California agriculture employers are facing increasing scrutiny from Cal/OSHA, with regulators actively targeting farms and agricultural businesses across the state.
Legal experts Kevin Bland and Karen Tynan have outlined the most common citations being issued to agricultural employers operating under California’s stringent workplace safety rules.
Tynan, who chairs her firm’s Workplace Safety and Health Practice Group, has made agricultural compliance a central focus of her legal practice, advising employers on how to stay ahead of enforcement actions.
Heat illness prevention remains one of the most cited violations, a serious concern given California’s intense summer temperatures and the physically demanding nature of outdoor agricultural work.
Employers are also being cited for failures related to their Injury and Illness Prevention Plans, which are mandatory documents that must be properly maintained, updated, and accessible to workers.
Field sanitation is another frequent source of citations, with regulators checking whether workers have access to adequate toilet facilities, handwashing stations, and potable drinking water in the field.
Lockout and tagout compliance, which governs the safe control of hazardous energy during equipment maintenance, is also among the violations regulators are finding most often on agricultural worksites.
Respiratory protection requirements are drawing additional attention, particularly around hazards such as valley fever and wildfire smoke, both of which pose significant health risks to outdoor agricultural workers in California.
Bland and Tynan stress that documentation and training are essential tools in building a defensible compliance posture against Cal/OSHA enforcement activity.
Basic measures such as providing potable water, shade structures, and proper sanitation facilities form the foundation of any effective agricultural workplace safety programme.
Employers who neglect these fundamentals are not only putting workers at risk but also exposing their businesses to citations that can carry significant financial and reputational consequences.
Tynan and Bland emphasise that consistent, proactive attention to these compliance areas is far less costly than dealing with enforcement actions after a violation has already been identified.