SCOTUS Decision On Vaccine Mandate: How it Works

At 12 a.m. on January 13th, SCOTUS published a post that they would be live blogging as the court released opinions in one or more argued cases from the current term. Many experts quickly jumped to the conclusion that there was a high likelihood that the ruling on both the OSHA and CMS cases may be the highlight only to be very quickly disappointed. This early speculation led to a frustrating letdown today as SCOTUS did not release an opinion on the vaccine mandate.

If like many, you are watching the play-by-play in the news and just want a direct line to the ruling when it comes, here is some information, resources, and quick tips that may help you!

Decision Day

With SCOTUS decisions, it is not as simple as saying we will be able to tune in for X decision on X date. The U.S. Supreme Court does not set dates for releasing opinions but rather posts digitally to a public calendar when opinions will be released without noting what opinions will be included in that release. For example, SCOTUS updated its calendar yesterday for the remainder of January including the note that one new opinion would be released today. Of course, speculation began to fly as to whether the opinion released would be that on the OSHA/ETS cases.

SCOTUS Opinion Releases: How It Works

SCOTUS opinions are often accompanied by a public reading of at least part of the final decision read aloud by the Justice that authored the majority opinion. Opinions are often available for public consumption either via the live SCOTUS blog and/or a live stream (audio and/or video) on the SCOTUS website homepage. Opinion days are posted to the SCOTUS calendar and released at 10am EST on the posted calendar date. If you are watching the releases live there are a couple of good things to know:

  1. How do I know they have finished releasing opinions for a given day? Opinions are released with an associated number. These are the numbers that correspond to opinions in the left-most column on the court's opinion page. When the court releases multiple opinions on a single day, the R numbers don't appear until the court has released its final opinion of the day. So when an R number DOES appear (as it did for Babcock today), we can be sure the court is done for the day.
  2. Are there any exceptions? White flags of impatience were being raised across the SCOTUS blog this morning with many expecting and not getting the decision for the OSHA/CMS cases. Given that there are no additional opinion issuance dates on the SCOTUS calendar for the month of January, questions and frustrations began to fly. However, just because you don't see it on the calendar now, doesn't mean a decision is not imminent. 
    1. Opinion issuance days tend to only be scheduled a few days out. And with the opinion announcements purely electronic, we could theoretically get them even when the justices are theoretically on their winter recess -- a change from non-pandemic times.   
    2. Emergency applications are different: Rulings on the vaccine cases could technically come at any time (because they are on the emergency docket, so the court might not announce in advance when they are coming). 

Resources to Stay Up-To-Date with SCOTUS

SCOTUS Live Audio Feed

SCOTUS Official Opinions

SCOTUS Live Blog

SCOTUSBlog on Twitter

What Employers Should Do While Mandate Is In Limbo?

Make no mistake that both the OSHA ETS and the CMS Healthcare Mandate already have compliance obligations in effect, and you can’t wait until the Court decides in order to act.

While some employers are taking a more conservative approach opting to 'slow roll' plans, policies and issuance of guidance for employees, other employers are moving forward with full compliance anticipating the ETS surviving the Supreme Court. No matter which camp you are in, one of the most vital things needed is consistent and clear communications to your employees on what they can expect in the coming days and where the company stands in regard to implementation and requirements for Vax-or-Test policies.

Currently, OSHA is looking for good faith efforts that employers are beginning to take steps towards compliance with full implementation of the requirements beginning February 1, 2022. To better understand the implications of OSHA's timeline and the definition of 'good faith', please take a look at our more detailed post better outlining what employers need to know.


Vaccine Mandate Status: Mid-Week Update

Here we are mid-week, and employers across the nation impatiently await word from the U.S. Supreme Court as to whether they will allow the OSHA ETS requiring employers with 100 or more employees to implement vaccinate-or-test policies in the workplace.

Here's What We Know

The Supreme Court's decision is pending. Since hearing the oral arguments on Friday, January 7th, there has been plenty of speculation regarding where the ruling may land, or if the court will issue a brief administrative stay until a decision can be made. In the meantime, the first compliance deadline of the ETS is here, so what does that mean for employers awaiting this decision?

What Employers Need to Know

OSHA's initial deadline of January 10th is based upon good-faith efforts being made by employers. So, what is considered 'good-faith efforts'?

  • Employers should show that they are beginning to make efforts to comply with the mandate.
  • Company leadership should be communicating a clear approach to how they plan to comply with this new policy.
  • OSHA-covered employers must begin moving forward with a Vax-or-Test policy by
    • Determining the vaccination status of all its employees by obtaining acceptable proof of vaccination,
    • Maintain a roster of employee vaccination status,
    • Unvaccinated employees should be wearing face coverings,
    • Instate a policy for paid time off for vaccination and vaccination side effects,
    • Provide guidance on how employees should provide (prompt) notice of a positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis,
    • Ensure you are in compliance with not only the OSHA ETS, but also any state laws or mandates regarding testing, masking, vaccination, and PTO.

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on OSHA ETS

OSHA ETS: Where are we now and what do we know

The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments today on the legality of the ETS issued by the Occupational and Safety Administration in early November. Since the ETS release, legal challenges have been making their way through the legal system taking employers nationwide on a bit of a see-saw ride on whether the ETS will or will not be instituted come Monday.

