1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |OSHA Issues Memo Regarding Discretion in Enforcement When Considering an Employer’s Good Faith Efforts During COVID-19

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.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.03.26

Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules on Interest Due in Cartel Damages Cases

In a judgment that will have direct and immediate consequences, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that for all competition damages actions brought after 26 December 2014, interest runs from the date on which the harm occurred. The ruling addressed two important questions: (1) whether national provisions implementing Article 3(2) of the EU Damages Directive — which requires interest to run from the date harm occurred —apply to cases in which the harm preceded the adoption of those provisions; and (2) how the date of harm should be determined in cartel cases involving the purchase of goods at inflated prices....

View All Insights