The NAM joined with hundreds of companies and other associations in a brief 11/13/02 on the appeal of an adverse ruling in a case where the business community challenged the validity of Washington's new ergonomics regulation. The brief argues in part that the issuance of the rule violated the Regulatory Reform Act of 1995 by not having a cost-benefit analysis prior to adoption, that the eventual cost-benefit analysis was poor, and that the Department exceeded its statutory authority in attempting to regulate simple physical activity in the workplace.On 11/4/03, Washington voters approved the ballot initiative rescinding the Washington State ergonomics rule. The initiative would also bar the state from adopting another ergonomics rule unless a federal standard is put in place. The overreaching ergo regulation would have required all employers (private and public) to identify jobs likely to cause "work-related musculoskeletal disorders." Employers then would have been required to do whatever was "technologically or economically feasible" to eliminate ergonomic hazards. This state regulation was as bad as the old Clinton federal ergonomics regulation.
A big congratulations to the Washington State business community--especially the NAM ’s state affiliate, The Association of Washington Business-- for its part in rescinding the regulation. This is a very big victory for all of the business community especially manufacturers. It is also a substantial loss for the unions because future adoption of comprehensive, but misguided, ergonomics rules at the state level will be even more difficult.