Is Obama’s safety nominee anti-business?
September 17, 2009 by Fred HosierPosted in: Compliance, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, OSHA news
Conservative and business groups are expressing their disapproval with President Obama’s choice to head OSHA. David Michaels’ past writings may be used against him at his confirmation hearing.
In a 2005 article and subsequent book, Doubt is Their Product, Michaels wrote, “Never in our history have corporate interests been as successful as they are today in shaping science policies to their desires.”
The National Association of Manufacturers said Michaels’ approach is always to paint employers as malevolent, and that’s not a quality the business community would like in someone responsible for policing workplace safety.
The White House responded that Michaels is a respected scientist whose resumé includes previous occupational safety work for the Department of Energy.
What experience should the head of OSHA have? Let us know in the Comments Box below.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: Doubt is Their Product, National Association of Manufacturers, OSHA nominee David Michaels
Loading ...
September 17th, 2009 at 7:59 am
[...] More here: Is Obama's OSHA nominee an… [...]
September 17th, 2009 at 8:02 am
The head of OSHA should have a sense of fiscal responsibility, but that won’t happen. Like most government programs, the return on investment isn’t there. The money they get from citations goes into a “general fund”, which then goes to congress to spend on its special interest groups in order to get re-elected time after time after time…
September 21st, 2009 at 1:41 pm
It is concerning that someone with David Michael’s ideology would be over OSHA. Michael’s paints an advisarial picture of business and employee’s which is not true in today’s workplace. Many companies have partnered with OSHA through VPP. This has helped to change not only business mindset but also the mindset of the worker. Worker’s understand that safety is not just a company’s obligation but also an individual obligation to keep ones’ self safe and watch out for fellow workers. It is a win-win for all involved. Michael’s may set this progress back 50 years with his anti-buisness rhetoric. He may be a good scientist but that doesn’t make him the best person to head up OSHA.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:31 pm
This is all just too crazy!
I will never understand why the AFL/CIO, UAW, and all the other construction and manufacturing unions think an OSHA that cites the hell out of you is the way to go. It’s amazing how the current administration says they are not doing away with partnering with employers which has been an extremely successful program. Just in hour little corner of Ohio OSHA has went from around 10 enforcement officers to 23. Now, what does that tell you. Just in 6 months. OSHA is ready to kick butt. They want to raise the penalty structure and increase the willful citations.
Regulate, regulate, regulate. There is no stopping the government from the extra burden of government intervention.
We spent over 20,000 manhours and 200,000.00 dollars on safety training over this past winter and we get an inspection and WHAM..We’re bad guys. To them it looks like a willful. Not that anyone can ever make a mistake and miss something during a fast track construction project.
Oh well. As long as the unions have influence over our safety on the job then we’re all going the way of Mexico, Viet Nam, China, Hondurous, etc.
OSHA has to be an agency that works with the employer and if you don’t then cite them.
I should know I worked for Federal OSHA for about 12 years. I had to eventually quit because I just could not figure out why the agency thought that by citing the hell out of someone this would make them a better employer. Doesn’t make any sense to me.
Partnerships, Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP), Outreach Programs, etc. is the way to go.
September 21st, 2009 at 7:23 pm
As with every other policy and appointment this administration is involved in, politics is the number 1 priority. This has become the most transparent administration and Congress in history because we can all see right through them. Since the Unions now only employ 12% of the work force at best, appointing someone to head OSHA who is clearly in favor of labor unions, is the right move. But it will only scare businesses to other countries. The only agenda here is power!
September 22nd, 2009 at 9:59 pm
OSHA appointments are a political position. The regulations are usually based on science, the citation is based on the inspectors ability to understand the regulation and how it applies to the task or job. I agree that citations should be the last resort, but they are necessary when supervisors are willing to jepordize safety for production. Safety is a neccessary evil due to our over population of trial lawers, the fed sees the payouts and wants their cut, hence excessive fines. The system needs to be more proactive in training, warnings and citations or shut downs as the final straw. I feel that this will never happen regardless of party because the income from citations is already a part of the operating budget.