Federal agency decisions, searchable in plain English.
Workplace-safety cases from the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) and mine-safety cases from the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (FMSHRC), each with a plain-English summary, the standards it cites, and whether it counts as precedent. More agencies are coming.
No decisions match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
Matsu Alabama, Inc., d/b/a A Division of Matcor Automotive, Inc.
Press-safety and repeat machine-guarding citations largely affirmed
Matsu Alabama assigned a temporary worker hired as a janitor to operate and load a mechanical press without adequate press training or supervision. A bent crowder-bar safeguard failed to keep him within the light curtain, and the press caused severe amputation injuries to both hands and one…
Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc.
Power-press inspection program had to cover concealed parts
Siemens performed monthly inspections of 23 mechanical power presses but limited them to visible parts and operating checks. After a press component broke and injured an operator, a repair company found missing springs, loose anchors, oily brakes, and improper adjustments in concealed areas. The…
Airloc, Inc.
A window maker's late contest of failure-to-abate penalties was dismissed
Airloc, Inc. is a small aluminum window, door, and awning maker in Youngstown, Ohio. In June 2000 it received a notification that it had failed to abate two power-press hazards, one for unguarded foot pedals and one for missing periodic inspections, with $3,000 in additional penalties proposed. The…
Kaspar Wire Works, Inc.
Commission upholds most willful recordkeeping violations but vacates unsupported items
Kaspar Wire Works manufactured formed wire products at a Shiner, Texas facility with roughly 850 to 900 employees. After a 1990 inspection, OSHA cited more than 400 alleged violations and proposed $1,236,000 in penalties; the ALJ affirmed most items and assessed $257,700. The Commission found that…
S.K. Wellman Friction Company
Press guarding, training, inspection, and lockout items affirmed
An employee lost a fingertip while clearing a frequently jammed turntable on a Toledo 250-ton press. Judge Ann Z. Cook found an obvious unguarded nip point, inadequate operator training before first use, and no documented program of periodic press inspections, although setup personnel performed…
Turnbull Metal Products, Inc.
Press and facility violations produce $9,450 penalty
Turnbull Metal Products manufactured metal furniture and other products at a Mississippi facility using press brakes and mechanical power presses. OSHA cited missing platform and stair midrails, an inadequate lockout program, unguarded machine parts, deficient press inspections, and electrical…
General Cutlery Co., Inc.
Knife maker loses on almost every safety and health citation, including a willful hazard-communication violation
General Cutlery makes bayonets and household knives in Fremont, Ohio. After complaint inspections in May 1994, OSHA issued two sets of citations, later consolidated: safety violations (Docket No. 94-2015) and health violations (Docket No. 94-1933). The company, represented by its president, argued…
Eyelematic Manufacturing Company, Inc.
Power-press, chain, cylinder, and electrical items produce $5,300
Eyelematic Manufacturing Company, Inc. made small metal parts at its Connecticut facility. Administrative Law Judge Richard DeBenedetto vacated a flammable-container item because the Secretary's amendment shifted the theory from approved container design to liquid transfer without evidence fitting…
What these documents are
- Commission decisions: Rulings by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission itself, the highest level of agency review. These are citable as Commission precedent, though a decision may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance.
- ALJ decisions: Rulings by OSHRC Administrative Law Judges after a hearing. When no Commissioner directs review, an ALJ decision becomes a final order under 29 U.S.C. § 661(j): it binds the parties in that case but is not binding precedent in other cases.
- Why finality matters: Every page here says which kind of decision you are reading, so you know whether it is precedent you can cite or a final order that only shows how one judge ruled on one set of facts.
- Where they come from: Every page links the official OSHRC public release, and the full text on the page is that release. The plain-English summaries are written by Ezel.