’s whistleblower program for FY 2023 (3,243) were greater than those received in FY 2022 (2,755). In FY 2023, OSHA received a total of 2,308 cases and completed 2,686 cases under all federal statutes. This is similar to FY 2022, when the agency received 2,135 cases and completed 2,091 cases, and lower than the surge in complaints during the first year of the pandemic. Cases completed include cases from other fiscal years; not all cases received are completed in the same fiscal year. In FY 2023, 71% of the federal cases received (2,308 out of 3,243) were federal 11(c) complaints under the OSH Act. Workers also filed a large number of whistleblower cases under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (361), the Federal Railroad Safety Act (134), the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (106), the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (86) and the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (64).

The backlog in whistleblower cases has grown over the years and continues to be a serious problem. Adequate funding for OSHA’s whistleblower program remains a serious concern. The COVID-19 pandemic placed an even greater responsibility on an already starved program, limiting the agency’s ability to respond to workers alleging retaliation for raising safety concerns on the job or for wearing their own personal protective equipment (PPE) when their employer did not provide it. In February 2021, OSHA was assigned two new whistleblower statutes to enforce—the Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act and the Anti-Money Laundering Act—but has only received a 9% funding increase since FY 2021 to carry out this additional responsibility and to rebuild the program to the levels it has needed for years. 

Under the Obama administration, the Department of Labor made the protection of a “worker’s voice” a priority initiative. As part of this effort, OSHA took a number of actions to strengthen the Whistleblower Protection Program to protect workers who raise job safety issues and exercise other rights from employer retaliation. The Obama administration elevated the whistleblower program, creating a separate Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs at OSHA (previously, the program had been part of OSHA’s enforcement directorate), and a separate budget line item for the whistleblower program, and sought increased funding and staffing for the program. In its budget requests, the Trump administration proposed to reorganize the whistleblower program, eliminating the supervisory personnel for the program in the regional offices, and centralizing management and supervision for the program at OSHA headquarters in Washington, D.C. There were serious concerns that such a centralization would make it harder for whistleblower investigators in the field, who already are stretched thin, to carry out their work. To improve the timeliness and consistency of case handling, the agency updated and revised its investigators’ manual and trained staff on policies and procedures. 

The Obama administration also established a Whistleblower Protection Advisory Committee composed of representatives from labor, management and the public, charged with overseeing and providing advice and guidance to OSHA on its whistleblower protection program. The Trump administration terminated this advisory committee, eliminating oversight on this important program, and held annual, generic stakeholder listening sessions instead. 

The Biden administration has emphasized a prioritization of vulnerable workers, equity issues and worker empowerment. It has continued the annual public whistleblower stakeholder meeting and announced hazard-specific public whistleblower stakeholder meetings on COVID-19 and heat, but it remains to be seen whether the formal advisory committee will be reinstated. On Feb. 17, 2023, OSHA started a pilot program to attempt to streamline the complaint intake triage process under all statutes. In October 2023, the Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board signed an agreement to strengthen the agencies’ partnership and outline procedures for information-sharing, referrals, training and outreach that explain federal anti-retaliation protections.

The considerable amount of time it takes to resolve cases is particularly problematic under the OSH Act and those other statutes where there is no opportunity for preliminary reinstatement for workers while the case is being resolved, nor a separate right of action for the complainant to pursue the case on their own. During this time, workers are in limbo, with no recourse or redress for discriminatory actions. Other whistleblower statutes provide these rights.

Even with improvements in the OSHA whistleblower program in recent years, problems and deficiencies remain. The largest problems stem from deficiencies in the OSH Act itself. The anti-retaliation provisions of the law were adopted nearly 50 years ago, and are weak and outdated compared with more recently adopted statutes. The OSH Act provides only 30 days to file a discrimination complaint, compared with the 180 days provided by a number of other laws. If a worker fails to file a complaint within this time, he or she simply is out of luck—even though retaliation is not always clear in that short of a time frame, and more time often is needed to provide evidence of retaliation.

The OSH Act also has extremely limited procedures for the enforcement of discrimination cases. If there is no agreement or settlement of the findings, the secretary of labor must bring cases to U.S. District Court. Most other statutes provide for an administrative proceeding. The formal procedures of the OSH Act mean meritorious cases may be dropped simply because the solicitor of labor does not have the resources to pursue them. Moreover, unlike other statutes, such as the Mine Safety and Health Act and the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, the OSH Act does not allow a complainant the right to pursue the case on his or her own if the secretary fails to act within a designated timeframe or declines to act at all. And the OSH Act does not provide for preliminary reinstatement, as other statutes such as the Mine Safety and Health Act do, which means that workers who are retaliated against for exercising their job safety rights have no remedy while final action on their cases is pending. These deficiencies in the whistleblower program can only be remedied through legislative improvements in the OSH Act.

OSHA also has addressed the issue of injury reporting through its whistleblower program—in particular, programs and policies that retaliate against workers or discourage workers from reporting injuries. In recent years, these employer programs and policies have grown in a wide range of industries. Under OSHA regulations, reporting work-related injuries is a protected activity and employers are prohibited from retaliating against workers who report injuries. The Federal Railroad Safety Act, for which OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions, also includes specific provisions that prohibit retaliation against workers who report injuries.

To address the problems of retaliation related to injury reporting, OSHA issued a policy memorandum in March 2012 to provide guidance to the field. The memo outlined the types of employer safety incentive and disincentive policies and practices that could constitute illegal retaliation under Section 11(c) and other whistleblower statutes, and the steps investigators should take in responding to complaints of employer retaliation for injury reporting. To date, the memo remains in effect.

In October 2018, OSHA issued an enforcement memo that limited the scope of anti-retaliation protections when employers report injuries, as they apply to workplace safety incentive programs and post-incident drug testing. In doing so, the burden was placed on workers to demonstrate actual retaliation in individual cases, rather than creating a presumption that certain types of programs were impermissible. This policy interpretation greatly limits the utility of the anti-retaliation provisions in prohibiting policies and practices that discourage the reporting of injuries.

Employer groups filed legal challenges to the anti-retaliation provisions of the injury reporting rule, but the litigation was held in abeyance until the Trump administration reconsidered other aspects of the injury reporting regulation. On July 20, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, under a settlement agreement, ordered OSHA to release all the worksite injury and illness reports that employers submitted on Form 300A for 2016 cases by Aug. 18, 2020. 

In March 2024, Congress passed legislation that appropriated OSHA a budget of $632 million for FY 2024, level funded from the previous year, but lower than the rate of inflation. Under OSHA’s current budget, the agency has enough to spend $3.93 to protect each worker it is required to protect under the OSH Act. 

Through the American Rescue Plan Act, Congress appropriated the U.S. Department of Labor $200 million for pandemic-related worker protection activities that had to be used by the end of FY 2023. Of these funds, OSHA was allocated $100.278 million and MSHA was allocated $13.245 million. Within OSHA, $10 million was designated for training grants, and not less than $5 million for enforcement activities related to COVID–19 at high-risk workplaces, including health care, meat and poultry processing facilities, agricultural workplaces and correctional facilities. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA spent $35.5 million of $43.4 million planned in FY 2021, $21.3 million of $44.8 million planned in FY 2022 and $11.3 million of $44.8 million planned in FY 2023—totaling $68.1 million of its $100 million—and MSHA spent $7 million in total of its $13 million.

The Biden administration has requested a 3.5% increase in OSHA funding for FY 2025, including small increases to federal enforcement and federal compliance assistance. 

Congress appropriated level funding of $388 million for MSHA in FY 2024 and the Biden administration requested a 5% budget increase for the mining agency in FY 2025. In FY 2020, the budget reorganized MSHA enforcement to combine the coal mine enforcement and metal and nonmetal mine enforcement into one program. MSHA had justified this reorganization in order to use resources more efficiently, and to direct more resources to metal and nonmetal mining, which is growing, while coal mine activity continues to decline. Consolidation has reduced the targeted expertise in each of the current mine safety enforcement programs, since many inspectors come from either coal or metal and nonmetal industries, specifically. 

