Voinovich feels heat on big labor priority
December 22, 2008
Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) could face more pressure than any other member of Congress next year to reverse his position on legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize.
Voinovich voted against allowing a debate on the Employee Free Choice Act last year, and has vowed to do the same when Democrats bring it up in the 111th Congress, perhaps as early as January.
But the Ohio centrist has also emerged as one of the most vulnerable Republicans up for reelection in 2010 and will campaign in a state where union muscle helped to guide Barack Obama to the White House this year and a liberal Democrat over an incumbent GOP senator in 2006.
Sensing a potential swing vote, labor organizers and business groups from the Rust Belt have begun targeting Voinovich with hopes of persuading him one way or the other.
The bill, also known as card-check, passed the House last year but failed to get enough votes for a debate in the Senate. Come January, when Democrats hold at least 57 seats in the upper chamber, Voinovich’s vote could be the difference between labor’s top priority becoming law or withering away.
“If the senator is comfortable with the economy we have now, he should vote the same way he did last year,” said Tim Burga, chief of staff for the Ohio AFL-CIO, which has 1.4 million members. “If he wants a change, then he should reconsider.”
Voinovich has signaled that he won’t budge.
“It’s undemocratic,” Voinovich says of the legislation that would bar employers from insisting on a secret-ballot election if a majority of workers sign cards saying they would like to join a union. “I’ve belonged to unions. I’m probably one of the few people who understand how this works.”
Card-check is likely to be a harbinger for organized labor’s influence on a number of centrist candidates from both parties who are seeking reelection next cycle.
Already, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican who supported moving toward a debate last year, has signaled he will seek some sort of compromise.
Democrats intend to use the card-check legislation as a means to reach middle-class voters in a slumping economy. Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, Voinovich’s Ohio colleague who toppled Sen. Mike DeWine (R) in 2006 with considerable help from unions, intends to make that point when the bill comes up for debate.
“The more people that belong to labor unions, the more people there are in the middle class in this country,” Brown said. “That’s been proven by statistics for 50 years.”
The pressure on Voinovich comes as the lawmaker failed to persuade his Republican colleagues to back an auto industry bailout this month that was critical to his home state and also as his electoral support seems to be softening.
After winning his 1998 and 2004 elections with comfortable margins — 56 and 64 percent, respectively — a recent poll shows he is more vulnerable in 2010 if he runs for reelection. A Quinnipiac University survey of 1,468 registered voters, conducted Dec. 4-8, found just 36 percent of respondents supported Voinovich against an unnamed Democrat. The generic Democratic candidate won 35 percent in the poll, with the remaining 29 percent of voters undecided. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percent.
Voinovich, who worked closely with unions when he was the mayor of Cleveland in the 1980s, shrugs off the pressure, saying his mind is “absolutely” made up.
“To just have a situation where somebody can go out there and get X number of cards and then say, ‘By the way, we’ve got 50-plus-one, now you’re unionized’ — it’s undemocratic,” he said.
Those statements are reassuring to Ohio’s business leaders, who say they are winning the battle for Voinovich’s vote despite the pressure he faces.
“I have not heard any wavering from his office and his position,” said Tony Fiore, director of labor and human resources policy for the Ohio Chamber of Commerce. “And it is important for all of those folks who have been on the right side of this to continue their strong opposition.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is applying pressure at the national level. Chamber Vice President Randel Johnson calls the bill “the top labor issue of the last 50 years” and said if Democrats get the 60 votes needed to proceed to a debate, the bill is all but certain to become law.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) not only said that Republicans would unite against the legislation, but predicted Democrats may peel away from the bill.
“You are likely to have very significant unity among Republicans,” McConnell said. “Also, you’re assuming that Democrats are going to walk in lockstep. I would predict there are going to be a lot of differences among Democrats in both the House and the Senate.”
FINAL RULE - OSHA PPE Clarification
December 12, 2008
In today's Federal Register, OSHA made final the rule to assign a 'per employee' compliance duty for failure to provide PPE and train employees. The rule purports to clarify that the employer duty to provide personal protective equipment of all types, including respirators, and training to employees is a duty owed to each employee covered by the requirement. They continue to state that this adds no new compliance burden; as the nature of the employer’s duty to protect each employee is inherent in the existing provisions.
"To comply with existing PPE and training provisions, the employer must provide PPE to each employee who needs it and train each employee who must be informed of job hazards. The employer is not in compliance if some employees are without personal protection or are untrained. The final rule achieves greater consistency in the regulatory text of the various respirator and training provisions in Parts 1910 through 1926, provides clearer notice of the nature of the employer’s duty under existing PPE and training provisions, and addresses the Commission’s interpretation that the language of some respirator and training provisions does not allow separate per employee citations and penalties."
Below is a summary of the key elements to the rule. Here is the complete language of the Federal Register Clarification of Employer Duty to Provide PPE.