Previous to the oral arguments today, on December 17th, a three-judge panel from the 6th Circuit Court of the United States lifted the latest stay and revived the ETS with immediate effect. Within hours of the ruling, an appeal was filed to the US Supreme Court by its challengers and OSHA made announcements on a timeline for enforcement.

Latest ‘Need to Know’ for Employers

Pending any overarching changes that may come from a Supreme Court ruling after oral arguments today, the ETS will take immediate effect on Monday, January 10th. OSHA has announced that it will not issue citations for noncompliance with any requirements of the ETS before January 10th, nor will it issue citations for noncompliance with the standard’s testing requirements before February 9th so long as an employer is exercising reasonable good faith efforts to come into compliance with the standard. Given that these dates are basically upon us, what next steps should an employer be focused on now?

  1. Determine if you are indeed covered by the ETS. To do so you need to answer the following:
    1. Is your workplace normally covered by OSHA?
    2. Do you have more than 100 employees nationwide?
    3. Are you exempt because you are covered by another ETS or mandate (i.e. Healthcare COVID-19 ETS or Federal Contractor mandate)?
  2. Gather vaccine status on your workforce.
    1. Develop the required vaccination roster for employees. Note whether the employee is fully vaccinated (as defined by the ETS).
    2. Determine if you will mandate vaccines or conduct testing.
  3. .Develop your vaccine-or-test policy.
    1. Create the required mandatory vaccine and/or testing/masking policies required under the ETS.
    2. Be prepared to implement said policy should the OSHA ETS move forward to enforcement or if the Supreme Court ruling does not change the current ETS status.
  4. Conduct compliance training & educate the workforce.
    1. Ready communications to inform and educate your workforce about your new policies, including posting necessary notices.
    2. Offer training for your managers to aid them in proper communication and enforcement of the said policy.
  5. Prepare a process/procedure for unvaccinated employee testing.
    1. Keep a roster of unvaccinated employees, as well as documentation of weekly test and test result.
    2. Provide a clear policy/procedure for testing and submitting test results.
    3. Keep negative/positive test results documented per employee as employees testing positive within the immediately preceding 90 days do not have to comply with a testing requirement.
    4. Provide clear policies for employees (vaccinated or unvaccinated) who may test positive for COVID-19.
  6. Handling exemptions:
    1. Federal law requires that you still need to consider and possibly accommodate valid medical and religious accommodation requests to a vaccination requirement.
    2. Ensure your policies provide provisions explaining how employees can request exemptions, including providing access to necessary paperwork, timelines for submission, and any additional policies or procedures that may impact exempt employees (such as remote work requirements, etc).

What’s Next?

Again, we wait to see what the justice system concludes. While many assumptions and predictions are being made, we simply don’t know what we don’t know. The only facts currently are, as of today (January 7, 2022):

  • The OSHA ETS is due to take effect on Monday, January 10, 2022
  • The oral arguments to both the employer mandate and the CMS rule have concluded. The US Supreme Court is expected to either institute a stay to allow additional time to review the arguments and make a ruling or, and less likely, issue an immediate ruling on the legality of the OSHA ETS and its implementation. Should a stay be issued by the high court, it is widely expected to be announced sometime over the weekend before the ETS can take effect on Monday.

Stay Tuned next week for more details as we monitor this developing situation. 

             


Senate Passes Bill to Overturn Biden Vaccine Mandate

Yesterday, in the latest blow to Biden's vaccine mandate for businesses, the United States Senate passed a bill that would overturn President Joe Biden's COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private businesses. The legislation will now go to the House of Representatives, where it potentially faces strong opposition. If it passes in the House, Biden has threatened to veto it. While this is significant in terms of the ongoing battle to prove the legality of the mandate itself, it doesn't change much for employers. So what does it all mean and what happens next?

Quick Catch Up:

  • All three orders of the vaccine mandate, (employers with over 100 employees, federal contractors and subcontractors, and health care workers), have been temporarily blocked from being enforced via separate court rulings. These rulings have effectively barred any implementation nationwide.

  • For now, there are no deadlines related to the original ETS or Executive Orders that employers are required to meet regarding COVID-19 vaccination policies or enforcement of vaccination or testing amongst employees. 

The Vaccine Mandate Timeline: 

  • 9/9/21: Biden Administration announces new COVID-19 Action plan, the first portion of which involved:
    • The signing of two new Executive Orders that would require vaccinations for all federal workers and contractors.
    • Instructed the Department of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to develop a rule requiring employers with 100 or more employees to ensure their workforce is fully vaccinated to require unvaccinated workers to produce weekly negative test results leveraging the use of an emergency temporary standard (ETS).
    • Instructed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to develop a rule requiring workers in health care settings that receive Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements to implement vaccination and testing protocols.
  • 11/4/21: The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued an emergency temporary standard (ETS) requiring large employers (100+ employees) to develop, implement and enforce a COVID-19 vaccination policy or institute a policy to allow employees to choose between vaccination and weekly testing.
    • 11/5/21: ETS took effect on 11/5/21.
    • 12/5/21: Employers were to have vaccination policies in place.
    • 1/4/22: Deadline for employers to be in compliance; employees to be fully vaccinated or begin regular testing.
  • 11/5/21: The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay on the ETS, citing challenges the plaintiffs brought against the ETS "show a great likelihood of success on the merits."
  • 11/12/21: The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals extended the original order made on 11/5/21.
  • 11/16/21: The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was selected in a lottery held by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to hear 34 consolidated challenges to the ETS.
    • The date for this hearing has not yet been scheduled. It has been noted that the court is not expected to rule on the stay until December 10th at the earliest.
  • 11/30/21: U.S. District Court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction to halt the start of President Biden's national vaccine mandate for health care workers.
  • 12/2/21: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a memo announcing it was suspending enforcement of the mandate due to U.S. District Court ruling while it appeals the court decisions.
  • 12/7/21: U.S. District Court issued a nationwide stay barring the enforcement of Executive Order 14042 for federal government contractors and subcontractors until further notice.