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the occupational safety and health research agency created in tandem with OSHA under the OSH Act, was appropriated $363 million again for FY 2024, and was essentially level funded in the Biden administration’s FY 2025 request. 

There are currently a total of 1,875 federal and state OSHA inspectors (not including supervisory inspectors) responsible for enforcing the safety and health law at more than 11.5 million workplaces, compared with 1,871 in 2022, 1,719 in 2021 and 1,798 in 2020. However, there has been a shift, compared with last year—the number of federal inspectors decreased while the number of state plan inspectors increased.

The number of federal OSHA compliance inspectors declined significantly during the Trump administration, and in 2019 reached 746 inspectors—its lowest level since the early 1970s, when the agency opened. That number grew in the Biden administration to 900 inspectors in 2022. This increase was due to reinvestment of the agency in hiring new staff; however, it takes additional time and resources to train new inspectors to conduct inspections on their own. Rebuilding of staff was required due to a combination of factors, including a federal hiring freeze imposed during the first year of the Trump administration, attrition and retirements, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, years of a stagnant budget, and the time needed for inspectors to gain experience. However, most recently, the number of federal OSHA inspectors decreased in 2023 to 853, while the number of state OSHA program inspectors increased to 1,022—an increase from the 971 inspectors in 2022 and 964 inspectors in 2021, and a return to the similar number of 1,024 inspectors in 2020.

The current level of federal and state OSHA inspectors provides one inspector for every 80,014 workers, compared with the benchmark of one labor inspector for every 10,000 workers recommended by the International Labor Organization for industrialized countries. In 12 states, the ratio of inspectors to employees is greater than one per 100,000 workers, with Louisiana having the highest ratio at one inspector per 233,199 workers. 

Since the passage of the OSH Act, the number of workplaces and number of workers under OSHA’s jurisdiction has nearly doubled, but there are fewer numbers of OSHA staff and OSHA inspectors. In 1975, federal OSHA had a total of 2,435 staff (inspectors and all other OSHA staff) and 1,102 compliance staff (including supervisors) responsible for the safety and health of 67.8 million workers at more than 3.9 million establishments. In 2024, there are 1,962 federal OSHA staff responsible for the safety and health of 150 million workers at more than 11.5 million workplaces, both of which are growing. 

At the peak of federal OSHA staffing in 1980, there were 2,951 total staff and 1,469 federal OSHA inspectors (including supervisors). The ratio of OSHA inspectors per 1 million workers was 14.8. But now, there are only 1,078 federal OSHA inspectors (including supervisors), or 6.7 inspectors per 1 million workers. This is the second year OSHA has had more than 1,000 inspectors (including supervisors) since 2012.

Voluntary programs have always been part of OSHA’s compliance assistance model, but the emphasis placed on voluntary initiatives has varied under different administrations. The Biden administration has prioritized strong workplace safety enforcement, introducing national emphasis programs and enforcement guidances with voluntary programs supplementing enforcement efforts. This is a shift from the Trump administration, which placed a greater emphasis on voluntary programs while maintaining OSHA’s enforcement program. However, for years, the agency consistently has spent more than 10 times the amount of money on employer compliance assistance than it has on worker training. 

The major voluntary programs conducted by OSHA are the Voluntary Protection Program (VPP), a program that recognizes companies with a high level of safety and health performance, and the Alliance program, under which OSHA partners with trade associations, professional groups and others to carry out safety and health initiatives targeted at particular industries or hazards. On Feb. 16, 2023, OSHA announced its intention to modernize VPP requirements, as much has been learned about safety and health management since the program was last updated in 1989. The agency requested public comment on a series of questions related to VPP; the docket closes Sept. 30, 2024. Alliances can be made at the national, regional or state level, with more than 1,000 alliances having been created. Currently, OSHA has 40 national and many more regional/area alliances, with areas of emphasis including agricultural operations, Asian American/Pacific Islander workers, construction, ergonomics, general industry, hazard communication, health care, Hispanic/Latino workers, immigrant workers and employers, maritime industry, oil and gas extraction, small business, temporary workers, transportation, trenching and excavation, and youth workers. In the midst of the pandemic, where meatpacking employers were not instituting key measures to keep workers safe and OSHA was not enforcing in this industry, on June 28, 2020, federal OSHA created a two-year alliance with the North American Meat Institute, a meatpacking industry trade association.

COVID-19 Pandemic 

Working-age adults were hit the hardest by the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly those in settings with individuals known to be infected (e.g., health care and nursing homes), indoor environments, poorly ventilated spaces and crowded conditions. 

Since March 2020, there have been more than 775 million cases and more than 7 million deaths, including more than 6.9 million hospitalizations and nearly 2 million deaths in the United States alone.,  These infections and deaths have been disproportionately borne by people of color and those in low-wage jobs that were deemed essential in the early days of the pandemic. Many of these workers also are impacted by co-morbidities. 

Major studies examining infections and deaths among non-health care (i.e., other essential) workers were few early on in the pandemic, based on industry, occupation and on household dependents of essential workers., ,  While those in health care and social assistance had elevated risks of COVID-19, workers in manufacturing, food preparation, sales and other industries and occupations were also at elevated risk and, importantly, COVID-19 prevalence increased with each additional worker in the household. The authors concluded that stronger workplace protections, paid sick leave and better health care access could mitigate working families’ risks from COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Before the pandemic, Latino and Black workers faced an increased risk of dying on the job, which is described in other sections of this report. Latino, Black and immigrant workers have been and continue to be disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.,  Workers of color are disproportionately employed in occupations where large outbreaks have occurred, including meatpacking, food processing, agriculture and transit, and they are especially vulnerable when raising job safety concerns. Workplace outbreaks not only severely affect the workers on site, but increase the risk for their families and communities. At the peak of the Omicron surge, the COVID-19 death rate among working-age Black and Latino people was more than 1.5 times to 2.0 times the death rate among White people.

Throughout the pandemic, there was a scattered patchwork of mitigation measures to prevent exposures and infections, but this approach was not effective in protecting people at work, where employers are responsible for protecting workers from occupational exposures.

CDC Advisory Committee 

The failure of governments and the corporate infectious disease community to recognize that SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses spread not just through large droplets and small droplets, but primarily through tiny, aerosolized particles through the air, has played a significant role in the protections workers have not been provided throughout the pandemic and for other infectious diseases. Improved ventilation and other measures continue to be underlooked as a key effective measure to clean the air that workers breathe. Those at highest risk, particularly in health care settings, also continue to need strong respiratory protection, such as N95s, and other screening and isolation measures when confronting an aerosolized virus. Other modes of transmission require different control measures. Surface cleaning measures are useful to protect against contact transmission and some other personal protective equipment, like face shields, face coverings and gowns are useful to protect against larger “droplet” splashes. 

The evidence of aerosol transmission causing COVID-19 disease is now overwhelming, with consensus in the scientific and public health communities. It also has been recognized at the highest levels of our national government, with the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy concluding the “…most common way COVID-19 is transmitted from one person to another is through tiny airborne particles of the virus…”

However, the advisory committee charged with examining the science and providing key recommendations to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the development of the Guidelines to Prevent Transmission of Pathogens in Healthcare Settings—the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC)—continues to ignore the abundance of evidence of how aerosolized viruses behave and infect others, and ignore the widespread recommendations from industrial hygienists, public health experts and workers regarding the control measures necessary to combat aerosolized viruses in these settings. Further, until just recently, representation on the committee consisted only of hospital management and scientists who are connected with the hospital industry.

