United States: OSHA Issues Final Rule On Complaints Under Affordable Care Act's Anti-Retaliation Provision

Last Updated: November 3 2016
Article by Kenneth A. Jenero

Kenneth A. Jenero is a partner in Holland & Knight's Chicago office.


  • The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a final rule governing claims under Section 18C of the Fair Labor Standards Act, which prohibits retaliation against employees who engage in certain activities protected by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
  • The final rule clarifies the broad range of activities protected by the ACA, the relatively low burden of proof for employees asserting claims under the ACA and the potentially significant liability to which employees are exposed for engaging in unlawful retaliation.
  • With implementation of the ACA now in full force, the growing attraction of retaliation claims generally and issuance of OSHA's final rule on the ACA's anti-retaliation provision, employers should be prepared for an increase in retaliation and whistleblowing complaints under Section 18C.


The Affordable Care Act (ACA) added Section 18C to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to prohibit retaliation against employees who engage in certain activities protected by the ACA. Responsibility for receiving and investigating complaints under Section 18C has been delegated to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health (Assistant Secretary).

On Oct. 13, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a final rule governing employee retaliation claims under Section 18C, including procedures and time frames for filing and handling employee complaints, investigations by OSHA, appeals of OSHA determinations to an administrative law judge (ALJ), hearings by ALJs, review of ALJ decisions by the Administrative Review Board (ARB), judicial review of the ARB's final decision and interpretations of certain key terms used in the ACA's anti-retaliation provisions. To the extent possible within the bounds of applicable statutory language, the final rule was designed to be consistent with procedures applied to claims under other anti-retaliation provisions administered by OSHA, such as the Consumer Product Safety and Improvement Act of 2008.

The final rule clarifies the broad range of activities protected by the ACA, the relatively low burden of proof for employees asserting claims under the ACA and the potentially significant liability to which employees are exposed for engaging in unlawful retaliation. This alert addresses some of the key provisions of the final rule of which employers should be aware. It also sets forth recommendations for employers to prepare for, and successfully defend against, retaliation and whistleblowing claims under the ACA.

Scope of Protected Activities

Under Section 18C, an employer may not retaliate against an employee for receiving a tax credit under Section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code) or cost-sharing reductions (referred to as a "subsidy") under the ACA. The Code allows certain individuals to receive a premium tax credit for coverage under a qualified health plan through an exchange if they are not eligible for health coverage other than in the individual market, including an offer of coverage from their employer that is affordable and provides minimum value. Individuals eligible for a premium tax credit also may qualify for cost-sharing reductions if certain other conditions are met.

Under the ACA, certain large employers are subject to an assessable payment (referred to as an "employer shared responsibility penalty") if they fail to offer coverage required by the ACA and any of their full-time employees receive a premium tax credit for coverage through an exchange. As noted in the final rule, the relationship between the employee's receipt of a premium tax credit and the potential employer shared responsibility penalty imposed on an employer could create the incentive for an employer to retaliate against an employee. Section 18C is designed, in part, to protect employees against such retaliation.

Section 18C also protects employees against retaliation because they:

  • provided or are about to provide to their employer, the federal government or a state attorney general information relating to any violation of, or any act or omission that the employee reasonably believes to be a violation of, any provision of the ACA
  • testified or are about to testify in a proceeding concerning such a violation
  • assisted or participated, or are about to assist or participate, in any such proceeding
  • objected to, or refused to participate in, any activity, policy, practice or assigned task that the employee reasonably believed to be in violation of any provision of the ACA, or any order, rule, regulation, standard or ban under the ACA

The final rule adopted a broad definition of the term "employee," consistent with other anti-retaliation statutes administered by OSHA. An "employee," who may bring a complaint under the ACA's anti-retaliation provision, includes not only current employees, but also former employees and applicants for employment.

The final rule clarifies that for purposes of the ACA's anti-retaliation provision, an employee is considered to have "received" a premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction not only when the credit is allowed on the individual's tax return, but also when an exchange finds the employee eligible for a credit or cost-sharing reduction. That is the point at which the employee may apply financial assistance to reduce his or her share of the premium cost for coverage purchased through an exchange.

Although the final rule was not revised specifically to address concerns by several commenters that employees be protected from retaliation for taking preliminary actions to receive a premium tax credit (such as asking their employer about the healthcare coverage they offer in order to complete an exchange application), OSHA expressed its belief that existing case law under other whistleblower statutes that it administers provides protection for such actions. According to OSHA, an employee's inquiry to his or her employer to gather information necessary to apply for a premium tax credit may trigger protection under Section 18C if the employee can show that the employer's adverse action was based, in part, on either 1) the employer's belief that the employee had received a premium tax credit or 2) the employer's desire to deter the employee from taking any further action that would result in the employee's receiving a premium tax credit.