What's Next?

Keep an eye out for updates, particularly from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals which is the next decision expected before we wrap 2021. However, no matter the outcome at the 6th Circuit Court, this is very likely to eventually make its way to the Supreme Court. Stay tuned and stay well!


OSHA Suspends Implementation and Enforcement of ETS

On November 16, 2021, OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) published that the COVID-19 vaccination and testing ETS (Emergency Temporary Standard) is being put on hold due to pending litigation.

What We Know

  • The OSHA ETS went into effect on November 5th, 2021.
  • The ETS has two compliance dates important to employers with 100 or more employees.
  • December 5th: Employers were to finalize their policies on vaccine mandates and weekly testing requirements
  • January 4th: Employers were to be in compliance with weekly testing by this date.
  • The vaccine mandate has met legal challenges wherein on November 12, 2021, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a stay. The stay order issued by the three-judge panel directs OSHA to “take no steps to implement or enforce” the ETS.
  • Until the stay is lifted or a ruling is reached, the ETS is not in effect and employers do not need to comply with the January 4, 2022 deadline. 
  • On November 16th, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati (the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals) has won the lottery to handle the consolidated case challenging the ETS. No date has been set on when this court will make a ruling.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling

On Nov. 12, 2021, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled to extend the stay of the OSHA ETS, stating the ETS imposes financial burdens on private employers. The court also claimed that the ETS fails to account for the different elements present between workplaces. Overall, the court raised substantial questions on whether OSHA has proven that COVID-19 presents a “grave danger” to workers and if the ETS is “necessary.”

Circuit Court Lottery

Attorneys general, employers, unions, and other organizations filed 34 petitions seeking review of the OSHA rule in 12 different circuit courts, according to the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. All of the lawsuits concerning the ETS for all Circuit court districts were then consolidated and, through a "lottery drawing" the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation randomly determined which Circuit court would review the arguments.

On November 16th, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati (the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals) has won the lottery to handle the consolidated case challenging the ETS. No date has been set on when this court will make a ruling.

While the Sixth Circuit won the random draw, the lottery doesn’t necessarily end the jockeying over which court will ultimately hear the case. Parties can petition circuit courts to transfer the case elsewhere.

And no matter what happens at the circuit court level, the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to have the final say on the vaccinate-or-test emergency temporary standard. Yet the appeals court’s decision could set the table for the justices by framing the debate and raising which legal questions will determine the rule’s fate.

Next Steps for Employers

  1. Continue to monitor updates for changes in status to OSHA's ETS
  2. Be prepared in the event the ETS survives the upcoming litigation
  3. Remember employers still have a continued duty to make their workplaces safe for employees.

Statement from OSHA

OSHA released a statement on its website. The statement reads:

“On Nov. 12, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit granted a motion to stay OSHA’s ETS, published on Nov. 5, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 61402). The court ordered that OSHA ‘take no steps to implement or enforce’ the ETS ‘until further court order.’ While OSHA remains confident in its authority to protect workers in emergencies, OSHA has suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS, pending future developments in the litigation.”


OSHA ETS: Vaccination & Testing Requirements Published

OSHA ETS: Vaccination & Testing Requirements Published

UPDATE 11/5: OSHA has issued an extensive FAQ (https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/ets2/faqs) to help employers navigate the newly published ETS. Employers are expected to comply with most provisions regarding the vaccination and testing of employees by December 5th.

ETS for COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Released

 

Over the last several weeks, employers have been waiting for the official ETS to be released to provide clarity on the timeline for implementation, associated fines for non-compliance, as well as documentation and reporting requirements.

Today, November 4, 2021, OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) announced a federal emergency temporary standard (ETS) to address the health and safety risks associated with COVID-19 in the workplace. Currently, the document is unpublished and is offered for public review. The ETS is scheduled to be published on November 5, 2021.

With the official release of the unpublished ETS, requirements are now made clear. We would expect additional guidance and FAQs to be released in the coming days to provide crucial insight for employers navigating the new requirements.

 

 Who does the ETS impact?

  • Private employers with 100 or more employees
    • This is a company-wide employee count and not a per location count.

Timeline for employers to comply with the ETS

  • Most provisions will require compliance by December 5, 2021
  • Testing requirements must be met by January 4, 2021
  • State plans will have 30 days to adopt the federal ETS or implement their own standard. Those states are:
    • Alaska | Arizona | California | Hawaii | Indiana | Iowa | Kentucky | Maryland | Michigan | Minnesota | New Mexico | Nevada | North Carolina | Oregon | Puerto Rico | South Carolina | Tennessee | Utah | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | Wyoming

 

What are the ETS Requirements?

  • Develop, implement and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy; OR
  • Develop, implement and enforce a policy allowing employees to choose to either
    • get a vaccination or
    • wear a face-covering in the workplace and have weekly COVID-19 testing done.

