OSHA Issues Memo Regarding Discretion in Enforcement When Considering an Employer’s Good Faith Efforts During COVID-19
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.20.20
On April 16, 2020, OSHA issued guidance entitled, “Discretion in Enforcement when Considering an Employer's Good Faith Efforts During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic” to announce that it will assess during an inspection an employer's efforts to comply with standards that require annual or recurring audits, reviews, training, or assessments in considering whether a citation should issue for non-compliance. The following were offered as examples:
- Annual Audiograms
- Annual Process Safety Management Requirements (Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) Revalidation, Review of Operating Procedures, and Refresher Training)
- Hazardous Waste Operations Training
- Respirator Fit Testing and Training
- Maritime Crane Testing and Certification
- Construction Crane Operator Certification
- Medical Evaluation
Compliance officers will evaluate whether the employer thoroughly explored all options to comply with the applicable standard(s); any interim alternative protections implemented or provided to protect employees, such as engineering or administrative controls; and whether the employer took steps to reschedule the required annual activity as soon as possible. Where an employer cannot comply with OSHA’s requirements because local authorities required the workplace to close, the employer should demonstrate a good-faith attempt to meet the applicable requirements as soon as possible following the re-opening of the workplace.
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
AI Companies Prevail in Path-Breaking Decisions on Fair Use
Last week, artificial intelligence companies won two significant copyright infringement lawsuits brought by copyright holders, marking an important milestone in the development of the law around AI. These decisions – Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta (decided on June 23 and 25, 2025, respectively), along with a February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence – suggest that AI companies have plausible defenses to the intellectual property claims that have dogged them since generative AI technologies became widely available several years ago. Whether AI companies can, in all cases, successfully assert that their use of copyrighted content is “fair” will depend on their circumstances and further development of the law by the courts and Congress.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
FDA Targets Gene Editing Clinical Trials in China and other “Hostile Countries”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25