No, he’s saying the law has issues, and was unnecessary because Cal/OSHA already does this. The biggest issue with the language in this bill is that it removes the regulators from the loop to enforce issues, and puts the honus on the employer, which creates a problem. Basically, the if a worker makes a claim, then the employer would have to prove it wasn’t their fault, and not OSHA as it is now. It creates a loophole that will certainly be abused on all sides.
The article seems to have more points in favor of the vetoed bill than against it. It didn’t say OSHA would have a diminished role in the process but it did say thus far OSHA has been lacking in it’s duties. The biggest opponents to the bill have been business interests so it seems like this would’ve been a net benefit to workers.
It didn’t say any of that. You’re reading into what you want to read into it. I follow this closely.
Cal/OSHA hasn’t been lacking in it’s duties (no idea where you even got that from), in fact, they just pushed for immediate changes in the regulations earlier this year. Here’s more specifics if you want to read what it covers.
The biggest opponents to the bill weren’t just businesses, but you can read their take here. Plenty of others were opposed, including local politicians, and legal scholars. I think what you’re reading into is “if business is against it…BAD.” Which isn’t always the case. As you can read elsewhere, the loopholes created here are massive, and creates a presumption of guilt pretty immediately without requiring any verification from OSHA, should a complaint be made. That’s how they are removed from the loop.
If this had passed, it would have been defeated in court, causing way more money waste than than actually fixing the problem, which the bill doesn’t. It just makes it easier for people to get compensation claims with zero evidence, and it would have been abused by claimants and businesses alike.
I mean I want to read the truth so I’m sorry I took the article, which someone else shared, at face value:
The legislation came as many farmworkers continue to labor in unsafe conditions and Cal/OSHA confronts a severe staffing shortage that is hampering its ability to enforce heat regulations for outdoor workers.
But nearly two decades after the rules were first enacted, ensuring compliance has remained challenging.
A 2022 study by the UC Merced Community and Labor Center found that many farmworkers were still laboring without the protections. Of more than 1,200 workers surveyed, 43% reported that their employers had not provided a heat illness prevention plan and 15% said they had not received heat illness prevention training.
No, he’s saying the law has issues, and was unnecessary because Cal/OSHA already does this. The biggest issue with the language in this bill is that it removes the regulators from the loop to enforce issues, and puts the honus on the employer, which creates a problem. Basically, the if a worker makes a claim, then the employer would have to prove it wasn’t their fault, and not OSHA as it is now. It creates a loophole that will certainly be abused on all sides.
This article actually goes into it more: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-09-28/gavin-newsom-vetoes-bill-intended-to-enforce-heat-safety-rules-for-california-farmworkers
The article seems to have more points in favor of the vetoed bill than against it. It didn’t say OSHA would have a diminished role in the process but it did say thus far OSHA has been lacking in it’s duties. The biggest opponents to the bill have been business interests so it seems like this would’ve been a net benefit to workers.
It didn’t say any of that. You’re reading into what you want to read into it. I follow this closely.
Cal/OSHA hasn’t been lacking in it’s duties (no idea where you even got that from), in fact, they just pushed for immediate changes in the regulations earlier this year. Here’s more specifics if you want to read what it covers.
The biggest opponents to the bill weren’t just businesses, but you can read their take here. Plenty of others were opposed, including local politicians, and legal scholars. I think what you’re reading into is “if business is against it…BAD.” Which isn’t always the case. As you can read elsewhere, the loopholes created here are massive, and creates a presumption of guilt pretty immediately without requiring any verification from OSHA, should a complaint be made. That’s how they are removed from the loop.
If this had passed, it would have been defeated in court, causing way more money waste than than actually fixing the problem, which the bill doesn’t. It just makes it easier for people to get compensation claims with zero evidence, and it would have been abused by claimants and businesses alike.
I mean I want to read the truth so I’m sorry I took the article, which someone else shared, at face value: