Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
www.blr.com or www.hrhero.com
For CD and other purchasing information, contact customer service at: 800-274-6774 or E-mail: [email protected]
© 2014 BLR ® and HR Hero® —Business & Legal Resources and HR Hero. All rights reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in part or in whole by any process without written permission.
The webinar qualifies for .075 COC points for designations such as CSP, CHST, and OHST. Check with your applicable accrediting body regarding application of COC credits for additional designations.
Workplace Safety Update for 2015: The Latest OSHA Enforcement
Initiatives and Regulations
Tuesday, January 6, 2015 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Eastern 12:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. Central
10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Pacific
Presented by:
Adele L. Abrams, Esq., CMSP Law Office of Adele L. Abrams PC
Workplace Safety Update for 2015: The Latest OSHA Enforcement
Initiatives and Regulations Presented by:
Adele L. Abrams, Esq., CMSPLaw Office of Adele L. Abrams PC
January 6, 2015
Overview
Heading into home stretch of Obama Administration … Issues:
Will ambitious regulatory agenda come to fruition in 2 year period?Will S&H issues be on Congress’ radar screen in 2015?Will delays continue at OIRA/OMB in releasing rules for comment or finalization?
Overview
New Priority IssuesEnforcement of GHS HazComContractor and Temporary Worker SafetyEbola control measures (and Infectious Disease rulemaking)Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements (more “event driven” inspections likely)Prosecution of more whistleblower claims by OSHA (and MSHA)
OverviewOSHA continues its National Emphasis Programs (NEPs) – regional offices may have own initiatives as wellMain federal OSHA emphasis areas:
Combustible dustHazardous machinery (LOTO) AmputationsHexavalent ChromiumLeadIsocyanates (paint, auto body repair)Nursing and Residential Care FacilitiesPrimary MetalsShipbreakingProcess Safety ManagementCrystalline SilicaTrenching & Excavation (special emphasis program)Federal agencies targeted inspection program
Other OSHA Directives
Severe Violators Enforcement Program (SVEP)Citations issued in conjunction with hazards covered by NEPs trigger SVEP status and company-wide OSHA inspections, federal and state
Field Operations Manual (FOM)“Inspector’s Bible” – another update may be coming
Site-Specific Targeting (SST)Identifies high risk employers in high-hazard industries – federal and stateLess likely to be used in 2015
Voluntary Protection Program (VPP)Current VPP is underfunded at federal level – few new sites addedMore reasons to expel VPP participants: fatalities, willful/repeat violations/incentive programs
Residential Construction Fall Protection Federal initiativeState Program Notice of Intent and Equivalency are required.
New Reporting RequirementsFinal Rule took effect 1/1/2015 – report to local office during normal hours or call 1-800-321-OSHA (6742)Updates list of industries that are exempt, due to relatively low I/I rates, using North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and injury and illness data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Rule retains the exemption for any employer with 10 or fewer employees, regardless of industry classification, from having to routinely keep records. Rule expands the list of severe work-related injuries that all employers must report to OSHA.
The revised rule retains the current requirement to report all work-related fatalities within 8 hours Adds the requirement to report all work-related in-patient hospitalizations, amputations and loss of an eye within 24 hours to OSHA. Employers only have to report an inpatient hospitalization, amputation or loss of an eye that occurs within 24 hours of a work-related incident
Temporary Worker SafetyStaffing agencies and host employers are jointly responsible for maintaining a safe work environment for temporary workers -training, hazard communication, PPE and recordkeeping/reporting.OSHA could hold both the host and temporary employers responsible for the violative condition(s) - and that can include lack of adequate training regarding workplace hazards. OSHA recommends that temporary staffing agency and host employer set out their respective responsibilities in their contract. OSHA says:
The key is communication between the agency and hostStaffing agencies must inquire into conditions that their workers will face at assigned workplaces and ensure the work environment is safeIgnorance of hazards is no excuseHost employer must protect temps in same manner as regular employeesALSO watch out for “contingent worker” issues including misclassification!
Residential Fall Protection
If an employer is engaged in residential construction, but does not provide guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or other fall protection allowed under 1926.501(b), a citation for violating 1926.501(b)(13) will be issued unless the employer can demonstrate the infeasibility or greater hazard. If the employer demonstrates infeasibility or a greater hazard, the CSHO must determine if the employer has implemented a fall protection plan meeting the requirements of 1926.502(k) (alternative measures to reduce or eliminate fall hazards).Fall protection plans under 1926.502(k) must be written and site-specific.
