AGC remains actively involved in litigation against OSHA’s Worker Walkaround Representative Designation Process final rule (walkaround rule), which allows an unlimited number of non-employee third-party representatives, including activists or even competitors, to access employer worksites during OSHA inspections.
AGC remains actively involved in litigation against OSHA’s Worker Walkaround Representative Designation Process final rule (walkaround rule), which allows an unlimited number of non-employee third-party representatives, including activists or even competitors, to access employer worksites during OSHA inspections. After joining the U.S. Chamber-led lawsuit in March 2024, AGC filed a legal brief asking the court to declare the rule unlawful, vacate it, and prevent its enforcement. AGC also presented evidence of harm to the industry (i.e., standing declaration), highlighting compliance cost impacts to AGC members.
Our main arguments are straightforward: OSHA’s new rule would force employers to allow third parties to enter worksites during inspections. This goes beyond what Congress intended when it passed the law that governs workplace safety. We also argue that this rule infringes on employers’ property rights by allowing unauthorized people onto private worksites without just compensation. Additionally, OSHA did not follow the necessary steps under the Administrative Procedures Act when making this rule, by failing to provide a reasonable explanation for the rule or account for its costs. The government responded by seeking to dismiss the case or win outright, arguing we lacked valid claims or legal standing to sue. We anticipated this and filed a strong opposition and reply brief, reinforcing our arguments and the rule’s negative impact on the construction industry.
AGC continues to highlight concerns over the lack of a formal process for selecting employee representatives, unclear guidelines on verifying third-party qualifications, risks to workplace confidentiality, and increased costs and liability concerns, where unqualified individuals could gain access. In response, OSHA recently issued new guidance to inspectors on determining whether a third-party representative is needed and whether the selected representative is qualified.
The court will hear the case later this year, and we remain committed to opposing this regulatory overreach that poses risks to the construction industry. Stay tuned for updates as the case progresses.
For more information, contact Leah Pilconis or Kevin Cannon.