By Susan Zachem

With help from conservative Democrats, the Republican majority in the 106th Congress is continuing to push bills that the AFL-CIO said would severely weaken safety and health protections for workers.

Fresh from its failure in the previous Congress is the so-called "SAFE Act" introduced by Sen. Michael B. Enzi (R-Wyo.). Enzi's S. 385 – the Safety Advancement for Employees Act of 1999 – would exempt from potential Occupational Safety and Health Administration penalties employers that get safety audits and "certificates of compliance" from "third-party" consultants.

S. 385 also would: override OSHA standards by allowing employers to use "alternative safe methods"; take away the worker right to onsite OSHA inspection by encouraging OSHA inspectors to phone or fax employers in response to worker safety and health complaints; and establish consultation alternatives and warnings instead of citations in some cases of safety and health violations.

In a special twist, the Enzi bill moved through the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee on a 10 to 8 party-line vote on April 28, 1999 – the day set aside in the United States and Canada to remember workers killed, injured, and made sick by their jobs.

Labor Secy. Alexis M. Herman said it is "a sad irony that on this Workers' Memorial Day, the Senate is moving forward with a bill that would undermine the safety of workers and the institution that protects them." She reaffirmed President Clinton's pledge to veto any legislation that would weaken OSHA.

Democratic Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.), Jack Reed (R.I.), and Paul Wellstone (Minn.) offered amendments respectively to remove the exemptions, impose restrictions on consultants, and extend OSHA to state, federal and local governments, but they were rejected by the panel.

Meanwhile, the House of Representative passed two bills that would affect OSHA through regulatory restrictions.

Introduced by Rep. Gary Condit (D-Calif.), H.R. 350, the Mandates Information Act, would require the Congressional Budget Office to analyze the impact of proposed laws on small businesses, consumers and workers and allow members of Congress to raise a "point of order" to block consideration of legislation that would impose annual costs on the private sector that exceed the $100 million threshold.

Introduced by Rep. David M. McIntosh (R-Ind.), H.R. 391 would exempt small businesses from penalties for first-time violations of paperwork requirements. The AFL-CIO noted that the broad definition of "paperwork" would include OSHA's hazard communications standard, written requirements for lockout/tagout programs, analyses of hazardous processes at chemical plants, exposure monitoring and medical surveillance requirements, among other standards designed to protect workers from serious injury, illness or death.

The AFL-CIO noted that both bills went to the House floor without hearings. An amendment to H.R. 350 offered by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and supported by labor, public interest and environmental groups, was defeated on a 216 to 203 vote. H.R. 350 passed on a 274 to 149 vote, while H.R. 391 passed on a 274 to 151 vote.

Also pending are H.R. 987 and S. 1070, that would prevent OSHA from issuing a proposed standard on ergonomics until the National Academy of Sciences completes another study on job-related musculoskeletal disorders – a delay estimated at about two years. The AFL-CIO said the Chamber of Commerce is leading the campaign for the bills' passage.

AFL-CIO Pres. John J. Sweeney called the bills "a futile attempt by extremists to deny the existence of the nation's biggest job safety problem – repetitive strain injuries." More than 600,000 workers lose time from work each year from carpal tunnel syndrome and other preventable, work-related musculoskeletal disorders.

Labor Secy. Herman took the occasion of Workers Memorial Day to announce the Clinton administration's proposal for legislation that would strengthen protections for workers who report unsafe working conditions.

The Labor Department said Clinton's Hazard Reporting Protection Act would strengthen whistleblower protections by: increasing from 30 to 180 days the period for workers to file complaints about employer retaliation; including as protected activity reports of unsafe conditions, injuries and illnesses; allowing the Labor Department to provide for reinstatement, back pay and damages without requiring the employee to go to court; and protecting workers who refuse to work in what they reasonably believe are seriously dangerous conditions, among other provisions.