In January 2024, after mounting pressure from health experts, unions and policy makers, the CDC announced it would have the advisory committee revisit the guidelines and consider additional questions, including: 

• Should there be a category of Transmission-based Precautions that includes masks (instead of NIOSH Approved® N95® [or higher-level] respirators) for pathogens that spread by the air? Should N95 respirators be recommended for all pathogens that spread by the air?
• Can the workgroup clarify the criteria that would be used to determine which transmission by air category applies for a pathogen? For the category of Special Air Precautions, can you clarify if this category includes only new or emerging pathogens or if this category might also include other pathogens that are more established? Can you also clarify what constitutes a severe illness?
• Is the current guideline language sufficient to allow for voluntary use of a NIOSH Approved N95 (or higher-level) respirator? Should the document include a recommendation about healthcare organizations allowing voluntary use?
• Should there be a recommendation for use of source control in health care settings that is broader than current draft recommendations? Should source control be recommended at all times in healthcare facilities?

Also in January, the CDC appointed occupational physicians and aerosol experts to the working group. As of the publication of this report, there continue to be no workers or worker representatives on the advisory committee. 

Meanwhile, other groups are coming out to support needed reforms to these guidelines. On April 18, 2024, the American Public Health Association and the American Industrial Hygiene Association issued a joint consensus statement to the HICPAC advisory committee to strengthen its draft guidance updates in response to CDC’s questions, and to follow the science and protect health care workers and patients; 57 organizations, including the AFL-CIO, and 499 individual experts signed on to the statement.

Also on April 18, 2024, completely distinct from the joint consensus statement, the World Health Organization published a report, updating its definitions to more accurately reflect the state of science of disease transmission. The new definitions reflect the difference between routes that involve direct contact through touching infected surfaces or other people and other routes that involve the air (through the air transmission); “through the air transmission” is divided into “direct deposition,” referring to larger particles that strike the mucus membranes of the eyes, nose or mouth, and “airborne transmission/inhalation,” which refers to smaller particles inhaled into the lungs. The updated guidelines no longer rely on droplet size or distance spread. This significant recognition by the WHO is the result of a multiyear, collaborative effort and reflects shared agreement on terminology between WHO and four major public health agencies: Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the U.S. CDC. 

Regulating Other Infectious Diseases

Experience with several major infectious disease outbreaks in the last decade (COVID-19, H1N1 and Ebola) has underscored the need for mandatory measures to protect health care workers and other workers at high risk from exposures to infectious diseases. Federal OSHA has some limited, existing standards to help protect workers from infectious disease exposures, including rules on bloodborne pathogens, personal protective equipment and respiratory protection. But there is no broad-based infectious disease standard to protect workers from airborne transmissible diseases such as tuberculosis, influenza and coronaviruses.,  Previous efforts by OSHA to strengthen specific protections for health care workers, including a standard on tuberculosis, never reached fruition. 

Following the H1N1 pandemic, OSHA began work on an infectious disease standard. In May 2010, OSHA issued a request for information to seek input from the public on the rule. The draft proposed rule was reviewed by a small business panel, which issued a report to OSHA in January 2015, as required by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. OSHA continued preparing the proposed rule and the required analysis for publication until the standard was demoted on the regulatory agenda to a long-term action item by the Trump administration in 2017. The Biden administration reinstated the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to the regulatory agenda, and it is currently listed to be published in June 2024. OSHA recently scheduled a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) for April 24, 2024, to specifically discuss the Infectious Diseases Rulemaking and Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Rulemaking. The Construction Safety Act and OSHA regulations require the assistant secretary of OSHA to consult with ACCSH before the agency proposes occupational safety and health standards affecting construction activities, so a proposal on infectious disease could be expected soon thereafter. The completion of this standard would ensure employers are better prepared for any infectious disease outbreak, including a pandemic, and could provide the essential, comprehensive framework needed for workplace infectious disease prevention plans.

The International Labor Organization is undertaking a multiyear effort to develop a global standard on biological hazards in the working environment, which should conclude in 2025.

Future Pandemic Protections

During the COVID-19 pandemic, states like Washington initiated efforts to address future workplace pandemic planning, requiring the reporting and notification to employees of outbreaks, presumption of illness and anti-retaliation measures in the case of future public health disasters. This health emergency standard in Washington passed the legislature and was signed into law on May 11, 2021. 

In April 2021, New York passed the NYS Health and Essential Rights (NY HERO) Act, which requires the state to offer model prevention plans for airborne infectious diseases that private sector employers must implement. Employers who do not comply may face civil penalties and civil action by employees. A great success of the NY HERO Act is the requirement for employers to have health and safety committees that are co-chaired and co-staffed with nonsupervisory workers. Those workers have to be chosen by the workforce and their representatives, not by the employer. The committees have to meet within certain time periods and employers have to respond to committee concerns in writing. However, the enforcement mechanism within the state still remains unclear, since the state OSHA plan in New York only covers public sector workplaces, but the state must enforce this in the private sector. 

Other Novel Transmissions and Outbreaks

In February 2023, there was a major industrial-setting fungal outbreak causing worker respiratory disease at the Billerud Paper Mill in Escanaba, Michigan, that escalated for several months. There were 21 confirmed and 76 probable cases of blastomycosis, 12 hospitalizations and one worker death. People can get blastomycosis from breathing in fungal spores from the air. Blastomycosis is a disease associated with a fungus that grows in moist soil and decomposing matter, such as wood and leaves. This facility is represented by the United Steelworkers (USW), which called for other paper mills to conduct proactive investigations to institute robust safeguards before cases appear. The plant closed for three weeks for a deep cleaning. However, the source of the outbreak still has not been identified. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health conducted a Health Hazard Evaluation, which has not yet been published. Some of its interim recommendations include: 

• Continue to make NIOSH approved N95® disposable filtering-facepiece respirators available to all employees for voluntary use to minimize exposure to Blastomyces, especially for employees who might have a weakened immune system or other high-risk underlying medical conditions.
• Inspect heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems, and follow the manufacturers’ recommended maintenance schedules.
• Contract with a licensed ventilation engineer or building scientist to inspect ductwork for water incursion or microbial growth.
• Limit activities that involve disrupting soil, such as excavation.
• Continue to encourage employees who develop symptoms to seek care from their health care provider.

On April 1 2024, the Texas Department of State and Health Services reported a dairy worker infected by the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 virus through cattle. This case also highlights the need for communication to non-English speaking immigrant workers, to reach individuals with the greatest risk of exposure on dairy farms. The CDC, Department of Agriculture and other agencies are monitoring the situation and the CDC has released preliminary recommendations to state health agencies on H5N1 in livestock, including some worker safety recommendations.

Although not apparently in the workplace, there is an ongoing measles outbreak in the United States. As of April 11, 2024, 121 measles cases were reported by 18 jurisdictions: Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York City, New York State, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington. There have been seven outbreaks (defined as three or more related cases) reported in 2024, and 71% of cases (86 of 121) are outbreak-associated. This compares with four outbreaks reported in 2023, with 48% of cases (28 of 58) outbreak-associated. The majority of cases (69%) are in individuals 19 years old and younger—many younger than 5—and 57% of total cases across age groups have been hospitalized for isolation or symptom management. Measles is a highly contagious viral infection; 82% of cases nationwide are unvaccinated or have unknown vaccination status. Chicago has been hit particularly hard, with half of the U.S. cases.

Occupational heat exposure has been a significant issue for decades. Working in hot and humid conditions, outdoors and indoors, puts workers at serious risk of heat stress, heat exhaustion, cramps, heat rash and heat stroke, which can result in death. Each year, dozens of workers die and thousands more become ill from heat exposure. The risk from occupational heat exposures is increasing as the global temperature is rising, and without enforceable standards to protect workers. 