Employer Responsibility Under the ETS

  • Determine the vaccination status of each employee
  • Obtain acceptable proof of vaccination
    • The record of immunization from a health care provider or pharmacy
    • A copy of the COVID-19 Vaccination Record Card
    • A copy of medical records documenting the vaccination
    • A copy of immunization records from a public health, state or tribal immunization information system
    • A copy of any other official documentation that contains the type of vaccine administered, date administered and name of the health care professional or clinic
    • Retain a roster of each employee’s vaccination status. These documents are considered to be employee medical records and must be maintained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1020. These records are not subject to regular retention requirements but must be retained while the ETS is in effect.
  • Any employee not able to provide one of the acceptable forms of proof of vaccination must be treated as not fully vaccinated for the purpose of the ETS. In instances where the employee is unable to produce acceptable proof of vaccination, per above a signed and dated statement by the employee, subject to criminal penalties for knowingly providing false information, including:
    • Attesting to their vaccination status (full or partial vaccination)
    • Attesting that they have lost or are otherwise unable to produce proof required by the ETS
  • The employer must report to OSHA:
    • Each work-related COVID-19 fatality within 8 hours of employer learning of the fatality
    • Each work-related COVID-19 in-patient hospitalization within 24 hours of the employer learning about the in-patient hospitalization.

 

ETS Weekly Testing Requirements

A COVID-19 test means a test for SARS-CoV-2 that is:

  • cleared, approved or authorized by the FDA
  • administered in accordance with authorized instructions
  • not self administer and self-read unless observed by the employer or an authorized telehealth proctor.

Testing Timeline and Who Must Test

  • An employee who reports at least once every 7 days to a workplace where others are present
    • Must be tested once every 7 days
    • Must provide documentation of the most recent COVID-19 test result to the employer no later than the 7th day following the date on which the employee last provided test results
  • Employees who do not report during a period of 7 or more days to a workplace where other individuals are present
    • Must be tested within seven days prior to returning to the workplace
    • Must provide documentation of that test result to the employer upon return to the workplace
  • Employers are not required to cover the cost of the testing*
    • *Note: Employer payment for testing may be required by other laws, regulations, collective bargaining agreements or other collectively negotiated agreements.

Who is Exempt from the ETS?

  • Employees who do not work with others present
  • Employees working from home
  • Employees who work exclusively outdoors
  • Employees covered under the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force
  • Employees under the Health Care ETS
  • Employers with fewer than 100 employees
  • Public employers in states without state plans
  • Employees holding a sincerely held religious belief must be allowed reasonable accommodation under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s guidelines (https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-covid-19-and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeco-laws).
  • Employees for whom a vaccine is medically contraindicated
  • Employees for whom medical necessity requires a delay in vaccination

 

What Paid Leave Provisions are in the ETS?

  • Employers are required to provide reasonable time for each employee to obtain each of their primary vaccination series and allow up to four hours of paid time at the employee’s regular rate of pay for this purpose
  • Reasonable time and paid sick leave are required for recovery from side effects of the vaccination
  • Employees must provide immediate notice of a positive COVID-19 test/diagnosis and must meet criteria before being allowed to return to work
    • No weekly testing will be required for 90 days following the date of their positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis
    • The employer must maintain a record of each test result provided by each employee
    • The employer must keep the employee removed from the workplace until the employee:
      • receives a negative result on a COVID-19 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) following a positive result on a COVID-19 antigen test if the employee chooses to seek a NAAT test for confirmatory testing;
      • meets the return to work criteria in CDC’s “Isolation Guidance”; or
      • receives a recommendation to return to work from licensed healthcare provider
      • The ETS does not require employers to provide paid time off to any employee for removal from the workplace due to a positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis

What Other Clarifications are in the ETS?

  • Prior COVID-19 Infection:
    • OSHA determined workers who have been previously infected with COVID-19 still face grave danger from workplace exposure and without additional supporting scientific evidence of immunity will still be required to comply with the standards set forth.
  • The basis for OSHA’s ‘grave danger’ finding is that employees can be exposed to the virus in almost any work setting; that exposure can lead to infection and that infection can cause death or serious impairment of health, particularly in the unvaccinated.
  • Although this ETS does not impose a strict vaccination mandate, OSHA has determined that, to adequately address the grave danger that COVID-19 poses to unvaccinated workers, a more proactive approach is necessary than simply requiring employers to make vaccination available to employees.
  • Although the ETS does not require all covered employers to implement a mandatory vaccination policy, OSHA expects that employers that choose that compliance option will enjoy advantages that employers that opt-out of the vaccination mandate option will not.
  • Under the ETS, fully vaccinated means a person’s status 2 weeks after completing primary vaccination or the second dose of a two-dose series with a COVID-19 vaccine
  • Clarification on what employers are impacted by the ETS were provided by OSHA through a series of examples:
    • If an employer has 75 part-time employees and 25 full-time employees, the employer would be within the scope of this ETS because it has 100 employees.
    • If an employer has 150 employees, 100 of whom work from their homes full-time and 50 of whom work in the office at least part of the time, the employer would be within the scope of this ETS because it has more than 100 employees.
    • If an employer has 102 employees and only 3 ever report to an office location, that employer would be covered.
    • If an employer has 150 employees, and 100 of them perform maintenance work in customers’ homes, primarily working from their company vehicles (i.e., mobile workplaces), and rarely or never report to the main office, that employer would also fall within the scope.
    • If an employer has 200 employees, all of whom are vaccinated, that employer would be covered.
    • If an employer has 125 employees, and 115 of them work exclusively outdoors, that employer would be covered.
    • If a single corporation has 50 small locations (e.g., kiosks, concession stands) with at least 100 total employees in its combined locations, that employer would be covered even if some of the locations have no more than one or two employees assigned to work there.
    • If a host employer has 80 permanent employees and 30 temporary employees supplied by a staffing agency, the host employer would not count the staffing agency employees for coverage purposes and therefore would not be covered. (So long as the staffing agency has at least 100 employees, however, the staffing agency would be responsible for ensuring compliance with the ETS for the jointly employed workers.)
    • If a host employer has 110 permanent employees and 10 temporary employees from a small staffing agency (with fewer than 100 employees of its own), the host employer is covered under this ETS and the staffing agency is not.
    • If a host employer has 110 permanent employees and 10 employees from a large staffing agency (with more than 100 employees of its own), both the host employer and the staffing agency are covered under this standard, and traditional joint employer principles apply.
    • Generally, in a traditional franchisor-franchisee relationship, if the franchisor has more than 100 employees but each individual franchisee has fewer than 100 employees, the franchisor would be covered by this ETS but the individual franchises would not be covered.


