Requires employers to protect employees from extreme temperatures through rest breaks, PPE, training, and equipment, and mandates quarterly supervisor training, to recognize and mitigate heat- and cold-related risks.
H5305 would add a new section to Rhode Island’s Division of Occupational Health law requiring employers to take specific steps to protect workers from extreme temperatures, defined as 90 degrees Fahrenheit or above or 32 degrees Fahrenheit or below. The bill requires employers to implement plans to reduce exposure to heat and cold, including paid rest breaks, access to shade or warming/cooling stations, drinking water, personal protective equipment, and other safeguards. It also directs employers to ensure supervisors and managers complete a Department of Health online tutorial each quarter on recognizing heat- and cold-related illness and maintaining appropriate protective equipment and heating/cooling systems.
The bill creates additional protections for employees who work in vehicles, warehouses, or outdoors, including construction, farms, vineyards, recreation, and fishing sites. For those workers, employers must provide adequate insulation and heating/cooling equipment, and quarterly temperature-safety training during work hours. The training must cover symptoms of heat and cold stress, emergency response, employer monitoring procedures, and proper use of PPE. The Department of Health is authorized to create and administer the online training program and may adopt rules to implement the law. The act would take effect January 1, 2026.
This bill would expand Rhode Island workplace safety requirements by imposing new employer duties related to extreme-temperature exposure and by making retaliation for failing to comply an unlawful employment practice under state law. It would add to the Division of Occupational Health chapter and interact with existing employment discrimination protections in § 28-5-7. The Department of Health would gain rulemaking and program-administration responsibilities, and employers in temperature-exposed industries would need to adjust policies, equipment, and training practices to comply.
Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as a worker-protection and occupational safety bill with a public-health focus. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no recorded debate or formal voting history to indicate broader legislative sentiment. The bill’s structure suggests support for stronger workplace protections, particularly for employees in physically demanding or outdoor jobs.
The main likely points of contention are the scope and cost of the new mandates for employers, especially small businesses and employers in industries that rely on outdoor, warehouse, vehicle-based, or seasonal labor. Requirements for paid rest breaks, equipment upgrades, quarterly training, and temperature-monitoring procedures may be viewed as burdensome by employers, while worker advocates would likely support them as necessary protections against heat illness and cold stress. Another possible issue is enforcement and how broadly terms like adequate insulation, heating/cooling equipment, and workplace considered outdoors are interpreted by regulators.