Document: 445 U.S. 1 100 S.Ct. 883 63 L.Ed.2d 154 WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Petitioner,v.Ray MARSHALL, Secretary of Labor. No. 78-1870. Argued Jan. 9, 1980. Decided Feb. 26, Syllabus Section 11(c)(1) the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1970 (Act) prohibits an employer from discharging or discriminating against any employee who exercises "any right afforded by" Act. Respondent Labor promulgated a regulation providing that, among other rights protected by Act, is to choose not perform his assigned task because reasonable apprehension death serious injury coupled with belief that no less drastic alternative available. Claiming suspended wire-mesh screen in petitioner's manufacturing plant used protect employees objects occasionally falling overhead conveyor was unsafe, two petitioner refused comply their foreman's order usual maintenance duties on screen. They were then ordered punch out without working being paid for remainder shift, subsequently received written reprimands, which placed employment files. Thereafter, respondent brought suit Federal District Court, alleging actions constituted discrimination violation § seeking injunctive relief. While finding implementing justified employees' refusals obey order, Court nevertheless denied relief, holding inconsistent therefore invalid. The Appeals reversed remanded, agreeing under but disagreeing conclusion Held: question valid exercise authority constitutes permissible gloss light Act's language, structure, legislative history. Pp. 8-22. (a) clearly conforms fundamental objective preventing occupational deaths injuries. Moreover, appropriate aid full effectuation "general duty" clause, requires furnish each place free recognized hazards are causing likely cause employees. thus its face appears further overriding purpose rationally complements remedial scheme. 11-13. (b) facts Congress, at time it considering passage rejected so-called "strike pay" provision (whereby obligation would be imposed employers continue pay absented themselves work reasons safety), also have given Department, imminent-danger situations, power temporarily shut down all part employer's plant, do indicate congressional intent incompatible administrative interpretation such as embodied issue. In contrast provision, does require workers refuse tasks imminent danger, simply provides case may "discriminate" involved. And "shutdown" accords Government officials permits private avoid workplace conditions they believe pose grave dangers own safety empower correct hazardous condition. 13-21. 593 F.2d 715, affirmed. Robert E. Mann, Chicago, Ill., petitioner. Sol. Gen. Wade H. McCree, Jr., Washington, D. C., respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion Court. (Act)1 Act.2 (Secretary) has so protects, available.3 presented before us whether this consistent 2 * company maintains Marion, Ohio, production household appliances. Overhead conveyors transport appliance components throughout plant. To fall these conveyors, installed horizontal guard approximately 20 feet above floor. This mesh welded angle-iron frames building's structural steel skeleton. 3 Maintenance spend several hours week removing screen, replacing paper spread catch grease drippings material performing occasional themselves. duties, usually able stand iron frames, sometimes find necessary step onto itself. 4 1973, began install heavier wire had been drawn into question. Several fallen partly through old one occasion completely floor below survived. A number reacted incidents bringing unsafe attention foremen. company's contemporaneous instructions admonished only frames. 5 On June 28, 1974, fell area where newer, stronger yet installed.4 Following incident, effectuated some repairs issued strictly forbidding stepping either screens supporting structure. An somewhat more cumbersome satisfactory method developed procedure required power-raised mobile platforms use hooks recover material. 