Urge OSHA and DOL to finalize the stalled heat-illness standard

Letters to OSHA and DOL leadership are read by the offices responsible for moving the rule. The public-comment dockets on the proposed rule are closed; the question now is finalization. The most effective letters are grounded in specific knowledge — a workplace, a region, an industry, an experience.

To the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health:

I’m writing to urge OSHA and the Department of Labor to finalize the proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule and issue it as an enforceable federal standard without further delay. I’m a [your role/job — worker in [industry], advocate, family member of a worker affected by heat exposure, etc.] in {{my_city}}, {{my_state}}.

The rule has been through the full process. OSHA published the proposed rule in August 2024, the public comment period closed in January 2025, the informal public hearing concluded in July 2025, and the post-hearing comment period closed at the end of October 2025. The record is complete. What is missing is a final-action date — the proposed rule is stalled, and the most recent regulatory agenda set no timeline for finalizing it. Meanwhile the underlying hazard has not paused.

I urge OSHA to finalize the rule because [pick one or more of the following and personalize]:

• The cumulative scientific evidence on heat exposure and worker health is overwhelming. Heat-related injuries and deaths in workplaces — particularly in agriculture, construction, warehousing, food service, and outdoor labor — are documented at scale, and the trends are worsening as heat seasons in most US regions lengthen and intensify.

• I work in [industry] and have direct experience with [heat-related conditions, near-misses, lost-time injuries]. The basic protections in the proposed rule — water access, rest breaks, shade or cooling areas, acclimatization protocols for new workers, and emergency response procedures — are not novel. They reflect what responsible employers already do; an enforceable standard would extend the same baseline to workers whose employers do not.

• The proposed acclimatization requirement is particularly important. New workers and workers returning from extended absences face elevated risk during the first two weeks; the empirical evidence on this is consistent. Standardizing the acclimatization protocol prevents avoidable injuries.

• The thresholds in the proposed rule — an initial heat trigger at lower thresholds and a high-heat trigger at higher thresholds — are reasonable and reflect substantial scientific input. The rule’s tiered structure should be carried into the final standard.

• A National Emphasis Program is not a substitute for a standard. Enforcement programs direct inspections, but they can lapse, be revised, or be left to expire — as the heat NEP did in April 2026 before being replaced. Only a final rule gives workers and responsible employers a stable, enforceable baseline that does not depend on the priorities of any single administration.

I would also urge OSHA to finalize the rule without weakening it under industry pressure. Specifically, the final standard should:

1. Apply to indoor and outdoor work alike. Indoor heat hazards in warehousing, kitchens, and laundries are documented at scale.
2. Not exempt agricultural employers or small-employer categories, which include the workers at highest risk.
3. Include meaningful penalties for repeat violators.
4. Not set exposure thresholds on lower-than-actual humidity assumptions.

The proposed rule has done the hard work of building a complete administrative record. I’m asking OSHA and DOL to carry that work to completion and issue an enforceable final standard.

Thank you for your attention to this.

[Your name] [Your city, state] [Your industry/role, optional]