Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 654.295 (2026)

Application of Oregon Safe Employment Act

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

654.295 Application of Oregon Safe Employment Act. (1) Nothing contained in ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423 and 654.750 to 654.780 shall invalidate any existing occupational safety or health regulation, rule, standard or order which is not clearly inconsistent with the purposes and provisions of ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423 and 654.750 to 654.780.

(2) Where any part of a law, regulation, rule, standard or order is found to be clearly inconsistent with ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423 and 654.750 to 654.780 and declared to be invalid, it is the intent of the Legislative Assembly that the remaining provisions of such law, regulation, rule, standard or order remain in effect as fully as if the invalid part had not been adopted. [1973 c.833 §36]

EMPLOYER LIABILITY LAW

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1989–1999 · leading case: Oregon Occupational Saf. & Health Div. v. Don Whitaker Logging, Inc., 985 P.2d 1272 (Or. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Oregon Occupational Saf. & Health Div. v. Don Whitaker Logging, Inc., 985 P.2d 1272 (Or. 1999). “Because the ALJ held to the contrary, the order must be reversed. The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed.”

Flores v. Metro Mach. Rigging, Inc., 783 P.2d 1024 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “001 to ORS 654.295. Linda asserted SEA and common law negligence claims.”

Oregon Occupational Saf. & Health Div. v. Tom O'Brien Constr. Co., 986 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1999). “Because the court concluded that the evidentiary issue was dispositive, it did not rule on OR-OSHA’s second assignment of error, which involved the propriety of what is known in cases decided under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 USC §§ 651-678 (OSHA), as the…”

Oregon Occupational Saf. & Health Div. v. Port of Portland, 918 P.2d 448 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “001 through ORS 654.295, ORS 654.750 through ORS 654.”

Beaty v. Grady, 868 P.2d 778 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “001 to ORS 654.295. Defendant moved for partial summary judgment on plaintiffs “claim” that the ELA imposed liability.”

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.