6 July 7, employees, Virgil Deemer Thomas Cornwell, met superintendent voice concern about disagreed view, permitted men inspect foreman point dangerous areas needing repair. Unsatisfied response results inspection, Cornwell 9 director. At meeting, requested name, address, telephone representative local office Administration (OSHA). Although director told "had better stop think what [they] doing," he furnished information requested. Later same day, contacted official regional OSHA discussed screen.5 7 next reported night shift 10:45 p. m. Their foreman, after himself walking directed section screen.6 carry directive. sent them personnel office, remaining six shift.7 8 little over month later, filed United States Northern Act.8 As complaint prayed, inter alia, expunge files references reprimands permanent injunction requiring compensate lost reason disciplinary suspensions. bench trial, found question9 Deemer's Cornwell's 10, 1974. court "refused cleaning operation genuine fear bodily harm," danger "real something [had] existed minds employees," acted good faith, realistically open than work. Secretary's Usery v. Whirlpool Corp., 416 F.Supp. 30, 32-34. 10 Sixth Circuit Court's judgment. 715. Finding ample support record factual determination regulation, id., 719, n. 5,10 appellate Id., 721-736. It accordingly remanded proceedings. 736. We granted certiorari, 444 823, 43, 62 29, decision conflicts those Courts important See Marshall Daniel Construction Co., 563 707 (CA5 1977); Certified Welding 77-2048 (CA10 Dec. 1978). That question, stated outset opinion, authorizing "self-help" circumstances, 29 CFR 1977.12(b)(2) (1979), II 11 itself creates express mechanism protecting believed emergent threat injury. Upon receipt inspection request stating grounds present workplace, must conduct inspection. U.S.C. 657(f)(1). event reveals practices "could reasonably expected physical harm immediately imminence can eliminated enforcement procedures otherwise provided Act,11 662(a), inspector inform affected notify recommending relief sought. 662(c). juncture, petition federal restrain giving rise danger. By means temporary restraining preliminary injunction, avoid, correct, remove prohibit area. 662(a).12 12 ensure process functions effectively, expressly every rights, subject him discharge discrimination. imminently condition practice practice. 657(f)(1).13 He limited assist inspecting §§ 657(a)(2), (e), (f)(2), determining risk fact exists. 660(c)(1). Finally, bring action compel seek if believes wrongfully declined so. 662(d). 13 detailed statutory scheme, obviously when acknowledges "as general matter, there entitle walk off job potential workplace."14 prompt notice inspector's intention condition, legislation contemplates will normally respond voluntarily speedily eliminating few instances occur, provisions judicial designed give protection most situations resulting worksite. 14 illustrates, however, circumstances exist justifiably arrangement sufficiently Such probably often situation arise (1) injury, (2) sufficient opportunity effective redress apprise 15 Nothing suggests dilemma rely exclusively remedies set forth safety. But nothing explicitly otherwise. Against background silence, exercised rulemaking 657(g)(2) determined faith finds predicament, expose subjected "subsequent discrimination" employer. 16 interpretative regulation15 Secretary, Our inquiry informed awareness entitled deference unless said reasoned supportable Skidmore Swift & 323 134, 139-140, 65 161, 164, 89 L.Ed. 124. Ford Motor Credit Co. Milhollin, 555, 790, 22; Mourning Family Publications Service, Inc., 411 356, 93 1652, 36 318. 17 Act—to prevent injuries.16 preamble, declares policy "to assure far possible man woman Nation safe healthful preserve our human resources . ." 651(b). (Emphasis added.) 18 accomplish basic purpose, legislation's orientation prophylactic nature. Atlas Roofing Review Comm'n, 430 422, 444-445, 97 1261, 1263-1264, 51 464. wait die become injured. authorizes promulgation health standards issuance citations hope act injuries ever occurring. seem anomalous construe constructed prohibiting employee, alternative, freedom withdraw environment highly dangerous. 19 viewed clause. clause "[e]ach shall employees." 654(a)(1). history reflects,17 intended deter occurrence placing mandatory independent specific Secretary. Since inspectors cannot around clock ensures enjoy complement scheme.18 absence contrary indication history, must, therefore, upheld, particularly remembered liberally construed effectuate purpose. Bacto-Unidisk, 394 784, 798, 1410, 1418, 22 762; Lilly Grand Trunk R. 317 481, 486, 347, 351, 87 411. B 21 urging reversal judgment us, relies primarily aspects Representative Daniels New Jersey sponsored House bills led ultimately Act.19 Committee Education Labor, bill contained soon dubbed provision.20 could examination Department Health, Education, Welfare (HEW) toxicity materials workplace. If revealed substance "potentially toxic harmful effects concentration found," 60 days potentially expiration period, exposed concentrations symptoms associated substance, instructed proper precautions dealing personal protective equipment. met, "absent period loss regular compensation period." 