New York Senate Bill S10371

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

Caption

Establishes a committee to examine the state industrial code and recommend any changes that need to be made; requires a report to be sent to the governor, the commissioner, the temporary president of the senate, the speaker of the assembly, the senate minority leader and assembly minority leader on any changes that need to be made to the state industrial code.

Summary

S10371 would create a temporary joint committee to review New York’s state industrial code, with a focus on part 23 as it applies to construction, demolition, and excavation work. The committee would include representatives from labor organizations, occupational safety advocates, and appointees from the governor and legislative leaders, plus a non-voting chair appointed by the commissioner of labor. Members would serve without compensation, though they could be reimbursed for necessary expenses. The committee would study the industrial code alongside OSHA standards, ANSI standards, and other nationally recognized construction and safety standards to determine whether updates are needed. It would then issue a report with findings and recommendations, including any suggested legislative changes, to the governor and legislative leaders by December 1, 2027. The committee itself would be temporary and would expire 60 days after the report is transmitted.

Impact

The bill does not directly change substantive labor or safety rules immediately; instead, it creates a new temporary oversight and review mechanism within the Labor Law. Its main legal effect is to add section 45 to the Labor Law establishing the committee, setting its membership, duties, reporting deadline, and automatic repeal. If the committee recommends changes, those would require future legislative or regulatory action to amend the industrial code or related statutes affecting construction, demolition, excavation, and workplace safety.

Sentiment

The available materials suggest a generally supportive or at least exploratory posture toward the bill, with the measure framed as a review and recommendation process rather than an immediate regulatory overhaul. Because there are no recorded votes or committee transcripts provided, there is no evidence of formal opposition or debate in the supplied record. The bill’s structure indicates an effort to gather labor, safety, and government input before making policy changes.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are likely to be the scope of the review, the composition of the committee, and whether the industrial code should be revised through this process at all. Labor and safety groups may favor a review that strengthens protections for construction workers, while employers or industry stakeholders could be concerned about future regulatory burdens or changes to construction, demolition, and excavation requirements. Another possible issue is that the bill creates a committee with no direct rulemaking power, so some may view it as too limited or merely advisory.