[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                 EXAMINING THE POLICIES AND PRIORITIES
                     OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND
                         HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

=======================================================================


                                HEARING

                               Before The

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE
                               PROTECTIONS

                                 of the

                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________


              HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MAY 25, 2022

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-46
                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce





               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]





        Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
        
        
        
                                 ______

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

57-089 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2024        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        


















        
                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR

              ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia Chairman

RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona            VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina,
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut              Ranking Member
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      JOE WILSON, South Carolina
  Northern Marina Islands            GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania
FREDERICA WILSON, Florida            TIM WALBERG, Michigan
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
MARK TAKANO, California              ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina        RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
MARK DeSAULNIER, California          JIM BANKS, Indiana
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey          JAMES COMER, Kentucky
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York          FRED KELLER, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania             MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
LUCY McBATH, Georgia                 BURGESS OWENS, Utah
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut            BOB GOOD, Virginia
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan, Vice Chairman  LISA McCLAIN, Michigan
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan           MARY MILLER, Illinios
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico   VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
MONDAIRE JONES, New York             SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin
KATHY MANNING, North Carolina        MADISON CAWTHORN, North Carolina
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana              MICHELLE STEEL, California
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York              CHRIS JACOBS, New York
SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK, Florida  VACANCY
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin                VACANCY
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
KWEISI MFUME, Maryland

                       Cyrus Artz, Staff Director
              Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
              
                                 ------                                

                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS

                 ALMA ADAMS, North Carolina, Chairwoman

MARK TAKANO, California              FRED KELLER, Pennsylvania,
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey            Ranking Member
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan           BURGESS OWENS, Utah
MONDAIRE JONES, New York             BOB GOOD, Virginia
SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK, Florida  MADISON CAWTHORN, North Carolina
ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia  MICHELLE STEEL, California
                                     VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina (Ex 
                                       Officio)
























                                       
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                               ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on May 25, 2022.....................................     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

    Adams, Hon. Alma, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Workforce 
      Protections:...............................................     1
        Prepared statement of....................................     5
    Keller, Hon. Fred, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Workforce 
      Protections:...............................................     6
        Prepared statement of....................................     8

                               WITNESSES

    Parker, Douglas L., Assistant Secretary of Labor, 
      Occupational Safety and Health Administration..............    10
        Prepared statement of....................................    13
    Costa, Thomas M., Director, Education, Workforce, and Income 
      Security...................................................    17
        Prepared statement of....................................    19

                         ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

    Norcross, Hon. Donald, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of New Jersey:
        Letter dated May 25, 2022, requesting the Occupational 
          Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to open an 
          investigation..........................................    53

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
        Mr. Douglas Parker.......................................    66

 
                 EXAMINING THE POLICIES AND PRIORITIES
                     OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND
                         HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

