AFL-CIO Files Emergency Petition Demanding Formal COVID-19 Action from OSHA

26 May 2020 Blog
Authors: John F. Birmingham Jr
Published To: Coronavirus Resource Center:Back to Business Labor & Employment Law Perspectives

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), along with other unions, advocacy groups, and some members of Congress, repeatedly has criticized OSHA’s response to the COVID-19 crisis as being insufficient to ensure worker safety during the pandemic.  To that end, on March 4 and 6, 2020, the union petitioned OSHA, demanding that the agency create an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) for infectious diseases to protect workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

When OSHA did not respond to the petition, the AFL-CIO sent a blistering letter to Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia.  When that letter spurred no action, on May 18, 2020, the AFL-CIO followed up by filing an emergency petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, arguing that OSHA’s failure to issue legally enforceable COVID-19-specific rules has imperiled workers, especially as the economy is reopening.  The union argued that specific safety standards are necessary to protect workers and hold employers accountable, and requested that the court require OSHA to issue an ETS related to COVID-19.

To be fair, OSHA has already issued several industry-specific guidance documents and alerts describing measures that employers should take to protect workers, as well as an Enforcement Guidance on the subject of COVID-19. And, the day after the AFL-CIO filed its lawsuit, OSHA issued an Updated Enforcement Guidance and a new policy requiring employers to determine and record if a COVID-19 case is work-related. OSHA also asserts that existing regulations provide sufficient protection to workers and that additional regulations will tax the resources of the agency and employers.  The court has expedited the schedule so that all briefing is due by June 2, 2020.  

However, despite the pressure brought from several sources, OSHA has great discretion in deciding whether to issue regulations, and the AFL-CIO’s lawsuit is likely to be an uphill battle.

While the formal standards requested in the AFL-CIO’s Emergency Petition potentially would expose employers to a greater risk of OSHA citations, it is questionable whether in reality they would result in substantial workplace safety changes. Currently, employers must follow state executive order safety requirements, and it is only a foolish employer that ignores CDC and OSHA guidelines, increasing the potential for government action, liability, union and employee relations problems, and bad publicity. 

Foley has created a multi-disciplinary and multi-jurisdictional team, which has prepared a wealth of topical client resources and is prepared to help our clients meet the legal and business challenges that the coronavirus outbreak is creating for stakeholders across a range of industries. Click here for Foley’s Coronavirus Resource Center to stay apprised of relevant developments, insights and resources to support your business during this challenging time. To receive this content directly in your inbox, click here and submit the form. 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services