23 encountered stiff opposition House. Steiger Wisconsin introduced substitute containing provision.21 response, offered amendment things, deleted bill's provision.22 suggested instead immediate premises, did provide. adopted bill.23 24 and, amendments, passed Senate never provision.24 did, inspections.25 These characteristics underscored Senator Williams, sponsor.26 25 After Williams Senate, submitted Conference Committee. There, acceded provisions.27 26 reads issue case. argues Congress' rejecting unilateral might abuse intimidate harass Congress deliberately chose instead, maintains, grant inspections cases lead coercive remedies. views gives precisely withhold them. 27 read differently. posing real threats severe remedy invoked following HEW's notification improperly high levels substances Had harm, presumably requested, long 60-day pursuant bill.28 Consequently, perilous fast-moving covered now us. 28 emphasize troubled requirement salary having properly section.29 instructive virtually employee's absent debates, context receive compensation.30 When concept, very meant reject law unconditionally imposing upon paychecks here "discriminates" treats favorably others similarly situated.31 30 second aspect rejection both officials, plant.32 aroused considerable Houses Congress. hostility engendered Representatives delete ersion proposing amendments original bill.33 gave authority.34 bill, approved contain shutdown bill.35 31 infers events hostile here. argues, expert 32 we pertinent misconceives thrust concern. Those prevented opposed safeguards, drastically impair business.36 Congressional opponents feared jeopardize Government's neutral role labor-management relations.37 33 Neither concerns implicated officials. clear others. acts reliance runs reprimand unreasonably bad faith. remotely resemble rejected. C 34 For conclude (1979) Accordingly, 35 ordered. 84 Stat. 1590, amended, 92 183, 651 et seq. (1976 ed. Supp.II). 1603, 660(c)(1), full: "No person manner discriminate instituted caused proceeding related testified testify behalf Act." 1977.12 "(a) addition file complaints, institute proceedings, proceedings 11(c) protects occurring 'of Act.' Certain Act; example, participate party (sec. 10). implication. Administration; requests constitute Likewise, interviewed agents course investigations discriminated cooperation. "(b)(1) hand, review discloses Hazardous violative ordinarily corrected employer, once attention. corrections accomplished, dispute existence hazard, 8(f) assistance public agencies responsibility field health. Under taking discipline refusing normal activities alleged hazards. "(2) However, occasions confronted choice between subjecting arising refuses subsequent nature person, confronting insufficient due urgency situation, eliminate resort channels. addition, possible, sought unable obtain, correction condition." result fatality, conducted investigation citation charging maintaining surface abatement hazard proposed $600 penalty. Nearly five years accident, Commission affirmed citation, decided permit months 1979 CCH OSHD ¶ 23,552. pending Columbia Circuit. disclose conversation beyond concerned direct outstanding directive accomplished apparatus. Both apparently returned day incident. 2, supra. 3, cite Appeals' raising review. covers particular Rule 23(1)(c); General Pictures Electric 304 175, 177-179, 58 849, 850-51, 82 1273. involve imposition penalties. 654 standard violation, fix condition's abatement, propose 658(a), 659(a), 666. contest (c). Should so, date postponed until completion initiated 659(b), 666(d). include hearing judge Commission. 