Copyright 2000 Times Mirror Company
Los Angeles
Times
View Related Topics
June 9, 2000, Friday, Home Edition
SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 23; National Desk
LENGTH: 950 words
HEADLINE:
HOUSE VOTES AGAINST WORKPLACE INJURY RULES;
REGULATIONS: CLINTON
INITIATIVE TO EXPAND PROTECTIONS AGAINST REPETITIVE-MOTION MALADIES SUFFERS
INITIAL PARTY-LINE DEFEAT LED BY GOP.
BYLINE: NICK
ANDERSON, TIMES STAFF WRITER
DATELINE:
WASHINGTON
BODY:
A sharply divided House on
Thursday backed efforts to torpedo proposed regulations giving the government a
larger role in preventing repetitive-motion injuries, ailments that force
thousands of American workers off the job with aching muscles, tendons and
joints.
The Republican-led bid to thwart President Clinton's ergonomics
initiative came as irate business lobbyists complained that the new government
regulations would impose needless, costly burdens on employers who are already
seeking to improve workplace safety.
The proposed regulations, unveiled
by the administration last fall, would require employers to take assorted steps
to prevent injuries known as musculoskeletal disorders. The regulations
represent the first attempt to establish broad federal standards incorporating
the principle of ergonomics: adjusting workplaces to the physical needs of
workers.
The debate over the regulations occurred as the House considers
a spending bill that it is likely to approve sometime next week. The measure
includes language barring the federal Occupational Safety and Health
Administration from taking action to complete the ergonomic
regulations. An amendment to strip that language from the bill failed
Thursday night, 220 to 203, a defining test of House sentiment on the issue.
The vote split largely along partisan lines, with most Republicans
voting to keep the anti-regulation language and most Democrats voting to kill
it.
Rep. Anne M. Northup (R-Ky.) ridiculed the administration proposal
as a "bang-you-over-your-head" approach that ignores good-faith efforts by
employers to help workers. "We're all worried about healthy workers, workers who
are important to this economy and important to their families," Northup said.
But Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez) said that the vote showed
Republicans are out of touch with the reality of conditions facing meatpackers,
steelworkers, cashiers and others in the working class who are vulnerable to
crippling injuries linked to repetitive, awkward or stressful tasks.
"Maybe the Republicans would recognize ergonomics injuries if we applied
them to tennis and golf," Miller said.
The administration wants to put
final regulations in place before Clinton leaves office in January. Whether the
Republican majority in Congress will be able to stop them remains unclear. Even
if a legislative prohibition passes both the House and the Senate, which is no
sure thing, it would face a veto threat. The regulations are also likely to face
a court challenge.
Long-Running Dispute
Thursday's House
vote--coming during debate on a $ 339.5-billion bill that would fund education,
health and social programs--cast fresh light on a long-running dispute over what
government should do to help fix workplace hazards.
The Labor Department
estimates that 1.8 million workers each year suffer injuries related to
overexertion or repetitive motion. A third of them are injured seriously enough
to be forced to take time off from work.
In the last two decades, OSHA
has gradually stepped up its involvement in ergonomic issues as public awareness
has grown of disorders such as carpal tunnel syndrome, a painful condition of
the wrists and hands that can be caused by typing or other repetitive motions.
The agency, an arm of the Labor Department, has raised its profile on ergonomics
under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
But Clinton and
Congress have tangled repeatedly over whether OSHA should be allowed to issue
new ergonomic regulations since Republicans took power on
Capitol Hill five years ago. Last November, the administration seized an opening
to publish draft regulations after Congress failed to block them.
Those
proposals generally go further than an ergonomics standard that California
recently adopted. If they take effect, federal provisions that are stronger
would supersede corresponding state rules.
The proposed federal rules
are intended to cover an estimated 27 million workers in a broad range of jobs
requiring manual labor or repetitive tasks, whether in factories or in offices.
According to OSHA, 1.6 million employers would be required to take basic steps
to disseminate information about ergonomics and set up a system for reporting
and responding to problems.
Employers who receive valid reports of
musculoskeletal disorders linked to repetitive motions or other working
conditions then would be forced to take additional steps. Administration
officials said that many fixes--some as simple as adjusting the height of a desk
or a chair--would be quick and cheap.
A projected reduction of 300,000
potentially disabling injuries a year, officials said, would help employers save
$ 9 billion in annual workers' compensation costs.
But business
lobbyists scoffed at those estimates and said that the regulations could cost
employers uncounted billions while giving government too much power to meddle in
the process of manufacturing or other key business decisions.
'We Don't
Trust' OSHA
Randel Johnson, a vice president of the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, said that the government has lost credibility on the issue. "There are
a lot of employers out there who are outraged by OSHA's proposal. When OSHA says
'Trust us, we'll enforce it reasonably,'--well, we don't trust them."
Among the California delegation's 24 Republicans, only Reps. Stephen
Horn of Long Beach and Tom Campbell of San Jose supported the bid to delete the
amendment blocking the proposed regulations.
Among the state
delegation's 28 House Democrats, only Rep. Calvin M. Dooley of Visalia voted to
keep the anti-regulation provision. Rep. Matthew G. Martinez of Monterey Park
did not vote.
LOAD-DATE: June 9, 2000
