Federal agency decisions, searchable in plain English.

Workplace-safety cases from the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) and mine-safety cases from the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (FMSHRC), each with a plain-English summary, the standards it cites, and whether it counts as precedent. More agencies are coming.

5,593 decisions and counting · Latest decision July 17, 2026
8 decisions 29 C.F.R. § 1926.751(d)

No decisions match these filters

Try a different search term or clear the filters.

COMM

L. R. Willson and Sons, Inc.

Commission lacked authority to halt penalty collection

An administrative law judge had affirmed a tag-line violation against L. R. Willson and Sons and assessed a $4,000 penalty. The parties later settled Willson's separate Equal Access to Justice Act fee claim concerning a withdrawn general duty clause item. When the Secretary sought to collect the…

January 25, 1999
Procedural
ALJ

C.W. Sprenger

Tag-line violation affirmed after one item settled

C.W. Sprenger erected a multi-story building in Maplewood, New Jersey. The parties settled item 1, and the judge approved that agreement without reproducing its terms. The remaining item alleged that a steel beam was hoisted near two connectors working about 30 feet high without a tag line to…

February 5, 1998 ·Irving Sommer
Mixed result
COMM

GEM Industrial, Inc.

Reviewed steel tag-line item withdrawn by settlement

GEM Industrial, Inc. was a structural-steel subcontractor on an Ohio building project. The administrative law judge had affirmed a serious tag-line violation for crane loads during steel shakeout and assessed $1,300, along with a separate $1,625 electrical violation. Review was directed on the…

June 7, 1995
Settled
ALJ

Thor Construction

Fall-protection and tagline violations affirmed

Thor Construction was cited for nine serious violations during a structural-steel construction project. Before the hearing, the parties settled seven items by vacating three, reclassifying four as other than serious, and agreeing to $3,000 in penalties. The judge found that several employees worked…

March 6, 1995 ·Michael H. Schoenfeld
Mixed result
ALJ

L. R. Willson and Sons, Inc.

Steel-erection tag-line violation affirmed serious, $4,000

L. R. Willson and Sons, a structural steel erector, was cited after a September 1992 OSHA inspection of a steel-erection job in Ephrata, Pennsylvania. The Secretary issued a serious citation with two items but withdrew the first, leaving a single item: failure to use tag lines to control loads…

October 3, 1994 ·Michael H. Schoenfeld
Citations affirmed
ALJ

Thomas Lindstrom Company, Inc.

Tag-line citation vacated as infeasible

Thomas Lindstrom was the structural-steel-erection subcontractor for a new Philadelphia medical examiner building. OSHA alleged that the company failed to use tag lines to control steel loads, and the judge held that the standard normally makes tag-line use mandatory. Lindstrom proved that using…

January 14, 1994 ·Michael H. Schoenfeld
Citations vacated
COMM

General Steel Fabricators

Six-item penalty reduced to $90

General Steel Fabricators received six nonserious citations involving cylinder transport, a portable ladder, crane safety measures, and tag lines. The company challenged only the judge's decision to assess $600 when OSHA had proposed a total of $90. The Commission confirmed that it may assess more…

September 16, 1977
Modified
COMM

Union Steel Erectors, Inc.

Willful crane-riding and fall violations affirmed

OSHA observed Union Steel employees riding a crane hook, headache ball, and suspended steel loads 50 to 70 feet above the ground. The foreman knowingly allowed the practice for about a week, the general contractor had warned him it violated safety rules, and the crane operator knew it was…

January 6, 1977
Citations affirmed

What these documents are

  • Commission decisions: Rulings by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission itself, the highest level of agency review. These are citable as Commission precedent, though a decision may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance.
  • ALJ decisions: Rulings by OSHRC Administrative Law Judges after a hearing. When no Commissioner directs review, an ALJ decision becomes a final order under 29 U.S.C. § 661(j): it binds the parties in that case but is not binding precedent in other cases.
  • Why finality matters: Every page here says which kind of decision you are reading, so you know whether it is precedent you can cite or a final order that only shows how one judge ruled on one set of facts.
  • Where they come from: Every page links the official OSHRC public release, and the full text on the page is that release. The plain-English summaries are written by Ezel.