State programs are required to notify OSHA within 60 days whether they intend to adopt a change in policies and procedures identical to thisIf a State adopts or maintains policies and instructions that differ from Federal OSHA's, the State must identify the differences in its policies and either post its different policies on its State Plan website and provide the link to OSHA or provide an electronic copy to OSHA with information on how the public may obtain a copy from the State
Crystalline Silica NEP
Latest version commenced 1/24/08 to identify and reduce/eliminate health hazards associated with occupational exposureStarted as Special Emphasis Program in 1996 – ongoing (tie-in with rulemaking)Addresses workplaces including: manufacturing, construction, maritime and agriculture (esp. sandblasting, foundries, tunnelling, cement cutting, demolition, masonry, and granite cutting)At least 2% of annual OSHA inspections must be silica-related!Inspections include: employee exposure monitoring, evaluation of engineering and work practice controls, respiratory protection, hazard communication, housekeeping and hygiene practices, employee exposure and medical records, abrasive blasting (noise and exposure to metals as well as silica, and evaluation of ventilation)
Combustible Dust NEP
Effective 3/11/08 – triggered by Imperial Sugar disaster; focus on dusts which pose a deflagration or fire hazard when suspended in air or some other oxidizing medium, regardless of particle size. Dusts include: metal, wood, coal and carbon, plastics and additives, biosolids, organic dust (sugar, flour, paper, soap and dried blood), and certain textilesIndustries covered: agriculture, food producs, chemicals, textiles, forest and furniture products, metal processing, tires and rubber manufacturing, paper products, pharmaceuticals, wastewater treatment, recycling operations, and coal handling/processingStandards cited include: 1910.22 (housekeeping), 1910.176 (storage areas), grain handling (1910.272) and general duty clause (approximately 25% of citations)Applies OSHA-wide, notice of intent required
Trenching & Excavating SEP
Started in 1985; applies OSHA-wide, but states not required to adopt.When CSHO sights a trenching/excavating operation, he/she will:
Make note of the state and condition of work operation and any serious hazardsNote name/address of location and any contractors performing work – area office will decide whether to initiate inspection (unless serious hazard is in plain view and not convenient for CSHO to contact a supervisor!)Scope of inspection normally limited to T/E activities – also CSHO is to be alert fo minors working (under age 18)
Oil/Gas Industry Alliance
In 12/14, OSHA signed alliance with the National Service, Transmission, Exploration & Production Safety Network and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to prevent injuries, illnesses and fatalities among workers in the exploration and production sector of the oil and gas industry.Participants will develop fact sheets and videos on the leading causes of fatalities in oil and gas exploration and production, provide OSHA materials and training resources for employers and workers, and support oil and gas safety stand-downs112 oil/gas industry workers died on the job in 2013!
EO 13650 – Chemical Security
OSHA has significant role in the multi-agency Chemical Facility Safety & Security Working Group aimed at improving chemical facility safety and security and reducing risks to workers and surrounding communities posed by hazardous chemicals at these facilities.Agencies include: DOL, DOJ, EPA, DHS, DOAIn 12/14, Dr. Michaels told Senate OSHA is considering changes to emergency response standards, modernizing and updating the PSM standard and policies, regulatory changes to improve ammonium nitrate safety, and developing targeted outreach and guidance products
SVEP
CPL 02-00-149 (SVEP) took effect 6/18/2010 and sets forth parameters of program.
Focuses enforcement efforts on employers who willfully and repeatedly endanger workers by exposing them to serious hazards.
Establishes procedures and enforcement actions for SVEP, including increased inspections, mandatory follow-up inspections of a workplace found in violation and inspections of other worksites of the same company where similar hazards or deficiencies may be present.
Targets those who commit willful, repeated or failure-to-abate violations in one or more of the following circumstances: a fatality or catastrophe situation; in industry operations or processes that expose workers to severe occupational hazards; exposing workers to hazards related to the potential releases of highly hazardous chemicals; and all egregious enforcement actions.
SVEP
Once under SVEP – remain there for at least 3 years!Will trigger inspections at all worksites based on certain types of violations found during initial inspectionsRepeat citations or failure to abate notices based on a serious violation related to the death of an employee or three or more hospitalizations.
