Connect with us

Washington

OSHA proposes rule to protect workers exposed to extreme heat

Published

on

OSHA proposes rule to protect workers exposed to extreme heat


The Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposed a rule Tuesday outlining steps employers must take to protect indoor and outdoor workers from the risk of heat illness, the first major regulation aimed at preventing heat-related deaths on the job.

The rule, if finalized, could add protections for 35 million workers nationwide. But it will face opposition from industry groups and major hurdles beyond that, including the possibility that Donald Trump could win a second term and block the rule from becoming final.

“The purpose of this rule is simple. It is to significantly reduce the number of work-related deaths, injuries and illnesses suffered by workers who are exposed to excessive heat and exposed to these risks while simply doing their jobs,” OSHA Assistant Secretary of Labor Doug Parker said on a call with reporters.

“Whether they are making deliveries, carrying mail all day, working construction, picking vegetables, repairing power lines, doing landscaping. It’s these things that put workers at risk.”

Advertisement

OSHA officials have been working on the proposed regulation for more than two years at the urging of public health and climate advocates.

The proposal comes as summertime heat envelopes the United States and the hottest month of the year gets underway. At the beginning of this week, over 60 million Americans were under heat alerts.

Excessive heat warnings now cover much of California, including in and around San Francisco, and the National Weather Service office that serves much of California’s Central Valley warned of a “dangerous, prolonged heat wave that will last several days.” Southeastern states are also facing hot and soupy weather and at least 45 million Americans will probably have to endure highs at or above 100 degrees this week.

Under the proposed rule issued Tuesday, OSHA would adopt two heat index thresholds that would apply nationally and would factor in humidity as well as temperature. One, at 80 degrees Fahrenheit, would require employers to provide drinking water and break areas that workers can use as needed. Employers would also need to have a plan for new and returning workers to gradually increase their workload so their bodies adjust to the heat.

More protections would kick in at 90 degrees, including monitoring for signs of heat illness and mandatory 15 minute rest breaks every two hours. Employers would be required to check on people working alone every few hours and to issue a hazard alert, reminding their workers of the importance of staying hydrated.

Advertisement

Juley Fulcher, a worker health advocate for the nonprofit Public Citizen, which has pushed for a national heat standard, said the proposal is based on scientific research on how the body responds to heat and borrows from state workplace heat safety laws. So far, only five states have such protections: California, Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon and Washington. Workers in Maryland could soon gain protections — there is a draft rule that is not yet final.

Fulcher praised the OSHA proposal, saying the agency had “done a really good job.” Although some Americans might balk at the suggestion they need protection from 80 degree weather, Fulcher said it’s important to remember that official temperature readings are taken in the shade. Once you factor in sunlight and humidity, an 80 degree day can feel more like 95 or 100, she said.

“If you’re doing really heavy work, you’re generating a lot of internal heat in addition to that external heat,” she said. “You’re not going to be able to cool off at those temperatures.”

The rule doesn’t cover everyone. “Sedentary” employees are exempt from the protections, as are those in indoor job sites kept below 80 degrees, emergency response workers and remote employees. And, because OSHA regulations do not extend to public employees, the regulation won’t apply to government workers and public school teachers, many of whom are confronting increasingly high temperatures in school buildings without air conditioning.

Some businesses and industry groups are gearing up for a battle over a regulation many see as burdensome, redundant and expensive.

Advertisement

Critics have made their displeasure known in letters to the agency. Some industries have argued they are already protecting employees from heat and that a new regulation would be duplicative or, worse, get in the way of what they’re doing. They have pushed back against the rule’s expected acclimatization requirements, which would mandate a gradual ramping up of work hours during high heat. Some have questioned the entire initiative, saying that a workplace heat rule is unnecessary because not many workers die of heat exposure.

From 1992-2019, the Bureau of Labor Statistics found there were an average of 32 heat-related workplace fatalities per year. There were 43 such deaths in 2022, up from 36 in 2021.

Agency officials and public health advocates say these numbers underestimate the scale of the problem, given underreporting and the difficulty of attributing a death to heat. Workplace data aside, deaths from heat in the U.S. have steadily increased in recent years, exceeding 2,200 last year.



Source link

Advertisement

Washington

Judge tosses Trump Media’s $3.8 billion defamation suit against The Washington Post | CNN Business

Published

on

Judge tosses Trump Media’s .8 billion defamation suit against The Washington Post | CNN Business


Another one of President Donald Trump’s lawsuits against a news organization has fizzled out.

