Using for the first time powers it granted itself in 1996, Congress last month dismantled a controversial ergonomics rule just weeks before it was to take effect.

The Senate used the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to vote on March 6 to repeal the rule, which had been developed by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The following day, the House voted 223 to 206 to do the same. President Bush signed the Joint Resolution of Disapproval on March 20.

That gives the business community some breathing room. "The CRA has stopped what we consider to have been the most far-reaching and costly rule in OSHA's history," says Jennifer Krese of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). "One of the nice things about the CRA is that, not only is the regulation dead, but OSHA will also be prohibited from promulgating a substantially similar rule in the future," adds National Coalition on Ergonomics (NCE) spokesman John Eisen.

Business groups cited numerous problems with the defunct regulation. One concern was that employer requirements would kick in with the report of even one ergonomics-related injury in the workplace. The problem with that, say the rule's critics, is there are numerous potential causes of ergonomics-related injuries, many of which can occur off the job or be related to individual physiology.

Of even greater concern, according to many observers, was that the regulation would have superseded state workers compensation systems. The rule would have required employers to cover the costs of ergonomics-related injuries at certain pay levels for specified periods of time, regardless of compensation determinations made by the applicable state system.

The dismantling of the existing regulation doesn't mean that there will be no new ergonomics regulations in the future, however. OSHA, Congress, business groups, and organized labor have all expressed interest in working together to create a new, more acceptable version.

Charles Jeffress, the OSHA administrator who dedicated the last two years to getting the ergonomics regulation passed, is out of a job, and a new OSHA head has not yet been appointed. The new secretary of labor, Elaine L. Chao, however, sent a letter to Sen. James Jeffords, chairman of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, on March 6 outlining OSHA's tentative plans. In part, the letter reads: "Let me assure you that, in the event a Joint Resolution of Disapproval becomes law, I intend to pursue a comprehensive approach to ergonomics, which may include new rulemaking, that addresses the concerns levied against the current standard."

In March, Sen. John B. Breaux (D-La.) introduced an amendment to a bankruptcy bill that would require OSHA to introduce a new ergonomics regulation within two years. "This will probably ultimately become a free-standing bill," predicts Krese.

Responses from business groups that fought against the original ergonomics standard, as well as organized labor groups that fought for it, indicate that they are interested in Sen. Breaux's proposal. "We view the new environment as an opportunity for OSHA to go back to the drawing board and do what it should have done a decade ago—listen to business and be open to different approaches from the ones it steadfastly refused to deviate from," says Eisen. "We want an agreeable and common-sense approach to ergonomics," agrees Krese.

In the meantime, Eisen encourages employers to continue to improve ergonomics on their own. "Even though the regulation is dead, it doesn't mean employers should discontinue their efforts," he emphasizes. "In fact, ergonomics should still be a high priority, and employers should continue to try to find ways to reduce these problems."