ETS from OSHA on Vaccination and Testing Released

UPDATE 11/5:

OSHA has issued an extensive FAQ (https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/ets2/faqs) to help employers navigate the newly published ETS. Employers are expected to comply with most provisions regarding the vaccination and testing of employees by December 5th.

ETS for COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Released

Over the last several weeks, employers have been waiting for the official ETS to be released to provide clarity on the timeline for implementation, associated fines for non-compliance, as well as documentation and reporting requirements.

Today, November 4, 2021, OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) announced a federal emergency temporary standard (ETS) to address the health and safety risks associated with COVID-19 in the workplace. Currently, the document is unpublished and is offered for public review. The ETS is scheduled to be published on November 5, 2021.

With the official release of the unpublished ETS, requirements are now made clear. We would expect additional guidance and FAQs to be released in the coming days to provide crucial insight for employers navigating the new requirements.

Who does the ETS impact?

  • Private employers with 100 or more employees
    • This is a company-wide employee count and not a per location count.

Timeline for employers to comply with the ETS

  • Most provisions will require compliance by December 5, 2021
  • Testing requirements must be met by January 4, 2021
  • State plans will have 30 days to adopt the federal ETS or implement their own standard. Those states are:
    • Alaska | Arizona | California | Hawaii | Indiana | Iowa | Kentucky | Maryland | Michigan | Minnesota | New Mexico | Nevada | North Carolina | Oregon | Puerto Rico | South Carolina | Tennessee | Utah | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | Wyoming

What are the ETS Requirements?

  • Develop, implement and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy; OR
  • Develop, implement and enforce a policy allowing employees to choose to either
    • get a vaccination or
    • wear a face-covering in the workplace and have weekly COVID-19 testing done.

Employer Responsibility Under the ETS

  • Determine the vaccination status of each employee
  • Obtain acceptable proof of vaccination
    • The record of immunization from a health care provider or pharmacy
    • A copy of the COVID-19 Vaccination Record Card
    • A copy of medical records documenting the vaccination
    • A copy of immunization records from a public health, state or tribal immunization information system
    • A copy of any other official documentation that contains the type of vaccine administered, date administered and name of the health care professional or clinic
    • Retain a roster of each employee's vaccination status. These documents are considered to be employee medical records and must be maintained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1020. These records are not subject to regular retention requirements but must be retained while the ETS is in effect.
  • Any employee not able to provide one of the acceptable forms of proof of vaccination must be treated as not fully vaccinated for the purpose of the ETS. In instances where the employee is unable to produce acceptable proof of vaccination, per above a signed and dated statement by the employee, subject to criminal penalties for knowingly providing false information, including:
    • Attesting to their vaccination status (full or partial vaccination)
    • Attesting that they have lost or are otherwise unable to produce proof required by the ETS
  • The employer must report to OSHA:
    • Each work-related COVID-19 fatality within 8 hours of employer learning of the fatality
    • Each work-related COVID-19 in-patient hospitalization within 24 hours of the employer learning about the in-patient hospitalization.

ETS Weekly Testing Requirements

A COVID-19 test means a test for SARS-CoV-2 that is:

  • cleared, approved or authorized by the FDA
  • administered in accordance with authorized instructions
  • not self administer and self-read unless observed by the employer or an authorized telehealth proctor.

Testing Timeline and Who Must Test

  • An employee who reports at least once every 7 days to a workplace where others are present
    • Must be tested once every 7 days
    • Must provide documentation of the most recent COVID-19 test result to the employer no later than the 7th day following the date on which the employee last provided test results
  • Employees who do not report during a period of 7 or more days to a workplace where other individuals are present
    • Must be tested within seven days prior to returning to the workplace
    • Must provide documentation of that test result to the employer upon return to the workplace
  • Employers are not required to cover the cost of the testing*
    • *Note: Employer payment for testing may be required by other laws, regulations, collective bargaining agreements or other collectively negotiated agreements.

Who is Exempt from the ETS?

