Committee on Education and the Workforce

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 13, 2000
Contact: Becky Campoverde
or Dan Lara (202) 225-4527

Statement of Republican Workforce Committee Members
on OSHA’s Final Ergonomics Standard

WASHINGTON – House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman Bill Goodling (R-PA) and Workforce Protections Subcommittee Chairman Cass Ballenger (R-NC) issued the following statement today regarding the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) publishing a final ergonomics standard:

            “We are very disappointed that the Clinton-Gore Administration decided to issue a final ergonomics standard, right in the middle of ongoing negotiations to resolve this issue to the satisfaction of both Congress and the administration.  Last week, language to allow OSHA to issue the standard and to give a new president the option to quickly rescind the regulations was agreed to in principle.  OSHA’s rush to issue the standard, however, demonstrates that the administration had no intention of negotiating in good faith.

“What OSHA Administrator Charles Jeffress fails to realize is that an ergonomics regulation would be a substantial mandated cost on American companies and the economy.  OSHA’s own conservative estimate shows that the regulation could cost $4.2 billion per year.  Some estimates show the cost could easily reach $100 billion per year.”

“Why are we concerned?  As we have repeatedly said in the past, there is a great deal of scientific and medical uncertainty and debate about repetitive stress disorders and ergonomics.  In fact, the number of  ‘ergonomic’ injuries has been steadily declining in recent years.  Furthermore, our committee hearings on the subject demonstrated that there does not yet exist a consensus among professionals on the cause and effects of musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace.

“Both the House and Senate went on record this year opposing OSHA’s plans to rush forward with the standard before a congressionally-mandated study of the issue by the National Academy of Science is completed early next year.  OSHA chose to ignore the will of Congress in this regard. 

           “We are not surprised by OSHA’s action because it follows a pattern of overstepping authority and issuing controversial new policies, which have no sound scientific basis and which are not supported by public opinion.  The same organization (OSHA) for instance, came out with a shortsighted and dangerous proposal earlier this year to extend its regulatory reach into private homes around the country.  Only after a significant and justified public outcry and congressional scrutiny did OSHA retreat on this misguided plan, which would have jeopardized telecommuting programs and the constitutional rights of individuals around the country.

            “The ergonomics standard is yet another example of OSHA’s aggressive regulatory approach, which emphasizes enforcement over cooperation and creates a one-size-fits-all answer to a complex issue with no clear scientific solution.  We are disappointed that OSHA chose to move forward, even before the outcome of last week’s presidential election is known. 

###