WASHINGTON (PAI) - It took an AFL-CIO lawsuit, congressional intervention and an appellate court ruling, but the Bush government's Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued its final rule requiring employers to buy personal protective equipment - such as hard hats and protective garments - for workers, on Nov. 15.

The rule, OSHA Administrator Edwin Foulke said in a telephone press conference, would cover approximately 5% of employers whom OSHA regulates who do not now pay for their workers' equipment, but should. The other 95% do, he said.

"This rule covers only who pays, not the type of personal protective equipment" involved, Foulke added. That is set by other OSHA rules and by paperwork firms file with the agency, detailing hazards at workplaces and injury prevention measures.

Foulke said the rule, which takes effect in six months, should cut yearly job injuries by 21,000, and save millions of dollars. It will cost those businesses who now do not protect their workers $85 million.

AFL-CIO Occupational Safety and Health Director Peg Seminario said "we're glad the rule has finally been issued. But it did take the (AFL-CIO) lawsuit and congressional intervention" to get it. "We'll be looking at it in detail to see if it provides the level of protection required by law," she added.

"This is going to be a codification of what the policy had been," she added. She noted OSHA will now require companies to pay for replacing workers' equipment when it wears out and that the equipment must meet the agency's safety standards.

Federal judges ordered OSHA to issue the rule - it had done everything but that - after the federation sued early this year. OSHA delayed its last step (issuing the final rule) since 1999. One reporter, in the press conference with Foulke, noted Bush's Office of Management and Budget's regulatory affairs office briefed the Chamber of Commerce behind closed doors about the workers' equipment rule, without OSHA there. Foulke said OSHA's absence from that meeting was due to a scheduling conflict.

"It should have never taken the threat of a lawsuit and legislation to get the Department of Labor to take these simple steps to protect workers from everyday jobsite hazards and prevent thousands of workplace injuries each year,'' said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.

The rule has some exceptions. One is if a worker bought equipment beforehand - at a firm that did not have to provide it - the firm does not have to repay the worker for it. And if it's ordinary clothing, such as long-sleeved shirts, work pants and work boots needed to protect workers on the job anyway, the employer doesn't have to pay.

"But if ordinary rainwear is not sufficient to protect a worker" from outdoor storms, "the employer has to pay" for special gear, Foulke said. The same rule applies for a worker who needs a heavy coat to work in a freezer, he added.