After the long delay of meeting the specifications in this legislation, the standards would emerge intact. The protections most damaged would be safety standards such as for forklift trucks, and program standards. I must add that the cost benefit analysis and net benefit analysis required to be performed by this legislation are not required by the OSHA law, and are even prohibited by law as a justification for raising the levels of permitted exposure and increasing the injuries or diseases expected. Further, the notion that labor unions, representing affected workers, would impose needless costs on employers is not credible in this economic climate. Workers are worried by threats of plant closure, of work leaving to low regulation havens like Mexico, and are constantly barraged with arguments for increased productivity and efficiency.
Costs are a concern.
Efficiency and quality are concerns. But health and safety comes first, and dire economic predictions are rarely if ever borne out. No OSHA standard has caused the economic disruption claimed by the industries that have created the hazards. This legislation imposes burdensome requirements on even the most minimal, practical and routine regulations to protect employees. OSHA attempts to protect employees of 6 million employers.