Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workplace Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Proposal to require employer plans for extreme heat and cold draws strong debate over scope and overlap with OSHA
Summary
House Bill 1451 would require employers to adopt written plans, provide rest in temperature‑protected areas, fluids and emergency procedures when heat index or wind chill thresholds are crossed. Supporters emphasized worker safety amid more extreme weather; business groups and the Department of Labor raised concerns about duplication with OSHA, feasibility for field work, and unclear technical definitions.
Representative Chris Muns introduced HB1451 to require employers (public and private) to develop written plans protecting workers from extreme heat and cold and to give the Health Commissioner rulemaking authority to implement standards. The sponsor cited rising days of extreme temperatures and examples of worker heat or cold stress in New Hampshire.
Key elements in the draft included mandatory rest breaks in a temperature‑protected area and provision of fluids once the heat index hits 80°F or wind chill falls to 15°F, emergency procedures for symptoms of heat or cold stress, and annual review of the plan with employees.
Business and industry witnesses — lodging and restaurant operators, timber and construction groups, and the Business & Industry Association — strongly opposed the broad private‑sector application. They argued OSHA already provides heat guidance and that the bill would impose impractical requirements on field operations such as logging, and kitchens where high ambient temperatures near equipment are routine. The Department of Labor said it is neutral but recommended precise definitions for terms such as "hierarchy of controls," clarified carve‑outs for truly emergent safety statutes (boilers, elevators, workplace safety rules), and questioned the operational feasibility of requiring the department to develop plans "in conjunction with" every employer.
Labor and public health witnesses urged the committee to adopt protections, saying incremental safeguards could prevent heat‑ and cold‑related injuries and deaths. The committee closed the hearing while stakeholders continue to debate thresholds, enforcement pathways, and exemptions for certain work contexts.
What happens next: The committee is likely to weigh industry suggestions to narrow scope, add exemptions for remote field work, and to leave technical rulemaking to the Department of Health and/or Labor with precise definitions in statute.