659(c), 661(i). consummation 662(b). determine "there exists employe[e] determination." raised concerning accordance procedural requirements Administrative Procedure (APA), 553. Thus, accept designation "interpretative," consider qualifies "interpretative rule" within meaning APA, 553(b)(A). contains numerous preventive tragedy individual accident. See, e. g., S.Rep.No.91-1282, (1970) (hereinafter S.Rep.), Leg.Hist. 142; 116 Cong.Rec. 37628 (1970), 516-517 (Sen. Nelson); 37628, 37630 518, 522 Cranston); 522-523 Randolph); H.R.Rep.No.91-1291, pp. 14, H.R.Rep.), 844, 853; 38366 978 (Rep. Young); 38367-38368 981 Anderson); 38386 1031, 1032 Dent); 42203 1210 Daniels). Yarborough, sponsor bill: "We talking people's lives, indifference cost accountants. assuring women plants factories go home day's bodies intact." 37625 510. debates reprinted, along House, Reports, one-volume Print Legislative History 1970, Subcommittee Public Welfare, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (June 1971) (cited supra hereafter Leg.Hist.). S.Rep. 9-10, 149-150; H.R.Rep. 21-22, 851-852. worth noting 660(c)(1) wished courts parallel antidiscrimination Mine 1977, 801 815(c)(1), ed., Supp.II), establishes "the refusal unhealthful." S.Rep.No.95-181, (1977). 36; 123 20043-20044 (1977) (remarks Sen. Church, Javits). H.R.16785, 91st 2d 893-976 (bill House). H.R.Rep., 831. 19(a)(5) supra, 969-970 (as floor) relevant part: "The publish list known occur; authorized group found; submit possible. Within sixty designated greater accompanied information, made available label means, long-term ill effects, signs, symptoms, emergency treatment use, equipment supplied allows established performed equipment, Report explained follows: "There still economically coerced self-exposure earn livelihood, duration pay. herein restricts except obligated agreements, assign worker non-prohibited during time. should allowing payment performed." 860. H.R.19200, 763-830 originally introduced). H.Res. 1218, 977. 38376, 38377-38378, 38707 1004, 1005, 1008-1009, 1071 38369 986 Perkins). why amendment: losing generally misunderstood drop it. want harm; enables get quickly. Instead making strengthened try minimize amount harm." 38377-38378 1009. 38715 (teller vote), 38723-38724 (roll call vote) 1091, 1112-1115. Daniels' upon. His voted favor bill. 38704-38705 1064 (the Chairman Rep. Perkins); 1072 O'Hara). S.2193, 204-295 Welfare). S.Rep., 141. 8(f)(1), 252-253. "[D]espite wide-spread contentions contrary, committee strike-with-pay provision. Rather possibility endless disputes pay, enhance prospects compliance special inspection." 37326 416. H.R.Conf.Rep.No.91-1765, 37-38 1190-1191. 657(f). 19, 12(b), 956 necessarily provision's requirement. then, today, already right, certain jobs faced conditions. 42208 1223-1224 Scherle) (reference Taft-Hartley Act). National Relations 157, strike issues. NLRB Washington Aluminum 370 1099, 298. Similarly, 502 Management 143, quitting labor abnormally [shall not] deemed strike." effect create exception no-strike collective-bargaining agreement. Gateway Coal Workers, 414 368, 385, 94 629, 640, 38 583. make conflict pattern 1977.18 (1979). Williams); 1009, Daniels); 38379 Leg. Hist. 1011 Randall); 38391 1046 Feighan); 38714 1089 Horton). cites passages first blush, appear suggest walkouts One statement Cohelan, supporter "a comprehensive program leave post whenever wherever endanger safety." 38375 1001. another Member authorize "strikes pay." 38708 1075. Read context, statements referring "discrimination" respective Whether dismissed indicating thought upheld regulation. expressed view limits entitled. remand, reach version days' duration. n.19, 12(a), 955-956 House); 25, 855. 72 Regional Director concur order. n.24, 11(b), 263-264. 12-13, 152-153; 56-57, 195-196 (individual appointed advice consent mandated prior shutdown. 37621-37622 499-500; 37624-37625 508-509. 562-563 Senate). 38372, 38378, 993, 1009-1010, 1011, explained: "[B]usiness groups great fears abuse. vested inspector. documentation fear, recognize prevalent. shown capacity quickly availability orders deal situations. rules civil procedure, ex parte. uses efficiently expeditiously, matter minutes rather hours." 1009-1010. n.21, 12, 796-798. H.R.Conf.Rep.No.90-1765, n.27, 40, 1193. 35607, 37602 299, 452-453 Saxbe); 37338 425 Dominick); 453-454 Schweiker); 41763 1149 Prouty); H.R.Rep.55-57, 885-887 (minority report); 38368 983 38702 992, 1058 Steiger); 38378-38379 1011-1012 38393 1050 Michel); 38394 1052 Broomfield); 38704 1062 Sikes); 38713 1087 Robison); 37 37346 448 Tower); 55-57, Michel). Some Members pressures bear strike.

Category: 6