The final rule addresses the subject of when an employee will be deemed to have a "reasonable belief" of a violation of the ACA. According to the final rule, the employee must have both a subjective, good faith belief and an objectively reasonable belief that the complained-of conduct violates an applicable provision of the ACA. The requirement that the employee have a subjective, good faith belief is satisfied as long as the employee actually believed that the conduct violated the ACA. The objective reasonableness of an employee's belief is evaluated based on the knowledge available to a reasonable person in the same factual circumstances with the same training and experience as the aggrieved employee. However, the employee need not show that the conduct complained of constituted an actual violation of the law. The employee's whistleblower activity is protected when it is based on a reasonable, but mistaken, belief that a violation of the law has occurred or is likely to occur.

OSHA specifically noted that Section 4980H of the Code does not prohibit an employer from reducing an employee's hours of service in order to avoid a potential shared responsibility payment. Therefore, it disagreed with a commenter's implication that the ACA's whistleblower provision would apply if an employer reduced an employee's hours of service for that purpose. At the same time, however, it observed that reducing an employee's work hours would be unlawful under Section 18C if it was done in retaliation for activity protected under the ACA. It also would be unlawful to threaten employees with reductions in hours in order to dissuade them from applying for a premium tax credit. Determining an employer's real motive typically involves an in-depth analysis of the particular facts and circumstances of each case.

OSHA also opted for broad definitions of the terms "adverse action" and "intimidation," consistent with case law under the other whistleblower statutes that it enforces. Adverse action is not limited to action that affects an economic or tangible condition of employment. Rather, it is any action that a reasonable employee would find "materially adverse," that is, more than trivial. Specifically, the evidence must show that the employer's action "could well have dissuaded a reasonable employee from engaging in protected activity." While intimidation may be linked with some other form of adverse action, intimidation that is more than trivial may, standing alone, qualify as adverse action. Thus, unlawful retaliation would include intimidating an employee for engaging in protected activity when the intimidation would dissuade a reasonable employee from engaging in protected activity, regardless of whether it affected an economic or tangible condition of employment.

Burden of Proof and Remedies

To be timely, a retaliation complaint must be filed with OSHA within 180 days of the date when the alleged violation has occurred, that is, when the alleged retaliatory decision has been both made and communicated to the employee. In other words, the limitations period commences once the employee is aware or reasonably should be aware of the employer's decision.

Complaints filed under Section 18C need not be in any particular form. They may be either oral or in writing. When a complaint is made orally, OSHA will put it in writing. OSHA will accept complaints in any language.

Upon the filing of a complaint, OSHA is to determine whether the complaint, supplemented as appropriate by an interview of the complaining employee, alleges the existence of facts sufficient to make a "prima facie showing." To establish a prima facie showing, the facts must show the following:

  • the employee engaged in protected activity
  • the employer knew or suspected that the employee engaged in the protected activity
  • the employee suffered an adverse action
  • the circumstances were sufficient to raise an inference that the protected activity was a "contributing factor" in the adverse action, that is, that the protected activity, alone or on combination with other factors, affected in some way the outcome of the employer's decision

The employee will be considered to have met this initial burden if the complaint, as supplemented, alleges the existence of facts and either direct or circumstantial evidence to meet the required showing. According to OSHA, an employee's burden may be satisfied when, for example, the employee shows that the action took place shortly after the protected activity or at the first opportunity available to the employer, giving rise to the inference that it was a contributing factor in the adverse action.

If the employee makes the required prima facie showing, OSHA will conduct an investigation of the complaint unless the employer shows, by "clear and convincing" evidence, that it would have taken the same action in the absence of the alleged protected activity. The "clear and convincing evidence" standard is a higher burden of proof than a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. Clear and convincing evidence is that which indicates that the thing to be proved is highly probably or reasonably certain.

Assuming that the investigation proceeds beyond what OSHA calls the "gatekeeper phase," OSHA will determine whether there is "reasonable cause" to believe that protected activity was a contributing factor in the alleged adverse action. If OSHA finds such "reasonable cause," it will order relief against the employer unless the employer demonstrates, again by "clear and convincing evidence," that it would have taken the same action in the absence of the protected activity. OSHA will issue written findings regarding whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the complaint has merit within 60 days of the filing of the complaint.

If there is a reasonable cause finding, OSHA will order appropriate relief, including preliminary reinstatement, affirmative action to abate the violation, back pay with interest, compensatory damages, attorney and expert witness fees, and costs. In rare circumstances, front pay may be appropriate in lieu of reinstatement. When ordering back pay, OSHA also will require the employer to submit documentation to the Social Security Administration allocating the back pay to the appropriate period.