Violations under this section do not need to be classified as “High Emphasis Hazards.”
A “High Emphasis Hazard” is one based on a fall or a specific National Emphasis Program (NEP)Non-Fatality/Non-Catastrophic High Emphasis Hazards. An inspection which finds two or more Willful or Repeat violations or failure to abate notices based on high gravity, serious violations due to a High Emphasis Hazard.All “egregious” enforcement actions (cases where OSHA has alleged instance-by-
instance violation of a particular standard) will be considered SVEP cases.Where circumstances warrant, at the discretion of the Area Director, high gravity serious violations related to standards and hazards identified in the SVEP will not normally be grouped or combined, and will have individual proposed penalties.
Field Operations Manual Changes
State plan citation history may be used to document employer knowledge to support a willful violation, and to determine eligibility for the history penalty reduction factor.
It may not be used to support a repeat violation. The CSHO is required to review any written hazard assessment that the employer has made in compliance with §1910.132(d) to determine appropriate personal protective equipment.Extensive guidance is provided on interviews of non-managerial employees.
Field Operations Manual - GDCSection 5(a)(1) of OSH Act permits issuance of citations to exposing employer for recognized hazards that could cause death or serious bodily injuryNecessary elements to prove a violation of the general duty clause:► The employer failed to keep the workplace free of a hazard to which employees of that employer were exposed;► The hazard was recognized;► The hazard was causing or was likely to cause death or serious physical harm; and► There was a feasible and useful method to correct the hazard.To show “potential exposure,” the CSHO must show that the hazard would pose a danger to employees simply by their presence in an area and it is reasonably predictable that they could come into that area during the course of the work, to rest or to eat, or to enter or exit from an assigned work area; or when a hazard is associated with the use of unsafe machinery or equipment or arises from the presence of hazardous materials and it is reasonably predictable that an employee could again use the equipment or be exposed to the materials in the course of work.
Actual exposure(s) must have occurred within the six months immediately preceding the issuance of the citation to serve as a basis for a violation, exceptwhere the employer has concealed the violative condition or misled OSHA, in which case the citation must be issued within six months from the date when OSHA learns, or should have known, of the condition.
Field Operations Manual - GDCRecognition of a hazard can be established on the basis of employer recognition, industry recognition, or “common-sense” recognition.Evidence of employer recognition may consist of written or oral statements made by the employer or other management or supervisory personnel during or before the OSHA inspection.Employer awareness of a hazard may also be demonstrated by a review of company memorandums, safety work rules that specifically identify a hazard, operations manuals, standard operating procedures, and collective bargaining agreements. In addition, prior accidents/incidents, near misses known to the employer, injury and illness reports, or workers' compensation data, may also show employer knowledge of a hazard. Employer awareness of a hazard may also be demonstrated by prior Federal OSHA or OSHA State Plan State inspection history which involved the same hazard.Employee complaints or grievances and safety committee reports to supervisory personnel may establish recognition of the hazard, but the evidence should show that the complaints were not merely infrequent, off-hand comments. An employer’s own corrective actions may serve as the basis for establishing employer recognition of the hazard if the employer did not adequately continue or maintain the corrective action or if the corrective action did not afford effective protection to the employees.
GDC and “Industry Recognition”Industry recognition of a hazard can be established in several ways:
Statements by safety or health experts who are familiar with the relevant conditions in industry (regardless of whether they work in the industry);Evidence of implementation of abatement methods to deal with the particular hazard by other members of the industry; Manufacturers’ warnings on equipment or in literature;Statistical or empirical studies conducted by the employer's industry that demonstrate awareness of the hazard. Evidence such as studies conducted by the employee representatives, the union or other employees must also be considered if the employer or the industry has been made aware of them; Government and insurance industry studies, if the employer or the employer's industry is familiar with the studies and recognizes their validity;State and local laws or regulations that apply in the jurisdiction where the violation is alleged to have occurred; If the relevant industry participated in the committees drafting national consensus standards such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the National FireProtection Association (NFPA), and other private standard-setting organizations, this can constitute industry recognition.
OSHA Revised Penalties
OSHA has made changes in administrative procedures that could significantly increase the average penalty –impacts what OSHA area directors can offer in settlement. The issuance of “egregious” violations is increasing, and this allows a penalty to be assessed for each occurrence of a problem or each worker affected. Area directors can offer an employer with 250 or fewer employees a 20 percent penalty reduction if it agrees to retain an independent safety and health consultant.Repeat Violations: The time period for considering the classification of repeated violations will be increased from three to five years.