  • Employees who do not work with others present
  • Employees working from home
  • Employees who work exclusively outdoors
  • Employees covered under the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force
  • Employees under the Health Care ETS
  • Employers with fewer than 100 employees
  • Public employers in states without state plans
  • Employees holding a sincerely held religious belief must be allowed reasonable accommodation under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidelines (https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-covid-19-and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeco-laws).
  • Employees for whom a vaccine is medically contraindicated
  • Employees for whom medical necessity requires a delay in vaccination

What Paid Leave Provisions are in the ETS?

  • Employers are required to provide reasonable time for each employee to obtain each of their primary vaccination series and allow up to four hours of paid time at the employee's regular rate of pay for this purpose
  • Reasonable time and paid sick leave are required for recovery from side effects of the vaccination
  • Employees must provide immediate notice of a positive COVID-19 test/diagnosis and must meet criteria before being allowed to return to work
    • No weekly testing will be required for 90 days following the date of their positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis
    • The employer must maintain a record of each test result provided by each employee
    • The employer must keep the employee removed from the workplace until the employee:
      • receives a negative result on a COVID-19 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) following a positive result on a COVID-19 antigen test if the employee chooses to seek a NAAT test for confirmatory testing;
      • meets the return to work criteria in CDC’s “Isolation Guidance”; or
      • receives a recommendation to return to work from licensed healthcare provider
      • The ETS does not require employers to provide paid time off to any employee for removal from the workplace due to a positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis

What Other Clarifications are in the ETS?

  • Prior COVID-19 Infection:
    • OSHA determined workers who have been previously infected with COVID-19 still face grave danger from workplace exposure and without additional supporting scientific evidence of immunity will still be required to comply with the standards set forth.
  • The basis for OSHA's 'grave danger' finding is that employees can be exposed to the virus in almost any work setting; that exposure can lead to infection and that infection can cause death or serious impairment of health, particularly in the unvaccinated.
  • Although this ETS does not impose a strict vaccination mandate, OSHA has determined that, to adequately address the grave danger that COVID-19 poses to unvaccinated workers, a more proactive approach is necessary than simply requiring employers to make vaccination available to employees.
  • Although the ETS does not require all covered employers to implement a mandatory vaccination policy, OSHA expects that employers that choose that compliance option will enjoy advantages that employers that opt-out of the vaccination mandate option will not.
  • Under the ETS, fully vaccinated means a person's status 2 weeks after completing primary vaccination or the second dose of a two-dose series with a COVID-19 vaccine
  • Clarification on what employers are impacted by the ETS were provided by OSHA through a series of examples:
    • If an employer has 75 part-time employees and 25 full-time employees, the employer would be within the scope of this ETS because it has 100 employees.
    • If an employer has 150 employees, 100 of whom work from their homes full-time and 50 of whom work in the office at least part of the time, the employer would be within the scope of this ETS because it has more than 100 employees.
    • If an employer has 102 employees and only 3 ever report to an office location, that employer would be covered.
    • If an employer has 150 employees, and 100 of them perform maintenance work in customers’ homes, primarily working from their company vehicles (i.e., mobile workplaces), and rarely or never report to the main office, that employer would also fall within the scope.
    • If an employer has 200 employees, all of whom are vaccinated, that employer would be covered.
    • If an employer has 125 employees, and 115 of them work exclusively outdoors, that employer would be covered.
    • If a single corporation has 50 small locations (e.g., kiosks, concession stands) with at least 100 total employees in its combined locations, that employer would be covered even if some of the locations have no more than one or two employees assigned to work there.
    • If a host employer has 80 permanent employees and 30 temporary employees supplied by a staffing agency, the host employer would not count the staffing agency employees for coverage purposes and therefore would not be covered. (So long as the staffing agency has at least 100 employees, however, the staffing agency would be responsible for ensuring compliance with the ETS for the jointly employed workers.)
    • If a host employer has 110 permanent employees and 10 temporary employees from a small staffing agency (with fewer than 100 employees of its own), the host employer is covered under this ETS and the staffing agency is not.
    • If a host employer has 110 permanent employees and 10 employees from a large staffing agency (with more than 100 employees of its own), both the host employer and the staffing agency are covered under this standard, and traditional joint employer principles apply.
    • Generally, in a traditional franchisor-franchisee relationship, if the franchisor has more than 100 employees but each individual franchisee has fewer than 100 employees, the franchisor would be covered by this ETS but the individual franchises would not be covered.

OSHA Proposes Change to Electronic Record-Keeping Rule

On July 30, OSHA submitted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would eliminate the requirement for worksites with 250 or more employees to electronically submit certain data. Continue reading to learn more.


Worksites with 250 or more employees would not be required to electronically submit certain data to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) under a proposal to roll back an Obama-era rule.

The Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses rule requires employers that are covered by OSHA's record-keeping regulations to electronically submit certain reports to the federal government. Certain establishments with 20-249 employees are required to submit only OSHA Form 300A each year—300A is a summary of workplace injuries and illnesses that many employers are required to post in the workplace from Feb. 1 until April 30 of each year.

In addition to Form 300A, larger establishments (those with 250 or more employees) were supposed to begin submitting data from Form 300 (the injury and illness log) and Form 301 (incident reports for each injury or illness) in July. However, in May, OSHA announced that it would not be accepting that information in light of anticipated changes to the rule.

As expected, on July 30, OSHA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to eliminate the requirement for large establishments to electronically submit information from Forms 300 and 301.

"OSHA has provisionally determined that electronic submission of Forms 300 and 301 adds uncertain enforcement benefits, while significantly increasing the risk to worker privacy, considering that those forms, if collected by OSHA, could be found disclosable" under the Freedom of Information Act, the agency said.