What you need to know about this rule…
- OSHA is adding a new section to subpart A of parts 1910, 1915, 1917 and 1918, and to subpart C of part 1926. These new sections contain general information about the scope and applicability of the standards in each part.
- Each new section will contain two new paragraphs, identical for each Part.
- The first new paragraph states that standards in the part requiring employers to provide PPE, including respirators, impose a separate compliance duty to each employee required to use the PPE, and that each failure to provide PPE to an employee may be considered a separate violation.
- The second new paragraph expressly states that standards in the part requiring training on hazards and related matters, such as standards requiring that employees receive training or that the employer train employees, provide training to employees or institute or implement a training program, impose a separate compliance duty to each employee covered by the requirement. Each failure to train an employee may be considered a separate violation.
- The rule also includes revisions to specific respirator paragraphs including language explicitly stating that employers must provide an appropriate respirator and implement a respiratory protection program for each such employee. The affected standards include the general respirator standard, most general industry toxic-substance health standards in Subpart Z of 1910, general industry occupational noise exposure as well as the shipyard employment asbestos standard 1915.1101 and 1915.1026, Chromium (IV).
Note: This final rule simply clarifies that the PPE and training standards are legally susceptible to per-employee citations. Nothing in the final rule addresses the circumstances in which the Secretary will or will not issue per employee citations in particular cases. The issuance of per-employee citations, like other types of per-instance citations, is a matter of prosecutorial discretion wholly outside the scope of this rulemaking.
Environmental Briefings Requested on Proposed CVN Move
December 08, 2008
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
For Immediate Release: Contact: Bronwyn LanceChester (Warner), 202-224-6290
Monday, December 8, 2008 Kimberly Hunter (Webb), 202-228-5258
Warner and Webb Concerned with Navy Fast-Tracking of Environmental Studies;
Request Briefings on Environmental Issues for Proposal to Homeport Carrier in Florida
Washington, DC—Senators John Warner (R-VA) and Jim Webb (D-VA), both former secretaries of the Navy and members of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, expressed their “serious concern” with the Navy’s apparent effort to fast-track interagency assessments of the environmental ramifications associated with the Navy’s proposal to homeport a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Mayport, Fla. They requested a briefing from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on the Navy’s issuance of its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for Mayport homeporting in November 2008, prior to the completion of necessary reviews by each agency.
The Navy’s decision to issue its FEIS before NOAA and FWS completed their reviews and findings regarding impacts to protected species and habitat are contrary to the usual manner in which the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 7 consultation is normally coordinated.
In a letter to Undersecretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere William J. Brennan and Director of Fish and Wildlife Service Dale Hall, Warner and Webb wrote of their concern that, “… The Navy’s stated goal of issuing a record of decision by December 31, 2008, will result in both an inadequate consultation process and findings, as well as a failure to consider fully the impacts of its proposed actions on protected species.” In view of the significant environmental issues associated with the Navy’s proposal, the senators said, “… It is inconceivable to us that your agencies should not be afforded as much time as necessary to ensure your assessments are developed as thoroughly and carefully as possible.”
According to the Navy’s own analysis, the comparative strategic advantages enjoyed by Naval Station Mayport over Naval Station Norfolk are “slight” at best.
EPA Policy Allows More State and Local Inputs
November 20, 2008
Katherine Boyle, E&ENews PM reporter (11/19/2008)
U.S. EPA issued a policy today allowing increased input from state and local authorities in developing federal rules.
The policy will expand EPA consultations with state and local governments on new regulations whose costs exceed $25 million. Previously, EPA policy required consultation when regulations cost $100 million or more.
"State and local officials often serve as the 'front line' managers of federally mandated environmental regulations," EPA Deputy Administrator Marcus Peacock said in a statement. "If we want good rules, early consultation with these partners is crucial."
The change updates an EPA policy carrying out a 1999 executive order from President Bill Clinton that required federal consultations on regulations or actions with substantial regional or local impacts.
State and local authorities have repeatedly called for more input in federal regulatory matters during the Bush administration. A coalition that includes the National Governors Association and the U.S. Conference of Mayors recently issued a joint statement asking President-elect Barack Obama to promote federal cooperation and consultation with local leaders.
EPA's new policy requires the agency to consult those two associations and eight other groups representing cities, counties and states if proposed regulations would cost more than $25 million or supersede state or local authority.
George Hawkins, director of the District of Columbia's Environment Department, welcomed the change. "State and local governments understand best how to protect our environment at the ground level," he said. "We always appreciate the chance to collaborate with our federal partners on this important work. To that end, the EPA's new policy is extremely commendable."
But for some, EPA's initiative is too little, too late.
"How ironic is it that in the last 60 days of this administration, EPA only now wants to engage with state and local governments on environmental decisions?" said Bill Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies.