OSHA Revised PenaltiesHistory Reduction: Employer who has been inspected by OSHA within the previous five years and has not been issued any serious, willful, repeat, or failure-to-abate citations will receive a 10 percent reduction for history.History Increase: Employer that has been cited by OSHA for any high gravity serious, willful, repeat, or failure-to-abate violation within the previous five years will receive a 10 percent increase in their penalty, up to the statutory maximum. Gravity-Based Penalty (GBP): The gravity of a violation is the primary consideration in calculating penalties and is established by assessing the severity and the probability that an injury or illness could occur. OSHA is adopting a gravity-based penalty structure for serious citations which will range from $3,000 to $7,000.Size Reduction: OSHA amended its penalty reduction structure based on the size of employers, allowing for a penalty reduction between 10 and 40 percent for those with less than 250 employees. None for larger employers.Good Faith: Employers must have a safety and health program in place to get any good faith reduction. Good faith reductions are not allowed in the cases of high gravity serious, willful, repeat, or failure-to-abate violations.
Other Enforcement InitiativesHigher penalties and more stringent enforcement by state plan states because this is one of OSHA’s benchmarking criteria to measure program effectivenessGranting union reps “walkaround rights” at non-union workplacesInclusion of I2P2 requirements, bar on I/I incentives, and corporate wide conditions as conditions of settlementMore emphasis on prosecuting whistleblower violations under Section 11(c) of OSH Act
OSHA has formed Whistleblower Advisory Committee to develop recommendations for improved enforcement under OSH Act and other environmental/transportation whistleblower provisions enforced by OSHA
Suggested PELs table and “safer chemicals” substitution list posted by OSHA … GDC implications???
OSHA’s Most-Cited Standards 2014
1. 1926.501 - Fall Protection2. 1910.1200 - Hazard Communication3. 1926.451 - Scaffolding 4. 1910.134 - Respiratory Protection5. 1910.178 - Powered Industrial Trucks 6. 1910.147 - Lockout/Tagout7. 1926.1053 - Ladders8. 1910.305 - Electrical, Wiring Methods9. 1910.212 - Machine Guarding10. 1910.303 - Electrical, General Requirements
OSHA Regulatory Agenda
I2P2 –on backburner. SBREFA panel would be next step but unlikely in 2015Crystalline Silica (massive record to review and expect congressional intervention to block rule but it is OSHA’s new “priority” rulemaking to complete this Admin.)Electronic Recordkeeping Requirements (at final rule stage – industry opposition is significant)Infectious Diseases – SBREFA panel completed and report expected soon (interim enforcement through GDC using CDC guidelines and Ebola info on OSHA website)… and don’t forget enforcement of HazCom GHS training requirements started 12/1/13!
OSHA Regulatory AgendaPre-rule stage:
Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) – RFI published 10/14 and comments due 4/15 on methods of updating chemical and air contaminant protectionsPSM – RFI issued requesting input on changes to standard (small business review to start 6/15)BBP review (findings due 5/15)Infectious diseases (SBREFA panel underway)
OSHA Regulatory Agenda
Proposed Rule Stage:Crystalline Silica – could be finalized in late 2015 or early 2016 … expect litigation or congressional interventionBeryllium – SBREFA review complete, ANRPM due 1/15. Relatively few employer affected
OSHA Regulatory AgendaFinal Rule Stage –
Confined Spaces in Construction – rulemaking is over a decade in the making – final rule due 2015Tracking of I/I (Electronic Reporting) – final rule slated for 8/15
Long-Term Actions –Combustible DustMSD RecordkeepingI2P2
Infectious Disease Draft Rule
New standard would apply only in healthcare settings (e.g., hospitals, doctor’s offices, long term care, in-house clinics/nurse’s stations) and a limited number of other settings (e.g., laboratories, facilities that handle medical waste, laundries, funeral and mortuary services).
Scope of rule could be expanded or limited based on SER input and post-proposal comments
The new standard would not apply to workers who provide first aid only.
Basics of ProposalEmployer would need to develop and implement a worker infection
control plan (WICP) for its facility:
1. Identify the potential sources of infection in the facility. 2. Consider which employees are exposed to those sources of
infection and develop precautions for those employees to follow to avoid infection.
