Maybe OSHA to cause the next ammo shortage?

[Wildernesshunter]

First of all... this isn't about the "C" word. This isn't conspiracy.....

What legal rights do our ammo and gun companies have to stay in business during this trying time in our country?

A lot of you may have read the read letter to Hornady employees from Steve Hornady on employment requirements by November 24th. As we have seen with other companies, there is likely to be a mass 'walk-out'. John Deere employees are striking and Southwest Airlines has already reeled it back.

Why OSHA? Yeah, they are assigned by Biden to be the entity to fine companies $10,000 per employee.

I am certain Winchester, Federal and others have far more than 100 employees, which will put them in the same basket. The deadline for companies to comply is December 8th.

Are we about to see that worst ammo shortage this country has ever seen? Will some of our ammo and gun companies stand up and fight for their constitutional rights?

I have already heard from a handful of entrepreneur types.... this might be the time to start smaller, mom/pop ammo companies with less than 100 employees.


.........

 

[ghbucky]

I went out and looked and see what is claimed to be a letter from Hornady, but that Hornady itself has refused to comment on the letter. So unless someone can provide confirmation, this is simply rumor.

I work for a fortune 25 company with over 100,000 US employees. There has been absolutely no word or comment from my management on this supposed mandate.

There are 2 things in play here: 1 is federal contractors ARE under authority of POTUS and that is the source of the airline industry pressure. They are federal contractors and as such there is an executive order with teeth.

My employer refuses to be a prime federal contractor.

The 2nd in play is the exec order to OSHA. It appears that OSHA has no idea how to go about this. The proposal I saw was that OSHA was supposed to refer a non-vaccinated worker to his employer HR department for counseling.

Not exactly draconian! I suspect most large non-fed contractors are just waiting it out to see what regs OSHA actually comes up with.

 

[BarryLee]

Having worked in the Safety industry I can tell you almost every business in American is out of compliance in one way or another. I could visit almost anywhere and find violations of various OSHA Standards in just a few minutes. The point being OSHA presently can't even address significant safety concerns in high risk environments. So, not sure OSHA is about to roll out a major push to write violations for vaccine non-compliance. Who knows how this may play out, but not sure we need a run on ammo just yet.

 

[BarryLee]

Oops, brain freeze - fixed it.

 

[44 AMP]

I suspect most large non-fed contractors are just waiting it out to see what regs OSHA actually comes up with.

And whether or not the govt has the legal authority to enforce them.

I don't want this to go off into the weeds about the vaccine OR politics, but as I see it, the root of the matter is FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

Over and over, over the years our legal ability to exercise our freedom of choice has been restricted, bit by bit, one specific item at a time. And always with the same claim as justification, "its for our own good".

we, as a people, historically prize our liberty, our freedom, and our freedom of choice is an integral part of that concept.

This must, necessarily include the freedom to make "bad" choices.

Want to get Americans to resist an idea?, its easy, tell them they HAVE to comply.

And include arbitrary penalties for non compliance. Over enough time you can change the culture, but overnight you're not going to.

Personally I think our govt is being misguided the way they are handling the matter. Not enough encouraging voluntary compliance and too much ordering mandatory compliance and threats of penalties for non compliance.

Fine a PRIVATE company out of business if they workers CHOOSE not to get vaccinated? TO me. that's a lose/lose situation. what is the result when you do that? People lose their jobs, our society loses whatever product or service that company provided, and you wind up with unemployed people who still are not vaccinated, so by the new rules they can't get new jobs.

What ever the idea, and it may be a good idea or a not so good one, you cannot just order people to do it, without a PREVIOUSLY established legal framework approved by the people giving you that authority.

"emergency powers" only goes so far, and for a limited amount of time. And as far as I can see, many sections of govt are not properly following the established process even for "emergencies".

In order to comply with existing law, OSHA can't fine or otherwise shut down JUST ammunition companies for not meeting vaccine rules. They will have to shut down ALL businesses in the nation that fail to meet the rules, otherwise, its not equal treatment under the law. And, equal treatment under the law is one of our foundation principles.

Its an ugly can of worms, made worse by "good inentions" (or at least the claim of such). Just remember what the road to hell is said to be paved with....

 

[ghbucky]

And whether or not the govt has the legal authority to enforce them.

And under what conditions. OSHA as I understand it, has a mandate for workplace safety. Well, I now work from home. I used to travel to customer sites, but I do not report into a 'workplace' anymore and travel for work is now forbidden without executive approval.

So, how would a workplace safety regulation apply in any way to someone like me when I do not go to a 'workplace'.

Another question is how to enforce it? Would they expect my employer to police it? What if my employer instead says "No. YOU want it, so you have to go to their workplace and find out"?

That would make things pretty dang sticky because no OSHA inspector will ever step foot in my workplace, or for that matter get the time of day from me.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Are we about to see that worst ammo shortage this country has ever seen? Will some of our ammo and gun companies stand up and fight for their constitutional rights?

