Proposition 97: Cal-OSHA Funding Plan : Cal/OSHA: A ‘Life, Death’ Issue on Ballot

A broad-based coalition of business, environmental, labor and law enforcement leaders has opened the campaign to pass Proposition 97, which would restore the state worker health and safety program abolished last year by Gov. George Deukmejian.

“This is a life-and-death issue,” declared Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner, chief spokesman for the Yes on 97 forces, at a press conference here on Friday.

After Deukmejian’s action, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) took over protection of California’s private sector. In the first six months, work-related deaths increased by 53% over a comparable period under Cal/OSHA, Reiner said. “Thirty-five people died who shouldn’t have died,” he said.

Deukmejian said at the time that the federal government had a good safety and health program and that the state could save $8 million by eliminating its program.

Plans for Campaign

Reiner is scheduled to hold press conferences in every major media market in the state during the next several weeks on behalf of Proposition 97 on the Nov. 8 ballot. He was chosen for such a highly visible role in the campaign because his office is widely thought to have the strongest job safety unit of any district attorney in the country. The unit has successfully prosecuted 20 criminal job safety cases, five of which resulted in jail sentences. No individual corporate official has ever received a jail sentence as a result of federal OSHA action.

Plans call for him to be accompanied by Ian Patterson, a veteran construction safety engineer, and Michael Paparian, legislative director for the Sierra Club. Their presence is designed to show that business and environmentalists all have a stake in passage of the measure.

At other stops, they will be joined by local elected officials, union leaders and health experts, in an attempt to show the breadth of support for the measure.

Proponents of Proposition 97 also plan to use television advertising and a direct mail campaign. So far, they have spent about $800,000, according to Marc Grossman, spokesman for the Coalition to Restore Safety at Work.

So far, there is no campaign against the initiative. Gov. Deukmejian signed the ballot argument opposing Proposition 97, but his press secretary Kevin Brett said Friday that the governor has “no plans” to actively campaign against the initiative. Brett also said he was aware of “no one else” planning to spend money against the measure.

Poll Favors Proposition

A Field poll of 809 registered voters taken in late July showed 59% of Californians favoring Proposition 97, with 24% opposed and 17% undecided.

That is a healthy lead, but Reiner said Friday that he is concerned that the measure will be overshadowed by advertising spent on the presidential race and several insurance initiatives also on the ballot.

The campaign is expected to focus on three major issues: whether workers have less protection under federal OSHA than they did under Cal/OSHA; whether the abolition of Cal/OSHA threatens the public at large, and whether the voters are willing to spend about $6.8 million to restore Cal/OSHA.

Reiner cited statistics compiled last month by the state Senate Industrial Relations Committee as the source for his fatality figures. The committee is chaired by Sen. Bill Greene (D-Los Angeles), a proponent of Proposition 97.

The study by committee consultant Andrew Schaefer found 101 private sector workplace deaths during the second half of 1987 under federal OSHA, compared to 66 in the last six months of 1986, under Cal/OSHA. He also found that the number of private sector work-related injuries and illnesses rose by 2,438 incidents in the last half of 1987.

His report said that job-related fatalities and illnesses declined among state and local government workers, who are protected by a state agency. But Ron Rinaldi, director of the state’s Division of Industrial Relations and a supporter of Deukmejian’s decision to eliminate Cal/OSHA, has challenged the validity of the report.

Grossman distributed material to show the superiority of the former California program. Included was a June, 1988, U.S. General Accounting Office report that said Cal/OSHA enforced 2,400 safety standards versus 700 for federal OSHA, regulated over 200 airborne workplace toxics ignored by its U.S. counterpart and had stricter standards for 100 other hazardous substances. The GAO also said Cal/OSHA had higher civil penalties, quicker action against “imminent hazards” that threaten workers’ lives and broader authority to subject lawbreakers to criminal prosecutions.

Patterson, safety manager of a large construction company, said construction site injuries had increased since the demise of Cal/OSHA. He said California businesses would save money with a more vigorous state safety program because it would keep down injuries and illnesses. This, in turn, would restrain insurance and workers’ compensation costs.

Taxes Could Be Issue

Political analysts anticipate that to the extent that an opposition campaign is mounted it will raise the specter of higher taxes to finance a restored Cal/OSHA. Deukmejian’s ballot argument asserts that workers are just as safe now as they were under Cal/OSHA and that “Proposition 97 has nothing to with worker safety. It has everything to do with big government, more bureaucrats and higher taxes.”

Reiner responded head-on Friday to that argument. He said that eliminating Cal/OSHA chopped $8.4 million out of the state budget. However, he said, the agency typically collected about $1.6 million annually in fines, so the net savings was $6.8 million. He also noted that Proposition 97 would restore $11 million in federal funds that Cal/OSHA received each year.

“People who work for a living carry the burden of taxes and don’t ask for much from government,” he said. “This is one program that gave them something back. It’s a crime that it was taken away from them.”