Objections, ALJ Hearings and Review

The parties will be advised of OSHA's findings and their right to file objections and request a hearing. If no objections are filed within 30 days, the findings and any preliminary order will become the final decision and order of OSHA. If objections are timely filed, any order of preliminary reinstatement will take effect. However, the remaining provisions of the order will not take effect until administrative proceedings are completed.

A hearing on timely-filed objections will commence expeditiously before an ALJ. The hearing will be conducted de novo, on the record. ALJs have broad discretion to limit discovery where necessary to expedite the hearing. Formal rules of evidence will not apply, but rules or principles designed to assure production of the most probative evidence will be applied. The ALJ also may exclude evidence that is immaterial, irrelevant or unduly repetitious.

The same burdens of proof applicable at the investigatory stage apply at the hearing stage. The employee must prove by a "preponderance of the evidence" that the protected activity was a "contributing factor" in the adverse action. If the employee does so, in order to avoid liability, the employer must demonstrate, by the higher "clear and convincing evidence" standard, that it would have taken the same action in the absence of the protected activity. The remedies that may be imposed by an ALJ are the same as those (discussed above) that may be imposed by OSHA at the conclusion of the investigatory stage.

The decision of the ALJ will become a final order unless a petition for review with the ARB is filed within 14 days after the date of the ALJ's decision and the ARB accepts the petition for review. An appeal to the ARB is not a matter of right; it is accepted at the discretion of the ARB. If no timely petition for review is filed, or the ARB denies review, the ALJ's decision will become the final order. If no timely petition for review is filed, the resulting final order is not subject to judicial review. Therefore, an employer must file a request for review in order to preserve its appeal rights.

When the ARB accepts a petition for review, the ALJ's factual determinations will be reviewed under the "substantial evidence" standard. The ALJ's determinations generally will be affirmed when there is such relevant evidence as reasonable minds might accept as adequate to support them, even if it is possible to draw contrary conclusions from the evidence. In addition, the ALJ's credibility determinations generally will be upheld unless they are inherently or patently unreasonable.

If the ARB grants review and finds that the employer has violated the law, it will issue a final order providing appropriate relief to the employee as provided in the statute and the final rule. If the ARB grants review and finds that the employer has not violated the law, it will issue an order denying the complaint.

Within 60 days after the issuance of a reviewable final order by an ALJ or the ARB, any person adversely affected or aggrieved by the order may file a petition for review of the order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the violation allegedly occurred or in which the complaining employee resided on the date of the alleged violation.

District Court Retaliation Action

A complaining employee may bring an original de novo action in an appropriate U.S. District Court, alleging the same allegations contained in the complaint filed with OSHA, in certain circumstances. A federal court action may be brought if there has been no final decision issued within 210 days after the filing of the complaint. Such an action also may be brought within 90 days after receiving a written determination at the conclusion of OSHA's initial investigation of the complaint (i.e., whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the employer has retaliated against the employee), provided that the determination has not become a final order. As noted by OSHA, the reasonable cause determination will become a final order and not subject to judicial review, if no objection is filed within 30 days. Therefore, an employee may need to file timely objections to OSHA's initial determination in order to preserve the right to file an action in district court.

At the request of either party, the district court action shall be tried by the court with a jury. The action will be governed by the same legal burdens of proof applicable to administrative hearings under Section 18C. In addition, the court has jurisdiction to grant all of the same relief necessary to make the employee whole, including injunctive relief and compensatory damages.

Suggestions for Employers

With implementation of the ACA now in full force, the growing attraction of retaliation claims generally and issuance of OSHA's final rule on the ACA's anti-retaliation provision, there likely will be an increase in the number of retaliation and whistleblowing complaints under Section 18C. The following are suggestions for employers to minimize the chances that such complaints will be filed and maximize the ability to successfully defend against any complaints that may be filed:

  • ensure that the company is complying with the substantive provisions and requirements of the ACA
  • limit disclosure of information about employees who apply for or receive a premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction under the ACA
  • review existing anti-retaliation policies to ensure that they include protected activity under the ACA among the action for which retaliation is prohibited
  • review existing complaint procedures to ensure that they address alleged ACA violations and ACA retaliation complaints
  • promptly and effectively investigate and respond to all internal and external ACA retaliation complaints
  • never say or do anything to indicate anger or animosity against an employee who engages in ACA-protected activity
  • ensure that human resources and possible legal counsel review any adverse actions to be taken against employees who engaged in ACA-protected activity to ensure that they are based entirely on legitimate, non-retaliatory considerations
  • ensure that the legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons for the company's action are objectively based and well-documented in order to meet the burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the company would have taken the same action in the absence of the employee's protected activity
  • train supervisors and managers on the company's anti-retaliation policies and procedures

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions