DOL Extends Deadline for Submission of Proposed OSHA Heat Standard Comments Into January — But This Rule Is Likely DOA

As frigid temperatures descend upon much of our country, heat standards may be the last thing on employers’ minds. Perhaps it was for this reason that the Department of Labor (DOL) extended the comment period associated with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) recent national heat standard proposed rule; comments were to be filed by December 30, 2024, and are now due prior to January 14, 2025. More likely, however, is the fact that this proposed workplace rule will be dead on arrival with the pending administration change. In fact, the proposed heat standard is likely just one of many labor and employment rules/regulations proposed or implemented under the Biden Administration that may see an about-face under a second Trump Administration.

As we previously reported, OSHA has proposed a new national standard intended to address the hazards associated with heat exposure in America’s workplaces. The proposed standard is not terribly dissimilar from those that have been adopted by various occupational safety and health agencies in some states: California (as of June 20, 2024, California’s workplace heat standard applies to both indoor and outdoor worksites), Colorado (applicable to agriculture worksites only), Minnesota (applicable to indoor and outdoor worksites), Oregon (applicable to indoor and outdoor worksites), and Washington (applicable to outdoor worksites and certain professions). The proposed federal OSHA standard addresses indoor and outdoor worksites and would require more exacting obligations from employers than those under the state agency heat standards that currently exist.

With the upcoming administration change, it is very likely that many of the OSHA enforcement directives and regulations will receive review, with the likely outcome being significant rollback. For example, in addition to the heat standard, there is litigation pending with respect to OSHA’s Walkaround Rule, which (as we also previously reported) allows an OSHA compliance officer to bring a third-party to a workplace inspection when OSHA believes that third-party can provide valuable assistance on the issues raised by the inspection. Many believe (and this has been borne out through some of the early activities under this new regulation) that the rule was implemented to allow unions to gain a foothold in workplaces where the employees are not then-represented by a union.

The country’s temperatures are definitely increasing. For example, new record highs were reached this year in Arizona, California, Florida, Maine, and New Hampshire, and according to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, this past summer was the warmest in recorded history. So, while the federal OSHA heat standard may not ultimately survive the new administration, employers in those states that have state OSHA programs (there are presently 27 such states and two territories) should anticipate efforts to adopt standards to address heat concerns in the near future.

Disclaimer

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.