Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 408.1016 (2026)

Promulgation, expression, and adoption of standards by director.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT

Act 154 of 1974

408.1016 Promulgation, expression, and adoption of standards by director.

Sec. 16.

The director may promulgate standards in accordance with this act to prevent accidents in places of employment and to protect the life and safety of employees. If another state agency has rules promulgated before the effective date of this act that regulate a place of employment relative to the safety of the public, the rules of the other state agency apply only to the safety of the public. If practicable, the standards promulgated shall be expressed in terms of objective criteria and of the performance desired.

History: 1974, Act 154, Eff. Jan. 1, 1975 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 455, Imd. Eff. Oct. 16, 1978 ;-- Am. 1991, Act 105, Imd. Eff. Oct. 3, 1991 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 416, Eff. Dec. 27, 2012

AdminRule Notes:

R 408.491 et seq.; R 408.1200; R 408.3901 et seq.; R 408.10001 et seq.; R 408.14511 et seq.; and R 408.45101 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1980–1995 · leading case: Beals v. Walker, 296 N.W.2d 828 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Beals v. Walker, 296 N.W.2d 828 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “Further, in addition to the commonsense meaning of the words, reference to the administrative definitions of the terms floor, opening, platform, runway and stairway indicate that the requirement for the use of guardrails and barriers on warehouse rooftops is simply inapplicable.”

Davis v. Link, Inc, 489 N.W.2d 103 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “Pursuant to MCL 408.1016; MSA 17.50(16) and MCL 408.1021; MSA 17.”

Parcher v. Detroit Edison Co., 531 N.W.2d 724 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). “Detroit Edison was not in violation of any safety regulations at the time of the accident, but, by operating the forklift within ten feet of the wire, plaintiff had violated safety standards adopted pursuant to MCL 408.1016; MSA 17.50(16) as 1979 AC, R 408.”

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.