Between 1992 and 2020, heat stress killed 963 workers and caused nearly 33,000 serious lost-time injuries and illnesses, according to BLS. In 2022, BLS reported 43 work-related fatalities from heat exposure, a 19% increase from 36 in 2021. There were 56 deaths in 2020, which was a 30% increase from 2019. More than half of occupational heat fatalities occur during a worker’s first few days of working in hot conditions. Workplace injuries and illnesses from heat exposures often are not reported, so the true toll is unknown. Hot working conditions contribute to other injuries due to slippery sweat, fogging personal protective equipment, dizziness, and hot tools and equipment.

In the absence of a federal OSHA standard, several states have issued enforceable standards to protect indoor and outdoor workers from heat illness. Oregon’s heat standard covers both indoor and outdoor workers, while California and Washington currently have an outdoor standard and are expected to develop an indoor standard soon, and Minnesota currently has an indoor standard only., , ,  In 2022, the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment issued a rule protecting agriculture workers from heat. On March 26, 2024, Phoenix became the first locality to pass an ordinance to protect workers from heat. The rest of the country’s workers remain unprotected unless they have union contracts covering heat. Worse, Texas and Florida have both instituted measures that preempt their localities from issuing requirements to protect workers from heat, like mandatory breaks for water, rest and shade.,  Maryland OSHA held stakeholder meetings in early 2024 to discuss a draft and is expected to issue a final standard in 2024. 

On Sept. 20, 2021, President Biden announced a national initiative to address heat exposures across vulnerable populations, including workers, to build resilience in local communities and to address disproportionate heat impacts. To address occupational exposures under this initiative, the administration committed to OSHA: 1) issuing an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking within a month, 2) issuing a National Emphasis Program, and 3) establishing a new heat work group under the agency’s formal advisory committee, the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH). 

The NACOSH heat work group directed by President Biden consisted of representatives from industry, labor and technical experts, and first convened on Feb. 25, 2022, focused on two charges for the group: 1) to examine and recommend improvements to OSHA’s national heat campaign, and 2) to identify elements of a potential standard on protecting outdoor and indoor workers from occupational heat exposure.,  The consensus work group presented its findings on task one at its Dec. 13, 2022, work group meeting and NACOSH moved the recommendations forward to the agency at its Jan. 10, 2023, meeting. The consensus work group presented its findings on task two at its April 27, 2023, public meeting and NACOSH approved and moved the work group’s report to OSHA on May 31, 2023. 

The federal advisory committee’s work group report on task two included the following potential elements for OSHA to consider in a potential standard: written exposure control (heat illness prevention) plan, worker and supervisor training, environmental (exposure) monitoring, workplace control measures using the hierarchy of controls (engineering, administrative, work practice, PPE), acclimatization, worker participation and emergency response.

On April 12, 2022, federal OSHA initiated its National Emphasis Program (NEP)—a targeted enforcement program—for outdoor and indoor heat-related hazards that is in place for at least three years. State plan OSHAs are strongly encouraged, but not required, to adopt NEPs. As of Jan. 19, 2024, 2024, only 17 state plan states had adopted the program, but some states already may have instituted their own heat enforcement schemes before the national program was issued. Maryland is listed as intending to adopt one, since it is in the process of finalizing its own standard.

In FY 2023, federal OSHA conducted 1,066 heat illness inspections, a significant change from FY 2022 at 9.4 times the number of heat illness inspections. In FY 2021, before the NEP, OSHA conducted 48 heat illness inspections and in FY 2022, OSHA conducted 114 heat illness inspections. Among the FY 2023 inspections, OSHA issued 29 serious violations that resulted in an average penalty of $6,323 per violation, an increase from 16 serious violations in FY 2022 that resulted in an average penalty of $8,893. Federal OSHA has not issued a willful violation for heat since FY 2021, when there was one. Federal OSHA also issued 571 hazard alert letters (HALs) on heat illness in FY 2023, compared with 98 HALs in FY 2022 and 31 HALs in FY 2021. HALs are warnings that do not result in an employer penalty.

On Oct. 27, 2021, OSHA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on “Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings” for a public comment period that closed in January 2022. The agency recently scheduled a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) for April 24, 2024, to specifically discuss OSHA’s Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Rulemaking and the Infectious Diseases Rulemaking. The Construction Safety Act and OSHA regulations require the assistant secretary of OSHA to consult with ACCSH before the agency proposes occupational safety and health standards affecting construction activities, so a proposal on heat could be expected soon thereafter. 

In 2023, Rep. Judy Chu (Calif.) and Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio) introduced the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act (H.R. 4897, S. 2501) to mandate OSHA to issue a heat stress standard requiring employers to develop a heat illness prevention plan for indoor and outdoor workers to prevent heat-related illnesses and fatalities. Under the bill, a proposed standard would be issued within two years of enactment, and then a final standard would be issued within 42 months of enactment. The standard also would require exposure limits that trigger action such as hydration, scheduled and paid rest breaks, an acclimatization plan, exposure monitoring and other prevention methods. The final standard must provide no less protection as the most protective state standard, currently California’s Heat Illness Prevention Standard (8 CCR §3395) and consider the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health’s Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot Environments. The standard would cover both outdoor and indoor workers who face exposure to heat levels that exceed the capacities of the body to maintain normal body functions and may cause heat-related injury, illness or fatality. The rule covers direct-hire employees, contracted and subcontracted employees, and temporary or leased employees employed at these covered facilities.

The completion of this standard would ensure employers are better prepared for the growing heat crisis and could provide the essential, comprehensive framework needed for workplace heat injury and illness prevention plans.

Workplace violence continues to be a significant and worsening problem in the United States. It is the third-leading cause of death on the job. Even as the reported overall U.S. injury and illness rate has steadily declined since 1992—by 70% overall—the injury rate for workplace violence decreased until 2011 when the rate increased 41% in one year (2.7 to 3.8). The injury rate for workplace violence has remained at 3.8 or higher; it is now at 4.3 per 10,000 workers. 

In 2022, more than one in every six work-related deaths was attributed to workplace violence, for a total of 849—more than from contact with objects and equipment or fires and explosions. This is an increase from 761 in 2021 and 705 in 2020—when fewer people were at work due to the COVID-19 pandemic—and a continued increase from 841 in 2019, 828 in 2018 and 807 in 2017.

Reports of workplace violence increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially true in already-high-risk settings for violence: health care, transit, retail and other settings. The CDC issued guidance for retail and service businesses recognizing that threats and assaults had increased in this sector in 2020, but has since archived the guidance. 

Homicides and Suicides

Homicides account for the majority of workplace violence deaths: 524 in 2022, a continued  increase from the past several years (481 in 2021, 392 in 2020, 454 in 2019 and 453 in 2018). 

In 2022, 267 workers committed suicide at work, a 13% increase from 236 in 2021. The largest number of suicides at work occurred in 2019 (307 suicides). There were 291 suicides at work in 1992, the year BLS began reporting these data, but it has fluctuated since; suicides do not include unintentional overdoses. Major increases in workplace suicides occurred just as the recession hit in 2008, when workplace suicides increased by 33%, and in 2016, when workplace suicides increased by 27%. Hopelessness, uncertainty and toxic work environments that include increased work pressures, workplace bullying and lack of worker control over their work environments most likely have contributed to this growing problem. One study published by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health examined U.S. workplace suicides from 2003 to 2010. In that time period, 1,719 people died by workplace suicide. According to the study results, workplace suicides were highest for men, workers ages 65 to 74 years, those in protective service occupations, and those in farming, fishing and forestry. 

Many unions now have peer-to-peer model support programs that aim to improve mental health outcomes and prevent suicide. One such program is the MATES model, focused on suicide prevention, that has been implemented in the Australian construction industry since 2008. A recent study in Australia found evidence of a decline in suicide rates among Australian construction workers over the last two decades (2001–2019).

