Season 3, Episode 12: OSHA in 2025: What Employers Need to Know Now

OSHA's General Duty clause applies to everybody. It's essentially a catchall safety requirement, even when there's no specific OSHA standard that applies to a particular hazard, and it requires employers to provide a workplace that's free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees at the workplace.

Now, this general duty clause can also be used as support for common law claims of negligence that could be brought by third parties. So even if OSHA is not enforcing in the same way that it did under other administrations, which we can talk about in a bit, there's still a lot of struggles that employers need to be aware of and risks in not adhering to OSHA standards and the general duty clause.

Daniel Schwartz: Yeah, that's a great point that it doesn't really so much matter about who is running OSHA versus whether employers are actually just following the duty to keep a workplace safe from hazards. So maybe that's a good transition though, to really dive into it. So, what is. OSHA's role today under the Trump administration, and what sort of changes are employers actually seeing on the ground?

Sarah Kettenmann: OSHA hasn't disappeared despite some early speculation. There was a bill that was brought by a representative, Andy Biggs in Arizona to abolish OSHA. Probably has no teeth, but this administration has already made some dramatic changes, but OSHA is still very much active. The Trump administration has appointed leadership with strong industry ties.

So, to me, that signals a shift toward a more business friendly approach. And there may be fewer regulations, but there aren't fewer responsibilities.

Daniel Schwartz: So, are inspections like still happening and, what does this current inspection landscape look like? I suppose when compared with recent years,

Sarah Kettenmann: Inspections are still happening and that's at the state and federal levels.

So, the number of inspectors may be down, especially at the federal level. We can discuss that more when we talk about enforcement. And in a nutshell, inspections are just more strategic. Now we know that OSHA is using data analytics to target high risk employers, so if your injury rates are high or if you've had complaints, you're still very much on OSHA's radar.

Daniel Schwartz: So, are we seeing more of these high profile enforcement actions or are they seeming to focus on particular types of violations?

Sarah Kettenmann: There's certainly certain violations, repeat violations will face more frequent OSHA inspections at your workplace, and there is at the same time. A clear move toward deregulation and voluntary compliance.

The administration is pushing across the board for a 10-to-1 rollback ratio, so for every 10 regulations removed, for every new one that's added. And so, this has withdrawn certain rules and in turn certain enforcement, but keep in mind, the general duty clause is still in place.

Daniel Schwartz: Yeah. You had mentioned that there's been this push to roll back some roles. In the previous Biden administration there were a number of major safety rules - I think there was a heat illness prevention standard was one. What's the status of rules like that and, for employers that started preparing for the rules? What do we do now?

Sarah Kettenmann: That's a great question, Dan. So, starting with the rules, the high-profile rules from the Biden administration, honestly, they're in limbo. So, we have the heat stress rule stalled at the federal level. That said, states like California, Oregon, even Connecticut, are enforcing their own versions and proposing their own versions.

There's also a PPE rule as for personal protective equipment that went into effect. In January of this year, it requires that PPE has to fit properly, and it applies to all types of PPE in construction for hard hats, gloves, safety glasses, et cetera. It was promulgated to address concerns among women, and workers with more diverse body types that have inadequate standard sized PPE.

So that rule is still in place. The heat injury proposed rules. It seems to be uncertain at this point. So, the Trump administration hasn't taken any concrete measures to eliminate the rule, but it is on pause, and so OSHA could end up issuing it in its own form or the current form, scrapping it or revising it to reduce burden on employers.

Daniel Schwartz: Yeah, and I would think with the cutbacks at the Department of Labor and just in terms of staff, we've seen it at the EEOC level. Certainly those cutbacks have impacted the Department of Labor and OSHA. So when we think about that, have we seen any major strategic shifts yet in how OSHA approaches enforcement, or are we taking a little bit of a wait and see approach there?

Sarah Kettenmann: Definitely. So, like I said, there is a clear move towards deregulation and voluntary compliance and the rollback strategy that I mentioned earlier with the 10-to-1 ratio, it's. To reduce perceived burdens on business, but it also means that employers need to be more proactive. So, there's less handholding, but more expectation that you know the rules as employers.

Inspections are down, but they're not gone. So, if somebody loses a limb, OSHA's still showing up. Remember now that self-reporting is the new norm. There's also penalties that are climbing, whistleblower complaints are on the rise, and regional offices are really looking- they're still out for blood after major accidents.

Daniel Schwartz: Yeah, and I think a point you brought up earlier about states, there are state components to OSHA compliance that we would certainly think are gonna be on the rise. If the federal government's taking a step back, certain states are definitely gonna be stepping forward, right?

Sarah Kettenmann: Absolutely. California is consistently the model and the kind of cowboy and the path forward. But states like Connecticut are putting together rules and enforcement actions at the same time.

Daniel Schwartz: Switching gears a little bit, you've talked about all of these enforcement actions and we're also seeing a rise in environmental cases sort of things that touch on both subjects. And there was that Norfolk Southern derailment that happened in the last few years that involved both OSHA and the EPA.

So can you just talk about these environmental regulations and how employers should be thinking about the intersection between the two.

Sarah Kettenmann: Absolutely. It's a great point that you raised. So OSHA, it often works behind the scenes with agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. These are silent partners, they help shape enforcement priorities, especially in industries dealing with hazardous materials. With regards to the East Palestine derailments, both EPA and OSHA launched coordinated investigations. EPA focused, of course, on environmental cleanup. Public health and OSHA insured worker safety during hazardous material handling.