DOL Publishes Final FMLA Regulation
November 17, 2008
Today the U.S. DOL published its final regulation on the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This final rule was praised by the business community as strengthening the 15 year old Act by providing needed clarity and understanding.
Highlights of the regulation include:
*Doctor's Visits: Clarifies rules on how often and when employees must see doctors. Previously, the law required employees to see a doctor twice during their leave. The new rules stipulate that those two doctor visits must take place within 30 days of beginning leave. The first visit must occur within the first seven days.
*Paid Leave: Under new rules, employees who use paid leave at the same time as family leave must follow employer rules on paid time off.
That means employees can't use vacation time to get paid time off during an unplanned leave; instead, employees must follow their employer's time-off rules.
*Notice of Leave: Employees must follow the employer's usual call-in rules for reporting an absence, except in emergencies. That may mean advance or same-day notice. Previously, employees could notify employers of plans to take family leave two days after their first absence.
*Fitness for Duty: Allows employers to require`fitness-for-duty''
evaluations for workers who took FMLA time and are returning to jobs that could endanger themselves or others.
*Military Leave: Eligible military family members will for the first time be able to take up to 26 weeks off in a 12-month period to care for a service member with a serious duty-related injury. Leave also will be granted to family members of those in the National Guard and Reserves.
Click here to see DOL's Final Rule on Family and Medical Leave fact sheet on the new rules. To view the new regulation in its entirety, click here <http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-26577.pdf.
OSHA Seeks Comments on Shipyard Asbestos Reporting
November 05, 2008
OSHA seeks public comment on its proposal to expand the reporting requirements for shipyards with respect to its asbestos standard.
The Special Issues for Comment are….
• Whether the proposed information collection requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency’s functions, including whether the information is useful;
• The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of the burden (time and costs) of the information collection requirements, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and
• Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply; for example, by using automated or other technological information collection and transmission techniques.
Today's Federal Register notice on Shipyard Asbestos Reporting can be accessed here. Comments must be submitted by January 5, 2009.
OSHA Released 2007 Non-Fatal Injury and Illness Data
November 03, 2008
OSHA has released its 2007 data of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry. The 2007 TRIR rate for Shipbuilding and Repairing, NAICS code 336611, is 8.7. The 2007 OSHA DART rate is 5.2. This is a fairly significant decline from OSHA's 2006 TRIR and DART rates for shipbuilding of 10.7 and 6.3 respectively.
The following link provides OSHA injury and illness data from 2007 on back, http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshsum.htm#06Summary%20Tables.
NAVSEA Releases FY-10 Standard Items
October 30, 2008
NAVSEA Final Report of August 2008 SSRAC announces the SSRAC web site posting of the FY-10 NAVSEA Standard Items and Appendix 4-E to Volume VII, Chapter 4 of the JFMM. The letter states that the FY-10 Standard Items shall be invoked for all CNO availabilities with an availability start date in FY-10 (on or after 01 OCT 2009) and in all other (CMAV and emergent) new procurements issued after 1 Feb 2009.
Please read the attached letter then visit http://www.sermc.surfor.navy.mil/SSRAC1/index.htm and follow the "What's New" link to view/download the items.
Corrected FY-10 Standard Item 009-77 is a correction to the subject Standard Item previously posted on the SSRAC web site. If you have already printed a copy, please replace it with the attached. The correction is in Attachment A, Cofferdam PCP Review Guide, and specifically, pages 7 and 8 of 14. The corrected copy has been posted on the SSRAC web site.
Final Log of Comments received during the preliminary review of the FY-10 products and the action taken is provided for your review.
These requirements do not authorize any change in terms, conditions, delivery schedule, price, or amount of any existing Government contract.
Linda D. Mayle
Asst NAVSEA SSRAC Coordinator
SERMC Business Office Code 1220/Standards Coordinator
Ph: 904-270-5593
FAX: 904-270-5729
linda.mayle@navy.mil
NAVSEA Standard Items FY-09 Change 2
October 29, 2008
This issues Change Two (CH-2) to the FY-09 NAVSEA Standard Items. This is a change to
009-32, Cleaning and Painting Requirements; accomplish (specifically pages 10 and 11 of 63), which allows the submission of paper QA Checklist Form Appendices as an alternative to using to the QA Tools Paperless QA program. All other requirements remain unchanged.
FY-09 SI 009-32 (change 2) is included here and on the SSRAC website in the FY-09 Standard Item download package at http://www.sermc.surfor.navy.mil/ssrac1/standard.htm.
The requirements here do not authorize any change in terms, conditions, delivery schedule, price, or amount of any existing Government contract.
Joey Cartwright
Code 106
NAVSEA SSRAC Coordinator
Office (904)-270-5722
joey.c.cartwright@navy.mil