This time, it is a defamation lawsuit that the Trump Media and Technology Group brought against The Washington Post in 2023 over a story titled “Trust linked to porn-friendly bank could gain a stake in Trump’s Truth Social.”

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out the suit, saying that Trump Media “failed to present evidence that would allow a jury to find by clear and convincing evidence” that The Post “published the allegedly defamatory statements with actual malice.”

US District Judge Thomas Barber’s conclusion came during the summary judgment phase of the case, when a judge can evaluate evidence and make a determination before proceeding to trial.

Advertisement

The Post’s lawyers argued that Trump Media could not prove “actual malice,” the high legal standard that public figures must meet to prevail in a defamation case. It means that the defendant either knew a claim was false or displayed “reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”

The Post’s reporter who wrote the story in question, Drew Harwell, “thoroughly investigated” the subject and “had confidence in the article’s accuracy at the time of publication,” the newspaper’s lawyers wrote.

In a summary docket entry last week, first reported by Reason magazine, Barber sided with the Post. He said he would issue a full opinion later.

The Post itself reported on the legal victory on Tuesday. “We are pleased with the court’s decision and look forward to reviewing its written order upon release,” a spokesperson told CNN.

A spokesperson for Trump Media did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment, but the company told The Post, “We believe a jury should decide whether these falsehoods were actionable and will evaluate whether to appeal last week’s ruling in due course. We will also continue to hold the media accountable.”

Advertisement

Trump Media positions itself as an opponent of, and an alternative to, traditional tech and media companies. It is best known for operating Truth Social, a relatively small social network favored by the president.

The publicly traded company has been losing money for years; it made less than $1 million in revenue in the first quarter of this year, according to public filings.

The company has repeatedly filed lawsuits over news coverage it deemed false. A defamation lawsuit against The Guardian and other defendants was thrown out by a different Florida judge last November. Trump Media initially filed an amended complaint, but then dropped the matter altogether in April.

Trump Media’s suit against the Post accused the newspaper of a “conspiracy” to harm the company and sought $3.8 billion in damages.

The lawsuit lawyers succeeded in narrowing the case considerably and asserted that Truth Media could not satisfy the “heavy burden” of the actual malice standard.

Advertisement

In May, while awaiting the judge’s ruling, The Post published a correction to the 2023 story stating that “discovery in the ongoing litigation has established” that two assertions in the story were incorrect. But the correction emphasized that the assertions were “based on The Post’s reporting at the time of publication.”

Trump and his businesses have a long history of getting publicity from lawsuits, only to see judges later throw them out.

In April, a federal judge dismissed Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal over its reporting on a lewd birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein bearing his name. Trump refiled that suit in May. He also has pending litigation against the BBC, The New York Times and the Des Moines Register.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Washington records world’s worst air quality for a city after 850,000 Fourth of July fireworks

Published

on

Washington records world’s worst air quality for a city after 850,000 Fourth of July fireworks


Washington DC residents breathed in “unhealthy” air for hours after a 40-minute Independence Day fireworks show over the National Mall on Saturday night, with the country’s capital briefly recording the worst air quality of any major city in the world.

The highly emitting display, which the president called “spectacular”, came as the Trump administration rolls back an unprecedented number of pollution controls.

Hourly concentrations of particulate matter rose to 6.7 times their pre-fireworks levels, according to a Tuesday analysis from the company Clarity Movement based on its network of 26 air quality sensors throughout the city in partnership with the local department of energy and environment. Every one of those sensors reached air quality levels which the Environmental Protection Agency deems “unhealthy for sensitive groups” during the event, the researchers found, with some recording even worse levels of emissions.

Levels of particulate matter peaked at 4am on Sunday, approximately five hours after the display concluded, according to the new analysis. It remained elevated for approximately five hours after reaching its peak, the authors found, with city officials issuing a Code Red alert.

Advertisement
Smoke hangs in the air as the Independence Day fireworks launch over Washington. Photograph: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

“Outdoor air quality is unhealthy for seniors, kids, people with medical conditions,” the alert said. “General public may experience health issues. Limit time outside.”

The south-west region of DC experienced the highest pollution levels, the report’s authors found, probably because of its proximity to one of the fireworks launch sites in West Potomac park, as well as overnight meteorological conditions that trapped smoke over the area.

