The federal firm tasked with making sure the office’s protection hasn’t protected staff “sufficiently” from the COVID-19 pandemic, a government watchdog said Wednesday.
The U. S. Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector GeneralThe U. S. Department of Health analyzed the movements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the first year of the pandemic, which saw primary outbreaks in workplaces, adding meatpacking plants, and concluded that the company wasn’t doing enough.
“We decided that OSHA’s compliance activities did not adequately protect personnel from COVID-19 health threats,” the report said. “As a result, there is an increased threat of staff being exposed to the virus unnecessarily. “
The report knew 3 main problems with the implementation of the agency:
In its response, OSHA said it agreed that more data on COVID-19 cases was needed, but that it largely adhered to its regulatory process.
The report does not explicitly mention meatpacking plants, but much of the complaints about OSHA’s handling of the pandemic revolved around those facilities. The company entered the pandemic with the fewest inspectors in decades. At the same time, the number of workplaces you have to monitor has increased.
[Read more: “They Think They’re Like Dogs. ” How red meat mill managers sacrificed protection for profits. ]
Previous reports through the inspector have criticized OSHA for its lax enforcement.
One found that the company relied on “virtual inspections,” meaning its staff never visited users’ services to locate potential problems. The report says virtual inspections can lead to more illnesses and deaths.
Some workplaces were not inspected in a timely manner. By the end of 2020, the first year of the pandemic, it was publicly known that 65 factories were linked to the death of an employee; the company had not inspected 40 percent of the plants found by USA TODAY and Investigate Midwest.
Another inspector general’s report criticized OSHA and the U. S. Department of Agriculture for the use of OSHA. The U. S. Department of Health has food protection inspectors stationed at most primary meatpacking plants, for not working in combination to maintain staff safety.
Since the pandemic began, more than 80,000 have tested positive for the virus and more than 400 have died, according to figures received through a congressional subcommittee and Investigate Midwest’s follow-up.
The Inspector General’s most recent report on 3 major disruptions with OSHA implementation:
1) The company failed to cite workplaces for failing to record deaths, injuries and illnesses, which employers must do. Failing to mention workplaces has hampered long-term compliance efforts, according to the report, as beyond citations they are used to help determine follow-up inspections.
The inspector general sampled 41 workplaces that recorded COVID-19 deaths. The company did not call six, or 15 percent, for failing to record the death. He also didn’t say why he didn’t call those workplaces.
OSHA said it adheres to its policy that firm managers have discretion to call employers.
The six offices are not named in the report, but an example of an office with deaths and no fines is Triumph Foods, a Missouri meatpacking plant. An OSHA inspector found that the company failed to protect its workers, resulting in about six hundred infections and 4 deaths. But OSHA has not imposed any sanctions. The inspection report does not include any data on why the plant was not mentioned. OSHA refused its reasoning at the time to investigate the Midwest.
One explanation for why lax enforcement would possibly have been the lack of a particular popular company similar to infectious diseases like COVID-19. The company has appointed employers under the “general obligation” clause, a general rule that employers have to provide an office free of known hazards. But subpoenas filed under this clause require a heavy burden of evidence and are difficult to maintain if an employer objects, former OSHA officials told USA TODAY and Investigate Midwest.
This is consistent with another inspector general location: 52% of OSHA inspectors said in a survey that it was more difficult to factor COVID-19-like quotes than those that are not similar to the pandemic virus.
2) OSHA does not know the full rates of COVID-19 infection in workplaces because it does not require workplaces to report all cases, the OIG found. Without the wisdom of infections, workers may simply not take action themselves, the workplace said.
The office said state agencies, such as the New Mexico Department of the Environment, will report to OSHA. This firm required all employers to report all COVID-19 cases they were aware of among their employees, whether or not the virus was contracted in the area. workplace. This was very important to reduce workers’ further exposure to the virus in a timely manner, the workplace said.
For example, Triumph Foods’ sister plant, Seaboard Foods of Oklahoma, has not reported COVID-19 cases to OSHA. The company reported to the media more than 1,000 cases among them, but only reported 3 respiratory illnesses to the agency. This summer, OSHA cited the plant for failing to report ailments and injuries, though the citation does not mention COVID-19.
OSHA told the inspector general that it agreed with the conclusion, but faced harsh realities.
“The need for more data on the spread of COVID-19, early in the pandemic, has been a persistent challenge for government and public health authorities,” the firm said. “However, addressing this factor will require significant regulatory adjustments and investments. “
At least for meatpacking plants, data on infections through the bureau has not been tracked through the government consistently. The challenge is so acute that senior USDA officials at one point analyzed Investigate Midwest’s COVID-19 case tracking, according to emails.
3) OSHA has terminated some of its enforcement moves without making sure employers have taken action for workers, the workplace inspector general said.
Of the inspections sampled through the Array, 20%, or thirteen out of 66, were closed without receiving data from employers showing that they had resolved known problems. Without this data, he said, “there is a threat (inspectors) make less informed decisions, leaving open the option that hazards will not be corrected and creating threats to employee safety. “
The office said this information was even more important given that the company relied on remote inspections. According to the bureau’s survey, 26 percent of inspectors said remote inspections did not allow them to “effectively help protect workers” compared to on-site inspections.
The bureau advised that OSHA implemented a tool to track whether it receives all the information requested by employers, but the company said such a tool would not have a positive impact on the effectiveness of inspections.
OSHA added that the inspector general had not demonstrated that potential hazards in the thirteen workplaces were not mitigated.
Top image: Washington, DC – Frances Perkins Building. photo via DOL
Investigate Midwest is an independent, not-for-profit newsroom. Our project is to serve the public interest by exposing the harmful and costly practices of influential companies and farms, deep investigative and data-driven journalism.