I am not in favor of either mask or vaccine mandates, but let's get to the point:

What constitutional right are you suggesting the ammo and gun companies are seeing violated? There are ten rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights -- which one or ones are you seeing as being abused?

 

[Wildernesshunter]

"Biden’s plan relies on the 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act, which grants the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) the power to issue “emergency test standards” (ETS) to protect workers against “grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful or from new hazards.” But nothing in the law even hints at the sweeping powers the president has claimed. On the contrary, the law’s reference to “substances or agents” strongly suggests that the ETS power is meant to target workplace hazards like dangerous chemicals, not naturally occurring hazards like viruses."

https://www.city-journal.org/biden-vaccine-mandate-unconstitutional

 

[dahermit]

Hasn't OSHA required certain protective gear (hard hats, etc.) for years? Wearing a hard hat when I worked those jobs never struck me as an attack on my constitutional rights. I was also inoculated against Polio, Small Pox, Whooping Cough, etc., etc., without my permission. I must be missing something.

 

[44 AMP]

Hasn't OSHA required certain protective gear (hard hats, etc.) for years?

this is a "yes and no" thing. The yes comes from OSHA requiring safety equipment, which the company must provide. The "no" part is that OSHA doesn't (usually) micromanage what that equipment is.

But in a way they do, because it has to be equipment they approve.

OSHA does not say "you have to wear a hardhat, from Hardhats-R-US. OSHA says "the company must provide approved safety equipment" and they say approved hard hats must meet ANSI standard #1234jfhgnb...

The COMPANY then buys the approved item(s) and the company requires you to wear them. We're TOLD its an OSHA requirement, but technically, its not. It a company requirement to keep OSHA from fining the company for noncompliance. Nitpicky stuff, but that's the way the regs work.

Now, on to an interesting point, is a disease a workplace safety issue, when the workplace doesn't work with diseases??

I bring this up, because of those nitpicky instances in law and regulation. Here's a quirk of the rules I discovered years ago working in chemical management with the industrial safety people and "worker right to know" rules/laws.

CARCINOGENS (the bad stuff that is "known or suspected" to cause cancer.

One of the listed carcinogens is silica dust. For those who don't know, silica dust comes from SAND. Now, here's the catch, silica dust is a listed carcinogen, so under the law workers must be informed of, and protected from the hazards. (sounds reasonable, right??)

BUT ONLY if the company BUYS sand to use in the workplace!!!

I worked at an industrial complex located in an area that, in an average year got 1/4" too much rain to be classified as a desert. But for all practical purposes, it was. There were sand dunes. Blowing dust would sometimes close the roads. etc. NATURE provided a lot of silica dust, that found its way inside everything that wasn't fully sealed against it.

THere was no OSHA regulated hazard there, because it wasnt' something the company provided and exposed workers to.

The sand that the company bought, for the highway crew to spread on the roads in the winter WAS regulated, tracked, and workers had to be both informed, and protected from the silica dust in THAT sand.

Get the point here? If its in your workplace, because the employer puts it there, (and this includes creating it) then workplace safety laws apply. But if the employer doesn't put it there, if its something from the natural environment, then the workplace safety rules don't apply. Or don't apply the same way.

So how does a disease, one found throughout our environment (and not just at a workplace) become a workplace hazard covered under existing regs, and how does OSHA get the authority to mandate (and punish) anyone, about it???

To answer this, I probably need to find Mr Owl, for he is wiser than we....

 

[s3779m]

I am not in favor of either mask or vaccine mandates, but let's get to the point:

What constitutional right are you suggesting the ammo and gun companies are seeing violated? There are ten rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights -- which one or ones are you seeing as being abused?

I might be way off, but I think a case could be made here that the mandate is a violation of the 10th amendment. The constitution does not state that the federal government is in charge of health.

 

[Tom Servo]

Just because this thread involves OSHA, that doesn't mean we're going to go off the rails into debating vaccines. A number of posts have been deleted for that. Please stay on topic.

 

[KyJim]

Some of you may find a blog by law professor Jonathan H. Alder over at Reason to be of interest on the topic of Osha's authority in mandating vaccination. He thinks it will survive a non-delegation argument but thinks the mandate may run into issues because the ETS requires there be a "grave risk" and the action be "necessary."

Turning to the executive order for federal contractors, I can foresee some employees affected may quit, rather than being forced to vaccinate. I have heard through the grapevine that a number of employees at two different manufacturing facilities in my city are considering quitting their jobs. Of course, they may not when the rubber hits the road.

I believe in getting vaccinated but think the idea of forced (yes, these are forced) vaccinations for work in non-medical fields is a horrible idea. To borrow a bit from T.S. Eliot:

This is the way the world [that freedom] ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.