That highly polluted air probably drifted into Arlington, Virginia, said David Lu, CEO and co-founder of Clarity Movement.

“Unfortunately, we don’t have sensors there to confirm it,” he said. “That’s exactly why expanding real-time air quality monitoring matters. Without comprehensive coverage, communities can be exposed to significant pollution events that go undetected.”

The air quality across the city could have been even worse in the aftermath of the display if it were not for thunderstorms that struck the city on Sunday evening.

Advertisement
Smoke hangs in the air as the Independence Day fireworks launch over Washington. Photograph: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

“Despite the scale of the fireworks display, the city’s air quality avoided a worst-case scenario thanks to favorable weather conditions and the timing of the event,” said Lu.

The Fourth of July fireworks show, organized by the Trump-backed non-profit Freedom 250, began at 11pm on Saturday evening. It involved more than 850,000 fireworks launched from 10 sites across the capital, the organizers said. (A typical Independence Day show in DC involves just 17,000 shells.)

Trump on social media called the show “the Most Spectacular Fireworks Show I have ever seen, and I’ve seen them all”.

The fanfare came as the region was baking under an extreme heatwave, which brought triple-digit temperatures to the city hours earlier. For a time after the fireworks show, the city recorded the worst air quality of any major city in the world, according to AirNow, the Environmental Protection Agency website that reports air quality measurements from its monitoring stations.

Asked to comment, a White House spokesperson, Taylor Rogers, said: “It was the largest and greatest firework display in the history of our country to properly celebrate America’s 250th birthday! Every year, fireworks on the Fourth of July cause short-term spikes in air quality across the United States, including Washington, DC. This was not unique to the 250th fireworks celebrations in our nation’s capital.”

Advertisement

The Guardian has contacted Freedom 250 for comment.

Americans shoot nearly 300m lb of fireworks into the atmosphere every year, according to the American Lung Association, letting off lung-harming gases such as sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.

The Trump administration has, since re-entering office, engaged in a wide-ranging assault on pollution controls, exempting polluting facilities from emissions regulations, boosting coal power, and halting the consideration of the value of lives saved when restricting fine particulate matter and ozone. On 4 July, the president also pardoned nine individuals convicted of violations related to the Clean Air Act, including people found to have tampered with emissions control equipment in cars or selling parts to bypass air pollution standards.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Question of the week: What does Santana Moss think of Washington’s WR depth?

Published

on

Question of the week: What does Santana Moss think of Washington’s WR depth?


The Washington Commanders are looking for a bounce back performance from their offense, and they’ll need their wide receivers to take a step up to do so.

Terry McLaurin is the clear No. 1 option at the position, but after him, there are several questions about how the rest of the room will shake out. The No. 2 spot is wide open, and there are several players who could fit the role and others in David Blough’s new scheme. Analysts Santana Moss, Logan Paulsen and Fred Smoot broke down the position on one of the most recent “Command Center” podcast episodes, and as one of the franchise’s all-time best receivers, Moss had a few thoughts on the group. Here’s his assessment on three wideouts and how they could fit into the offense.

“Knowing that he can play both outside and inside, I would think with some of the guys and their size and their experience, I would mainly probably see Antonio attack that middle. I think his route running ability is already to the level of some of these guys who have already played at this level. And just showing me that you don’t look like that this is new to you … He ain’t scared to go out and compete against these guys. To me — and we don’t know anything; we’re just sitting here speculating and assuming — I’d say he’s a slot guy out the gate.”

“I think if I had to just say if I look at that paper, and I asked any coach in this building by name how they think this guy played…if you tell me that Burks played well this offseason, he would be my No. 2 out the gate. He would be my No. 2 wide receiver because one: he brings size, he brings speed, he brings a gear at that size that a lot of people ain’t comfortable checking … You got a guy with size, leaping ability, the catch radius and can run.”

Advertisement

“They talk about how he was one of those guys from Day 1 that could play every position, and that’s stemming from him being a quarterback. Quarterbacks learn the game a little different from just a regular skill position guy. Luke came in here, and he knew X, he knew Z, he knew Gator. When you have those intangibles and you have that kind of mindset when it comes to playing that position, they can use him where they want to use him. That’s why I said he’s a great committee guy. He’s a guy that I know I’m gonna have on special teams as a returner, and guess what? If he’s not the starter, I’m okay with that because I know I’m going to ask more of him if somebody needs to take a breather.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending