Politics

Occupational safety reform

asbestos_hazard_237426684.jpg

(Image: Flickr user ktheory (cc: by-nc-sa))

President Obama has picked a new leader for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA. And the nominee, David Michaels, is sure to raise some eyebrows in the business community that OSHA regulates.

Player utilities

Listen to the Story.

As an epidemiologist at the George Washington University School of Public Health, Michaels was a fierce advocate for worker safety and a harsh critic of industry. Last year he told "Living on Earth" how polluting companies manipulate regulators behind the scenes.

"We need a lot more transparency, and I'm hoping that the next administration, the next president -- whoever that is -- guarantees that all of these decisions around how we regulate chemicals, how we measure the effects on people's health, are done in a way that's transparent," said Michaels.

If confirmed, Michaels will get a chance to do that at OSHA, an agency that's been widely criticized.

Wake Forest University law professor Sidney Shapiro is one of those critics. In his book "Workers At Risk," Shapiro says OSHA is in sore need of reform.

"David Michaels has his job cut out for him," said Sharpiro. "I think it's fair to say that OSHA is one of the most dysfunctional agencies in Washington. For example, Congress had a plan how to regulate toxic chemicals in the workplace. And OSHA has been almost unable in the last ten years or so to fulfill that plan. In fact, it's only issued three health regulations in roughly ten to the last fifteen years."

Shairo says OSHA should be most concerned with worker safety, "I think there's almost universal consensus that we have to do something better to protect the health of workers. Science doesn't fully understand how our exposure to chemicals day in and day out affects our body. But what we do know is if we are exposed to toxic substances in the work place or even the air -- air pollution -- eventually it takes a toll on our body, but that toll shows up maybe fifteen, twenty, twenty-five years later. So we have this challenge of regulate now and get the protection later, but that's a very important challenge."

In a book called "Doubt is their Product," writen my Michaels, he had some harsh criticism for industry and industry's role in the regulatory process. Here's how he summed things up:

"What polluters have seen is that the strategy that the tobacco industry came up with, which essentially is questioning the science, find the controversy and magnify that controversy, is very successful in slowing down public health protections. And so the scientists who used to work for the tobacco industry are now working for most major chemical companies. They don't have to show a chemical exposure is safe. All they have to do is show that the other studies are in question somehow. And by raising that level of uncertainty, they throw essentially a monkey wrench into the system."

Shapiro thinks most worker advocates would agree with Michael's assessment, and that it says a lot about what he will bring to OSHA, "Well, I think he would bring a breath of fresh air. David has a number of ideas and they follow along the lines that the people who produce the risk oughta really be responsible for understanding it and doing something about it. More profoundly, I think it's important that we know that David Michaels is a health professional. And I think OSHA's done best when it's had administrators from the public health community. It is, after all, a public health agency. More times than many of us would wish, it's been headed by someone who's been an adamant critic of OSHA and has come from industry or been an industry lawyer."

If confirmed, Michaels as head of OSHA would work within the Department of Labor. And the Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solice also has expressed a lot of interest in strengthening the regulation particularly of workplace exposure to chemical hazards.

Shapiro sees clear challenges for Michaels and Solice, "The problem that both of them face is two-fold. First, what can we do within the confines of existing legal authority? And then, secondly, can they get the administration to go to Congress and try to rectify what we now know are some of the fundamental problems with our legal approaches to environmental hazards, particularly toxic chemicals -- both in the workplace and in the air.

"The political barrier is OSHA's very unpopular. It's been unpopular for a long time. The business community has played on that lack of popularity to stymie it and cut its budget. And he's going to have to try to convince the broader public that OSHA's out there doing a good job."

Hosted by Steve Curwood, "Living on Earth" is an award-winning environmental news program that delves into the leading issues affecting the world we inhabit. More "Living on Earth."