                              ----------                              

                        Wednesday, May 25, 2022

                               House of Representatives,
                      Subcommittee on Workforce Protections,
                              Committee on Education and Labor,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 12 p.m., via 
Zoom, Hon. Alma Adams [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] 
presiding.
    Present: Representatives Adams, Norcross, Stevens, Scott, 
Keller, Miller-Meeks, Steel, and Foxx (Ex Officio).
    Also present: Courtney and Chu.
    Staff present: Brittany Alston, Staff Assistant; Nekea 
Brown, Director of Operations; Christian Haines, General 
Counsel; Rasheedah Hasan, Chief Clerk; Sheila Havenner, 
Director of Information Technology; Eli Hovland, Policy 
Associate; Stephanie Lalle, Communications Director; Andre 
Lindsay, Policy Associate; Kevin McDermott, Director of Labor 
Policy; Kota Mizutani, Deputy Communications Director; Max 
Moore, Kayla Pennebecker, Staff Assistant; Mason Pesek, Labor 
Policy Counsel; Veronique Pluviose, Staff Director; Robert 
Shull, Labor Policy Staff; Michele Simenky, Oversight Counsel 
Labor; Banyon Vassar, Deputy Director of Information 
Technology; Sam Varie, Press Secretary; ArRone Washington, 
Clerk and Special Assistant to the Staff Director; Tanisha 
Wilburn, Director of Labor Oversight and Counsel; Cyrus Artz, 
Minority Staff Director; Bisson Gabriel, Minority Staff 
Assistant; Michael Davis, Minority Legislative Assistant; Cate 
Dillon, Minority Director of Operations; Mini Ganesh, Minority 
Staff Assistant; John Martin, Minority Deputy Director of 
Workplace Policy/Counsel; Kelly Tyroler, Minority Professional 
Staff Member.
    Chairwoman Adams. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for 
being here. We are ready to begin. I am going to countdown from 
five and then we will start. Five, four, three, two, one. 
Before I actually get started, I do want us to just take a 
moment of silence. I am sure that you have all been devastated 
by the horrific tragedy in Uvalde, Texas, the children at Robb 
Elementary School.
    If we could just have 1 minute of silence to recognize that 
tragedy. Thank you.
    The Subcommittee on Workforce Protections will come to 
order. I would like to welcome everyone, and I note that a 
quorum is present. I note for the subcommittee that Mr. 
Courtney of Connecticut and Ms. Chu of California are permitted 
to participate in today's hearing, with the understanding that 
their questions will come only after all members of the 
Workforce Protections Subcommittee on both sides of the aisle 
who are present have an opportunity to question the witnesses.
    The subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on 
examining the policies and priorities of the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration. This is an entirely remote 
hearing. All microphones will be kept muted as a general rule, 
to avoid unnecessary background noise. Members and witnesses 
will be responsible for unmuting themselves when they are 
recognized to speak or when they wish to seek recognition.
    I will also ask that members please identify themselves 
before they speak. Members should keep their cameras on while 
in the proceeding. Members shall be considered present in the 
proceeding when they are visible on camera, and they shall be 
considered not present when they are not visible on camera. The 
only exception to this is if they are experiencing difficulty, 
technical difficulty, and inform the committee staff of such 
difficulty.
    If any member experiences technical difficulty during the 
hearing, you should stay connected on the platform, make sure 
you are muted, and use your phone to immediately call the 
committee's IT director, whose number was provided in advance. 
Should the Chair experience technical difficulty or need to 
step away to vote, another majority member is hereby authorized 
to assume the gavel in the Chair's absence.
    This is an entirely remote hearing, and as such the 
committee's hearing room is officially closed. In order to 
ensure that the committee's 5-minute rule is adhered to, staff 
will be tracking time using the committee's field timer. The 
field timer will appear on its own thumbnail picture and will 
be named 001--timer.
    There will be no ``one minute remaining'' warning. The 
field timer will show a blinking light when time is up. Members 
and witnesses are asked to wrap up promptly when their time has 
expired. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(c), opening statements 
are limited to the Chair and the Ranking Member. This allows us 
to hear from our witnesses sooner, and it provides all members 
with adequate time to ask questions.
    I would now like to recognize myself for the purpose of 
making an opening statement. Today we are meeting to discuss 
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (or OSHA's) 
priorities and their role in protecting the health and safety 
of our Nation's workers. Since 1970, OSHA's mission has been to 
reduce workplace deaths, injuries and illnesses.
    When OSHA was first authorized, 38 workers were killed on 
the job every day from acute injuries. 52 years later, that 
figure has fallen to 14 deaths per day in a workforce that is 
double the size. OSHA's critical safety standards and 
enforcement have directly contributed to these improvements. 
Nevertheless, workers continued to be injured, made ill, or 
killed on the job. Fatal workplace rights have stalled after 
decades of decline, and many causes of occupational disease 
remain unregulated or underregulated.
    As we have explored in various hearings, in previous 
hearings, the spread of COVID-19 caused the worst worker safety 
crisis in OSHA's history and served as a stress test of OSHA's 
capacity to address hazards and respond nimbly. This virus also 
has a mind of its own, prolonging the need for robust efforts 
to protect America's workers.
    Regrettably, OSHA was missing in action throughout the 
Trump administration, and in its handling of the COVID-19 
pandemic. For example, the former administration refused to 
issue an Emergency Temporary Standard that would have increased 
worker participation, while workplace COVID-19 outbreaks 
claimed the lives of workers across the country. Moreover, a 
report from the House Select Committee on the Coronavirus 
Crisis found that the previous administration intentionally 
weakened OSHA guidance for COVID mitigation at employers' 
request.
    Simply put, the former administration turned its back on 
workers to support employers` bottom line. The Trump 
administration's inaction on behalf of workers and vigorous 
action on behalf of corporations adds to decades of attacks by 
prior administrations, past Congresses, and conservative courts 
that left OSHA weakened.
    Combined, this means that the Biden administration was at a 
disadvantage when making worker protections a priority. 
Unfortunately, the consequences are prioritizing politics over 
hard science falls on the shoulders of hardworking Americans.
    Thankfully, the Biden administration has taken the science-
based steps to address the COVID pandemic, to protect workers, 
and to keep our businesses open.
    The administration launched the largest vaccination 
campaign in history, working hand-in-hand with the business 
community. Making our workers safer helped the U.S. economy 
create 6.6 million jobs in 2021--the strongest job growth of 
any year on record and, most importantly, allowed workers to 
get back to work safely.
    Despite this historic comeback, the Biden administration 
has struggled to make up for OSHA's past inaction and even, at 
times, its own stumbles. Notably, the administration failed to 
successfully implement an Emergency Temporary Standard, or an 
ETS, which would have increased protections for workers. After 
a 3-month delay, the first ETS was narrow in scope and only 
extended protections to healthcare workers.
    While this was an important step, it left millions of 
workers without adequate protection from COVID-19. Regrettably, 
the administration let this ETS expire, and its fate is still 
unknown. The second ETS, the vaccine-or-test standard, was 
blocked by the conservative controlled Supreme Court.
    While American Rescue Plan delivered historic resources to 
help OSHA develop these Emergency Temporary Standards, we 
remain concerned that funding has not yet been used to 
adequately staff OSHA and deliver on its mission. Moving 
forward, the administration must take meaningful, science-based 
actions to keep workers safe on the job, including issuing an 
enforceable COVID-19 workplace safety standard for all workers.
    To ensure OSHA has the resources it needs to do its job, I 
am committed to working with my colleagues to update the 
Occupational Health and Safety Act and advance meaningful 
proposals introduced by my colleagues, so the agency can 
protect workers' health and safety in the 21st Century 
workplaces.
    If we care about workers, their well-being, and want to 
keep businesses open, then we must work together to invest in 
and strengthen OSHA. Thank you to Secretary Parker for your 
service to workers, and I look forward to a meaningful 
discussion. I want to now recognize the Ranking Member for his 
opening statement. Ranking Member Keller, you are recognized.
    [The statement of Chairwoman Adams follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    Mr. Keller. Thank you. Every American worker has the right 
to safely return home to their families. Republicans support 
common-sense policies that achieve the goal of ensuring safe 
workplaces, and we support OSHA's enforcement of the 
Occupational Safety and Health Act to hold those people who do 
not follow it accountable.
    That said, Committee Republicans will not shy away from 
holding OSHA accountable for overreach and predatory policies 
that unjustly target American job creators and their workers. 
This overreach is clear in President Biden's Fiscal Year 2023 
budget, which requests an $89.4 million funding increase for 
OSHA to be used for overzealous enforcement and the development 
of new onerous regulations that will force employers out of 
business.
    The request represents an overall funding increase of 15 
percent from the Fiscal Year 2022 enacted level and would add 
hundreds of new OSHA personnel. We are most concerned about the 
nearly 50 percent increase for OSHA's office in charge of 
devising and writing regulations, not to mention the 18 percent 
increase for Federal enforcement.
    OSHA's most recent agenda includes a staggering list of 28 
planned regulatory actions. This includes the regulations OSHA 
already has underway, including restoring provisions of the 
controversial Obama-era electronic reporting rule, which would 
do nothing to improve workplace safety but would severely 
burden businesses and put the personal data of their workers at 
risk.
    This strikes me as yet another attempt to place job 
creators in a regulatory stranglehold, which will continue to 
keep our economy from fully recovering from the pandemic. If 
OSHA gets this budget approved, it will be well on its way to 
fulfilling the administration's pledge to double the number of 
inspectors by the end of Joe Biden's presidency.
    Instead of spending so much of its efforts targeting job 
creators, OSHA should work with employers to expand its 
compliance assistance efforts. Compliance assistance benefits 
employees and job creators by protecting workers before an 
injury or illness can occur. Unfortunately, the Biden 
administration's budget places less of an emphasis on these 
important efforts.
    The Biden administration is not shy about its anti-business 
agenda, and OSHA has lost a lot of trust with the American 
people. In the middle of a serious worker shortage, OSHA issued 
an illegal and unprecedented Emergency Temporary Standard, or 
ETS, which sought to force every American working for a company 
with more than 100 employees, to get the COVID-19 vaccine, test 
weekly, or face losing their jobs.
    This harmed private sector businesses that were already 
struggling to recover from shutdowns, by forcing them to choose 
between firing employees or facing massive penalties from the 
Federal Government. This was an impossible dilemma for 
businesses, and Biden's OSHA seems all too eager to keep 
putting job creators in that untenable position.
    Luckily, the Supreme Court stayed the OSHA vaccine testing 
mandate, finding that it was a massive overreach of executive 
power. Had this tyrannical vaccine mandate not been stayed, it 
would have exacerbated a workers shortage and further crippled 
our economy.
    Moreover, the uncertainty surrounding the mandate put undue 
burdens on employers who were forced to act as vaccine and 
testing police on behalf of the Federal Government. Still, OSHA 
did not learn from its mistakes and has made the decision to 
revive the controversial COVID-19 ETS for the healthcare 
industry.
    Our healthcare industry is already straining to meet the 
needs of Americans without the Biden administration demanding 
additional and burdensome COVID-19 requirements. Democrats and 
OSHA's misuse of the COVID-19 pandemic as a pretense to 
increase top-down Federal control over the workplace is 
damaging to our economy and those that fuel it--America's 
workers and job creators.
    Weaponizing OSHA against employers is not the way to make 
workers safer, but we know that if OSHA gets its massive 
funding increase, America's workers and job creators can expect 
more of the same. We must work to keep this from happening and 
work to restore collaboration between the Federal Government 
and the private sector to ensure the Nation's workplaces are 
safe and healthy.
    It is important that we build policies that bring small 
businesses and other job creators and our workforce together, 
not drive them apart. Thank you, and I yield back.
    [The statement of Ranking Member Keller follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you, Mr. Keller. Without objection, 
all of the members who wish to insert written statements into 
the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk 
electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m. on May 25.
    I will now introduce the witnesses. The Honorable Douglas 
Parker is Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety 
and Health at the U.S. Department of Labor. He previously 
served in the Obama administration as Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Policy in the Department of Labor's Mine Safety 
and Health Administration.
    Mr. Parker earned a J.D. from the University of Virginia 
School of Law and a B.A. in history from James Madison 
University.
    Mr. Thomas M. Costa is a Director on the Education, 
Workforce, and Income Security Team at the Government 
Accountability Office. He oversees worker protection, safety, 
employment, and training issues. Tom joined the GAO in October 
2005. He earned a master's degree in international relations 
with a focus on policy, political psychology from George 
Washington University, and he earned a bachelor's degree in 
philosophy and psychology from the University of Connecticut.
    Now let me thank all of the witnesses, and our 
instructions. We appreciate you for participating today. We 
look forward to your testimony but let me remind the witnesses 
that we have read your written statements, and they will appear 
in full in the hearing record.
    Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(b) and the committee practice, 
each of you is asked to limit your oral presentation to a 5-
minute summary of your written statement. Before you begin your 
testimony, please remember to unmute your microphone. During 
your testimony staff will be keeping track of time, and the 
timer is visible to you at the witness table.
    Please be attentive to the time, wrap up when your time is 
over, and re-mute your microphone. If any of you experience 
technical difficulty during your testimony or later in the 
hearing, you should stay connected on the platform, and make 
sure you are muted, and use your phone to immediately call the 
committee's IT director whose number was provided.
    We will let the witnesses make their presentations before 
we move to member questions. When answering a question, please 
remember to unmute your microphone. The witnesses are aware of 
their responsibility to provide accurate information to the 
subcommittee, and therefore we will proceed with their 
testimony. I would like to first recognize Mr. Parker. Mr. 
Parker, you are recognized for 5 minutes, sir.