The electronic record-keeping rule has faced considerable opposition from the business community, in part because some of the data submitted will be made available to the public.

The proposed rule would also require employers to submit their employer identification numbers (EINs) when e-filing Form 300A. "Collecting EINs would increase the likelihood that the Bureau of Labor Statistics would be able to match data collected by OSHA under the electronic reporting requirements to data collected by BLS for the Survey of Occupational Injury and Illness," the agency said.

Anti-Retaliation Rules Remain

OSHA's electronic record-keeping rule also contains controversial anti-retaliation provisions. These provisions, which went into effect in December 2016, give OSHA broad discretion to cite employers for having policies or practices that could discourage employees from reporting workplace injuries and illnesses. For example, the provisions place limitations on safety incentive programs and drug-testing policies. OSHA has said that employers should limit post-accident drug tests to situations where drug use likely contributed to the incident and for which a drug test can accurately show impairment caused by drug use.

Prior to the new rules, many employers administered post-accident drug tests to all workers who were involved in an incident. The anti-retaliation provisions create another layer of ambiguity for employers, because they have to justify why they tested one person and not another, which may lead to race, gender and other discrimination claims, said Mark Kittaka, an attorney with Barnes & Thornburg in Fort Wayne, Ind., and Columbus, Ohio.

OSHA has not announced any plans to revise the electronic record-keeping rule any further. Many employer-side stakeholders were disappointed that OSHA made no effort to revise the anti-retaliation provisions, said John Martin, an attorney with Ogletree Deakins in Washington, D.C.

There are still undecided lawsuits in federal courts that challenged these provisions back when they were first issued but have been put on hold while revisions were pending, Martin noted. OSHA's proposed revision clearly did not resolve all of the challengers' concerns, so they are now deciding whether to ask the courts to resume litigation, he said.

What Now?

Employers should keep in mind that OSHA's electronic record-keeping rule refers to "establishment" size, not overall employer size, Kittaka said. An establishment is a single physical location where business is conducted or where services or industrial operations are performed, according to OSHA.

Large employers still need to electronically submit 300A summaries for each work establishment—office, plant, facility, yard, etc.—with 250 or more employees, Martin said. If they have work establishments with 20-249 employees and they are covered by OSHA's high-hazard establishment list, then they must also submit 300A summaries for those smaller establishments.

The proposed rule is open for public comment until Sept. 28. "OSHA made clear in the proposed rule that the agency was only seeking comments on the electronic submission and EIN" proposals, said Tressi Cordaro, an attorney with Jackson Lewis in Washington, D.C.

SOURCE: Nagele-Piazza, L (14 August 2018) "OSHA Proposes Change to Electronic Record-Keeping Rule" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/osha-proposes-change-to-electronic-record-keeping-rule.aspx/


New Workers Are at Highest Risk for Heat-Related Death

Did you know new employees or workers coming back from an extended break are at more risk of heat stroke? It is important to make sure these workers review safety procedures and gradually build up their tolerance to the heat. See the article by Dana Wilkie below and make sure your new workers are safe.

Original Post from SHRM.org

Who would you guess is most at risk for heat-related death while on the job?

It’s not necessarily older workers, first responders or those who toil outside all day.

Instead, the majority of recent heat-related deaths investigated by federal authorities involved workers who’d been on the job for three days or less.

That finding by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) highlights how important it is for employers to ensure that new workers—and returning employees who have been back to the job for a week or less—are prepared to protect themselves, OSHA authorities said.

With weather forecasters calling for above-average temperatures across much of the country this summer, the standard precautions—drink lots of water, take frequent breaks and spend time in the shade—may seem obvious. Yet those precautions may not be enough for new workers or employees returning to the job after extended time away. OSHA recommends allowing new or returning workers to gradually increase their workload and take more frequent breaks as they build up a tolerance for working in the heat.

Prevention

 Construction workers make up about one-third of heat-related worker deaths, but employees who work outdoors across many industries—agriculture, landscaping, transportation, utilities, grounds maintenance, emergency response, and oil and gas operations—are at risk when temperatures go up. Additionally, indoor employees who do strenuous work or wear bulky, protective clothing and use heavy equipment are also at risk. High humidity increases the chances of heat-related maladies such as heat exhaustion or heat stroke.

In 2014, 2,630 workers suffered from heat illness, and 18 died from heat stroke and related causes on the job, according to OSHA.

Under the general duty clause of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, employers are responsible for protecting workers from hazards on the job, including extreme heat. To prevent heat-related illness and fatalities, OSHA offers these suggestions:

