Protecting OSHA's Jurisdiction over Home Workplaces

[摘要]

The American Public Health Association,

Considering that a fundamental goal of public health is to protect the health and well-being of the US workforce in manufacturing as well as other types of industry; and

Recognizing that working at home can be a positive option with benefits that include reduced commuting time and increased flexibility; and

Considering that due to cost-saving strategies and/or use of new technologies, private households are becoming hazardous worksites for contingent, flexible, or non-standard arrangement workers in the manufacturing and services sectors of the economy;¹ and

Considering the violations identified by the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) following a complaint from home manufacturing workers in California;² and

Considering that the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act² covers private sector employees in businesses of two or more workers, regardless of where employees are carrying out the work (with certain exceptions such as family farms and nuclear workers); and

Acknowledging that current economic projections from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics predict growth in “home work” occupations such as home assemblers, garment laborers, home care personnel, and clerical workers;³ and

Acknowledging that OSHA’s lack of enforcement in the traditional workplace leaves the door open for abuses in the home;⁴ and

Acknowledging that OSHA does not cover self-employed persons and primarily enforces in response to a complaint, which raises practical issues in the implementation when the employer may be a family member or a neighbor; and

Recognizing that home assembly workers are exposed to lead, acid, and fluxes, solvents, and solders that may endanger their health as well as that of their family members though systemic poisoning and other mechanisms;^3,5-7 and

Considering that these assembly workers are often vulnerable populations such as pregnant or immigrant women that work at home without proper ventilation, respirators, or protective clothing,^2,3,5-7 or that children may be in, or working in these homes; and

Noticing that home office workers, in particular, female home-based clerical workers, who are characterized by employers as “independent contractors,” are most vulnerable to gender-based discrimination and to health risks such as low wages, quota systems, lack of health benefits, lack of safety coverage, and increased job insecurity;^3,7,8 and

Considering that home clerical workers are also at greater risk of ergonomic injuries such as repetitive motion injuries, because they often work under piece rate or quota systems, systems that are experiencing a comeback among US industries;⁷ and

Whereas that home work weakens the capacity of these workers to organize and defend their health rights in the workplace due to forced isolation, therefore

1. Urges that OSHA regulations be enforced among employees, employers, or contractors in home offices and home workplaces, including requirements for employee training and reporting of homework injuries and illnesses on the OSHA log 200 forms, while respecting the privacy of individual homes;
2. Calls upon Congress, the Secretary of Labor, and the secretary of Health and Human Services to designate National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) as the federal agency in charge of developing a national and ongoing occupational injury and illness surveillance system for “home work.” “home offices,” “work at home,” and similar non-standard workplace arrangements;
3. Urges the federal government to increase its financial support for NIOSH to pursue the aforementioned home workplace occupational and injury surveillance system; and
4. Calls upon the members of the Congress to actively oppose legislation that will severely limit OSHA’s inspections of home offices and would not hold employers accountable for occupational injuries in home workplaces. 

References

1. Landsbergis PA, Cahill J, Schnall P. The impact of lean production and related new systems of work on worker health. J Occup Health Psychol. 1999;4:108-130.
2. Santa Clara Center for Occupational Safety and Health. Statement to OSHA on need for OSHA coverage of home workers. San Jose, CA. Submitted 2000.
3. Daniels CR; Daniels E, (eds), Homework: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Paid Labor at Home. Christiansen K, Home-based Clerical Work, 1989; pp. 183, 189-190.
4. McQuisson TH, Zakocs RC, Loomis D. The case for stronger OSHA enforcement-Evidence from evaluation research. Am J Public Health, 1998; 88:1022-1024.
5. LaDou J; Rohm TJ, Occupational hazards in the microelectronics industry. Occupational Medicine.
6. Mayhew C; Quinlan M. The effects of outsourcing on occupational health and safety: A comparative study of factory-based workers and outworkers in the Australian clothing industry. International J Health Services. 1999; 29 (1): 83-107; 1999.
7. US House of Representatives, Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, Home-based Clerical Workers: Are They Victims of Exploitation? Washington, DC GPO 1986.
8. Hurrel JJ. Are you certain? Uncertainty, health, and safety in contemporary work. Am J Public Health. 1998; 88:1012-1013.

Back to Top

[发布日期] 2000-01-01

[学科分类] 医学（综合）