     STATEMENT OF HON. DOUGLAS PARKER, ASSISTANT SEC-
      RETARY  OF LABOR  FOR  OCCUPATIONAL  SAFETY AND
      HEALTH, ADMINISTRATION

    Mr. Parker. Chairman Scott and Chairwoman Adams, Ranking 
Member Foxx and Keller and members of the subcommittee, thank 
you for the opportunity to testify today to highlight the 
important work the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration to protect the health, safety, and dignity of 
our nation's----
    Chairwoman Adams. Mr. Parker, can you turn your microphone 
up a bit?
    Mr. Vassar. Mr. Parker, if you could please mute and then 
unmute your microphone one time again and begin to speak, sir.
    Mr. Parker. Is that better?
    Mr. Vassar. It is slightly better, but the beginning of 
your testimony was very clear, and it immediately changed to 
become a lot lighter. If you could mute one time sir, and then 
immediately unmute your microphone, then try speaking again 
sir, thank you.
    Mr. Parker. How is this, one, two, three, testing.
    Chairwoman Adams. Okay.
    Mr. Parker. Is that better?
    Chairwoman Adams. It is. Go ahead, sir. We had stopped your 
time, so you will not lose your time.
    Mr. Parker. I also want to thank members of the Education 
and Labor Committee for providing more than $100 million in 
supplemental funding to the American Rescue Plan, to support 
and strengthen OSHA's enforcement and regulatory effort, and 
additional resources for our Susan Harwood Training Grant 
Program.
    OSHA is determined to proactively address the need of a 
changing and diverse 21st Century workplace and support the 
Secretary of Labor's vision of good, safe, healthy jobs. Our 
goal at OSHA is to align one of the most fundamental priorities 
we all share: our health and safety and the health and safety 
of our families is a core value that guides how American 
workplaces design, supervise, and perform work, and ensure an 
equitable approach that improves all workers' methods.
    To achieve this OSHA must meet current workplace safety and 
health hazards, as well as emerging threats. That requires us 
to first rebuild the agency's workforce from record low 
staffing levels, and we have begun to do that. OSHA made more 
than 270 hires between August 2021 and April 2022, including 
156 inspectors and 32 whistleblower investigators.
    OSHA must continue to respond to the threat of COVID-19. 
OSHA is working to finalize its permanent COVID-19 standard for 
healthcare workers. We have not waited for that standard to 
act. In March of this year, we launched an enforcement 
initiative to significantly increase OSHA's presence in 
healthcare, and since the beginning of this administration, 
OSHA and its State partners have conducted more than 2,500 
COVID-19 healthcare inspections.
    OSHA continues to inspect other high-risk industries, 
investigate COVID whistleblower complaints, and conduct 
outreach and education to help employers and employees be 
better prepared. OSHA is also looking ahead, using our 
rulemaking tool to make sure workers are protected against 
unregulated hazards, and finding ways to address these hazards 
in the meantime.
    First, to ensure we are ready for future outbreaks of 
pandemics, we are developing an infectious disease standard for 
highest risk workplaces. Second, OSHA began rulemaking to 
develop a standard to address the growing threat of 
occupational heat illness and has engaged with stakeholders 
early in the process to help draft a protective and workable 
rule.
    As with COVID, we are not waiting to act. We recently 
launched a nationwide initiative to educate employers, and for 
the first time, proactively inspect workplaces for heat 
hazards.
    Our third major rulemaking priority is advancing a standard 
to protect healthcare workers from the epidemic of workplace 
violence. Again, even without a rule, we have been able to 
successfully prosecute several important workplace violence 
cases to ensure healthcare facilities address workplace 
violence hazards.
    Enforcement remains the key component of the agency's work 
to address these hazards. OSHA is increasing the number of 
inspections and bringing more cases with enhanced penalties 
where it is warranted by employer conduct. We are committed to 
using all the tools available to us, including criminal and 
other enhanced judicial relief, for those employers who flaunt 
safety standards and put workers in danger.
    In light of infrastructure investment spurred by the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, OSHA continues its focus on 
construction hazards, including health risks, and is 
revitalizing the initiative to protect vulnerable temporary 
workers. We are also increasing staffing and filling the long-
vacant director's position for our whistleblower program.
    Compliance assistance and training are also key to exposure 
and critical for our vision of health and safety as a core 
value in the workplace. The agency is dedicated to helping 
small-and medium-sized businesses, in particular, take 
advantage of our free, onsite assistance to develop a safety 
and health management program.
    Last fiscal year, OSHA's programs trained over 1.1 million 
workers, and OSHA has engaged with employers to help them 
address hazards that have historically been overlooked such as 
mental health awareness, in particular suicide prevention and 
substance abuse.
    I want to again thank the subcommittee for the continued 
interest and support in making sure workers have the safety and 
health protections they need and deserve. We owe this to every 
worker and family in America. I am now happy to answer any 
questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Parker follows.]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you, Mr. Parker. I want to 
recognize now Mr. Costa. You have 5 minutes sir.

       STATEMENT OF MR. THOMAS COSTA, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION,
        WORKFORCE,  AND  INCOME  SECURITY,  GOVERNMENT AC-
        COUNTABILITY OFFICE

