{"id":808,"date":"2025-07-22T14:05:49","date_gmt":"2025-07-22T14:05:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.agencywebdesigners.com\/?p=808"},"modified":"2025-07-24T14:24:16","modified_gmt":"2025-07-24T14:24:16","slug":"trumps-labor-department-proposes-more-than-60-rule-changes-in-a-push-to-deregulate-workplaces","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.agencywebdesigners.com\/index.php\/2025\/07\/22\/trumps-labor-department-proposes-more-than-60-rule-changes-in-a-push-to-deregulate-workplaces\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump\u2019s Labor Department proposes more than 60 rule changes in a push to deregulate workplaces"},"content":{"rendered":"

By CATHY BUSSEWITZ, Associated Press<\/strong><\/p>\n

NEW YORK (AP) \u2014 The U.S. Department of Labor<\/a> is aiming to rewrite or repeal more than 60 \u201cobsolete\u201d workplace regulations, ranging from minimum wage requirements for home health care workers<\/a> and people with disabilities to standards governing exposure to harmful substances.<\/p>\n

If approved, the wide-ranging changes unveiled this month also would affect working conditions at constructions sites and in mines<\/a>, and limit the government\u2019s ability to penalize employers if workers are injured or killed while engaging in inherently risky activities such as movie stunts or animal training.<\/p>\n

The Labor Department says the goal is to reduce costly, burdensome rules<\/a> imposed under previous administrations, and to deliver on President Donald Trump\u2019s commitment<\/a> to restore American prosperity through deregulation.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Department of Labor is proud to lead the way by eliminating unnecessary regulations that stifle growth and limit opportunity,\u201d Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer<\/a> said in a statement, which boasted the \u201cmost ambitious proposal to slash red tape of any department across the federal government.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"Labor
FILE \u2013 Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer listens as President Donald Trump speaks with reporters while signing executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House, April 23, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo\/Alex Brandon, File)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Critics say the proposals would put workers at greater risk of harm<\/a>, with women and members of minority groups bearing a disproportionate impact.<\/p>\n

\u201cPeople are at very great risk of dying on the job already,\u201d Rebecca Reindel, the AFL-CIO union\u2019s occupational safety and health director, said. \u201cThis is something that is only going to make the problem worse.\u201d<\/p>\n

The proposed changes have several stages to get through before they can take effect, including a public comment period for each one.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s a look at some of the rollbacks under consideration:<\/p>\n

No minimum wage for home health care workers<\/h4>\n

Home health care workers help elderly or medically fragile people<\/a> by preparing meals, administering medications, assisting with toilet use, accompanying clients to doctor appointments and performing other tasks. Under one of the Labor Department\u2019s proposals, an estimated 3.7 million workers employed by home care agencies could be paid below the federal minimum wage \u2014 currently $7.25 per hour \u2014 and made ineligible for overtime pay if they aren\u2019t covered by corresponding state laws<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The proposed rule would reverse changes made in 2013<\/a> under former President Barack Obama and revert to a regulatory framework<\/a> from 1975. The Labor Department says that by lowering labor and compliance costs, its revisions might expand the home care market and help keep frail individuals in their homes for longer.<\/p>\n

\"Caregiver
FILE \u2013 Caregiver Warren Manchess helping Paul Gregoline with his shoes and socks, in Noblesville, Ind., Nov. 27, 2013. (AP Photo\/Darron Cummings, File)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Judy Conti, director of government affairs at the National Employment Law Project, said her organization plans to work hard to defeat the proposal. Home health workers are subject to injuries from lifting clients, and \u201cbefore those (2013) regulations, it was very common for home care workers to work 50, 60 and maybe even more hours a week, without getting any overtime pay,\u201d Conti said.<\/p>\n