The case has actually sparked broader discussions on rail safety, regulatory reform, and corporate responsibility, and it shows that multi-agency collaboration matters. That accountability was central to the derailment. Norfolk-Southern was held responsible for cleanup and safety violations. And really the case acted as a wakeup call.

It's, it has prompted national conversations about emergency preparedness and the need even for stronger regulations. So cross-agency coordination is real. And as employers, if you're storing chemicals or generating emissions or managing waste. You are probably well aware that you're being watched by both EPA and OSHA, and they do share the data that's generated.

Daniel Schwartz: Yeah, so before I get into sort of some practical stuff about what employers should be doing, are there certain industries or regions that we're seeing heightened OSHA attention? I'm thinking, I've heard the headlines about a recent focus on warehouse operations or scrutiny of construction sites. Is that sort of what you're seeing on the ground as well?

Sarah Kettenmann: Absolutely. Fall protection is still the most frequently cited citation. It's the violation that comes up with construction, and scaffolding and so protecting workers against falls from heights over six feet. That's been consistently the highest cited violation across the country.

Daniel Schwartz: Yeah, as someone who has a little bit of a fear of heights, I can understand that. So, what's the biggest misconception that you hear from employers about OSHA compliance today?

Sarah Kettenmann: It's a great question, Dan. I think the biggest myth is that OSHA has gone soft and the reality is. Enforcement is still happening. It's just happening differently. Like we said at the beginning of our podcast, you're still gonna see negligence claims by third parties. Maybe it's unions, maybe it's employees. If there aren't OSHA protections saying that there's a violation of the general duty clause. Then with regards to OSHA, the agency itself - the tone might be more cooperative, but expectations haven't changed. And if anything, it seems like the burden is shifting more onto employers to prove that they're doing the right thing. Remember that OSHA fines and penalties are still real. One serious violation can cost tens of thousands of dollars, even an other than serious violation starts at $16,000 per incident. So prevention is always cheaper than penalties.

Daniel Schwartz: Yes, and cheaper than lawyers involved in the penalties too. I would add. So, it's summer of 2025 when employers may be listening to this. What should employers be doing right now to ensure they're staying compliant?

Sarah Kettenmann: Employers should continue to stay updated. Hopefully this is not a new change in direction - to stay updated on changes at the federal and state level with respect to OSHA and state level OSHA document everything. Record keeping is critical. Document training, document incidents, document inspections. I would say conduct regular internal audits, be prepared for inspections and the heat illness prevention plans that we talked about, the proposed and promulgated rules - in California, Oregon, and proposed in Connecticut and even at the federal level, you should implement a heat illness prevention plan if you're in a hot weather state. And one other thing I wanted to raise is. An overlooked tool we've seen with our clients is a job hazard analysis. So, this is a simple but powerful way to identify risks before they become violations.

It shows OSHA that you're serious about safety, and also don't forget about training. It's not just about checking a box. It's making sure your team actually understands risks and how to respond. If there's an incident on your site and OSHA comes to inspect and interviews your employees and they say: I don't know anything about training. No, we haven't done training. And you say, oh no, we do. We do these trainings. You know it. It's not gonna show OSHA strong enough evidence to put together a decreased proposed citation. So it's important to make sure your team understands risks and how to respond to them. I'd also suggest conducting regular audits, including for PPE, use and availability.

Daniel Schwartz: Sarah, that's a great point, and this has been really helpful. I know I've learned a lot here. So before we wrap up, is there anything that employers should know that we haven't already covered here?

Sarah Kettenmann: Thank you, Dan. I think that really the takeaway is what we started with and has been a consistent theme throughout this podcast.

It's to be prepared and to take steps with regards to training, record keeping, auditing, et cetera, to make sure that if and when an incident happens at your workplace, you are prepared to respond and you have data backing up to show that you have insured a safe workplace environment.

Daniel Schwartz: Terrific. Thank you again, Sarah, for taking the time out to join us.

For any of our listeners who want to dig deeper into these topics, Sarah and the rest of our employment team at Shipman & Goodwin is obviously here to help. And you can find our contact information in our show notes or at. Shipmangoodwin.com. So that will wrap up this episode from lawyer to employer. I want to give you a heads up that September 30th in New Haven, we will have our first in-person Labor and Employment seminar that we've had in a number of years. Obviously when COVID happened, we move everything online, but we've heard from clients and friends that you would still like to get back to an in-person one. So we have that scheduled for the afternoon of September 30th. More details will be coming out.

Over the summer, as I mentioned at the start of the show, we're gonna take some time off from recording and we will be back with an all-new season of podcast episodes, probably in about early September. If you have any topics that you'd like us to talk about, just drop me a line. Always love hearing from you.

If you found today's episode helpful, please subscribe and share it with other business leaders who could benefit from these. Practical legal insights. Until then, have a great summer. Stay safe, stay compliant. As always, good legal advice isn't just about avoiding problems, it's about enabling your success.

So, thanks again for listening.

Host: Thank you for joining us on this episode of From Lawyer to Employer, a Shipman podcast. This podcast is produced and copyrighted by Shipman & Goodwin LLP. All rights reserved. The contents of this communication are intended for informational purposes only and are not intended or should not be construed as legal advice.

This may be deemed advertising under certain state laws. Subscribe to our podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcast, Google Podcast, or wherever you listen. We hope you'll join us again.