Quick Hits

  • The U.S. Senate confirmed Jonathan L. Snare to the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) on October 7, 2025, marking a significant step toward restoring the federal workplace-safety appeals system, though OSHRC still lacks a quorum to issue Commission decisions.
  • Jonathan Snare, with extensive experience in OSHA policy and management-side litigation, will play a crucial role in assessing petitions for discretionary review and managing the docket administratively while OSHRC awaits the appointment of additional commissioners.
  • Despite Snare’s confirmation, OSHRC remains unable to issue official decisions or take other actions requiring a quorum, leaving many cases in limbo and continuing the reliance on ALJ decisions becoming final by operation of law.

Who Jonathan Snare Is and Why His Background Matters

Jonathan Snare most recently served as the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) deputy solicitor of labor and previously held several senior roles at the DOL between 2003 and 2009, including acting assistant secretary for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and deputy solicitor. In private practice, he led an OSHA-focused practice representing management in enforcement, compliance, and incident response matters before OSHA and related safety agencies. This blend of OSHA policy experience and management-side litigation counseling gives Snare a granular grasp of OSHA enforcement mechanics, ALJ litigation practice, and the Commission’s appellate role. That depth of experience will be relevant to how he assesses petitions for discretionary review and manages the docket administratively while a quorum is still lacking.

The State of OSHRC: Structure, Quorum, and Backlog

OSHRC is an independent adjudicatory agency created by Section 12 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act). It resolves disputes arising from OSHA citations and penalties. Cases proceed in two stages. First, an ALJ conducts a hearing and issues a written decision. Second, within thirty days of docketing the ALJ’s decision, any OSHRC commissioner may direct the case for Commission-level review. If no commissioner directs review, the ALJ’s decision becomes a final order of the Commission by operation of law, and the adversely affected party may then seek review in a U.S. court of appeals within sixty days.

By statute, two commissioners constitute a quorum, and official Commission action requires the affirmative vote of at least two members. Over the last two years, OSHRC has operated without a quorum, and, following the expiration of Cynthia L. Attwood’s term in April 2025, it had no commissioners. During this period, dozens of ALJ decisions awaited Commission review, some dating back several years, while new ALJ decisions largely became final without Commission involvement because there was no commissioner available to direct review. Snare’s confirmation fills one seat for a term running to April 27, 2029. The other two seats remain vacant as of this writing.

The immediate institutional consequence is that OSHRC remains a one-member body. It can receive filings, its ALJs can continue to hear and decide cases, and a commissioner can direct review within thirty days to prevent automatic finality. But without a second commissioner, OSHRC cannot issue Commission decisions, adopt or revise rules, or take other official actions that require a quorum. The backlog of directed cases therefore remains unresolved.

What Changes Now: Procedural Consequences for OSHA Cases

The most tangible near-term change is the restoration of a gatekeeping function at the thirty-day mark after an ALJ decision is docketed. The OSH Act’s framework gives any single commissioner the power to direct a case for Commission review. That power matters even in the absence of a quorum, because a timely direction for review prevents the ALJ’s decision from becoming the Commission’s final order by operation of law. In practical terms, parties who lose at the ALJ stage and want to preserve Commission review will once again have a path to do so, provided the commissioner agrees to direct review. If review is directed but the Commission still lacks a quorum, the case will sit pending and cannot be decided until at least one more commissioner is confirmed.

For cases not directed for review within thirty days, the ALJ decision automatically becomes a final order of the Commission. At that point, an adversely affected party may petition for review in the appropriate U.S. court of appeals within sixty days. This pathway has been the default during the quorum lapse for many cases. It remains available and, for some litigants, may be preferable to a direction for review that would otherwise stall the case indefinitely. A practical nuance follows from prior practice: in past periods of dysfunction, the Commission has sometimes vacated directions for review to allow court review of an ALJ decision; but vacating a direction is an official action that requires the affirmative vote of two commissioners. With only one member in place, that kind of relief will not be available unless and until a second commissioner takes office.

The presence of a single commissioner also influences abatement dynamics and penalty exposure. Employers are obligated to abate only once their case is final. When a case is directed for review, finality is postponed, which can delay the start of abatement obligations and the payment of assessed penalties. By contrast, when the ALJ decision becomes final for lack of direction, abatement and penalties are required absent a court-ordered stay or reversal on appeal. This makes the direction-for-review decision consequential for both sides. The DOL may want some adverse ALJ decisions to become final promptly so it can seek affirmation in the courts of appeals; employers, on the other hand, may seek to avoid finality by urging the commissioner to direct review and thereby pause the case. How Commissioner Snare uses his discretionary review authority will therefore shape the pace at which cases move out of the ALJ channel and into appellate courts.

Practical Impact of Snare’s Appointment

The practical impact of Snare’s confirmation turns on how quickly the remaining seats are filled.

In the present one-commissioner state, the most immediate question for litigants is whether to encourage or resist a direction for review. A direction prevents finality and forecloses immediate recourse to the courts of appeals. For a party seeking delay or hoping for a more favorable Commission in the future, that can be advantageous. For a party seeking a definitive judgment to implement abatement or to secure appellate review, avoiding direction may be preferable.

Once a second commissioner is confirmed, the calculus changes; OSHRC will be able to decide cases, including those already directed. But until that quorum is restored, the Commission’s appellate function remains dormant.

Deference, Adjudication, and ALJ Structure

Snare’s confirmation also lands at a time of significant change in administrative law. The Supreme Court of the United States’ recent decisions limiting judicial deference to agency statutory interpretations, coupled with rulings scrutinizing administrative adjudication, are already shaping OSHA litigation strategies. The end of Chevron-style deference means courts—and ultimately the Commission when it regains decisional capacity—will engage more directly with the OSH Act’s text when assessing questions such as the reach of the OSH Act’s General Duty Clause, the contours of “employer” for multi-employer worksites, and the boundaries of “willful” or “repeat” classifications.