3. Designate a responsible administrator. 4. Update WICP at least annually, and whenever necessary (e.g.,
new job procedures).5. Determine how contractors, vendors, and licensed independent
medical practitioners who operate in the employer’s facility can adhere to infection control practices that are consistent with the employer’s plan.
6. Develop, implement, and update written SOPs that are consistent with recognized and generally accepted good infection control practices (e.g., CDC guidelines)
Mandated SOPs & TrainingAll employers covered by rule would need to train workers initially and annually and have SOPs for:
Infectious agent hazard evaluations to promptly identify suspected or confirmed sources of infectious agents) and communication of hazard evaluation results;Hand hygiene;Restricting food and cosmetics;Engineering, administrative and work practice controls, and personal protective equipment;Decontamination;Handling, containerization, transport, or disposal of contaminated materials;Occupational health services;Exposure incident investigations;Signage and labeling/color-codingNotification of occupational exposure during transfer, transport, shipping, or receipt of samples of infectious agents
Current Enforcement Tools –EBOLA?
OSHA says: “Employers must protect their workers from exposure to Ebola virus on the job.”
https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/ebola/index.htmlGeneral Duty Clause (Sec. 5(a)(1))
Policies provide notice to employers but are not binding on agency and can be issued, modified & withdrawn without public notice or comment
Bloodborne Pathogens 1910.1030PPE Requirements 1910.132
Includes written hazard assessment requirementEmployer is required to provide at no cost to employees
Respiratory Protection 1910.134Hazard Communication Standard 1910.1200
OSHA’s Silica Proposed RuleEstablishes new PEL of 50 μg/m3 and an action level of 25 μg/m3
Possible incorporation by reference of ASTM E1132 (general industry) and E2625 (construction)Preference for engineering and administrative controls but BARS job rotation as method of controlIncludes provisions for:
Measuring worker exposures to silica;Limiting access to areas where workers could be exposed above the PEL;Use of dust controls;Use of respirators when necessary;Medical exams for highly exposed workers;Worker training; andRecordkeeping.
Electronic Recordkeeping Proposal
Grows out of Recordkeeping NEP – and “public shaming” approachAll employers with 250+ workers would have to submit I/I reports electronically on quarterly basisEmployers between 20-250 workers in high hazard industries would have to submit annually (2009 DART rate in the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses of 2.0 or greater) Same info as on OSHA 300/301 – OSHA estimates $40 cost to employers …
PSM Request for Comments
On 12/3/13, OSHA requested comment on potential revisions to its Process Safety Management standard and related standards, as well as other policy options to prevent major chemical incidents.The RFI is in response to Executive Order 13650, which seeks to improve chemical facility safety and security, issued in the wake of the April 2013 West, Texas, tragedy that killed 15 in an ammonium nitrate explosion. In addition to comments on its Process Safety Managementstandard, OSHA seeks input on potential updates to its Explosives and Blasting Agents, Flammable Liquids and Spray Finishingstandards, as well as potential changes to PSM enforcement policies.Comment period closed.
PELs RFIRFI issued 10/10/14 – comments due 4/8/15Issue: Many PELs outdated, many chemicals have no PELs at all, and legal hurdles preclude “group rulemaking”OSHA is reviewing its approach to managing chemical exposures, and seeks input on new approaches (in light of legal requirements)
Role of exposure modeling in feasibility analysisPotential role of REACH (EU approach), HazCom and control bandingSources of info about chemical hazardsNon-OEL approaches to chemical management
MSHA Regulatory AgendaMSHA has proposed changes to civil penalty system that also affect contractors working at mines
citation system reclassified and for medium/larger employer penalties would increase by 300-1000 percentwould also remove ALJ’s “de novo” penalty authority. Comments still open.
Final rule stage: proximity detection systems in underground coal minesProposed rule stage: crystalline silica (follow OSHA’s lead)Prerule stage includes RFI on exposure to diesel exhaust, and plans to revise workplace examination requirements.
