OSHA

Definition/Background

When President Richard Nixon signed the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 was passed, OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Administration was formed (OSHA.gov). OSHA works to assure safe working conditions for people working through private employment by creating and maintaining standards and by providing training and education for employers (OSHA.gov). The bill was passed in the face of intense and pointed public outcry over the deterioration of work place death and illnesses during the 1960’s (OSHA.gov). OSHA is an administration under the umbrella of the United States Department of Labor, and as such, their administrator answers directly to the US Secretary of Labor, a member of the cabinet. As a whole, OSHA was created to prevent the abuse of workers in the private sector, to provide regulation for employers and to create standards of working conditions that are deemed acceptable. OSHA also covers some public sector workers. Several rights are assured for workers by OSHA: training in an understandable language, working on safe machines, access to safety gear, protection from toxic chemicals, reporting injury or illness and attaining information about the safety of the workplace (OSHA.gov).

Historical Context

Occupational Health matters were always in the purview of federal legislation; however, most legislation prior to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 were insufficient in increasing government intervention and expanding to enough employers. By 1920, nearly every state had some sort of occupational safety and health law, but they were not substantive (Meeds, 1974). Similarly, the growth of the labor movement in the 1930’s lead to the passage of the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 and Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act of 1936 (Meeds, 1974). While both of these acts increased federal involvement in setting occupational standards, they were limited in scope and had little actual impact on the lives of workers. In 1948, President Truman initiated conferences on industrial safety that continued throughout the 50’s and 60’s (Meeds, 1974). . Finally, several minor acts in the 1960’s the included health and safety provisions as well as demands for environmental protections and public outcries against several industrial accidents lead to the creation and passing of OSHA (Meeds, 1974).

The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 was passed after a decade of turmoil in the private sector. In 1969, several troubling statistics forced public attention on the ways in which the government was regulating private businesses and corporations in the ways they treated their employees. In that year, a predicted 14,500 people died as a result of a workplace accident and 2.2 million workers were injured or disabled in a major way while at work, creating a loss of 250 million man-days of work (Meeds, 1974). That number is ten times greater than the number of days of work lost to strikes. Similarly, these injuries and deaths lead to a loss of $1.5 billion in wages and $8 billion in gross national product (Meeds, 1974). Finally, it could also be predicted that there would 20% more disabling injuries in the workplace than there were in 1958, signaling a downward trend in working conditions that persisted in the 1960’s (Meeds, 1974). All of these concerns were taking place in an era of intense social and political unrest in the United States. The Civil Rights Movement, the women’s rights movement and protests over America’s role in the Vietnam War all marked a decade of instability and increased participation in the workplace. Each of these historical contexts were important in providing the political framework for the passage of OSHA; the public was mobilized in supporting various causes and citizens were more willing to bring up issues with their employers because of increased rights guaranteed through the Civil Rights Movement and other accompanying social changes.

Controversy/Perspectives

OSHA has seen many controversies since its inception regarding its rules and regulations, specifically the question of whether it does enough to protect the health of workers across the country. Specifically, concerns over the health of workers in the field of health and medicine have plagued the department. In the 1990’s outbreaks of drug-resistant strands of tuberculosis began to reemerge throughout the country. As a result, seventeen health care workers developed active multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and six health care workers died (Jarvis and Bolyard et al., 1995). As a result of the increasing outbreaks and the danger they posed to health care workers, several federal agencies, including OSHA, issued recommendations and regulations expounding upon protective measures to prevent contraction of the disease. Each of these agencies recommended the use of particular respirators, or devices that filter particles one to five microns in diameter out of the air (Jarvis and Bolyard et al., 1995). However, different respirators were recommended, causing incredible confusion and concern, especially once data suggesting some kinds of these respirators allowed for leakage that could reach the lungs of health care workers. OSHA issued a recommendation that the minimum level of respiratory protection should be that of the dust-fume-mist respirators, a mid-level respirator (Jarvis and Bolyard et al., 1995).

However, a month later, OSHA also called upon NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) to officially recommend a specific respirator for protection. As a result of intense pressure to prevent the spread of tuberculosis, NIOSH issued a statement recommending that health workers wear half-mask respirators, especially in dangerous areas and when completing at-risk surgeries. These recommendations contradicted each other and the official recommendations of the CDC, which recommended any sort of particular respirators. Finally, in 1993, OSHA issued the Compliance Memorandum on Health Care Workers Tuberculosis Protection that stated they would fine institutions and health care facilities for failure to use proper respiratory protection. However, the memorandum caused confusion, as many different standards for respiratory protection were given by different organizations (Jarvis and Bolyard et al., 1995). Ultimately, the controversy brought attention to the possible over-abundance of institutions regulation the protection of workers and called for greater communication between the institutions. This controversy matters in that it highlights a line of argument that OSHA is possibly unnecessary given the many regulatory agencies in the federal government.

Relation to Politics of Health

OSHA relates to the politics of health in several important ways, including providing a new perspective on citizenship, how the illness and injury of our bodies impacts the political economy in several key ways. First, the regulations and protections provided by OSHA create another connection between bodies and the state, contributing to the concept of biological citizenship. Biological citizenship is defined by Adriana Petryna as “a demand for, but limited access to, a form of social welfare based on medical, scientific, and legal criteria that recognize injury and compensate for it,” (Petryna, 2016). Petryna discusses the concept in the context of the Chernobyl disaster; however, the same concept can easily be equated to the protections provided by OSHA. Compensation to workers and fines faced by corporations due to OSHA’s regulations create a connection between citizens and state that makes citizens reliant upon the state for their wellbeing. People express their belonging to the state through the ways they are compensated for work-place accidents and injuries, in the same way victims of radiation after Chernobyl claimed citizenship in Ukraine through compensation.

Similarly, OSHA highlights the power that our health and wellbeing have over the economy and the political system in general, creating another connection with the politics of health. The loss of wages and the overall loss in gross national product that resulted from work-related accidents and deaths in 1969 prove how the health of the public impacts not just individuals but the growth of the nation as a whole. This connection between public health and the economy provides a space for politics to regulate and determine health measures for the public, not only for the wellbeing of citizens but for the sake of the country. OSHA is a manifestation of this concept; it regulates the workplace to maintain adequate contributions from the workplace to the economy.

Citations

Petryna, Adriana. “Biological Citizenship: The Science and Politics of Chernobyl-Exposed Populations.” Osiris 19 (2004): 250-265.

OSHA.gov. “About OSHA,” Accessed on February 27 2017. https://www.osha.gov/about.html

Meeds, Lloyd. “A Legislative History of OSHA.” Symposium: The Developing Law of Occupational Safety and Health (1973): 327-330.

Jarvis, William et al. “Respirators, Recommendations, and Regulations: The Controversy Surrounding Protection of Health Care Workers from Tuberculosis.” Ann Intern Med 122 (1995): 142-146.