The problem with publishing OSHA 300 logs
OSHA’s proposal to publish online the workplace injury and illness reports from companies with more than 250 workers may at first blush sound like a good idea in this age of transparency, but there are some good reasons not to do this.
Many companies under OSHA’s jurisdiction have to make an annual report to the Bureau of Labor Statistics on illnesses and injuries on their worksites, and these reports, called OSHA 300 logs, are posted for employees to see. But as my colleague Jim Stanley’s comments to The Wall Street Journal and National Public Radio illustrate, those logs don’t tell the whole story.
The logs contain statistical data on injuries and illnesses, but provide no insight as to the cause. Was an accident caused, for example, by an employee who violated safety rules? That is certainly a possibility, but the natural assumption by a member of the public reading these reports would likely be that the company was at fault. That would potentially create an unfair hit on the employer’s reputation.
In addition, that potential reputational damage may discourage some employers from fully reporting. There are gray areas in the definitions of reportable injuries or illnesses, and some employers may be inclined to fudge.
But the biggest question about the proposal is this: What will publication of these reports do to increase protection for workers? That is a question without a good answer.
1 Comment
I agree that these logs would cause reputation damage. It’s only allowing a one sided story, and from because of this, the company might not be able to defend themselves or get their story out there. Thanks for sharing!