Others endorse the proposal, including the Independent Women\u2019s Forum, a conservative nonprofit based in Virginia. Women often bear the brunt of family caregiving responsibilities<\/a>, so making home care more affordable would help women balance work and personal responsibilities, the group\u2019s president, Carrie Lukas, said.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re pleased to see the Trump administration moving forward on rolling back some of what we saw as counterproductive micromanaging of relationships that were making it hard for people to get the care they need,\u201d Lukas said.<\/p>\n

Samantha Sanders, director of government affairs and advocacy at the nonprofit Economic Policy Institute, said the repeal would not constitute a win for women.<\/p>\n

\u201cSaying we actually don\u2019t think they need those protections would be pretty devastating to a workforce that performs really essential work and is very heavily dominated by women, and women of color in particular,\u201d Sanders said.<\/p>\n

Protections for migrant farm workers<\/h4>\n

Last year, the Labor Department finalized rules that provided protections to migrant farmworkers who held H-2A visas<\/a>. The current administration says most of those rules placed unnecessary and costly requirements on employers.<\/p>\n

Under the new proposal, the Labor Department would rescind a requirement for most employer-provided transportation<\/a> to have seat belts for those agriculture workers.<\/p>\n

The department is also proposing to reverse a 2024 rule that protected migrant farmworkers from retaliation<\/a> for activities such as filing a complaint, testifying or participating in an investigation, hearing or proceeding.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere\u2019s a long history of retaliation against workers who speak up against abuses in farm work. And with H-2A it\u2019s even worse because the employer can just not renew your visa,\u201d said Lori Johnson, senior attorney at Farmworker Justice.<\/p>\n

Michael Marsh, president and CEO of the National Council of Agricultural Employers, applauded the deregulation efforts, saying farmers were hit with thousands of pages of regulations pertaining to migrant farmworkers in recent years.<\/p>\n

\u201cCan you imagine a farmer and his or her spouse trying to navigate 3,000 new pages of regulation in 18 months and then be liable for every one of them?\u201d he asked.<\/p>\n

Adequate lighting for construction spaces<\/h4>\n

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration<\/a>, part of the Labor Department, wants to rescind a requirement for employers to provide adequate lighting at construction sites, saying the regulation doesn\u2019t substantially reduce a significant risk.<\/p>\n

\"Construction
FILE \u2013 Construction workers frame up a roof of wood lumber at a new home build, April 1, 2025, in Laveen, Ariz. (AP Photo\/Ross D. Franklin, File)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

OSHA<\/a> said if employers fail to correct lighting deficiencies at construction worksites, the agency can issue citations under its \u201cgeneral duty clause.\u201d The clause requires employers to provide a place of employment free from recognized hazards which are likely to cause death or serious physical harm.<\/p>\n

Worker advocates think getting rid of a specific construction site requirement is a bad idea. \u201cThere have been many fatalities where workers fall through a hole in the floor, where there\u2019s not adequate lighting,\u201d Reindel said. \u201cIt\u2019s a very obvious thing that employers should address, but unfortunately it\u2019s one of those things where we need a standard, and it\u2019s violated all the time.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mine safety<\/h4>\n

Several proposals could impact safety procedures for mines. For example, employers have to submit plans for ventilation<\/a> and preventing roof collapses in coal mines for review by the Labor Department\u2019s Mine Safety and Health Administration<\/a>. Currently, MSHA district managers can require mine operators to take additional steps to improve those plans.<\/p>\n

\"A
FILE \u2013 A miner gathers his thought before taking part in a rescue mission, Jan. 3, 2006, in Tallmansville, W.Va.. (AP Photo\/Haraz N. Ghanbari, Pool, File)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The Labor Department wants to end that authority, saying the current regulations give the district manager the ability to draft and create laws without soliciting comments or action by Congress.<\/p>\n

Similarly, the department is proposing to strip district managers of their ability to require changes to mine health and safety training programs.<\/p>\n

Limiting OSHA\u2019s reach<\/h4>\n

The general duty clause allows OSHA to punish employers for unsafe working conditions<\/a> when there\u2019s no specific standard in place to cover a situation.<\/p>\n