Many workplace injuries go unreported to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, witnesses told a House Committee today, but the reason for the underreporting was a matter of debate.

OSHA reporting activity was called into question at the outset of the hearing by House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif.

"Every time top officials at the Department of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Administration have appeared before Congress, they have cited declining injury, illness and fatality numbers to demonstrate their effectiveness at protecting America's working men and women," he noted.

However, he added that "a growing amount of evidence" shows that the reported decline may have as much to do with a lack of reporting of injuries as any improvements made by OSHA, and he suggested the self-reporting system used may be a contributing factor.

"This flawed system gives employers an incentive to underreport injuries: The fewer injuries and illnesses an employer reports, the less likely it will be inspected by OSHA and the more likely it will pay lower premiums for workers' compensation," he said.

Dr. Kenneth Rosenman, a professor of Medicine at Michigan State University, said that numerous studies over the past 20 years have found evidence of significant underreporting.

"There is no disagreement in the medical literature that an undercount exists and that this undercount is significant," he said.

Dr. Rosenman cited a study from the University of California at Davis showing that the current system misses 33-to-69 percent of all nonfatal work-related injuries at a cost of $170 billion annually in 1992 dollars.

He also mentioned a Boston University study showing that the current system misses up to 50 percent of work-related injuries based on seven states. His own work, he added, found that the current system misses 66 percent of the work-related injuries and illnesses in Michigan across all industries and injuries.

"In summary, the current system to count work-related injuries and illnesses has been repeatedly studied and shown by researchers to have a large undercount," he said. "Expert panels that have reviewed the current system have reached a similar conclusion."

However, Baruch Fellner, a partner at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP who spoke on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said that those studies are misleading, and that they fail to take into account the differences in the data.

Studies such as those mentioned by Dr. Rosenman, he said, provide an "apples to oranges" comparison based on broader databases, such as workers' compensation information, that include many workers that do not fall under OSHA's jurisdiction.

Additionally, he noted that even the definition of the term "injury" differs between OSHA and the over 50 jurisdictions governing workers' compensation.

The existence of a difference between a workers' comp list and the OSHA data shows the notion "that something is deliberately going on to cook the OSHA books" is a "misconception," he said.

Bob Whitmore, the former chief of the OSHA Division of Recordkeeping at the U.S. Department of Labor, told the committee that the low rates reported by OSHA and supported by OSHA audits are "bogus" from his experience. Mr. Whitmore noted at the outset of his testimony that he is currently suspended from his official duties, and that his testimony was that of a "concerned citizen" rather than a government official.

"I contend that the current OSHA Injury and Illness information is inaccurate, due in part to wide-scale underreporting by employers and OSHA's willingness to accept these falsified numbers," he said.

Mr. Whitmore noted that congress in 1992 enacted legislation mandating that OSHA better quantify its findings through a "report card," but he said the agency responded by simply keeping fewer records.

"OSHA ceased virtually any meaningful recordkeeping enforcement actions after 1991. Unfortunately, rather than aggressively pursuing programs to try and insure accurate numbers, OSHA's leadership turned its backs on such pursuits," he said. "Sadly, OSHA's primary mission--trying to insure worker safety--was lost in their attempt to obtain and publicize a better report card."

Mr. Whitmore also noted "one important institutional factor" that he said had dramatically influenced what he said was OSHA's lax policy on data. "Regardless of the political party in power," he said, "steady annual declines in the number of workplace injuries and illnesses makes it appear that OSHA is fulfilling its mission."

Special Reports /

House Panel Witnesses: OSHA Injury Count Is Flawed

Related Stories

Recommended For You