How OSHA responds to complaints has changed over time. OSHA conducts on-site inspections for alleged serious violations or  hazards and makes phone/fax inquiries for allegations of a less serious  nature. OSHA considers serious violations or hazards to be those that  allege conditions that could result in death or serious physical harm. Only the employer reporting the  greatest amount of time believed that the time he invested was  inappropriate given the nature of the alleged hazard. Erroneous Information Can Affect OSHA Hazard Assessments

More than half of the 20 nonsupervisory compliance officers we  interviewed told us that complainants’ limited knowledge of workplace  hazards and their reasons for filing complaints can affect the quality of the  information they provide, which, in turn, can affect OSHA’s determination  of the hazard’s severity. Of the 52 OSHA officials we interviewed, 23 said the extent to  which they remind complainants of the penalty for providing false  information is “little or none at all.” Furthermore, several officials said  complainants report hazards based on a perceived violation; therefore,  they doubted a hazard that turned out to be invalid would result in a  penalty. Although Consistent Handling of Complaints Is a Key OSHA Principle, Practices in Some Area Offices Varied

OSHA’s policy for responding to complaints requires compliance officers  to address complaints in a systematic and timely manner; however, we  found practices used by area offices to respond to complaints varied  considerably. In addition, while OSHA requires its regional administrators to  annually audit their area office operations, some administrators do not,  and further, for those who do, OSHA does not have a mechanism in place  to review the results and address problems on an agencywide level. Complaints Have, to Some Extent, Drawn OSHA to Serious Hazards at Worksites

To some extent, complaints have drawn OSHA compliance officers to sites  with serious hazards. From Fiscal Year 2000 to 2001, Half the Worksites Inspected for Complaints Had Serious Violations

OSHA compliance officers found serious violations in half of the worksites  they inspected when responding to complaints alleging serious hazards  according to OSHA’s data for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 combined. These  are hazards that pose a substantial probability of injury or death. Conclusion

Since 1975, OSHA has had to balance two competing demands: the need to  use its inspection resources efficiently and the need to respond to  complaints about alleged hazards that could seriously threaten workers’  safety and health. When OSHA conducts inspections of complaints based on incomplete or  erroneous information, it potentially depletes inspection resources that  could have been used to inspect or investigate other worksites. With better information, OSHA could better  conserve its inspection resources, minimize the burden on employers, and  further enhance the agency’s credibility in the eyes of employers. Some variation in how OSHA officials respond to complaints is inevitable,  particularly considering that there are 80 area offices with as many as   16 compliance officers in each office. Our conclusions are based on site visits to 3 area offices  processing large numbers of complaints, reviews of case files  in those offices, interviews with 52 OSHA officials—area  directors, assistant area directors, and compliance officers— who represented 42 of OSHA’s 80 area offices, interviews with  officials in all 10 of OSHA’s regional offices, interviews with the  director of the Office of Enforcement, interviews with officials  in 13 states that have their own safety and health programs,  analysis of data on complaints from OSHA’s Integrated  Management Information System, analysis of BLS data on  injuries and illnesses, interviews with 15 employees whose  companies were the subject of complaints, interviews with 6  employees who filed complaints, and the review of agency  documents related to the complaint process. Occupational Safety and Health: Federal Agencies Identified as  Promoting Workplace Safety and Health.
Why GAO Did This Study

Each year, OSHA receives thousands of complaints from employees alleging hazardous conditions at their worksites. How OSHA responds to these complaints--either by inspecting the worksite or through some other means--has important implications for both the agency's resources and worker safety and health. Responding to invalid or erroneous complaints would deplete inspection resources that could be used to inspect or investigate other worksites. Not responding to complaints that warrant action runs counter to the agency's mission to protect worker safety and health. Considering OSHA's limited resources, and the importance of worker safety, GAO was asked: (1) What is OSHA's current policy for responding to complaints in a way that conserves its resources, (2) how consistently is OSHA responding to complaints, and (3) to what extent have complaints led OSHA to identify serious hazards?

What GAO Found

In general, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) responds to complaints according to the seriousness of the alleged hazard, a practice that agency officials say conserves inspection resources. OSHA officials usually conduct on-site inspections for alleged hazards that could result in death or serious injury. For less serious hazards, OSHA officials generally investigate by phoning employers and faxing them a description of the alleged hazard. Employers are directed to provide the agency with proof of the complaint's resolution. OSHA officials said the availability of both options allows them to manage resources more effectively when responding to complaints. However, many agency officials we interviewed said some complainants provide erroneous information about the alleged hazard, which can affect the agency's determination of the hazard's severity. For example, some complainants lack the expertise to know what is truly hazardous and, as a result, file complaints that overstate the nature of the hazard. Others, particularly disgruntled ex-employees, may have ulterior motives when filing complaints and misrepresent the nature of the hazard. In the 42 area offices where we conducted interviews (there are 80 area offices), OSHA officials described practices for responding to complaints that varied considerably. For example, the degree to which supervisors participated in decisions about which complaints would result in inspections and which would not varied across offices. While OSHA requires annual audits that would identify the extent to which its area offices are correctly employing the complaint policies, some regions are not conducting these audits, and agency officials have told us that OSHA does not have a mechanism in place to address agencywide problems. To some extent complaints direct inspection resources where there are serious hazards. At half the worksites OSHA inspected in response to complaints, compliance officers found serious violations--those that posed a substantial probability of injury or death, according to OSHA's own data for fiscal years 2000-2001.