Extent of OSHA coverage

Under 1975.3(a), OSHA's objective is to extend coverage as broadly as Congress' commerce power allows so that, "so far as possible, every working man and woman in the Nation" is protected. See the statement of purpose in 1975.3(a) and the part-number overview at 1975.

• This means the Agency reads "employer" and "business affecting commerce" broadly to include commercial and noncommercial activities involving one or more employees. See 1975.3 for the controlling discussion on coverage.

Under 1975.3, "so far as possible" refers to the practical limits of government regulation and available resources rather than a legal cap on who may be covered by the Act. See the explanation in 1975.3.

• In short, the phrase guides implementation and enforcement priorities but does not create a categorical exclusion from coverage.

Under 1975.3, an "employer" is any person engaged in a business affecting commerce who has employees, and the term is interpreted broadly to include commercial and noncommercial activities that employ one or more workers. See the definition discussion in 1975.3 and the part overview at 1975.

• The regulation emphasizes that Congress intended coverage to reach all employments where hazards exist or could exist, provided the employment affects commerce.

No—OSHA's guidance says unpaid volunteers generally are not "employees" under the federal OSH Act, so the Act normally does not apply to volunteers who receive no monetary or other compensation. See the OSHA interpretation "Applicability to volunteers" (2005-05-13) and 1975.3.

• However, if an organization employs at least one paid worker, OSHA treats the organization as an employer and OSHA standards apply to that employer's employees, and volunteers may be protected in some State plan jurisdictions depending on state rules. See the OSHA interpretation for details.

Under OSHA policy, individuals who privately employ workers in their own residences to perform ordinary domestic tasks (including caring for an elderly household member) are generally not covered employers under the OSH Act. See the interpretation "Coverage for elderly care" (2001-02-21) and the coverage discussion in 1975.3.

• This exclusion applies where the work is ordinary household domestic work performed in a private residence and the employer is the resident individual.

Under 1975.3(b), the United States and any State or political subdivision are not included in the statutory definition of "employer," but the Act contains special provisions for Federal and State employees in other sections so that these employees receive protections even where the general employer definition excludes governments. See 1975.3(b) and the part overview at 1975.

• In short, States and the Federal Government are not "employers" under section 3(5), yet the Act provides separate mechanisms (e.g., sections 18(c)(6) and 19) to protect many public employees.

Yes—a state hospital may be treated as a "State or political subdivision" and thus not an "employer" under the OSH Act if it meets tests showing it is created by the State and administered by officials controlled by public authorities; the determination is fact-specific. See the OSHA letter "State hospital employer definition" (2001-08-27) and 1975.3.

• The letter outlines tests and factors (appointment and control of administrators, government-like powers, tax status, etc.) used to decide whether an entity is a political subdivision for 3(5) purposes.

No—1975.3(c) explains Congress did not intend general exemptions; section 4(b)(1) only avoids direct duplication with other Federal agencies, not create broad exclusions. See 1975.3(c).

• Where another federal agency already regulates particular working conditions, OSHA's goal is to prevent overlapping regulation while still ensuring worker protection—not to carve out broad classes of workers from OSHA coverage.

Yes—employees working on Indian reservations are generally entitled to the same protections under the OSH Act as other private-sector workers, and tribes are treated like other private employers for OSHA purposes unless a different legal status applies. See the interpretation "OSHA jurisdiction on reservations" (1993-03-25) and the coverage discussion in 1975.3.

• Court precedent and OSHA guidance treat tribes as private-sector employers for jurisdictional purposes unless a specific exception applies.

Yes—if a charitable or non-profit organization employs one or more paid workers, it qualifies as an "employer" under the OSH Act and must comply with OSHA standards that affect its employees. See the OSHA interpretation "Applicability to volunteers" (2005-05-13) and the coverage rationale in 1975.3.

• Whether specific individuals are employees or volunteers is a facts-and-circumstances legal determination, but the presence of paid employees brings the organization within OSHA's coverage.

Under 1975.3, OSHA reads Congress' commerce power broadly so that even local or noncommercial activities that affect commerce—and that involve employees—can fall within OSHA coverage if hazards impose a substantial burden on commerce. See the commerce clause discussion in 1975.3(a) and the part overview at 1975.

• Practically, this means the Agency will consider the overall effect on interstate commerce and potential hazards when deciding coverage, rather than excluding activities solely because they appear purely local.

Yes—1975.3 explains that "business" is interpreted to include any commercial or noncommercial activity affecting commerce that involves the employment of one or more employees. See 1975 for the broader part context.

• The purpose is to ensure worker safety across a wide range of employments where hazards may exist, not just those run for profit.

OSHA treats entities that recruit, supervise, or otherwise control agricultural workers as employers or joint employers for Field Sanitation compliance, based on the specific facts, and will hold all responsible parties accountable. See the Field Sanitation interpretation (1994-04-25) and the coverage policy in 1975.3.

• The Agency looks at factors like recruitment, supervision, and control of working conditions to determine joint-employer status in agriculture.

Yes—1975.3 makes clear OSHA coverage applies to any person engaged in a business affecting commerce who has one or more employees, so having a single paid employee can bring you under the Act. See 1975.3.

• Employers with even a single employee should assess applicable OSHA standards and compliance obligations.

If a State plan covers volunteers differently, employers should consult that State's plan regulations and guidance in addition to Federal OSHA materials, because State plans may extend coverage beyond the federal approach described in the OSHA interpretation "Applicability to volunteers" (2005-05-13) and the federal coverage discussion in 1975.3.

• State plan rules vary; check the applicable State plan agency for definitive guidance on whether volunteers are covered in that jurisdiction.