  • Prepare a heat acclimatization plan and medical monitoring program. Closely supervise new employees, including those who are temporary workers or returning seasonal workers, for the first 14 days on the job—or until they acclimate to the heat. Though most heat-related worker deaths occur in the first three days on the job, more than one-third occur on the first day. If someone has not worked in hot weather for at least a week, his or her body needs time to adjust.
  • Encourage workers to drink about one cup of water every 15-20 minutes, even if they say they’re not thirsty. During prolonged sweating lasting several hours, they should drink sports beverages containing electrolytes.
  • Provide shaded or air-conditioned rest areas for cooling down, and encourage workers to use them.
  • Provide workers with protective equipment and clothing, such as hats, light-colored clothing, water-cooled garments, air-cooled garments, ice-packet vests, wetted overgarments, and heat-reflective aprons or suits.
  • Be familiar with heat illness signs and symptoms, and make sure employees are, too. Some heat exhaustion signs are dizziness, headache, cramps, sweaty skin, nausea and vomiting, weakness, and a fast heartbeat. Heat stroke symptoms include: red, hot, dry skin; convulsions; fainting; and confusion. In general, any time a worker has fainted or demonstrates confusion, this represents an emergency situation.
  • Tell workers to notify a supervisor or to call 911 if they or their co-workers show signs of heat illness. Implement a buddy system where workers observe each other for early signs and symptoms of heat intolerance. Have someone stay with a worker who is suffering from the heat until help arrives.
  • Encourage supervisors and workers to download OSHA’s Heat Safety Tool on their iPhone or Android device. [https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/heatillness/heat_index/heat_app.html] This app calculates the heat index, a measurement of how hot it is when taking humidity into account. The app also has recommendations for preventing heat illness based on the estimated risk level where one is working.

Dana Wilkie is an online editor/manager for SHRM.

Read original article here.

Wilkie, D. (2016, June 6). New workers are at highest risk for heat-related death [Web log post]. Retrived from https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/employee-relations/Pages/New-Workers-Are-at-Highest-Risk-for-Heat-Related-Death.aspx


In Case of: Effective Responses to Workplace Emergencies

Original post business.com

Within sixty seconds of its launch on November 14, 1969, the Apollo 12 spacecraft was struck twice by lightning, which caused critical navigation systems and fuel cells to shut down.

A N.A.S.A. engineer who remembered his training for a similar scenario immediately recommended a fix, which saved the entire mission and quite possibly the lives of the Apollo 12 astronauts.

Four months later, those same engineers faced and successfully responded to challenges that they never anticipated with the ill-fated Apollo 13 mission.

Emergencies can and do happen in every workplace, but it does not take a rocket scientist to plan for them or to fashion an intelligent response when they do happen.

Emergencies and Violence: The Stats

Workplace emergencies are not limited to high-tech or high-risk operations light rocket launches. Statistics compiled by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reveal more than 23,000 employee were injured in 2013 solely from workplace assaults.

The latest data available from the BLS show that the annual rate of workplace violence has held steady for more than twenty years, and violence continues to be the second leading cause of employee fatalities after transportation accidents.

This does not even account for injuries or fatalities that result from other workplace emergencies, including fires, natural disasters, chemical spills and contamination, or civil disturbances or terrorism. In 2010, more than three million workers suffered injuries following workplace emergencies. How a business responds to emergencies is typically a function of the nature of the emergency itself.

What Is Categorized as an Emergency? 

OSHA defines a workplace emergency as an “unforeseen situation that threatens your employees, customers, or the public; disrupts or shuts down your operations; or causes physical or environmental damage”.

Most individuals might limit their concept of a workplace emergency to newsworthy, large-scale evacuations caused by natural or man-made causes, but lesser-scale emergencies are far more common. One employee might suffer an injury or a sudden medical event.

A small fire might be easily contained by sprinkler systems, but that fire will be no less disruptive of business operations than a larger conflagration. A single disgruntled individual can start an emergency situation that shuts a business down for days. If that individual is armed, the emergency becomes a national tragedy.

OSHA has issued Emergency Action Plan standards for workplace emergencies that are codified in the Federal Regulations. Those standards define, for example, when and where businesses need to have fire extinguishers, building evacuation plans, and medical emergency response protocols.

The New Focus: Armed Shooter Scenarios

Because of high-profile publicity and responses, businesses are also becoming more attuned to armed shooter scenarios. Although not without objection or controversy, some workplaces are training employees in a run/hide/fight protocol that was popularized by a video produced by the City of Houston.

The gist of that protocol is to train employees first to run from an armed assailant. If running is not possible, the employees should hide, and if hiding is impossible, only then should employees attempt to fight the assailant.

Technology can be a boon during a workplace emergency if it is used as a tool and not a solution. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) places a high priority in communication technology in emergencies. Excessive reliance on technology can be a downfall, however, if an emergency removes the option to use technology. Businesses should consider deeper contingency plans in the event that the emergency takes down their communication networks.

A Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) is a notification that is sent to mobile devices in cases of tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis and other serious emergencies. These emergency alerts are complimentary public safety service provided by participating wireless service providers. But, if employees have trouble with cellphone reception inside their workplace, they may or may not receive these alerts.

If workplaces were able to plan for all possible workplace emergencies, then to the extent that they were anticipated those events would not be emergencies. The responses by the NASA engineers in the Apollo program are more instructive in developing an effective workplace emergency response plan.

The Apollo 12 lightning strike shows the efficacy of contingency planning for potential emergencies and trusting an employee to implement his or her training when the emergency happens.

The engineer who recommended the solution after the lightning strike was in his early twenties, but his co-workers and the ship’s crew had developed enough of a cohesive relationship and a sense of trust among themselves that they did not hesitate to implement his solution.

During the Apollo 13 mission, the entire workforce again worked cohesively toward a common purpose to develop an effective response that, almost fifty years later, remains one of NASA’s finest efforts.

A workplace will not always have the luxury of implementing thorough contingency training to prepare for an emergency. A business’s ability to survive a workplace emergency is on a par with the conduct of its regular business operations. As with other aspects of those operations, the most effective emergency response requires mutual employee trust and cohesiveness.