A bill from an independent · See all 17 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Protecting America's Workers Act amends the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to increase worker protections and employer accountability. It expands coverage to include public employees and strengthens whistleblower protections against retaliation. The bill increases civil and criminal penalties for safety violations and establishes new rights for victims and their families. Additionally, it improves reporting requirements for injuries and mandates stricter oversight of State occupational safety plans.
Yes· 3 of 25
- Scored +7
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Provides critical safety protections and legal rights for high-risk workers who often fall into low-income brackets.
- Scored +6
Would union members be better off under this?
Strengthens the role of authorized employee representatives and protects union-led safety reports.
- Scored +6
Does this give the federal government more power?
Strengthens the Secretary of Labor's oversight and concurrent enforcement authority over State plans.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -8
Would business owners be better off under this?
Imposes significantly higher civil penalties, criminal liability for directors, and increased administrative burdens.
- Scored -5
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
Reduces State autonomy by mandating stricter conformity to Federal OSHA standards and increasing oversight.
- Scored -5
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Significantly increases civil and criminal penalties and administrative reporting burdens for employers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Expanded Coverage for Public Workers: Public employees, including those working for the United States or any State and its political subdivisions, are now covered under the Act (Section 101).
-
Stronger Whistleblower Protections: Employees are protected from retaliation for reporting unsafe conditions or refusing to perform duties they reasonably believe would cause serious injury (Section 201).
-
Victim and Family Rights: Victims of work-related injury or death, or their representatives, gain the right to meet with the Secretary, receive copies of citations, and make statements during proceedings (Section 331).
-
Guaranteed Pay During Inspections: Employees will not lose wages or benefits for time spent participating in or aiding safety inspections (Section 313).
-
Increased Accountability for Fatalities: The Secretary is required to investigate any incident resulting in death or "significant incidents" involving the hospitalization of two or more employees (Section 314).
-
Enhanced Training Access: The bill provides for grant programs to help nonprofit organizations offer safety and health training to high-risk workers and employers (Section 502).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Higher Costs for Employers: Employers face significantly higher civil penalties, with some maximums increasing from $70,000 to $700,000, which may impact business operations (Section 351).
-
Stricter Criminal Penalties for Management: Corporate officers and directors can now face imprisonment for up to 10 years if a knowing violation significantly contributes to an employee's death (Section 352).
-
Increased Administrative Burden: Employers must now electronically report certain injury and illness records to the Secretary and maintain site logs for all workers, including independent contractors (Section 312).
-
Limited Ability to Delay Corrections: For violations labeled as serious, willful, or repeated, filing a contest no longer automatically stops the required correction period (Section 342).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Provides critical safety protections and legal rights for high-risk workers who often fall into low-income brackets. Would union members be better off under this? — Strengthens the role of authorized employee representatives and protects union-led safety reports. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Extends safety protections to all employees including those at work sites regardless of status. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Enhances general worker safety and whistleblower protections. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact on safety for workers in high-risk industrial sectors. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact on safety for workers in high-risk industrial sectors. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact on safety for workers in high-risk industrial sectors. Would men be better off under this? — General improvement in workplace safety and whistleblower rights. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Improves safety and provides legal recourse for workplace injuries. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact on safety for workers in high-risk industrial sectors. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Improves general workplace safety and health standards. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Improves safety in industrial rural workplaces. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Improves safety and provides legal recourse for workplace injuries. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Improves safety in industrial urban workplaces. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact on safety for workers in high-risk industrial sectors. Would women be better off under this? — General improvement in workplace safety and whistleblower rights. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Improves workplace safety and whistleblower protections for entering employees. Would farmers be better off under this? — Increases safety standards and reporting for agricultural work sites. Would business owners be better off under this? — Imposes significantly higher civil penalties, criminal liability for directors, and increased administrative burdens.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Strengthens the Secretary of Labor's oversight and concurrent enforcement authority over State plans. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Establishes formal rights for victims and families to participate in proceedings and receive notifications. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires electronic reporting of injury records to be available to the public in a searchable format. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Reduces State autonomy by mandating stricter conformity to Federal OSHA standards and increasing oversight.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Reduces workplace injuries and illnesses through stricter safety standards and oversight. Does this put more money into medical research? — Expands health hazard evaluations by NIOSH for toxic substances and physical agents.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this shorten or soften prison sentences? — Increases criminal penalties and imprisonment terms for corporate officers regarding safety violations.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — Strengthens employee representatives' roles and protections against retaliation for reporting safety issues. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Significantly increases civil and criminal penalties and administrative reporting burdens for employers. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Establishes new grant programs for nonprofit safety training and increases investigation mandates.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Directs NIOSH to expand health hazard evaluations on toxic substances.
- 9/14/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 7/30/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/13/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 4/28/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 12 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Angela AlsobrooksDemocrat · Maryland
Tammy BaldwinDemocrat · Wisconsin
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey
Tammy DuckworthDemocrat · Illinois
John FettermanDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Andy KimDemocrat · New Jersey
Edward MarkeyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Patty MurrayDemocrat · Washington
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon
Alex PadillaDemocrat · California
Gary PetersDemocrat · Michigan
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California
Tina SmithDemocrat · Minnesota
Elissa SlotkinDemocrat · Michigan
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland
Elizabeth WarrenDemocrat · Massachusetts