New Jersey Leads Challenge to DOL's Rollback of Workplace Injury Reporting
The lawsuit by New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota and New York says the Department of Labor acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner in ending the reporting rule.
March 06, 2019 at 04:04 PM
3 minute read
The rollback of rules at the U.S. Department of Labor requiring large employers to report workplace injuries and illnesses has drawn a challenge from attorneys general in six states.
The action by New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota and New York says the Department of Labor acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner on Jan. 25 when it rolled back a 2016 rule governing reporting of injuries.
That rule, which requires large employers to submit information annually from three different workplace injury and illness tracking forms that employers were already required to maintain, was intended to help the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and employers identify safety hazards and encourage their abatement. But three years later, OSHA reversed course, claiming that the rule provided little benefit and undermined workers' privacy, according to the state's lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
In making the change, the Department of Labor violated the Administrative Procedures Act by failing to provide the significant justification that the act demands, including showing there are good reasons for the new policy, the suit argues. That burden is especially important where a new policy rests on factual findings that contradict those which underlay its prior policy, according to the suit. The states seek declaratory and injunctive relief vacating the 2019 final rule and preventing its implementation.
Before the 2016 rule change, employers were required to keep records of workplace injuries on three forms: Form 300, which provides basic information about each incident and its outcome; Form 300A, which provides a summary of the number, types and outcomes of all injuries; and Form 301, which provides a more detailed account of each injury and how it occurred, as well as information about the employer's line of business. Employers were required to keep completed forms on file and to make them available to federal or state inspectors on request.
The 2016 rule change required companies with 250 or more employees to annually submit information from the three forms to the Department of Labor, which intended to make the information available online after removal of personally identifiable information.
The suit names the Department of Labor, OSHA, Labor Secretary R. Alexander Acosta and acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Loren Sweatt as defendants. New Jersey is the lead agency on the plaintiff side of the suit.
“By making public reports of workplace injuries and illnesses harder to access, the Trump Administration is jeopardizing the health, safety, and wellness of our workers,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “Simply put: we cannot properly tackle workplace safety issues if we do not know about them.”
“Public reporting of workplace safety information helps states enforce our labor laws, forces employers to remove hazards, and empowers workers to demand improvements,” New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal said in a statement. “Workers deserve that transparency, and the federal government should not be trying to take it away.”
The suit by the state attorneys general follows a similar challenge to the rollback of reporting requirements that was filed in January by Public Citizen and two public health organizations.
A media contact at the Department of Labor did not respond to a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
DOJ: TD Bank Agrees to Pay $3B Over Anti-Money Laundering Program Violations
2 minute readWhat Judicial Nominations Could Look Like Under a President Harris or Trump
Binance Sued After $30 Million in Crypto Stolen and Allegedly Laundered on Platform
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250