    Mr. Costa. Thank you, Chairwoman Adams, Republican Leader 
Keller, and members of the subcommittee. I am pleased to be 
here today to discuss OSHA's preparedness to handle emergent 
risks. I will highlight, one, enforcement challenges OSHA faced 
and the enforcement actions it has taken during the COVID 
pandemic. Two, new standards OSHA developed, or used to protect 
workers from COVID, and three, OSHA's efforts to obtain injury 
and illness data from employers. My testimony is based 
primarily on prior GAO reports and updated information provided 
by OSHA.
    As the COVID pandemic passes the 2-year mark, the disease 
continues to pose new challenges, and OSHA's ability to help 
protect workers from COVID and its preparedness for a future 
crisis remain concerns. OSHA helps ensure safe and health 
conditions for workers by setting standards, conducting 
inspections, and investigating reports of injuries, illnesses, 
and fatalities, among other efforts.
    This brings me to my three discussion points. First, to 
support COVID-related safety, OSHA used voluntary guidance, 
existing standards, such as those related to the use of 
respirators, and healthcare-focused Emergency Temporary 
Standards. However, OSHA faced challenges with applying 
existing standards to COVID cases because these standards do 
not contain provisions specifically targeting COVID.
    When no standard applies to a particular hazard, OSHA can 
cite violations based on its General Duty Clause; however, 
violations of the General Duty Clause require substantial time 
to collect the documentation to support a citation. Moreover, 
OSHA must issue a citation within 6 months of any violation, 
and OSHA sometimes did not know about possible violations for 
months, which limited OSHA's ability to cite General Duty 
Clause violations.
    When OSHA began enforcing its COVID healthcare ETS in July 
2021, it became an important tool OSHA used to protect workers. 
From February 2020 through December 2021, OSHA received almost 
22,000 COVID-related reports of illness and fatalities. They 
conducted over 3,000 COVID-related inspections, and cited over 
1,000 violations, only 25 of which were General Duty Clause 
violations, and proposed over $7 million in penalties.
    My second point concerns the new standards OSHA developed 
or used during the pandemic. From February 2020, through June 
2021, OSHA primarily relied on voluntary employer guidance and 
existing standards for its COVID-related assistance and 
enforcement.
    In June 2021, OSHA issued the COVID ETS for the healthcare 
industry that I just mentioned, and in November, OSHA also 
issued a COVID vaccination-and-testing ETS for larger 
employers. To issue an ETS, OSHA must determine that the 
employees are being exposed to a grave danger. For example, in 
the COVID healthcare ETS, OSHA cited the severe health 
consequences of COVID and the high risk of transmission in the 
workplace as the basis for their determination.
    However, in December OSHA announced it was no longer 
enforcing most of the COVID healthcare ETS because it 
anticipated that a final rule could not be completed in the 6-
months contemplated by the OSH Act. In January of this year, 
OSHA withdrew the vaccination-and-testing ETS as an enforceable 
standard after a Supreme Court decision halted its 
implementation.
    OSHA is still working on a permanent COVID healthcare 
standard and is also developing an infectious disease standard 
through the rulemaking process; however, our past work found 
that to issue a new standard, it takes more than 7 years on 
average and can take up to 19 years. OSHA began working on its 
current infectious disease standard over 11 years ago.
    My third point concerns employer reporting of required 
injury and illness data. We found employers did not report this 
data on more than 50 percent of their establishments for 2016 
through 2018, although the reporting has increased slightly in 
recent years.
    OSHA uses this data to help identify establishments with 
the highest injury and illness rates and targets some for 
planned inspections. Without good data, they may not be 
inspecting the most dangerous establishments.
    Moreover, OSHA has limited procedures to encourage 
employers to report injury and illness summary data. For 
example, in 2019 OSHA sent reminder postcards to 27,000 of the 
nearly 220,000 employers that potentially did not report. OSHA 
got less than a 20 percent response rate. Similarly, OSHA 
issued fewer than 300 citations over an almost 2-year period 
for failing to report this data.
    As a result of our work, we recommended that OSHA assess 
various challenges related to resources, communication, and 
guidance in response to the pandemic. We also recommended that 
OSHA evaluate its current procedures for ensuring that 
employers report required injury and illness data. Both 
recommendations remain open.
    In conclusion, OSHA faced challenges in enforcing various 
standards during the pandemic and struggles to get quality data 
to identify those establishments with the highest injury and 
illness rates. Without more action, OSHA may not be best 
prepared for the next crisis. This completes my statement. I 
look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Costa follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you very much, Mr. Costa. Under 
Committee Rule 9(a), we will now question witnesses under the 
5-minute rule, and I will be recognizing the subcommittee 
members in seniority order. Again, to ensure that the members' 
5-minute rule is adhered to, staff will be keeping track of 
time. Please be attentive to the time, and wrap up when your 
time is over, and re-mute your microphone.
    I recognize myself as Chair for 5 minutes now.
    Mr. Parker, I would like to focus on the COVID standards. 
During the Obama administration, OSHA started work on an 
infection disease standard that would have covered healthcare 
employers, but the Trump administration killed that, and he 
chose not to develop an Emergency Temporary Standard on COVID-
19. Did these choices put OSHA on the back foot when President 
Biden ordered the agency to protect workers?
    Mr. Parker.
    Mr. Parker. Thank you. I do believe that if more work had 
been done to complete an infectious disease standard that OSHA 
would have been in a better position to address COVID within 
the scope of that rule. In California, there is an infectious 
disease standard. I was the Chief of Cal/OSHA, prior to taking 
this position, and so, from my experience I know that the State 
was in a much better position to address the infectious disease 
and hospitals which was the scope of that rule.
    There were standards in place. There were plans in place 
that the hospitals were required to have. Our staff were 
trained on it, there was a mechanism, and there were clear 
expectations of hospitals. It certainly was not perfect, and 
hospitals certainly were not prepared for the scale of the 
pandemic that we all experienced, but it certainly put 
California in a better position to be able to enforce basic 
infectious disease control because of the existence of a 
standard.
    Chairwoman Adams. Okay. Well, let me turn to some more 
current matters.
    OSHA published the healthcare ETS last June. The OSH Act 
requires OSHA to develop a final standard within 6 months, but 
OSHA failed to meet that deadline. OSHA was given $100 million 
in additional funding through the American Rescue Plan for 
COVID-related work.
    Did OSHA hire any new FTEs for standards office, so that it 
could work on more than one major standard at the same time?
    Mr. Parker. We have been using ARP fundings to hire staff, 
and to hire contractors to work on COVID-19 standard making. We 
hired about a dozen FTEs during that time period. Some of those 
have been working on the standard. It is a little bit difficult 
to bring people out on a budget that is happening on such an 
accelerated scale, and rapidly incorporate them into the budget 
planning process.
    Our teams had a plan that they were executing that they did 
a little bit, but I think that, you know, I have to say I think 
they have done an incredible job under the circumstances of 
moving so quick.
    Chairwoman Adams. All right. Let me move on. You know from 
where I sit, and from where many of us sit, it is difficult to 
understand how OSHA could have this level of resources and not 
be able to produce two standards at the same time.
    What were the challenges that kept OSHA from being able to 
issue and enforce these standards in a timely manner? Can you 
give me a quick answer to that? What were those challenges?
    Mr. Parker. Well, you know part of that occurred before I 
was confirmed as Assistant Secretary, but I have done some 
review, and I think that there is some concern. There are 
bottlenecks in the process that make it challenging.
    In order to make sure that a rule is meeting all of the 
required legal standards to make sure it is sufficiently 
supported by the evidence, it requires a great amount of work, 
and given the time that it takes to hire people, it frankly 
would have been difficult to gear up quickly enough to move 
faster and sort of move the needle significantly with hiring in 
such a short period.
    We are now hiring, we are continuing to hire and have 
certainly made the funding request to expand our rulemaking so 
that we are better prepared in the future, but it is simply 
challenging to invest those kinds of resources for such a quick 
turnaround as the one on our past departments did.
    Chairwoman Adams. All right. Thank you, sir. I am out of 
time, so I am going to move on now and recognize the Ranking 
Member for the purpose of questioning the witnesses. Mr. 
Keller, you are recognized.
    Mr. Keller. Thank you. My question is for Mr. Parker. 
Following OSHA's rebuke of the Supreme Court, the agency was 
forced to rescind its vaccine and testing Emergency Temporary 
Standard. In its notice to rescind the ETS, however, the agency 
chose to keep the measure as a proposed rule, leaving the door 
open to yet another tyrannical vaccine mandate in the future.
    Mr. Parker, why are you keeping the vaccine mandate alive 
after OSHA's loss at the Supreme Court?
    Mr. Parker. Thank you, Ranking Member Keller. By operation 
of law when an Emergency Temporary Standard is issued, it 
functions as a proposed rule. The Supreme Court ruled that the 
Emergency Temporary Standard, the vaccine and testing rule, was 
