Asunción Valdivia, a 53-year old father and farmworker at a Giumarra vineyard in California, died after laboring to pick grapes for ten straight hours in 105-degree heat. When he collapsed, his employer told Valdivia’s son, Luis, who was also working in the field, to drive him to the hospital, but Valdivia died before they arrived.
In Valdivia’s memory, on July 10, Reps. Judy Chu and Raúl Grijalva paved the way to protecting outdoor and indoor workers across the nation from extreme heat by introducing the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness and Fatality Prevention Act (H.R. 3668).
Valdivia is among 815 workers who died on the job because of extreme heat between 1992 and 2017, based on cases documented by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Tens of thousands more workers have suffered illnesses and injuries from exposure to excessive heat. Extreme heat poses the greatest risk to outdoor workers, such as those in agriculture and construction, but it also affects indoor workers, such as in the warehousing industry (e.g., Amazon). And the toll of deaths and injuries is continuing to climb as the climate crisis brings higher temperatures and humidity.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is well aware that extreme heat poses a significant risk to workers. In fact, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) first recommended OSHA adopt a standard to protect workers from heat more than 40 years ago in 1972. NIOSH has updated its recommendations twice, in 1986 and again in 2016. Yet OSHA has remained unwilling to develop safeguards, even denying a rulemaking petition by Public Citizen and other public interest groups in 2011 and failing to reply to a new petition filed in 2018 on behalf of more than 125 organizations, including the Center for Progressive Reform.
The new legislation mandates that OSHA adopt a nationwide standard to safeguard indoor and outdoor workers from excessive heat within 42 months of the bill’s enactment. If OSHA fails to propose a standard within two years, the bill requires the agency to adopt an interim final standard while it works to develop a permanent one. OSHA’s final heat standard must take NIOSH’s 2016 recommendations into consideration and include, at a minimum, the following:
To learn more about this new bill, tune in on July 11 at 10:15 a.m. Eastern time for a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, "From the Fields to the Factories: Preventing Workplace Injury and Death from Excessive Heat."
Showing 2,832 results
Katie Tracy | July 11, 2019
Asunción Valdivia, a 53-year old father and farmworker at a Giumarra vineyard in California, died after laboring to pick grapes for ten straight hours in 105-degree heat. When he collapsed, his employer told Valdivia’s son, Luis, who was also working in the field, to drive him to the hospital, but Valdivia died before they arrived. […]
Robert L. Glicksman | July 9, 2019
Originally published by The George Washington Law Review. Reprinted with permission. Imagine a world in which administrative agencies whose actions are challenged in court are afforded little respect and even less deference from reviewing courts. Imagine further that congressional efforts to vest authority in these agencies to act as guardians of public health and safety, […]
Daniel Farber | July 8, 2019
Originally published on Legal Planet. The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Kisor v. Wilkie was eagerly awaited by administrative law experts. It is one skirmish in the ongoing war over deference to agencies. In this case, the issue was whether to overrule the Auer doctrine, which requires courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation […]
James Goodwin | July 2, 2019
Last night, CPR Member Scholar Amy Sinden and I published an op-ed in The Hill explaining the dangers of a new rulemaking recently launched by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Andrew Wheeler and former air office Assistant Administrator Bill Wehrum. Through this rulemaking, Wheeler and Wehrum – both former industry lobbyists – will kick off […]
Daniel Farber | July 1, 2019
Originally published on Legal Planet. In a recent decision, four of the conservative Supreme Court Justices indicated a desire to limit the amount of discretion that Congress can give administrative agencies. If taken literally, some of the language they used would hobble the government by restricting agencies like EPA to "filling in the details" or […]
Alice Kaswan | June 27, 2019
The Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, the Trump administration's recently released substitute for his predecessor's Clean Power Plan (CPP), has been widely criticized as an ineffectual mechanism for addressing power plants' greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. More broadly, the rule substitutes a technocratic, plant-by-plant approach for the more comprehensive and participatory state planning required by the […]
Daniel Farber | June 27, 2019
Originally published on Legal Planet. Gundy v. United States was a case involving a fairly obscure statute regulating sex offenders, but some have seen it as a harbinger of the destruction of the modern administrative state. In a 4-1-3 split, the Court turned away a constitutional challenge based on a claim that Congress had delegated […]
Hannah Wiseman | June 26, 2019
The EPA released its finalized rule for carbon emissions from existing power plants last week. The agency calls the rule the "Affordable Clean Energy" (ACE) rule, but it would be better named the "Advancing Coal Energy" rule given its explicit aim to keep old, dirty coal-fired power plants running. A bit of background first for […]
Evan Isaacson | June 26, 2019
On June 21, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its evaluation of the third and final round of state Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) under the Chesapeake Bay restoration framework known as the "Bay TMDL" (Total Maximum Daily Load). EPA's evaluation of the seven Bay jurisdictions broke no new ground regarding the quality or contents of […]