It helps the case if the employee has volunteered to do another "safe" job in the interim. The worker should stay near the job site unless ordered to leave by the employer. Also, an OSHA inspection should be immediately requested at the time the job is refused.
In theory, the II(c) clause protects workers against retaliation for exercising their safety and health rights. In practice, though, it simply doesn't work. Workers who file an II(c) complaint must depend upon the federal government to investigate and prosecute their case in federal district court. The process can take months to years, and according to a 1989 study by the GAG, less than 20 percent of these cases are resolved or prosecuted. An analysis of II(c) complaints in New York City revealed that not one case out of 51 filed by workers in 1991 was settled in favor of the worker.
"Concerted action" means that two or more workers or an individual act in order to protect other workers, even though the others may disagree with the action.
Under Section 502 of the NLRA, workers can only refuse to work if the conditions are "abnormally dangerous." As with OSHA, this does not mean that the worker has to be correct about the degree of danger. But at the time of refusal, there must have been evidence which would have made other "reasonable" people believe there was a danger.
But the Board has rarely upheld this right. In fact, in the 40-plus years since the passage of Section 502, the Board has found "abnormally dangerous" working conditions in only six contested cases.
In each of these cases the workers had to objectively prove that "tangible and immediate physical dangers" existed at the worksite. Also, the dangers had to be "substantially greater than those presented by normally existing conditions" to justify stopping work - a heavy burden indeed.
Source: OCAW Reporter, July-August, 1987; and TNS, Inc. and OCAW, 309 NLRB.
Hazardous Materials Workbook, OCAW/ Labor
Institute
New York, Apex Press, 1996, pp.379-80.