Operation of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) - Essay Example

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Labor markets play an important role in the society. Both employers and employees equally benefit from their interactions and relations in the labor market setting. The benefits of the workplace, however, are not without challenges to both employers and employees. Safety and health issues in the workplace emerge from time to time, making it necessary for an agency like OSHA to undertake its mandate effectively and efficiently. OSHA is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that working conditions are safe and healthful for workers. It is important to point out that not all workplaces in the United States fall under the jurisdiction of OSHA. For those that do, OSHA enforces workplace standards, regulations, and subsequently conducts inspections in relation to chemical exposure, injury vulnerability, safety procedures, protective gear requirements, and certain information availability to employees (Reese and James 71). Workplaces that do not fall under the jurisdiction of OSHA are regulated by other relevant agencies. Most importantly, violation of OSHA regulations attracts fines and/or jail time based on the safety and health provisions violated. Over the last four decades, OSHA has had to deal with many different criticisms that cut across the administration’s operations. One of the most criticized areas of OSHA’s activities is the ever-rising number of inspections in workplaces that fall under its jurisdiction. The number of inspections has kept rising, but the outcomes of such inspections have had little positive results to show. The idea of inspections failing to reflect improved results in workplaces often spur controversy over the effectiveness and efficiency of the agency. Accompanying the inspection criticism is the argument that follow up practices are lacking in OSHA’s system of executing its mandate. In this respect, many workplaces change little, if any, aspects of OSHA’s concerns. In the same regard, majority of workplaces correct their safety and health practices only in anticipation of inspection. Once these inspections are undertaken, employees could end up facing working conditions that are unsafe and unfit for their health for years. Even as OSHA strives to be as effective and efficient as possible, the workload of its mandate is simply overwhelming. (Mayer 145) contends that it would take the administration over one hundred years to inspect and ensure regulatory compliance in all workplaces that fall under OSHA’s jurisdiction. What this shows is that OSHA will hardly account for all workers’ welfare at any given point in their employment tenure. The administration’s operations, therefore, can be defined as either limited in scope or outperformed by the actual regulations it should undertake. In essence, OSHA works to the best interest of the entire workforce within and across the United States. Safety and health regulations focus on the welfare of employees in the workplace. However, there are many other players to account for in the labor market. In particular, employees work for or with employers, making it critical to consider the two parties (Hall and Peter 668). For the most part, OSHA focuses on the employees and somehow sidelines employers in the process. The administration’s high regard for employees without necessarily implementing practices that foster employer welfare alongside that of their employees is seen as a critical factor of ineffectiveness. In light of employer-employee relations and interactions, OSHA has been subjected to job-killing criticisms. What this means is that the agency’s regulatory practices sometimes limit the number of employees an employer can hire, all in the name of ensuring that OSHA requirements, policies, or regulations are met for the employees already employed. Compliance with OSHA regulations, therefore, influences hiring and firing decisions in the workplace (Williams and Mark 127). Stakeholders in the labor market feel that OSHA should actually induce job creation if the administration was working to its expectations. As earlier mentioned, violation of OSHA regulations attracts fines and jail time depending on the type of violation in question. Four decades after its establishment, OSHA still struggles to hold violators accountable for their actions. In many instances, fines and penalties that follow various regulation violations are best described as too lenient. Specifically, maximum penalties for violating OSHA regulations amount to a misdemeanor and jail time not exceeding six months (LaTourrette and John 21). With massive regulations, compliance requirements, safety and health education, and training (Lewis 83), the costs and benefits of OSHA exhibit a critical mismatch. The final count of criticism builds on OSHA’s bureaucratic structure and countrywide operations. It takes the agency at least ten years to formulate and subsequently implement new regulations. This slow pace of regulation development is attributed to the agency’s structure and countrywide relations with stakeholders. Internal creativity and innovation do not match national and regional changes as far workforce trends are concerned. For example, combustible dust explosions have been at the center of recent controversy with regard to OSHA’s ineffective and efficient operations. Moreover, state plans have further challenged OSHA activities at the state level. Once state plans become operational, replacement of federal OSHA takes place. The enforcement of state plans takes over the involvement of OSHA as an administration at the state level. On the same note, OSHA handles whistleblower laws that have no direct relationship with safety and health from time to time (Jung and Michael 96). even though this move receives the support