not likely to prevail on the merits in the lower courts.
    We withdrew that rule, but as a matter of law the proposed 
rule continues to be in place, not unlike other proposals that 
we have had on (inaudible) for a long time. We do not have any 
plans to move forward with a vaccine-and-testing rule, but that 
is just the function of how--at this time, we have not really 
given it a lot of consideration because of this, a function of 
how the law works that it continues to be in place.
    Mr. Keller. I guess just to followup, employers and should 
employers and workers be concerned that there may be another 
ill-advised or illegal vaccine mandate promulgated from the 
agency in the future, or is that pretty much dead?
    Mr. Parker. No. We do not have any plans to move forward on 
a vaccine-and-testing rule.
    Mr. Keller. Okay. Mr. Parker, prior to President Biden 
taking office, OSHA had rarely used its emergency rulemaking 
authority, which allows the agency to bypass critical 
regulatory safeguards like soliciting public comment.
    Now OSHA has issued two Emergency Temporary Standards in 
President Biden's first year in office--the vaccine mandate and 
the healthcare industry ETS. Should the regulated community 
expect this to be standard operating procedure at OSHA during 
the Biden administration?
    Mr. Parker. I think, Ranking Member, you have to keep in 
mind the scale of the pandemic and what we were up against as a 
Nation. More than a million people have died in the pandemic. 
It was a massive sad thing that required a massive emergency 
response, and both of those emergency rulemaking activities 
that you are referring to were directly related to COVID.
    We would address through the emergency rulemaking process 
emergencies where it is appropriate, but I do not think that we 
can extrapolate from this unprecedented scale of a pandemic, 
that that is the kind of delivery you want. It is a relatively 
high standard that we have to meet for this emergency 
temporary.
    Mr. Keller. You know in that and so, do you believe it is 
important to give the regulated community opportunity to weigh 
in on OSHA's regulations?
    Mr. Parker. Oh, absolutely. Not only is it important for 
them, it is important for us. It allows us to make a better 
rule.
    Mr. Keller. Yes. I would just say I know we are all talking 
about the pandemic. We know that during the pandemic when we 
had the first day of session, Speaker Pelosi had a COVID-19 
booth set-up on the House floor, so people that were positive 
for COVID-19 could come in and vote for her for Speaker.
    Now I do not know of any business that would have done that 
because they needed somebody to come into work, allowed them to 
come in, knowing they were positive for COVID, and having to go 
through the entire building to get to an area.
    When people were talking about the pandemic and employers, 
right, I think they need to talk about the actions that have 
been taken by some of the Democrats in Washington, DC. that did 
not put the Federal employees first and were not concerned for 
their safety, yet they want to demonize the people for which we 
work, America's job creators, and the people who go to work 
every day.
    I just wanted to make that point. My last question Mr. 
Parker, we have consistently heard Committee Democrats demonize 
employers and question their commitment to ensuring that 
workers go home to their families safe and health every night. 
Based on my experience with employers in my district, and I 
know I worked in a factory, I know these statements that 
employers do not care about workplace safety is entirely wrong.
    With that, what is OSHA doing to cooperate--work with 
employers to expand its compliance assistance efforts, which 
benefit employees by protecting them before an injury or 
illness can occur?
    Mr. Parker. We are actively engaged in that work, working 
with small businesses. We requested significant funding in 1923 
to expand our compliances.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you. The gentleman's time--the 
gentleman is out of time. Thank you very much. I want to now 
recognize Mr. Takano of California; you are recognized sir for 
5 minutes. Is Mr. Takano on the platform?
    Mr. Vassar. Chairwoman Adams, I cannot confirm that Mr. 
Takano is currently present or available in the room.
    Chairwoman Adams. Okay. Let me move on to Mr. Norcross of 
New Jersey. Mr. Norcross, you are recognized for 5 minutes, 
sir.
    Mr. Norcross. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for holding this 
hearing today. OSHA 1970, to reduce injuries, sickness, and 
death. In my career, which started in construction as an 
electrician, we always went to work, each and every day, with 
the premise we are going to come home the way we went in: 
healthy and alive.
    Unfortunately, three times in my career I was on a job 
where someone did not come home. They were killed on the job. 
You will never forget that. That made such a profound 
difference in the way I view workplace safety. When you see 
somebody die in front of you, you will never forget it.
    The idea that giving additional money to keep up with all 
the pressures of a workforce, in this case OSHA, somehow hurts 
employers, let me make this absolutely clear: increasing the 
money to OSHA will make sure that more people come home the way 
they went to work, alive.
    Let us be clear. Profits do not come before people. I have 
been on jobs. I understand this. Let us just put that aside, 
and thank OSHA for what they have done, help more people come 
home each and every day. We can work together on this, and we 
need to. Mr. Parker, let me ask you a question about something 
that I found astounding, and again I have been involved my 
entire career.
    Recent reports by the Strategic Organizing Center in the 
New Jersey Policy Perspective found based on analysis of OSHA's 
records that in 1921, the last year available, Amazon workers' 
serious injury rate comprised of almost 55 percent of all 
serious injury rates in New Jersey. That is astounding.
    We sent over a letter, and I ask the Madam Chairwoman to 
enter it into the record, for you to look into this, for OSHA 
to look in, what is going on. Sometimes we see some changes, 
and the numbers coming in, but this is really remarkable. Can 
OSHA commit to opening an investigation into the issues that 
actually are going on at Amazon, at these warehouses?
    Mr. Secretary.
    [The information of Mr. Norcross follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Parker. Thank you. Thank you for that question. The 
data that you are referring to, I believe, is actually company 
data. It underscores the fact that it is only because of our 
2016 rule that requires certain employers to submit to OSHA 
their electronic injury and illness rates, that we are able to 
see the kinds of patterns or results that may happen within a 
particular industry, or a company, or at an individual 
establishment.
    It gives you a sense of why we think that expanding that 
rule could give us more information, give the public more 
information, give workers more information is just so 
important, so that we have a much better understanding on what 
injuries are affecting this country.
    With respect to committing to a particular investigation, 
you know we do not talk in advance about it, investigations or 
inspections, and we are very careful not to do that, but we 
take the issues you raised very seriously.
    Mr. Norcross. Well, thank you. Two points I want to make. 
Yes, this is information provided by Amazon to OSHA. We got the 
information from you.
    Mr. Parker. Okay.
    Mr. Norcross. This is not some numbers that are coming out 
of left field, and we understand about making them publicly, so 
let me rephrase that. If in a State, a company that had less 
than 10 percent of the workforce had 55 percent of the 
injuries, would OSHA think that is a little bit unusual and 
look at it as an anomaly, that something might be going on--
hypothetically?
    Mr. Parker. That is certainly the kind of information that 
would be worthy of inquiry. I mean (inaudible).
    Mr. Norcross. Well, we appreciate that. Again, now, the 
idea that employers are intentionally doing this, I understand 
that does not happen, but let us be absolutely clear. When 
people die in violations and citations are ordered, that means 
something went wrong. At the end of the day, we want to make 
sure everybody comes home the way they went to work, and with 
that I yield back.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you, Mr. Norcross. Thank you. 
Representative Miller-Meeks, you are recognized for 5 minutes, 
ma'am.
    Mrs. Miller Meeks. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, thank 
you, Ranking Member Keller, and I thank our witnesses for 
appearing. You know this is an interesting hearing, especially 
after OSHA having been given millions of dollars of the COVID-
19 funding to have a vaccine mandate struck down, and I can 
speak on this as both a small business owner, as a healthcare 
professional, as a former Director of the Department of Public 
Health where some of these policies were misguided.
    The committee has a responsibility to ensure that hundreds 
of millions of taxpayer dollars that the agency received in 
discretionary and supplemental funding during the COVID-19 
pandemic has been spent wisely. Mr. Parker, does OSHA have an 
estimate of how many taxpayer dollars were wasted in pursuing 
vaccine-and-testing mandate, which the administration knew was 
going to be ruled unconstitutional? They even remarked upon 
that, and given that the rule was ultimately rebuked as illegal 
by the Supreme Court, do you believe that the Federal funding 
that OSHA received to protect workers from COVID-19 could have 
been better spent?
    Mr. Parker. I do not have it at my fingertips, you know, a 
counting of the dollars that were used specifically for that 
rule. It is not necessarily how we do our accounting on a rule-
by-rule basis, but it is something that I can see how much 
information I can get and provide it to you subsequent to the 
hearing.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. I think it would be very helpful for us 
to know where those dollars were spent, and if there are 
dollars that are unspent that could be returned or utilized in 
a different manner for you to fulfill your mission.
    I think there are many of us, physicians, former directors 
