Member Stuart T. O’Neal, III was elected to serve as Vice President of The Hamels Foundation Board of Directors, effective Nov. 1 for a one-year term. Mr. O’Neal was initially appointed to the board in May of this year.
By: Cressinda D. Schlag
On Oct. 9, 2014, OSHA published a Request for Information (RFI) on Chemical Management and Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) in the Federal Register. OSHA’s RFI requests that stakeholders, including businesses and local government entities, comment on the potential impact of an alternative approach to managing chemicals in the work environment through the modification of the current PEL process.
OSHA has set enforceable PELs, or regulatory limits on the amount or concentration of a substance allowed in the air, for over 500 chemicals. These PELs are addressed in specific standards for the general industry, shipyard employment and construction industry. Despite multiple proposals from both OSHA and industry groups seeking to change or enhance specific PELs over the past decade, 95% of the PELs have been in existence without change since 1971. OSHA’s limited ability to modify or enhance PELs within the current regulatory framework is the administration’s primary incentive for changing current regulations on chemical management and PEL regulations.
OSHA’s RFI raises several potential approaches to chemical management, which include: a tiered approach, hazard banding, task-based approach and informed substitution. Any of the proposed approaches would drastically streamline OSHA’s existing regulatory framework for PELs by allowing OSHA to regulate groups of chemicals or types of chemical exposures in the same manner, without identifying or establishing exposure limits for each individual chemical.
For example, if OSHA adopted the proposed “control banding” approach, all chemicals with similar qualities would be grouped and regulated based on the group’s qualities instead of a single chemical’s qualities. OSHA would therefore avoid having to develop PELs for every single chemical.
Although OSHA’s RFI has no impact on OSHA’s current enforcement policies, information obtained during the RFI could significantly impact the administration’s future approach to chemical regulation and in turn could severely affect employers with chemical exposures. Employers should therefore consider reviewing and commenting on OSHA’s RFI.
Comments on OSHA’s proposal are not due until Wednesday, April 8, 2015 or 180 days after the RFI’s Oct. 10 publication in the Federal Register. You can access OSHA’s RFI and electronic submission page at https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/10/10/2014-24009/chemical-management-and-permissible-exposure-limits-pels
For more information about any of OSHA’s proposed approaches or to obtain assistance in writing a formal comment, please contact any member of the Burns White Occupational Safety and Health team.
By: Cressinda D. Schlag
At the end of September, OSHA released its list of the top 10 most frequently cited standards in violations resulting from work site inspections during the 2013 fiscal year. In the 89,664 industry inspections performed, the top number of violations occurred in these ten categories:
Nearly all of the standards noted on OSHA’s top ten list appeared on last year’s list, and notably, the top four violations — fall protection, hazard communication, scaffolding and respiratory protection — appeared in the exact same order.
For more information on OSHA’s Top Ten Violations list or how OSHA’s emphasis programs might affect your business, contact any member of the Burns White Occupational Safety and Health team.
Associate Matthew G. Brouse was recently named to the Young Professionals Board of Junior Achievement of Western PA. In this role, he’ll assist with advancing Junior Achievement’s mission of inspiring and preparing young people to succeed in a global economy through promoting interest and generating support among Pittsburgh’s young professionals.
Burns White Members Stuart T. O’Neal, III and John M. Steidle and Associate Laura E. Caravello recently obtained a summary judgment in Trumbull County, Ohio for an insurance client in a coverage matter. The third-party plaintiffs, three nurses who were being sued for medical malpractice in relation to the obstetrical management, labor and delivery of a baby born on Feb. 24, 2010, were seeking liability insurance coverage, and damages for breach of contract and bad faith.
Burns White attorneys argued that the policy did not apply to any loss prior to the retroactive date of Oct. 1, 2010, thus excluding the Feb. 24 incident from coverage. The court agreed, dismissing all counts in the third-party complaint with prejudice.
Note: The results obtained in a particular case are heavily dependent on the facts and the law specific to that case.
On April 21, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) held that a franchisee of the Jimmy John’s sandwich chain committed unfair labor practices, ordering it to cease and desist disparaging or promoting the disparagement of pro-union workers. Additionally, the decision required the franchisee to offer reinstatement for discharged employees, rescind each disputed written warning, and provide full back-pay to each employee for lost earnings and/or other benefits.
Click here to read more about this unique case.
Philadelphia-based Jeffrey S. Adler, Co-Chair of the Employment Group, was quoted in an article titled, “Wage-and-Hour Claims on the Rise in Pennsylvania.” Published on Sept. 23, 2014 in The Legal Intelligencer, it looks at possible rationales behind the increase in Fair Labor Standards Act-related litigation in the state over the past few years. Click here to read the article.
Associate Nicholas D. Varischetti was appointed to serve on Emclaire Financial Corp and its subsidiary The Farmers National Bank of Emlenton Boards of Directors, effective January 1, 2015. Click here to read the official announcement from Emclaire Financial Corp.
In the final rule for Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements released on Sept. 11, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration tightened its reporting requirements for all employers covered by the Occupational Safety & Health Act. This revised rule, which will go into effect on Jan. 15, 2015, will require employers, whether exempt from maintaining injury and illness records or not, to notify OSHA of any work-related fatalities within eight hours, and any work-related in-patient hospitalizations, amputations or losses of an eye within 24 hours. In contrast, the prior standard only imposed the reporting of in-patient hospitalizations affecting three or more employees.
In addition to the phone reporting system already in existence, OSHA is currently developing a web portal for employers to submit incidents electronically.
Along with the new reporting requirements, OSHA issued an update to the list of industries that are exempt from routinely keeping and maintaining injury and illness records based on the North American Industry Classification System. The reporting exemption for any employer with 10 or fewer employees, regardless of their industry classification, remained intact in the final rule.
For more information on how these changes to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements might affect your business, contact any member of the Burns White Occupational Safety and Health team.
Last week, two railroad clients facing occupational injury allegations under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) from two former employees were granted a reversal by the Superior Court of Pennsylvania to transfer court venues from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County to Blair County.
Represented by Burns White Members T.H. Lyda and Ira L. Podheiser, the trial court initially granted the change in venue on Feb. 19, 2013 and entered it on Feb. 20 based on the fact that both appellees lived and worked in Blair County during the course of their employment. The appellees filed a motion to transfer a day later but failed to file a direct appeal. On April 10, the trial court granted the reconsideration motion, which led to the Superior Court appeal. Burns White attorneys argued that the trial court had no jurisdiction to reconsider the change in venue as more than 30 days had lapsed since the entry of order. In a published opinion, the Superior Court agreed, holding that the trial court lost jurisdiction after March 22. As a result, the Superior Court ordered that the cases be transferred to Blair County.
Note: The results obtained in a particular case are heavily dependent on the facts and the law specific to that case.