Nonfatal, Serious Injuries

The majority of nonfatal workplace injuries from violence occur in health care, social assistance and educational services. These attacks are serious, underreported and often leave workers physically and emotionally scarred for life. For 2021 and 2022 combined, 124,040 workplace violence incidents that led to injuries involving days away from work, job transfer or restriction in private industry were reported. Women workers experienced 66% of these serious injuries. 

For 2021–2022 combined, the annualized rate of workplace violence injuries that led to days away from work was 4.3 per 10,000 workers in the private industry, an increase from 4.0 in 2020, and 7.1 for all ownerships. This is the first year that injuries that lead to job transfer or restriction were also reported; the combined rate for all injuries that lead to days away from work, job transfer or restriction was 6.2 per 10,000 workers in the private industry and 10.0 for all ownerships. All of these numbers and rates only reflect injuries that led to days away from work, not all violence-related injuries reported or all that occur. 

Health Care and Social Assistance

Workers in the health care and social service industries are particularly affected. The nature of their front-line work—direct contact with patients and clients—makes these workers at great risk for job-related violence. The number of homicides among workers in health care and social assistance has not been reported by BLS since 2019, when there were 32, compared with 24 in 2018 and 31 in 2017. 

Over time, nonfatal injury rates in health care and social services that lead to days away from work, job transfer or restriction (DART) have increased exponentially and continue to be well above the rate for all industries (6.2 per 10,000 workers). In 2021 and 2022 combined, the workplace violence DART rates were 46.3 per 10,000 workers for nursing and residential care facilities, 32.7 per 10,000 workers for hospitals, 8.7 per 10,000 workers for home health services, 15.3 per 10,000 workers for all social assistance and 20.6 per 10,000 workers for all health care and social assistance combined. These rates for psychiatric and substance abuse hospitals continue to be off the charts at 229.3 per 10,000 workers. 

In the last 15 years of BLS data available, the workplace violence injury rate in private hospitals and home health services has increased more than 100%. 

Violence against health care and social service workers is foreseeable and preventable. With the expected job growth in the health care and social assistance sectors, workplace violence events will continue to rise without safeguards in place. Workplace controls are more necessary than ever to address this systemic and serious issue, and reduce the prevalence and severity of violence in the workplace.

OSHA Guidelines and Enforcement 

During the Obama administration, in the absence of a federal standard, OSHA enhanced its efforts to address the growing problem of workplace violence through guidelines and enforcement initiatives using the general duty clause (Section 5(a)(1) of the OSH Act). 

In April 2015, OSHA updated for a third time since 1998 its comprehensive “Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Healthcare and Social Service Workers,” a comprehensive document outlining the contents of violence prevention programs using hazard assessments and the hierarchy of controls. Earlier, OSHA issued several guidance documents for other high-risk populations, including “Recommendations for Workplace Violence Prevention Programs in Late-Night Retail Establishments” and a fact sheet, “Preventing Violence against Taxi and For-Hire Drivers.”,  

In 2011, OSHA issued a directive, “Enforcement Procedures for Investigating or Inspecting Incidents of Workplace Violence,” which established uniform procedures for OSHA field staff when responding to incidents and complaints of workplace violence, and conducting inspections in industries with a high risk of workplace violence, including health care and social service settings and late-night retail establishments. In January 2017, the agency issued a new directive, “Enforcement Procedures and Scheduling for Occupational Exposure to Workplace Violence.” This directive clarifies the different types of health care settings where workplace violence incidents are reasonably foreseeable; expands the OSHA-recognized high-risk industries to include corrections and taxi driving; and provides more resources and guidance to OSHA inspectors. 

In 2016, federal OSHA Region VIII (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming) instituted a regional emphasis program in residential mental intellectual and developmental disability facilities (NAICS 623210), focused on workplace violence hazards. This program has been renewed annually and now is effective through September 2024.

In FY 2023, OSHA conducted 89 workplace violence inspections. OSHA issued seven serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $13,563—11 of these involved a fatality or catastrophe.

In FY 2022, OSHA conducted 64 workplace violence inspections. OSHA issued five serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $13,653, and one repeat violation that resulted in a current penalty of $4,000, reduced from $16,408.

In FY 2021, OSHA conducted 33 workplace violence inspections. OSHA issued three serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $12,277. During the COVID-19 pandemic, on-site inspections and enforcement slowed significantly. 

In FY 2020, OSHA conducted 43 workplace violence inspections. OSHA issued two serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $12,687, and one repeat violation that resulted in an initial penalty of $72,930. During the COVID-19 pandemic, on-site inspections and enforcement slowed significantly. 

In FY 2019, OSHA conducted 76 workplace violence inspections—13 of these involved a fatality or catastrophe. OSHA issued four serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $11,082, and one repeat violation that resulted in an initial penalty of $72,930.

In FY 2018, OSHA conducted 78 workplace violence inspections—10 of these involved a fatality or catastrophe. OSHA issued two serious violations that each resulted in an initial penalty of $12,934, and two repeat violations that each resulted in an initial penalty of $71,137.

In FY 2017, OSHA conducted 85 workplace violence inspections—four of these involved a fatality or catastrophe. OSHA issued six serious violations that resulted in an initial median penalty of $11,525.

In FY 2016, OSHA conducted 124 workplace violence inspections—15 of these involved a fatality or catastrophe. OSHA issued nine serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $12,471, and two willful serious violations that resulted in a current median penalty of $42,000.

Where there are workplace violence hazards, but OSHA may not issue a general duty clause citation, the agency can issue a Hazard Alert Letter—a voluntary measure that warns employers about the dangers of workplace violence and identifies corrective actions. OSHA issued HALs in 65 investigations in FY 2023, 58 in FY 2022, 30 in FY 2021, 40 in FY 2020, 65 in FY 2019, 60 in FY 2018, 64 in FY 2017, 71 in FY 2016, 18 in FY 2015, two in FY 2014 and five in FY 2013.

The need for enhanced efforts by OSHA to address workplace violence was underscored by a March 2016 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The report, “Additional Efforts Needed to Help Protect Health Care Workers from Workplace Violence,” examined the magnitude of the problem, existing workplace violence prevention programs and policies, state and local ordinances, and the need for these programs and policies, including the need for an OSHA workplace violence prevention standard for health care and social service workers. The report found that workplace violence is a serious and growing concern for 15 million health care workers, and is preventable through violence prevention programs. The GAO recommended that OSHA improve workplace violence citation training for its inspectors, follow up on Hazard Alert Letters, assess current efforts and determine whether the agency should take regulatory action. 

Federal Regulatory Action 

In response to the growing threat from workplace violence, there have been increased efforts to secure workplace violence protections through mandatory regulations. In July 2016, a coalition of unions petitioned OSHA to develop a federal workplace violence standard for health care and social assistance workers. Another union petition was filed seeking a standard in the health care sector. In response to the petitions, OSHA issued a request for information to seek input and information on a workplace violence standard, and in early January 2017 held a public meeting of interested stakeholders. At the meeting, the Obama administration announced that OSHA was accepting the petitions and would develop and promulgate a workplace violence standard for health care and social assistance, a critical first step in the process for federal OSHA to protect workers. 

After years of stalled efforts, federal OSHA’s workplace violence draft rulemaking framework completed the process for small business review required for significant OSHA rules through the Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels, due to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, signed into law in 1996. This is a 60-day process that gives small entity representatives an opportunity to review and provide input on the impact of the rule on them. A final report was issued in May 2023. 

On April 18, 2023, Rep. Joe Courtney (Conn.) and Sen. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.) introduced legislation in the House (H.R. 2663) and Senate (S. 1176), respectively—The Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care and Social Service Workers Act—to help protect these workers. Similar legislation had been passed with bipartisan support by the House of Representatives in April 2021 and November 2019. The bill requires OSHA to issue a federal workplace violence prevention standard, requiring employers in the health care and social service sectors to develop and implement a plan to identify and control workplace violence hazards. The bill ensures that front-line workers participate in the development and implementation of the plan, helping employers identify commonsense measures like alarm devices, lighting, security, and surveillance and monitoring systems to reduce the risk of violent assaults and injuries. The legislation would ensure OSHA protections against violence for all covered workers in the scope of the bill, regardless of whether they otherwise have OSHA coverage in their state. The bill incorporates important elements from OSHA’s current “Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Healthcare and Social Service Workers.” 