of the Congress, it only complicates the occupational matters handled by the administration. In other words, almost every aspect of OSHA operations falls under the expected level of effectiveness and efficiency. The above-discussed criticisms constitute the key problems and limitations faced by OSHA from time to time. This criticisms form a strong foundation for the improvement of OSHA regulations. An improved and reliable OSHA system will not reduce worker injuries and illnesses, but also minimize the incidence of such occurrences. One of the areas that need immediate attention is the issue of regulatory follow-up. It is important for OSHA keep track of worker injuries and/or illnesses in the workplace (Arnold and Bowie 229). the essence of enforcement is to ensure an occurrence does not repeat itself in future. In this respect, OSHA lacks a functional follow-up mechanism that can record and track safety and health progress over time. Another critical area is coverage of all workplaces under the jurisdiction of the administration. Although OSHA conducts many different inspections and subsequent regulations within a given year, the number of untouched workplaces is still high. Thousands of workplaces are yet to be assessed for compliance with OSHA requirements (Crawford 11). However, workers continue to go to work every day, with or without necessarily paying attention to the prevailing working conditions. In this respect, OSHA needs to diversify its scope and operational to reach to majority, if not all workplaces within its jurisdiction. Fines and penalties also stand a critical aspect of improvement. The current types of punishments are ineffective and non-deterrent. Subjecting violators to misdemeanor and jail times that do not exceed six months does not stand the test punishing OSHA violations. Violation of the set standards should attract harsher penalties that actually deter employers from subjecting employees to unfavorable working conditions. In light of OSHA regulations, there is need to criminalize certain working conditions or employer behavior in the organizational environment. Workplaces that fail the test of compliance several times cannot continue to be punished with the same old practices (Roelofs 32). Formulating and implementing felony provisions for OSHA violations is necessary. With follow-ups, it would be easy to identify violated safety and health practices that qualify to be categorized as felony. Felony charges are far more serious and attract stricter punishment if upheld. This is the way to go for OSHA in a bid to improve its effectiveness and efficiency in service delivery. Most importantly, the administration has to understand that there are many different stakeholders as far as worker safety and health is concerned. Majority of OSHA’s enforcements are directed towards the employee. It is important to ensure that the administration works with both employers and employees (LoPinto 166). On the same note, there are diverse and dynamic union demands to account for. All these forces play a significant role in influencing the welfare of the workforce in the workplace. Primary concentration on the employees sidelines employers and unions, when, in fact, they should be an important part of the system. Finally, innovation will go to great lengths in transforming OSHA. The decade-long periods of developing new regulations should be reviewed. The workplace settings are highly dynamic, thus the need for OSHA to be at par with this dynamism. Extensive and intensive research is necessary to ensure that OSHA prevents harm, injury, and illnesses to employees, as opposed to enforcing compliance when damages are already evident (Berezdivin 58). Chemical exposure, explosive dusts, unhygienic working conditions, and the general welfare of all stakeholders in the labor force should drive OSHA’s agenda of innovation. In essence, OSHA should take a proactive position in its mandate, as opposed to playing responsive to issues of safety and health that affect the society in diverse and dynamic ways. Works Cited Arnold, Denis, and Bowie Norman. Sweatshops and respect for persons. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(2), 2003: 221–242. Berezdivin, Javier. Experts Consensus of OSHAs Guidelines for Workplace Violence Prevention Program Effectiveness: A Delphi Study. New York: ProQuest, 2008. Print. Crawford, Clarence. Occupational Safety and Health: Changes Needed in the Combined Federal-state Approach. Washington, D.C: The Office, 2007. Print. Hall, Joshua, and Peter Leeson. Good for the goose, bad for the gander: International labor standards and comparative development. Journal of Labor Research, 28(4), 2007: 658– 676. Jung, Juergen, and Michael Makowsky. Regulatory Enforcement, Politics, and Institutional Distance: OSHA Inspections 1990–2010. Towson University Working Paper, No. 2012- 02, 2012. Print. LaTourrette, Tom, and John Mendeloff. Mandatory Workplace Safety and Health Programs: Implementation, Effectiveness, and Benefit-cost Trade-offs. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 2008. Print. Lewis, Elliot. OSHA Needs to Evaluate the Impact and Use of Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in Penalty Reductions as Incentives for Employers to Improve Workplace Safety and Health. New York: DIANE Publishing, 2010. Print. LoPinto, Lidia. Protect Your Business from OSHA. Raleigh: Lulu.com, 2009. Print. Mayer, Robert. What’s wrong with exploitation? Journal of Applied Philosophy, 24(2), 2007: 137–150. Reese, Charles, and James Eidson. Handbook of OSHA Construction Safety And Health. New York: CRC/Taylor&Francis, 2006. Print. Roelofs, Cora. Preventing Hazards at the Source. New York: AIHA, 2007. Print. Williams, Richard, and Mark Adams. Regulatory Overload: Mercatus on Policy. Arlington, VA: Mercatus Center at George Mason University, 2012. Print. Read More