Key Cases of InterestFiberdome – case settled but was example of using GDC to enforce more stringent PELs than those codified by OSHA, based on “industry recognition” that PELs were not sufficiently protective of workersAracoma Widows case – affirms that federal inspectors can be personally liable for “negligent” inspections that do not detect hazards that subsequently kill/injure workers (expansion of US Supreme Court decision in United States v. Olsen) – US Govt settled case in 2014!Grinnell – OSHA can use subpoenas to obtain copies of insurance company audits and worker’s compensation files to use against employerArmstrong Coal (US Ct of Appeals) – Held MSHA is public health agency entitled to workers comp and other insurance records over objections of workers concerning privacy (parallel finding for OSHA?)Warrior Coal (US Ct of Appeals) – Held MSHA investigators had right to home addresses and phone numbers of workers so interviews can be conducted off-site without employer’s knowledge.
Litigation StrategiesAvoiding SVEP is critical – moving citations from willful >serious > OTS helpfulAbatement can be delayed until contest is adjudicated but monies spent to abate can reduce penalties (possible credit for audits)Proactive adoption of SHMPBut watch for hidden provisions in “informal settlements” (retraining of all workers, I2P2 programs, bars on I/I based incentive programs)Don’t be afraid to go beyond informal conference – 99% of cases settle without trialRemember that information/documents presented at informal pre: contest can be used against you in court!
Legislative ActionProtecting America’s Workers Act could be reintroduced but probably DOAPossible cherry picking of items from PAW Act for individual consideration: public sector worker protections, whistleblower protection enhancement, heightened civil and/or criminal penalties
Republican initiatives could include codification of VPP, third party audit or audit privilege legislation
Mine Safety legislation could be reintroduced – event drivenAppropriation “Riders”Oversight hearings on agency effectiveness, use of “guidelines” in lieu of rules, and OSHA’s expansive use of General Duty ClauseReturn of “Regulatory Reform” legislation (REINS Act) with focus on “scientific” basis for EHS rules, possible requirement to obtain Congressional approval for final rules …
Examples of “Pro Business” BillsLegislation introduced in previous Congress sessions could return:
Require federal agencies to review regulations and modify or eliminate regs as neededRequire agencies to eliminate existing regs before new ones can be adoptedCreate Office of Regulatory Analysis to review all regulations before implementationProvide 6 mo. “grace period” for employers to correct non-imminent danger violations and, if abated, citation would be withdrawnThird party audits in lieu of programmed OSHA inspectionsAudit privilege – formalize and expand OSHA’s audit “safe harbor” to make more like EPA
Appropriations & Budget Issues
OSHA/MSHA/NIOSH funding for FY 2015 included in continuing resolution:
OSHA received $552.8 mil. (same as 2014 but lower than Obama’s $565 mil. Request)MSHA received $375.9 mil. (same as 2014; president proposed $377 mil.)NIOSH received $334.9 mil. (same as 2014; Obama proposed $281 mil., which would have eliminated ERC, AAF programs etc.)
What About 2016 Funding?
New ballgame with Republic control of CongressPresident expected to send proposed budget to Congress by March 2015Riders on FY 2016 Labor-HHS appropriations could include:
Freeze on finalization of crystalline silica rule and electronic rulemakingProvisions barring further work on I2P2Protections for VPP programRetention of funding for MSHA State Grants Program
Questions????
Adele L. Abrams, Esq., CMSP301-595-3520
All-new program!
Practical guidance for overcoming the latest safety management challenges!
Comprehensive pre-conference workshops!
Esteemed faculty of seasoned safety practitioners and consultants!
And much, much more!
Visit http://safetysummit.blr.com to register today!
BLR’s Safety Summit: Best Practices & OSHA Compliance for 2015
Disclaimers
*This webinar is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information about the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. *This webinar provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship has been created. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. We recommend that you consult with qualified local counsel familiar with your specific situation before taking any action.
Adele Abrams, Esq., CMSP, is an attorney and safety professional who is recognized as a national expert on occupational safety and health. She heads a ten-attorney firm that represents employers and contractors nationwide in OSHA and MSHA litigation, and provides safety and health training, auditing,
and consultation services. She is a Certified Mine Safety Professional, and a Department of Labor–approved trainer. Adele is on the adjunct faculty of Catholic University in Washington, DC, where she teaches employment and labor law. She is also a professional member of the American Society of Safety Engineers, and is co-author of several safety-related textbooks. She is chair of the National Safety Council’s Business & Industry Division committee on regulatory and legal affairs. She is admitted to the Bars of MD, DC and PA, as well as multiple federal courts including the US Supreme Court.
Adele Abrams