Meanwhile, ongoing constitutional challenges to agency adjudication—including challenges focused on the appointment and removal protections for administrative law judges—introduce an additional layer of uncertainty. In one strand of litigation, the U.S. Department of Justice has stated that it will not defend certain multilayer removal protections for ALJs, signaling that structural issues could surface in OSHA cases. While those issues do not bear directly on OSHRC’s immediate quorum problem, they may affect remedies, stays, or appellate trajectories in contested cases and could shape the Commission’s approach once it returns to issuing decisions.

It is also important to distinguish the Commission’s role from OSHA’s. OSHRC is independent of the DOL and does not make or enforce safety standards; it decides contested enforcement actions. When Commission decisions are unavailable, the development of OSHA law shifts either to ALJ decisions, which resolve individual cases but set no binding precedent for other matters, or to circuit courts, which can produce divergent regional interpretations. The longer the Commission lacks a quorum, the more likely it becomes that circuit law rather than Commission precedent will frame outcomes on recurring issues, increasing the value of forum selection for appellate review and elevating the risk of inconsistent national guidance.

Practical Guidance for OSHA Litigants

For employers and the DOL alike, the key near-term inflection point in each case remains the thirty-day window after the ALJ decision is docketed. Parties may want to calibrate their submissions during that window with an eye toward whether Commission review will advance their interests. When a party seeks to preserve the possibility of Commission-level correction of an ALJ ruling but is prepared to accept additional delay, requesting direction for review is now viable again. When a party prefers an expeditious path to judicial review, the better course may be to allow the ALJ decision to become final by operation of law and then pursue appellate review on the statutory sixty-day timetable.

Abatement planning should take into account whether the ALJ decision will become a final order. Where an employer has not secured a stay, abatement obligations attach upon finality. If a direction for review is issued, abatement may be deferred until the case is resolved. Employers may therefore want to coordinate legal strategy with practical abatement planning to manage risk, including the potential for contempt or additional citations if hazards persist. The DOL, for its part, should consider whether to seek to avoid directions for review in cases where it wants to establish appellate validation, as well as whether to prioritize settlement on terms that achieve prompt abatement in matters that would otherwise languish awaiting a quorum.

Parties may also want to preserve issues comprehensively at the ALJ stage. In the current environment, many disputes will proceed directly from an ALJ’s final order to the courts of appeals. Issue preservation and record development at the hearing level are therefore more critical than ever, particularly on questions of statutory interpretation, fair notice, feasibility, and penalty factors. Because Commission precedent is not being replenished, litigants may want to be prepared to brief circuit-level authorities and to address the implications of reduced deference to agency interpretations in the wake of recent Supreme Court decisions.

Governance and Timing: What Comes Next

Snare was confirmed by a 51–47 Senate vote for a term expiring on April 27, 2029, filling a seat previously held by Amanda Wood Laihow, who is currently serving as the acting assistant secretary for OSHA. As of today, the other two OSHRC seats are vacant. The Commission cannot issue decisions until at least one more commissioner is confirmed and sworn in. The pace of additional nominations and confirmations will be determinative for OSHA litigation in the federal system. If a second commissioner is seated, OSHRC can begin deciding the dozens of cases that have been directed for review and can take official actions to manage its docket, including prioritizing older cases and those presenting recurring legal questions. If the second seat remains vacant for an extended period, the Commission’s appellate function will remain mostly dormant despite having one member in office, and the incentive structures described above will continue to govern litigant behavior.

It is also worth noting that tie votes at a two-member Commission leave the ALJ decision in place without creating precedent. While such outcomes resolve individual disputes, they do little to harmonize the law nationally. A full three-member Commission is therefore the most reliable path to clearing the backlog while producing precedential decisions that guide ALJs, parties, and OSHA area offices.

Conclusion

Jonathan Snare’s confirmation restores a critical but limited capability at OSHRC: a commissioner can once again direct ALJ decisions for Commission review within the statutory thirty-day period. That power will matter in individual cases because it can prevent automatic finality and defer abatement and penalties. But one commissioner cannot issue Commission decisions or take official actions requiring a quorum. In practical terms, the immediate impact on OSHA cases is bifurcated. Where review is not directed, ALJ decisions will continue to become final orders, preserving a path to the courts of appeals and, in some cases, accelerating appellate resolution. Where review is directed, cases will be held until a second commissioner is confirmed, extending the backlog and delaying final outcomes.

Ogletree Deakins’ Workplace Safety and Health Practice Group will continue to monitor developments and provide updates on the Governmental Affairs and Workplace Safety and Health blogs as additional information becomes available.

This article and more information on how the Trump administration’s actions impact employers can be found on Ogletree Deakins’ Administration Resource Hub.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts

Author


Browse More Insights

American flag flapping in front of corporate office building in Lower Manhattan
Practice Group

Governmental Affairs

Ogletree Governmental Affairs, Inc. (OGA), a subsidiary of Ogletree Deakins, is a full service legislative and regulatory affairs consulting firm, dedicated to helping clients solve their problems with the public sector. OGA unites the skills and experience of government relations professionals with the talent of the Firm’s lawyers to provide solutions to regulatory issues outside the courtroom.

Learn more
Businessmen walking and talking in empty warehouse
Practice Group

Workplace Safety and Health

The Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) practice of Ogletree Deakins is characterized by the knowledge and credibility of our attorneys, and the exceptional level of service that we provide to our clients.

Learn more

Sign up to receive emails about new developments and upcoming programs.

Sign Up Now