CODY — The Biden administration recently proposed a new Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule aimed at protecting workers from extreme heat exposure. This regulation, while potentially life-saving, could impose significant costs on employers.

The proposed rule, announced on July 2, requires employers to develop comprehensive heat illness prevention plans. 

These plans would include measures such as providing water, mandatory rest breaks, and monitoring for heat-related symptoms when temperatures reach certain thresholds. Specifically, employers must ensure hydration and breaks when the heat index hits 80 degrees Fahrenheit and offer paid rest pauses every two hours once it reaches 90 degrees Fahrenheit.

Doug Parker, OSHA’s Assistant Secretary of Labor, emphasized the urgency of this regulation, stating, “Workers at risk of heat illness need a new rule to protect them from heat hazards. OSHA is working aggressively to develop a new regulation that keeps workers safe from the dangers of heat.” 

This sentiment is echoed by public health advocates who highlight the rising number of heat-related fatalities, with more than 200 deaths reported last year alone.

However, the proposed rule has sparked controversy, particularly among business groups and industry associations. 

Critics argue that the regulation is both unnecessary and financially burdensome. They point to the acclimatization requirements, which mandate a gradual increase in work hours for new or returning employees, as particularly onerous.

 “The financial implications of compliance could be substantial, especially for small businesses already struggling in a tough economic climate,” noted an industry representative.

Despite these concerns, the need for such regulations is underscored by alarming statistics. 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported over 2,200 heat-related workplace fatalities last year, a number that is likely underestimated due to underreporting. Public health experts argue that the proposed rule, if enacted, could significantly reduce these numbers by providing consistent and enforceable standards across all industries.

The regulation’s path to finalization is fraught with potential obstacles, including political opposition and legal challenges. 

The upcoming election could play a pivotal role in determining the rule’s fate. President Biden’s potential second term might facilitate the rule’s approval, whereas a Republican administration could impede its enactment.

In Wyoming, the impact of this proposed rule is a significant concern for ranchers, farmers, and construction companies, who have employees working outdoors in extreme conditions. 

Gov. Mark Gordon, a rancher himself, expressed his concerns, stating, “While protecting our workers is paramount, the costs associated with implementing these new regulations could be crippling for small operations like ours. We need a balanced approach that ensures safety without putting us out of business.”