State Regulations and Legislation 

A number of states have taken action to adopt laws, standards and policies on workplace violence, which vary widely. Several states (California, Connecticut, Illinois, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey and New York) have passed laws or regulations outlining basic requirements for workplace violence prevention in health care. All detail a requirement of developing and implementing a comprehensive workplace violence prevention plan. 

New York passed a comprehensive workplace violence standard in 2006, but it only covers the public sector. Public employers are required to develop and implement programs to prevent and minimize workplace violence. Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey and Washington have adopted some form of legislation specifically focused on health care settings. The Maryland legislation, which was implemented on Oct. 1, 2014, addresses all workplace injuries in health care facilities by means of an overall safety program, which includes workplace violence hazards. The measure requires public and private health care employers to establish a safety committee consisting of management and employees, and it requires the committee to establish a safety program that consists of 1) a written policy; 2) an annual comprehensive risk assessment and recommendations for injury prevention; 3) a process for reporting, responding to and tracking incidents of workplace injuries; and 4) regular safety and health training. 

In December 2016, the California Department of Industrial Relations filed its final workplace violence standard with the California secretary of state, with an effective date of April 1, 2017. This comprehensive standard, issued in response to a legislative mandate, protects health care workers in the public and private sectors from workplace violence. 

In January 2024, California enacted a new workplace violence prevention law: California Senate Bill 553 (SB 553) amended California Labor Code section 6401.7 and created section 6401.9. It requires nearly all California employers to develop and implement a written workplace violence prevention plan, provide annual training on the plan to employees and maintain a log of incidents of workplace violence. Employers have only until July 1, 2024, to develop and implement the plan as well as provide the first round of training. This law is the first of its kind in the United States. 

Meanwhile, in response to a 2014 petition from a teacher, the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board tasked an advisory committee to examine workplace violence prevention in all California workplaces, which currently is going through the state process to develop a workplace violence standard for all of general industry. The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board is required to adopt the standard no later than December 31, 2026.

State and local ordinances are an important piece in addressing workplace policies and practices related to workplace violence, but workers need a strong, comprehensive federal OSHA standard to address this growing national problem. 

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) continue to account for the largest portion of work-related injuries and illnesses. The total number of serious MSD cases, categorized as leading to days away from work, job transfer or restriction (488,040), accounts for 27.7% of all serious work-related injuries and illnesses in private industry (1,761,900). This report estimates the number of all MSD cases to be 775,122. After underreporting, the true toll is estimated to be approximately 2.3 million MSD cases in one year.

Industries with the highest incidence rates throughout the years continue to be those in health care and social assistance, transportation, and warehousing and storage. It is important to recognize that the numbers and rates of MSDs reported by BLS represent only a portion of the total MSD problem. Other industries with significant MSD problems also have significant prevalence of retaliation against workers who report injuries, like food processing, which keeps certain industries from appearing in these data that are voluntarily reported by employers. Similar detailed reports are not collected for injuries and illnesses that do not involve lost work time or those that do not result in job transfer or restriction. Moreover, these figures do not include injuries suffered by public sector or postal workers.

The Biden administration has refocused its attention on ergonomic hazards. In FY 2023, federal OSHA issued 12 serious 5(a)(1) violations and 50 Hazard Alert Letters (HALs). These letters are issued in cases where OSHA identifies serious ergonomic hazards, but is not able to or does not want to meet the legal burden for issuing a general duty citation. Under the Trump administration, enforcement on ergonomics hazards declined significantly: In FY 2019, FY 2020 and FY 2021, OSHA did not issue any 5(a)(1) citations; it only issued HALs: 31 in FY 2019, 13 in FY 2020 and 20 in FY 2021. 

Addressing ergonomic injuries in the warehousing industry, OSHA conducted several recent investigations in Amazon warehouse facilities throughout the nation. These investigations resulted in one serious citation and six HALs across seven warehouses. OSHA continues to find Amazon workers at high risk for lower back injuries and other musculoskeletal disorders. These investigations follow multiple willful serious citations issued by the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries that resulted in a $60,000 penalty that was upheld by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

In June 2023, OSHA announced a national emphasis program aimed at preventing workplace hazards in warehouses and distribution centers, which includes ergonomic hazards. In March 2024, OSHA issued a hazard alert on severe injuries in the food-processing industry due to the “alarming number of serious preventable” injuries and deaths in poultry, meat and other food-processing establishments, including cleaning and maintenance shifts. 

An investigative piece on Amazon worker injuries examined the severe injury rates and extreme work pace seen at Amazon workplaces and highlights the work done by OSHA and the U.S. Department of Justice under the Biden administration to address the issues. Based on the Strategic Organizing Center analysis of OSHA’s Injury Tracking Application data in 2022, Amazon’s injury rate was 70% higher than the rate at non-Amazon warehouses, and its serious injury rate—6.6 per 100 workers—was more than double the rate at non-Amazon warehouses (3.2 per 100). Workers at Amazon facilities sustained nearly 39,000 injuries in 2022. And while Amazon employed 36% of all U.S. warehouse workers in 2022, the company was responsible for more than half (53%) of all serious injuries in the industry.

Chemical Exposure Limits and Standards

Occupational exposure to toxic substances poses a significant and unreasonable risk to millions of workers and is a major cause of acute and chronic disease in the United States. Occupational diseases caused by chemical exposures are responsible for more than 50,000 deaths and 190,000 illnesses each year, including cancers and other lung, kidney, skin, heart, stomach, brain, nerve and reproductive diseases.,  Many of these diseases are chronic, serious and disabling for millions of workers, and impair their professional and personal lives; this problem largely goes underreported, and its effects are understated. The costs of fatal and nonfatal occupational illnesses from chemical exposures create an enormous burden on the U.S. public health system. Today there are between 7,700 and 84,000 chemicals in commerce, most of them unregulated., 

It is not inevitable that workers develop diseases because of their work with chemicals. Where proper controls are installed or safer alternatives are used, exposures can be controlled and diseases prevented so that workers are not made ill because of their jobs.

Workers face particularly high risks from chemical exposures. They manufacture chemicals or are otherwise exposed early in the chemical life cycle, often at the highest exposures, for long durations, when little to no hazard information is known; are a conduit for bringing chemicals home to their families via clothing, equipment, skin and hair; dispose of chemicals and sort through chemical-containing waste; are often unknowingly exposed to legacy uses of chemicals; and are provided little to no information about chemicals they work with or near. 

OSHA has issued comprehensive standards on some major chemical hazards, including benzene, asbestos, lead and silica that have significantly reduced exposures and disease. But relatively few chemical standards have been issued over time; most were issued during OSHA’s first decade, and most chemical hazards remain unregulated or outdated as toxicity evidence grows. 

Even where OSHA has regulated chemicals, OSHA protections alone are not sufficient to protect workers from dangerous chemicals. Many workers in the United States are not covered by the OSH Act. Currently, 7.9 million public sector workers, including many firefighters and teachers, 10 million self-employed workers, 323,990 workers in the mining industry and many other agricultural workers on small farms are not afforded safety and health protections under the OSH Act. Even where OSHA has coverage responsibilities, the agency is allocated so few resources compared with its mission that in FY 2023, it would have taken federal OSHA inspectors 186 years to visit every workplace in the country once. Unions have some ability to bring in OSHA to help investigate a chemical issue at work, but access to OSHA for unorganized workers, especially as it relates to chemical exposures, is much more difficult—and OSHA has not had a lot of success bringing forward enforcement cases on any unregulated chemical exposure in a union or nonunion setting.

