C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER XVII—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › PART 1977—DISCRIMINATION AGAINST EMPLOYEES EXERCISING RIGHTS UNDER THE WILLIAMS-STEIGER OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OF 1970

29 C.F.R. § 1977.22

Employee refusal to comply with safety rules

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Employees who refuse to comply with occupational safety and health standards or valid safety rules implemented by the employer in furtherance of the Act are not exercising any rights afforded by the Act. Disciplinary measures taken by employers solely in response to employee refusal to comply with appropriate safety rules and regulations, will not ordinarily be regarded as discriminatory action prohibited by section 11(c). This situation should be distinguished from refusals to work, as discussed in § 1977.12.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2016–2016 · leading case: Thomas Perez v. Ohio Bell Tel., 655 F. App'x 404 (6th Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Thomas Perez v. Ohio Bell Tel., 655 F. App'x 404 (6th Cir. 2016). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1977.22 . An employee doing so is “not exercising any rights afforded by the Act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.