of public health, people in the public health sphere, who felt 
that immunity was the issue that we were trying to get at, 
which protects ourselves and protects others, but we never 
heard the concept of immunity, we just heard vaccine mandate 
and terminating people when there is a labor shortage.
    Our labor participation rate is not where it was prior to 
the pandemic, that creating further hurdles, I think, for those 
in the healthcare field. I am also concerned about President 
Biden's budget request to increase agency staffing 
dramatically. Workplace injury and illness rates have been 
steadily decreasing for decades. Let me just show you this 
little graph. I am not sure if everyone can see it, but it 
shows that the numbers of non-fatal occupational injuries and 
illnesses have decreased, almost by half, from 2002 to 2020.
    I can get those exact figures for you. Given this positive 
trend, which we all welcome--we want people to be able to go to 
work, to be safe. Certainly, as a former employer and a small 
business owner, my employees were my greatest asset, and I 
treated them as such. Given the positive trend, is the request 
for increased staffing so that OSHA can write additional 
onerous regulations and ramp up enforcement, more than record--
such as recordkeeping violations? I have seen this time and 
time again as a justification for increased staffing.
    You should, at OSHA, should be partners with our business 
owners, and especially our small business owners, to allow 
maximum safety, but also to allow those businesses to continue 
to operate.
    Mr. Parker. Thank you, Congresswoman. I should first note 
that, you know, OSHA, a lot of people think about enforcement 
when they think of OSHA, but there are many facets to the work 
that OSHA does. It is not only enforcement, but we do a 
considerable amount of compliance assistance.
    We reach out to thousands of employers every year. We pay 
more than a million workers through both direct training and 
support of private sector trainers. There is considerable other 
work that we do.
    Now the graph that you showed did show significant 
improvement from the time that the OSH Act was developed or 
enacted back in 1970. At that time, there were about 1,100 OSHA 
inspectors, and we are down below--the last 2 years, below 800.
    If you look at that trend line, it has gotten flat--so I 
think when we still have more than 5,000 people dying at work 
every year, many thousands more injured, it is worth more, you 
know, a factor higher than that, that are affected by 
occupational illness. That if we want to get----
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. If I may, sir. If I may correct you. The 
graph I showed you was not from 1970, it was from 2002 to 2020, 
and the number of workplace fatalities in 2020 was 4,349, not 
more than 5,000. If I am hearing you correctly, you are saying 
that you are going to help with compliance, you are going to 
help with training. Is it correct to say that the majority----
    Chairwoman Adams. The gentlelady is out of time.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. It is not going to go to regulatory and 
punitive measures, it is going to go to compliance and 
training.
    Chairwoman Adams. The gentlelady's time is up.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you so much, I yield back my time.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you very much. I would like to 
recognize Representative Stevens. You have 5 minutes, ma'am.
    Ms. Stevens. Well, allow me to just say, Madam Chair, I am 
so grateful to you for having this hearing, examining the 
policies and priorities of the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration, in part because the legislation that was 
enacted in 1970 was certainly very important, and now we find 
ourselves half a century later still in the middle of a global 
pandemic, looking at the ways in which we can modernize and 
improve.
    That is what today's hearing is about. Often in the 
Congress we run into these very type of matters, how we are 
operating off of laws that were written half a century ago, 
that need to be tweaked, that need to be modernized, that need 
to be improved. Tweak might be too docile of a term.
    Doug Parker, our Assistant Secretary of Labor here, Mr. 
Parker, Secretary Parker, in the OSHA budget's justification it 
mentions increasing the diversity of the agency's workforce by 
creating an apprenticeship program that will develop safety 
technicians into entry level CSHOs--recruiting for those 
positions from HBCUs, MSIs, veterans' networks, and other 
organizations.
    Can you explain for us, sir, how the creation of the 
apprenticeship program will help OSHA increase diversity in its 
workforce and fulfill its mission to protect workers?
    Mr. Parker. I would be happy to. First of all, let me note 
that we are already working hard to increase the diversity of 
this organization. We have done a considerable amount of hiring 
and actively work to recruit at agency and through associations 
made up of workers of color, women, and so, you know, we are 
actively working to do that.
    We also work recently very closely with the Office of 
Personnel Management to obtain, for a limited period, direct 
hire authority so that we can go to conferences, we can go to 
colleges, and we can virtually hire on the spot, so that we can 
really buildup our ranks and do it quickly with the inspector.
    Ms. Stevens. Yes.
    Mr. Parker. With respect to the apprenticeship program, 
this is really to get nontraditional folks, maybe you do not 
have all the degrees, you did not take organic chemistry to 
become an IH for example, that we can bring in because they 
have on-the-job experience, they have a different set of 
experiences that are still extremely relevant to the strong 
work of OSHA.
    They can come on to the--they can come in as safety 
inspector, and we can train them on the job and give them the 
skills they need, too.
    Ms. Stevens. Well, on-the-job training is phenomenal, Mr. 
Secretary, and, you know, we really want to applaud you.
    On a separate, but more urgent note, the Surgeon General 
released an advisory on healthcare worker burnout and 
resignation, because the healthcare system is becoming more 
fragile and less able to serve the people as workers in the 
system get driven to the edge. Just to the ``I work too much, 
and you know, I do not know if I can actually fulfill the 
mission of my job.''
    Organizations, communities, and policies must prioritize 
protecting health workers from workplace violence, right? That 
is a point I want to stress.
    ``In the national survey among healthcare workers in mid-
2021, eight out of ten experienced at least one type of 
workplace violence during the pandemic, and two thirds have 
been verbally threatened, and one-third of nurses reported an 
increase in violence compared to the previous year.'' This is 
legislation we have also worked on as a committee.
    When can we expect OSHA to followup on the Surgeon 
General's recommendation, Secretary Parker, and update its 
policies by publishing a proposed rule on workplace violence?
    Mr. Parker. The next step in that process, you know our 
priority right now is to finish the COVID-19 rule and to work 
on infectious disease in healthcare. It is not keeping us from 
doing other work.
    This fall we will take on the next step of the workplace 
violence standard. We will be having a meeting to do the SBREFA 
process, the Small Business Fairness Act process, to hear from 
small businesses that would be affected by that, that rule. 
That is coming up in the fall. I do not have an exact date in 
front of me on the proposed rule, but we are working, we will 
be working very diligently on that.
    Ms. Stevens. Yes, well, we will do whatever we can, sir, to 
support you to get that addendum going, and certainly 
appreciate the dialog and the service to the Nation. With that, 
Madam Chair, I am yielding back. Thank you for the hearing.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you very much. We want to recognize 
now Representative Steel. You are now recognized, 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Steel. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Ranking 
Member. Local small businesses need consistency from government 
and OSHA, even during the pandemic. When I was Chair of the 
Orange County Supervisors at the start of pandemic, I 
established the Orange County Business Recovery Ad Hoc 
Committee to establish a responsible and effective plan to 
mitigate the pandemic.
    It is like a plan to mitigate the pandemic. Mixed messaging 
from the Federal Government hurts small businesses and our 
community very much. Also, Secretary Parker, new OSHA 
regulations and aggressive actions can have major costs on 
small business. Will OSHA work with the employers to ensure 
fair and responsible inspection and enforcement policies?
    Will OSHA focus on collaborative efforts with employers to 
make workplace safer? Do you believe in a proactive approach to 
safety where OSHA can build trust with local businesses?
    Mr. Parker. I absolutely believe that. One of the things 
that I believe that we have to do as an agency is to establish 
safety and health as a core value. The OSH Act puts the 
responsibility on employers to provide a safe and healthy 
workplace, and yes, it gives us the responsibility to set 
standards and conduct enforcement, but it also provides that we 
are to provide assistance and guidance and to help business, 
particularly small businesses. We are committed to that.
    One of the things that we want to promote in this 
administration is the expansion of safety and health management 
programs, so that if the employers are really taking on the 
full aspects of doing a hazard assessment in their workplace, 
proactively working to make sure that there are not hazards in 
the workplace, engaging with their workers, having more 
participation, and building those programs.
    It is often quite intimidating for a small business to 
think about doing all those things, so we are working very hard 
to think about how we can provide small businesses with the 
tools to start taking the first steps. Right, to take a 
progressive approach where they can, through building blocks, 
develop aspects of its safety and health management programs, a 
worker health and safety program in their workplace.
    They can start the process, they can build from there, it 