Some states, including California and Washington, have done a better job updating exposure limits and, as a result, workers in those states have much better protection against exposure to toxic substances. Additionally, state OSHA plans could have chosen to adopt and enforce the 1989 permissible exposure limits (PELs) federal OSHA was required to vacate. For instance, Minnesota OSHA continues to enforce the 1989 PELs. In 2016, California resumed activity on chemicals through its Health Effects Advisory Committee, prioritizing chemicals for which to establish PELs, but meetings have stalled since 2020 and the agency’s plan on this work remains unclear. But largely, states have not taken stronger action than federal OSHA on workplace chemical regulation. 

A bipartisan law updating the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) passed in 2016, creating a key opportunity through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to improve the federal process for assessing chemical toxicity and strengthening worker protections from exposures at different stages of a chemical’s lifecycle. Seven months after Congress passed this legislation, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act” (LSCA), the Trump administration took office. While the Obama administration’s EPA had been adhering to strict deadlines outlined in the law, the Trump administration, influenced by the chemical corporations, derailed EPA’s efforts to fulfill its legislative mandate, and protect workers and the public from dangerous chemical exposures: it delayed issuing chemical assessments, weakened the protections proposed by the previous administration and narrowed the scope of uses for the agency to assess for the first 10 chemicals. The Biden administration has reset EPA on course to fulfilling its legal obligations under the new law on using science and evidence in TSCA implementation and to address many worker exposures. More action is needed to ensure people are protected from chemical exposures at work, as mandated by Congress. 

EPA: Opportunity for Progress

The Toxic Substances Control Act passed by Congress in 1976 aimed to protect the public from dangerous chemical exposures and prevent disease by giving the Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate chemicals throughout the environment and chemicals being newly manufactured. Lawmakers intended the original law to be a gap-filling statute, giving EPA co-existing and compatible authority with other agencies over chemical exposures. But court decisions thwarted EPA’s efforts to regulate even the most dangerous chemicals, including asbestos, and left TSCA toothless and ineffective in protecting people from exposure to chemicals.

In 2016, Congress passed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (LSCA), a bipartisan effort to update and address the deficiencies of the original TSCA. This update assigned EPA a specific mandate to include workers as a potentially vulnerable subpopulation at particular risk to disease from chemicals, and gave authority to EPA to eliminate or reduce that risk, through risk management or bans over time, for chemicals that have been in use for decades and for chemicals new to the market. Further, the revised act gives EPA authority to prioritize and evaluate chemicals that pose a danger to human health or the environment where: 1) other agencies cannot or will not adequately regulate a substance, or 2) the substance is already regulated, albeit ineffectively, by another agency, such as OSHA. Importantly, the amended law requires EPA to prioritize and assess unregulated or inadequately regulated chemicals on a strict timeline in order to protect people and prevent disease.

Before LSCA, EPA helped reduce chemical exposures in workplaces by requiring worker protections for new chemicals or new uses, including issuing some exposure limits and requiring engineering and work practice controls such as ventilation requirements and changing processes. Now under LSCA, EPA has authority that OSHA does not have, such as the ability to regulate, enforce or compel data from manufacturers; ban or phase out a chemical; and require substitution with a safer chemical or process.

Implementation of the Amended TSCA

Existing Chemicals

Soon after the law was passed, EPA was required to begin scoping, risk evaluation and risk management of 10 priority chemicals for expedited review through the risk evaluation and risk management processes, since the agency already had done extensive work on these chemicals throughout the years. In December 2017, EPA identified these as:

• 1,4-Dioxane
• 1-Bromopropane
• Asbestos
• Carbon Tetrachloride
• Cyclic Aliphatic Bromide Cluster (Hexabromocyclododecane or HBCD)
• Methylene Chloride
• N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP)
• Pigment Violet 29 (Anthra[2,1,9-def:6,5,10-d'e'f]diisoquinoline-1,3,8,10(2H,9H)-tetrone)
• Tetrachloroethylene (PERC)
• Trichloroethylene (TCE)

In addition, on an ongoing basis as the priority chemicals move through the evaluation and regulation process, EPA must continue rounds of review of 20 additional high-priority and 20 low-priority chemicals—once finalized, the high-priority chemicals will be further assessed through risk evaluation and risk management under LSCA. EPA must consult with other agencies throughout the process regarding relevant exposures, controls and regulatory action.

To date under LSCA, EPA has made progress on existing chemicals in a way OSHA would not be able to. The agency has: 

• Completed the final risk management rule to ban and phase out current uses and imports of chrysotile asbestos.
• Moved forward with and soon will issue the final risk management rule to ban and phase out methylene chloride in commercial settings (it was already banned for personal use).
• Issued proposed risk management rules for perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene and carbon tetrachloride.
• Finalized risk evaluation rules and will move toward risk management for 1-bromopropane, 1,4-dioxane, pigment violet-29 (revised risk determination), HBCD (revised risk determination) and NMP. 
• Proposed a risk evaluation to begin addressing exposures to legacy asbestos and its disposal. 
• Proposed new rules for five persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals.
• Initiated many efforts to reduce exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including finalizing a rule requiring notice and EPA review before these chemicals can be used, and banning the import of certain PFAS chemicals without EPA review and approval. This rule will provide EPA, its partners and the public with the largest-ever dataset of PFAS manufactured and used in the United States.,  
• Issued scoping documents on its first set of 20 high-priority chemicals and began risk evaluations.
• Identified a set of 20 low-priority chemicals for evaluation.

Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, EPA also recently proposed to reduce risk of ethylene oxide exposures for workers, including protections that will reduce risk when workers are involved in sterilization of health care and other equipment, and in the manufacturing of spices.

New Chemicals

The amended law gave EPA more authority to put in place more protections on new chemicals coming onto the market. Additionally, EPA plans to use orders to mandate necessary worker protections as appropriate, and collect additional safety information if needed to make a risk assessment. 

The Biden administration issued an executive order to evaluate all policies, guidelines, templates and regulations related to LSCA and has announced updates to the new chemicals program to reflect the full scope of chemical exposures, including worker exposures as identified in the law. On March 29, 2021, EPA announced several instances where the approach under the Trump administration made assumptions related to worker exposures that did not ensure protections for human health and the environment. The agency has stopped issuing “not likely to present an unreasonable risk” findings based on a proposed Significant New Use Rule, and will incorporate reasonably foreseen conditions of use when determining potential risks, including the absence of worker protections or the assumption that OSHA standards adequately protect workers. 

Under the Trump administration, EPA emphasized the allowance of voluntary approaches by employers rather than using its enforcement authority to require employers to implement engineering controls as chemicals move through the supply and use chain. Specifically, EPA allowed employers to rely on warning statements in Safety Data Sheets that instruct workers to wear personal protective equipment (PPE), rather than issue enforceable orders to the company that require the use of more effective controls. In 2020, EPA allowed a new chemical onto the market with a risk of more than 25,000 times its acceptable risk level for workers, based solely on the warning statements about PPE in the Safety Data Sheets. An effort by a coalition of chemical companies, called the TSCA New Chemicals Coalition, attempted to push EPA’s longstanding authority on establishing workplace protections for new chemicals and new uses of chemicals onto OSHA, an agency with no ability to regulate chemicals not introduced yet to the market. Any claim that existing general OSHA standards will protect workers is maliciously inaccurate. 

