There is a bit of controversy swirling around the latest legislative efforts in Florida regarding government regulation of workforce safety practices. The state Senate voted along party lines Tuesday to pass legislation prohibiting local, municipal, and county governments from mandating workplace heat standards that exceed those set by federal law. Examples would include mandatory water breaks and the ability to have shade available for breaks during the day. A nearly identical law was passed in Texas last year. These rules might make sense at first glance, at least from a small-government conservative perspective. But looking more deeply into the details, they could produce significant problems. (NBC News)

Florida’s Senate on Tuesday approved a bill that would ban cities and counties from adopting requirements for mandatory water breaks and other workplace protections against extreme heat.

The Republican-controlled Senate voted 28-11, along party lines, to pass Senate Bill 1492, which would prohibit local governments from determining workplace heat standards that go beyond those required by federal law. In effect, the bill would strip cities and counties of the ability to require water breaks for workers and time to rest in the shade throughout the day.

The state legislation comes after the planet notched its hottest year in recorded history in 2023. Nearly the entire southern portion of the United States last summer suffered weeks on end of oppressive humidity and triple-digit temperatures in a series of long-lasting heat waves that climate scientists said were intensified by global warming.

Supporters of this bill are arguing that the new rules are needed to "establish uniform regulations, rather than having rules applied inconsistently across the state." In general terms, that's typically a good thing. The same rules should apply to everyone, after all. But workplace safety regulations are a bit of an exception to the rule because not all jobs entail the same types or levels of risk. Office workers at an accounting firm aren't going to experience the same sort of heat exposure as someone pouring concrete at a construction site (unless the air conditioning goes out). Similarly, you wouldn't demand that librarians wear a hard hat, but such protection could be a matter of life and death for people working on a road crew.

Proponents of the new rules say that everyone will be treated the same because they will all be required to follow the guidelines provided by OSHA. But there's a problem with that idea as well in the specific working conditions under discussion. OSHA recognizes heat exposure as a potential workplace danger, but they have yet to issue formal guidelines to protect workers from high temperatures. In other words, employers could do basically nothing and say they are in compliance with federal guidelines because those guidelines effectively don't exist.

 The media is trying to frame this debate around global warming just as they do with almost everything else these days. Perhaps that's triggering an automatic pushback response from some conservatives. But I lived and worked in Florida for a while in the seventies when I was in the Navy. That was back when we were still being warned about "global cooling" and the next ice age. But I can tell you from experience that it gets hot in Florida, particularly when you're working outside in the summer. Absent any federal guidelines, customized control might be appropriate for at least some industries to avoid instances where unscrupulous employers are putting workers at risk by cutting corners and minimizing breaks in the schedule.

Ron DeSantis and the state's GOP legislative majority have made enormous progress in improving conditions in the free state of Florida. Many of us, including yours truly, have been quick to applaud the reforms they've put in place. But before we rush to get behind this particular effort, a bit more attention is probably required. Different conditions exist from place to place and one set of rules likely won't be appropriate for all. Perhaps some local control wouldn't be such a bad thing in this case.