will be manageable. It is not 200 pages long. We hope to have 
more information on that in the future. Some of that is in 
development, but we are very much committed to making sure 
small businesses have the support that they need.
    I will remind you and all that are listening, OSHA provides 
free, onsite consultation with small and medium businesses who 
seek out our help to improve their safety and health programs 
and address hazards in the workplace. Employers can do that.
    I am working to build our program. You know we are hiring 
more people to do that work, and it is my hope that if we can 
continue to get more funding, that we can make sure that we 
have a compliance assistance, compliance consultant in every 
field office who can help businesses with that approach.
    Mrs. Steel. So, my next question is, you know, those 
regulations and tougher guidelines--how do you reach out to 
these small business--because I own small businesses, and I 
actually work with small businesses in my community. How do you 
reach out, because that regulation has been changing so much, 
and then these guidelines just keep coming in.
    How are you reaching out? How are you going to take these, 
you know, for small business seriously, and how? You know their 
concerns. How you listen to them, and then implement these 
regulations.
    Mr. Parker. I think that that is an interesting question, 
and it presents some challenges. Like, one of the things that I 
have found here is that our people are committed and do a great 
job of community outreach, and we have social media, and we 
have these channels of communication.
    We are also reaching the kind of same people over and over 
again. I think there is another group of business people out 
there--and the pandemic has laid this bare--that we can do a 
better job of reaching out to. I think the key is where 
organizations like the one that you were involved with in 
Orange County, getting more engaged with these associations for 
these strong conduits to local businesses to get out the 
message on our behalf, and not only for the benefit of 
themselves.
    Mrs. Steel. Thank you, Assistant Secretary Parker. You know 
what? I have two more questions that I am going to submit in 
writing. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you very much. I want to recognize 
now the Chair of the Committee on Education and Labor, Mr. 
Scott. Chairman Scott, you are recognized.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to thank both 
of our witnesses for being with us today. Mr. Costa, you have 
been studying the delays in getting OSHA standards implemented. 
I know Beryllium and other airborne diseases standards took 
decades. Basically, why does it take so long?
    Mr. Costa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Setting the standards, 
OSHA has a higher threshold of procedural requirements than 
most other agencies. In addition, it has faced, as we have seen 
recently, rigorous standards of judicial review. Then also 
shifting priorities over time.
    For example, we have seen that the average amount of time 
it takes to establish a rule is over 7 years, and can be as 
long as 19 years, which was for scaffolding and construction. 
The standard for respiratory protection, which OSHA cited 
fairly, relatively frequently during COVID, took 15 plus years. 
It is a big challenge for them to get something done quickly 
because of the amount of----
    Mr. Scott. Do you have recommendations on how--obviously, 
that is not satisfactory. Do you have any recommendations we 
can expedite the proceedings?
    Mr. Costa. We did not look specifically at recommendations 
for that. We did talk about the need for additional 
consultation with other stakeholders, which I know from like 
NIOSH, back in our 2012 report that looked at this 
specifically, and we did close that recommendation because OSHA 
did increase its collaboration with NIOSH.
    We have not looked more recently at the process to see if 
there are other steps that OSHA could take to increase the 
speed with which it gets standards out.
    Mr. Scott. Well, you mentioned litigation, one of the 
things we learned from the Supreme Court's decision in the 
vaccine ETS, the Emergency Temporary Standard seemed to require 
explicit authorization from Congress to implement some of these 
regulations. Looking forward, are there areas we need better 
legislation to help OSHA implement new standards?
    Mr. Costa. I am sure there are sir, I would defer to 
Assistant Secretary Parker for specifics as to where the 
administration thinks it needs additional representation.
    Mr. Scott. Mr. Parker, looking forward--I mean, these 
things you know you do not want to start working on this when 
the emergency starts. You are looking forward to seeing what we 
need to be doing legislatively?
    Mr. Parker. We would be happy to consult with Congress and 
provide technical assistance on suggestions for how the process 
might be streamlined.
    Mr. Scott. Okay. Well, you said you are working on the 
workplace violence. Do you need any legislation in that area?
    Mr. Parker. We are operating, you know we are going forward 
with the standard based on our usual processes. If there is 
interest in Congress in a bill, and I know that there have been 
some bills so it is introduced on that--if there is concern how 
a bill would complement the rulemaking process with that, I 
would be happy to provide assistance, technical assistance on 
that. I believe there has been some discussions, too.
    Mr. Scott. Mr. Parker, you obviously do not have time to 
inspect each workplace. I think right now, with the funding you 
have, you can get to each workplace every 100 years. One way to 
deal with that is to check records, to target the appropriate 
places for danger. What are the challenges in relying on 
recordkeeping?
    I know a lot of people do not keep good records, and what 
can be done about it?
    Mr. Parker. We are always going to be--in using employer-
provided records, there is always going to be a limitation on, 
you know, it is always going to be dependent on how good the 
recordkeeping is and whether they have been submitted. 
Certainly the starting point, as the GAO has suggested, is 
making sure that we are doing what we can to make sure that all 
employees who have to report, do report.
    The second thing that we need to do is expand the type of 
data that they are collecting. Employers have significant data 
they are already required to collect and retain in case there 
is an inspection, but it is sitting in a file in their office 
unless we come in and look at it. In this modern age everything 
is so dependent on data, and we use data for all kinds of 
applications and efficiency and productivity, and the efficacy 
of programs.
    Looking at it more would be a way of getting that data and 
being able to analyze it.
    Mr. Scott. My time has expired. If you could give us some 
recommendations on that, and as you talk about legislation give 
us some information about what you did in California in terms 
of airborne infectious diseases, and infectious diseases 
generally, that we might want to replicate on a Federal level. 
That would be appreciated.
    With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me recognize 
Representative Chu. You are recognized for 5 minutes, ma'am.
    Ms. Chu. Thank you. Yes, Mr. Parker, thank you so much for 
being here today, and for the Department's timely attention to 
preventing heat-related illnesses and fatalities. Nearly two 
decades ago in Central California, Mr. Asuncion Valdivia was a 
farmworker who was picking grapes for 10 hours straight in 105-
degree temperatures, when he dropped over. Soon thereafter, he 
died at the age of 53 of a preventable heat stroke.
    That is why in 2005, in partnership with the United 
Farmworkers, I introduced the country's first heat stress 
related protections standards in California. I am proud that 
the total number of fatal heat-related illnesses that are 
reported to the State OSHA agency have decreased since this 
implementation.
    Despite California's success, industry claims that these 
types of regulations can be too burdensome for employers to 
comply with, and that new regulations of any kind can increase 
prices on their goods, but California's example shows that 
these claims are incorrect. My State is one of the Nation's 
largest agricultural producers, with employers large and small, 
and has proven that you can protect workers and have a thriving 
agricultural sector.
    I heard from so many workers in California who told me what 
guaranteed shade and water breaks and rest periods means to 
them. It is literally life-saving.
    While many employers act in good faith to protect their 
workers, it is clear that we need enforceable Federal 
regulations to ensure bad actors are not allowed to exploit 
hard-working laborers.
    Mr. Parker, I introduced a bill that addresses this issue. 
It is H.R. 2193, the Asuncion Valdivia Heat Illness and 
Fatality Prevention Act. This bill directs OSHA to issue a 
safety or health standard on excessive heat that includes, 
among other protections, allowing workers to have a minimum 
paid break in cool spaces, access to water, and limited 
exposure to heat.
    If we were to pass this legislation, how would it enhance 
or facilitate OSHA's current work on a heat standard and the 
agency's other heat-related enforcement activities, such as the 
National Emphasis Program? How would such legislation ensure 
that these protections exist beyond the current administration?
    Mr. Parker. Thank you. I would--I clearly want to review 
some of the provisions of those more closely. I know that I 
have--I am familiar with the bill, and I know that it follows 
some of the elements of the California standard. It follows 
some of the best practices that organizations like NIOSH and 
America's Conference of Government Industrial Benefits have 
suggested, and so I think that there are certainly valuable 
elements of that legislation that we can look at in our own 
rulemaking.
    I would interact with our current standard-making process 
that we are doing. I think we have to look at it a little more 
closely, and get back to you on that, but we certainly share--
absolutely share the vision that is expressed in that bill, not 
only in terms of the importance of addressing this issue, the 
recognition of this as a significant hazard to workers, not 