Since 2011, OSHA only has issued 29 general duty clause citations for airborne exposures of (existing, not new) chemicals—there is no OSHA PEL for 21 of these, and for the remaining eight there is only a PEL with no requirements for exposure monitoring or medical surveillance. In the rare case that general duty clause citations have been issued, four major conditions have been true:

• The cases involved clinical health effects experienced by workers at the cited facility, consistent with “serious physical harm.”
• The majority of cases were symptoms with acute onset (minutes to hours) following inhalation that were anticipated to worsen with continued harmful exposure.
• The cases involved occupational exposures to a relatively well-studied chemical/chemical class at very high levels consistent with “recognized hazard.”
• Violations were issued because evidence documented workers at the facility were physically harmed by a hazardous exposure to the chemical inhaled during workplace operations, and not because airborne exposure exceeded an occupational exposure limit.

Data from MSHA for 2023 show 40 overall fatalities in mining, an increase from previous years. There were 31 metal and nonmetal miner deaths, an increase from 19 fatalities in 2022, and nine coal miner deaths, a decrease from 11 fatalities in 2022. The last year of the Obama administration was the safest on record for the mining industry, with record low fatalities and injuries reported.

In April 2010, the worst coal mine disaster in the United States in 40 years killed 29 miners at Upper Big Branch (UBB) in West Virginia. The UBB explosion and subsequent investigations highlighted major deficiencies in MSHA’s oversight, and the poor state of safety and health and a lack of compliance not only at UBB, but also at many of the nation’s mines. The Obama administration took aggressive action following the UBB explosion, criminally prosecuting both the company and individuals for violations that led to the deaths. Don Blankenship, the CEO of Massey Energy—the owner of the UBB mine—was found guilty of conspiracy to violate mine safety standards and was sentenced to and served one year in jail. In January 2024, Don Blankenship announced his candidacy for West Virginia Senate.

Following the UBB explosion, MSHA launched a series of initiatives to strengthen enforcement programs and regulations that significantly improved safety and health conditions at the nation’s mines. These included impact inspections to target mines with poor safety records, and an enforcement program to address mines with patterns of violations. New mine safety and health standards were issued, including rules on rock-dusting to prevent mine explosions, proximity detection systems on continuous mining machines in underground coal mines and pre-shift examination of mines. The most significant MSHA rule issued by the Obama administration was the coal dust rule in April 2014, which cut permissible exposure to coal dust to reduce the risk of black lung disease. The Miners’ Voice initiative encouraged miners to exercise their rights under the Mine Act, educating miners about their rights and stepping up enforcement of anti-retaliation protections.

The Trump administration took a less aggressive approach to oversight of working conditions in the nation’s mines. President Trump appointed a mining executive as MSHA assistant secretary. David Zatezalo, formerly CEO of Rhino Resource Partners, was confirmed by the Senate in November 2017 on a party-line vote. Rhino Resources has a long history with MSHA, and previously had received two pattern of violation notices from the agency for failure to correct repeat and ongoing violations. During the four years of the administration, MSHA largely maintained its enforcement programs, while expanding voluntary programs for mine employers. 

The Biden administration began several initiatives to improve mining safety. 

In February 2022, the Biden administration recognized the number of preventable mining injuries and announced a campaign to reinforce the importance of training. The Miner Health Matters campaign was announced on Sept. 29, 2022, as an effort to raise awareness of regulations that give coal miners with pneumoconiosis, or black lung, the right to work at a section of a mine with lower levels of dust without having their pay reduced, discrimination or termination. A Miner Safety and Health app was launched in both English and Spanish to be used as a tool to review best mine safety and health practices, find resources on miners’ rights and responsibilities, and report hazardous work condition complaints. 

In 2023, there were 39,153 coal mine citations and orders issued and 56,579 citations and orders issued in metal and nonmetal mining. This is an increase compared with the year before. 

Impact inspections, instituted as a 10-year initiative after UBB, began slowing in 2018 and paused in April 2020 until the initiative was reinstated in January 2023. Impact inspections are conducted at mines with a poor compliance history with MSHA standards, high numbers of injuries, illnesses or fatalities, or other indicators of unsafe mines. In 2023, there were 178 impact inspections—93 in coal and 85 in metal/nonmetal that resulted in 2,676 total citations, 58 orders and 764 significant and substantial (S&S) citations. Orders are issued to mine operators to require them to withdraw miners from affected areas of the mine for failure to abate violations, for “unwarrantable failure” (reckless disregard, intentional misconduct) to correct S&S violations, and where imminent danger exists. S&S citations are a violation of a mandatory MSHA standard in which the hazard resulting from the violation has a reasonable likelihood of resulting in an injury of a reasonably serious nature. 

The pattern of violations (POV) list has been a way to identify mining operators who have recurring significant and substantial violations. Since the POV initiative began in 2010 with 51 mines, the number of mines on the list has declined significantly. In December 2022, the first mine since 2014 was placed on the POV list (Weeks Island Mine and Mill), and in 2023 another was placed on the list (Gramercy Operation). The renewed use of one of the agency’s toughest enforcement actions shows a commitment to mining enforcement initiatives that hold mining owners accountable.

In 2023, MSHA filed 40 discrimination complaints on behalf of miners and sought 12 reinstatement cases. This was an increase in both complaints and reinstatements compared with 2022 and the highest number of discrimination complaints filed since 2016.

In December 2023, MSHA issued a final rule to protect miners from surface mobile equipment by requiring employers to have a written safety program for mobile and powered haulage equipment at surface mines and surfaces of underground mines. In 2023 alone, 26 mineworkers died from machinery and powered haulage. In its proposal, in September 2021, MSHA reported that from 2003 to 2018, there were 109 preventable fatalities and 1,543 injuries caused by hazards related to working near or operating mobile and powered haulage equipment at mines. 

Silica

In June 2022, MSHA announced a silica enforcement initiative to better protect miners from health hazards related to repeated overexposures of silica. The initiative includes inspections, sampling, compliance assistance and direct conversations with miners about their rights to report health hazards.

After decades, the final rule to address respirable crystalline silica exposures for miners was issued April 18, 2024. This rule will save many lives and prevent debilitating, permanent lung disease in many workers at mine sites, including underground and surface mines in coal and metal/nonmetal settings, and for mineworkers and construction workers on mine sites. In 2023, MSHA proposed to lower the permissible silica exposure limit from 100 µg/m3 to 50 µg/m3 in both coal and nonmetal mine settings, and include other ancillary requirements to address the significant risk miners face even at the new limit. The standard was set to be lowered following the issuance of the OSHA silica rule in 2016, which reduced permissible exposures to 50 µg/m3 for industries under OSHA’s jurisdiction. However, even under massive pressure, the Trump administration opted to issue only a request for information on silica in 2019 when the agency had plenty of information to issue a proposal or direct final rule, and refused to take further action even in the face of the alarming increase in black lung disease (coal worker pneumoconiosis, or CWP) among miners. This rule had been in development for years before it was placed on the long-term regulatory agenda by the Trump administration. 

In 2018, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reported the largest cluster of black lung disease among active coal miners that had been identified in years. More than 400 cases of advanced progressive massive fibrosis (PMF), the complicated form of CWP, were reported from just three clinics in Appalachia from 2013 to 2017. In central Appalachia (Kentucky, Virginia and West Virginia), 20.6% of long-tenured miners have CWP; the national prevalence of CWP in miners with 25 years or more of tenure now exceeds 10%. The current conjecture is that exposure to silica from mining coal seams containing high concentrations of quartz is a major factor in causing this increase in disabling lung disease, and that new technologies and equipment pulverize the rock more intensely—worsening exposures—which is evidenced by younger workers being diagnosed. 

Two recent NIOSH studies reinforce these mining silica exposures and the need for protections. In one, using MSHA’s health inspection data, the researchers found that hazardous silica exposures in metal and nonmetal mining overall have been prevalent and persistent over decades, well greater than the MSHA permissible exposure limit for respirable dust and the NIOSH recommended exposure limit. Additionally, these exposures appear to be increasing in recent years in certain settings. NIOSH also published the largest study ever on coal miner fatalities from lung disease, with a major finding that younger miners have higher mortality rates than their predecessors.