Editors Note: This post appears under a partnership between News4JAX & Jacksonville Today. Never miss an answer. Sign up for the free Jacksonville Today newsletter.
Q: Florida recently enacted a law prohibiting local governments from requiring heat protections for workers, after Miami-Dade County last year ended a push to protect outdoor workers like agricultural and construction laborers.
Recommended Videos
“Miami-Dade County is experiencing a significant increase in the number of extreme heat days every year, which is estimated to reach 134 days by the middle of the century,” read the county’s legislation, which was ultimately withdrawn.
The new Florida law, House Bill 433, says, in part, that cities and counties “may not establish, mandate, or otherwise require an employer … to meet or provide heat exposure requirements not otherwise required under state or federal law.”
Jacksonville Today reader Barb B. is perplexed by the legislation that Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law in April.
“I would like to see someone try to explain why DeSantis and our Legislature think this law was humane, “ Barb writes.
“Why prevent local heat protections for workers?”
A: The short answer, according to the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Tiffany Esposito, R-Fort Myers, is that a patchwork of local regulations would make it difficult for businesses to navigate if they are operating statewide.
When Esposito introduced the bill on Feb. 14 to the House State Affairs Committee, she said, “This bill preempts the regulation of terms and conditions of employment to the state. That is the bill.”
As Orlando Weekly reported, business interests including the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Associated Industries of Florida, construction companies and agriculture companies lobbied lawmakers this year to eliminate local rule over heat protections as well as wage rules. Text messages reviewed through a public records request show industry lobbyists applied pressure in the final days of the legislative session to ensure HB 433’s passage.
A few Republicans ultimately joined Democrats in voting against the bill, but it passed by a vote of 74-36 in the House and 24-15 in the Senate.
Lawmakers heard public comment from opponents, who included an agricultural worker whose father had died of heat exposure on the job, as well as the Sierra Club of Florida. They urged stronger heat protections because workers are dying from heat exposure.
Miami-Dade County’s failed legislation would have required construction and agriculture companies to take steps such as ensuring workers have access to cool drinking water and 10-minute breaks in the shade every two hours when the heat index is at least 95 degrees.
During debate on the measure, House Democrats asked whether stronger heat protections for workers could be increased at the state level — to avoid the patchwork issue. House State Affairs Committee Chair Lawrence McClure, R-Plant City, cut off that line of questioning.
Rep. Felicia Simone Robinson, D-Miami Gardens, said she felt like she repeats herself over and over in saying government closest to the people is the government that works best for the people.
“All of this preemption, we just really need to stop it,” Robinson said.
“It seems that we’re just continuously being hypocritical as a legislature,” she said. “We did the Live Local Act, but then now we’re trying to take away living wages.”
The Live Local Act, or SB 102, aimed to bolster the availability of affordable housing options, allowing more people to live in the communities where they work.
Before voting yes on the heat protection bill, Rep. Rick Roth, R-West Palm Beach, said he had to speak up.
“Thank you for this great bill,” said Roth, who owns Roth Farms. “I’m infuriated that any local government thinks that they can do a better job of management — managing my employees. I’ve farmed in South Florida for 45 years. People that work outside — contractors, agriculture — we cannot farm or work without good employees. And I guarantee you, we do everything to do the best for our employees, and this insinuation that we need more help from local government regulating heat exposure problems, it’s insulting.”
What protections exist
The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration does not have a specific rule in place for heat safety. But the agency can take action against businesses through what is known as a “general duty clause” of a workplace-safety law.
OSHA recently announced it had cited Guerrero Ag LLC, an Arcadia-based labor contractor, after a 41-year-old worker collapsed in December 2023 while harvesting oranges. The worker, who died after being hospitalized, had symptoms consistent with a heat stroke, the agency said in a news release.
The company, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, faces $30,651 in proposed penalties for the death.
The federal government, in the meantime, is working to toughen worker heat protections at the national level. Last week, OSHA released a proposed rule similar to what Miami-Dade County had considered, which would require employers to provide such protections as water and shade breaks when temperatures top certain thresholds.
“Workers all over the country are passing out, suffering heat stroke and dying from heat exposure from just doing their jobs, and something must be done to protect them,” Douglas L. Parker, assistant secretary for occupational safety and health, says in a statement emailed to Jacksonville Today. “Today’s proposal is an important next step in the process to receive public input to craft a ‘win-win’ final rule that protects workers while being practical and workable for employers.”
That process is expected to take several years.
Curious about something in Jax? Email your question to news@jaxtoday.org, and a Jacksonville Today reporter might answer it in a future story. Just put #ASKJAXTDY in the subject line. This post appears under a partnership with Jacksonville Today. Never miss an answer. Sign up for the free Jacksonville Today newsletter.