only at the workers who are working outside, like the 
farmworker that tragically died, that your bill is named after, 
but also a significant number of people who are working indoors 
and affected by excessive heat.
    We certainly, wholeheartedly support the spirit of the bill 
and the need to address this issue, and to follow the science, 
and have the appropriate controls.
    Ms. Chu. Mr. Parker, I was concerned about timeliness too, 
since one of the topics we have been exploring is how long it 
takes OSHA to get a final standard produced. I was gratified to 
see that OSHA published an advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking, but do you think OSHA can publish a final standard 
by spring of 2024?
    Mr. Parker. I think that could be challenging. It just 
depends on the data that is available to do that. The COVID 
rulemaking that we had to go through, and the prioritization of 
infectious disease so that we do not have to get caught 
unprepared for another pandemic in the healthcare industry--it 
has taken some valuable time.
    An important investment, the way we invested that time, but 
it is--but it has set back some of our other important health-
related rulemaking, and certainly people can see the theme here 
on the things that we are needing to prioritize and elevate.
    Chairwoman Adams. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Ms. Chu. Thank you. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you very much. I would like to 
recognize the Ranking Member. Representative Chu, you need to 
mute. All right. I want to recognize the Ranking Member of the 
Education and Labor Committee. Dr. Foxx, you are recognized 
now.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Mr. Parker, despite 
repeated warnings from the Committee and legal experts about 
the limits on OSHA's authority, the Labor Department doubled 
down on the illegal vaccine-and-testing mandate, causing 
massive confusion for employers and threatening workers' 
personal medical decisions.
    OSHA now lists a whopping 28 planned regulatory actions in 
its most recent agenda. What assurance can you provide that 
these regulations will be lawful? What safeguards are in place 
to ensure that massive regulatory overreach from OSHA will not 
threaten workers and job creators again?
    Mr. Parker. Well, thank you, Ranking Member. I certainly 
take seriously, as the Assistant Secretary, to make sure that 
all of our actions are legal and supported by the 
Administrative Procedures Act, that our regulations are 
supported by evidence in the record, and that they are 
supported by substantial evidence, and will continue work with 
through that.
    Certainly, in the case of the vaccine-and-testing rule, we 
did believe that we were on solid legal ground based upon the 
scale of the challenges, and the scale of the pandemic, and 
ongoing tragedy that we were experiencing. The Supreme Court 
ruled otherwise, of course, and that is always--that, at times, 
is going to be the case in these issues that involve complex 
legal questions.
    We cannot guarantee that in every case our rules will be 
sustained in some aspect, but we will certainly operate in good 
faith, and absolutely take seriously the need to be committed 
to the rule of law.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you for that commitment. We certainly are 
going to hold you to that, and we will express our opinions if 
we feel like you are not issuing lawful regulations.
    Mr. Parker, OSHA appropriately allowed the COVID-19 
Emergency Temporary Standard for the healthcare industry to 
expire at the end of 2021, but the agency's currently pursuing 
a final and permanent COVID-19 healthcare industry standard. 
The Biden administration seems intent on using the pandemic as 
an excuse to exert more Federal control over people in the 
workplace. With the pandemic coming to an end, is it time for 
OSHA to stop exerting new powers?
    Mr. Parker. The powers that we are currently using with 
respect to COVID-19 are within our judicial authority. The 
COVID-19 healthcare rule, as you know, our Emergency Temporary 
Standard by law operates as a proposed rule, and so we have to 
move forward on that and make it, ultimately, a decision about 
whether to make it permanent.
    We have initiated that rulemaking and are committed to 
doing something quickly. We think that it is important to have 
a rule, certainly by the fall. Our focus with respect to our 
COVID-19 activities, whether it is our focused inspections that 
we are doing right now in healthcare, our national emphasis 
program, or our COVID-19, or our infection disease rule. Those 
are really focused on readiness and putting the employers in a 
position to be prepared for future eventualities, and future 
dangers, so fewer workers die or their families are affected by 
this tragic disease or other future infections.
    Ms. Foxx. Well, I was in a healthcare facility yesterday, 
and that was the only thing they wanted to talk about were the 
absolutely unrealistic rules put out by OSHA, particularly as 
they relate to masks.
    Mr. Parker, the president's budget requested a massive 49 
percent increase for OSHA's office in charge of devising and 
writing regulations and the agency's plans to pursue an 
aggressive regulatory agenda. Has the administration considered 
the impact that dozens of new regulations will have on our 
Nation's job creators and workers in the struggling Biden 
economy?
    Mr. Parker. Absolutely, Dr. Foxx, we always consider the 
burden on employers and the cost in all the rulemaking that we 
do. We take very seriously that factor. We certainly do not 
think that there is a--that we have an either/or situation 
where we have to keep going with jobs and safety, and health 
protections for workers, and that is the approach that we take.
    Chairwoman Adams. The gentlelady's time.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you very much. Thank you. I want to 
thank all of the witnesses. Are there other members who may 
have joined the platform who have not been heard? Okay. We are 
going to proceed then. I want to first of all thank the 
witnesses for their testimony.
    I want to remind my colleagues that pursuant to committee 
practice, materials for submission for the hearing record must 
be submitted to the committee clerk within 14 days, following 
the last day of the hearing, so by close of business on June 8, 
preferably in Microsoft Word format. The materials submitted 
must address the subject matter of the hearing, and only a 
member of the subcommittee or an invited witness may submit 
materials for inclusion in the hearing record.
    Documents are limited to 50 pages each. Documents longer 
than 50 pages will be incorporated into the record via an 
internet link that you must provide to the committee clerk 
within the required timeframe. Please recognize that in the 
future that link may no longer work.
    Pursuant to House rules and regulations, items for the 
record should be submitted to the clerk electronically by 
emailing submissions to edandlabor.hearings@mail.house.gov.
    Again, I want to thank the witnesses for their 
participation today. Members of the Subcommittee may have some 
additional questions for you, and we ask the witnesses to 
please respond to those questions in writing.
    The hearing record will be held open for 14 days, in order 
to receive those responses. I remind my colleagues that, 
pursuant to committee practice, witness questions for the 
hearing record must be submitted to the majority committee 
staff or committee clerk within 7 days. The questions submitted 
must address the subject matter of the hearing.
    I now would like to recognize the distinguished Ranking 
Member for a closing statement.
    Ranking Member Keller.
    Mr. Keller. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I would like to 
thank the witnesses for participating in today's hearing. As we 
have heard throughout today's hearing, the Occupational Safety 
and Health Administration plays an important role ensuring 
America's workers are safe and healthy.
    Committee Republicans support enforcement of the 
Occupational Safety Health Act and commonsense policies that 
protect workers. OSHA works best when engaging cooperatively 
with employers through compliance assistance and other efforts 
to protect employees before injury or illness can occur.
    I know first-hand from the people I have the privilege to 
represent--the employers, job creators in Pennsylvania's 12th 
congressional District--that they care deeply about keeping 
their team members, the people that come to work every day, 
safe. Unfortunately, time and time again, Democrats in Congress 
and this administration demonize our job creators.
    If President Biden's budget request for OSHA and the 
agency's egregious overreach during the COVID pandemic are any 
indication of this administration's priorities, I am afraid 
businesses and their employees can expect more of the same. We 
should reject this approach, and we will continue to hold OSHA 
accountable. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Adams. Thank you, Mr. Keller. I now recognize 
myself for the purpose of making my closing statement.
    I do want to again thank our witnesses for being with us 
today. OSHA's safety standard and enforcement play a critical 
role in protecting workers on the job and ensuring that they 
come home safely.
    Unfortunately, the agency was missing in action during the 
worst safety crisis, COVID-19, in OSHA's history. As a result, 
the Biden administration has been left to make up for the Trump 
administration's inaction, while also working to advance the 
agency to protect employees in the 21st Century workplace.
    To ensure OSHA has the tools to fulfill its mission, 
Congress must update the Occupational Safety and Health Act and 
provide OSHA with the resources it needs. Moving forward, I am 
committed to working with my colleagues to advance meaningful 
science-based legislation that invests in and strengthens our 
workplace safely for our Nation's workers.
    Again, thank you to our witnesses for your time and 
testimony. Thank you to all of my colleagues as well for being 
with us today and for your participation. If there is no 
further business, without objection, the subcommittee stands 
adjourned.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    [Whereupon, at 1:23 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.]

                                 [all]