NJBIA testified on Thursday against legisation that would mandate expedited regulations on heat stress at indoor and outdoor work sites, noting the bill’s vague language and overly broad enforcement mechanism will drive up the cost of doing business in New Jersey and spur litigation.
The Assembly Labor Committee voted to release the bill with technical amendments following several hours of testimony from scores of business and labor groups.
“For our members, the prevention of employee illness through exposure to heat has always been and continues to be a critical part of maintaining an effective workplace safety program,” NJBIA Vice President of Government Affairs Elissa Frank wrote in a memo to the committee prior to her testimony.
“However, our members have found that it would be extraordinarily difficult for them to comply with this legislation given its sheer impracticality, vagueness, costs, and industrial workplace-oriented standards that do not fit the needs of all businesses and clearly makes New Jersey an outlier regarding this new overly burdensome mandate,” Frank said.
The legislation would require the state Labor Commissioner to adopt regulations on what constitutes “excessive heat.” Until those rules are adopted, the legislation defines excessive workplace heat as 85 degrees Fahrenheit or above at both indoor and outdoor job sites. However, at indoor workplaces where “employees wear clothing that restricts heat removal” or work in a “high radiant heat area,” the standard would be 80 degrees.
Frank noted the bill would force employers to stop work during periods of “excessive heat” unless a worker’s duties are deemed essential.
“An expansive definition of ‘non-essential’ could result in long-term closure of businesses; employers will struggle to determine what is ‘non-essential;’ and disputes over whether tasks are essential will lead to unnecessary litigation,” Frank said.
“This excessive requirement would have a host of unintended consequences, including smaller paychecks for employees, disruptions to the normal course of business, and companies rethinking their decision to do business in our state during the summer.”
Frank also noted that NJBIA has grave concerns with the bill’s provision giving the State Commissioner of Labor the authority to issue a stop-work order affecting all operations at company worksites, including facilities where no violations occurred.
“This bill would allow for the smallest of administrative errors to result in a company shuttering its operations across the state, not just its one facility accused of a violation,” Frank told the committee. “Hypothetically, a business with 100 locations across the state may have to close each establishment and send workers home if the Labor Commissioner issues a stop-work order to one site. Such a provision would be unique among U.S. jurisdictions and would even exceed federal OSHA’s powers.”
Frank noted the bill imposes a costly mandate on both private and public employers and makes New Jersey even less affordable to live and do business. She noted state taxpayers would also bear the cost of hiring more employees to enforce heat regulations, because this type of work is normally done by the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
“State agencies and their existing staff do not regulate occupational or workplace safety across the state’s employers; federal OSHA does,” Frank said. “If enacted, this legislation would require a significant expenditure to hire new employees.
“State agencies are preparing to implement substantial budget cuts, which will likely impact public services that businesses rely on, such as permitting, infrastructure maintenance, and workforce development programs,” she said. “Introducing new expenditures and mandates under these conditions risks further burdening the business community and governmental entities and undermining efforts to support economic growth.”
