FR 2024-30671

The Department of Labor (DOL) has announced a request for public feedback concerning the Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS), as outlined in their submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. As part of the Occupational Requirements Survey, conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), data collection is expected to continue until 2031, with final findings to be published in 2032. The survey has been revised to exclude certain data elements related to job work levels.

General Summary

The notice invites public comments on various aspects of the information collection request. Interested parties have until January 27, 2025, to submit their input. This solicitation not only aims to gather opinions on the survey's necessity and accuracy but also seeks suggestions on improving the survey's utility and reducing the associated burden on respondents. Comments can be submitted through the reginfo.gov website.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several issues in the proposal deserve closer attention:

• Cost Implications: The document does not provide detailed information regarding the financial implications of extending the survey timeline to 2031. This lack of transparency might lead to concerns about potential unnecessary spending or inefficient allocation of resources.

• Data Elimination Clarification: The decision to eliminate data elements related to job work levels is mentioned without offering a clear justification or consideration of its consequences. Such omission could lead to misunderstandings or dissatisfaction among stakeholders who value this data.

• Burden Analysis: While the notice mentions an estimated response burden, it fails to detail how this burden impacts different categories of respondents (e.g., businesses, non-profits, government entities). A more nuanced understanding could enhance stakeholder engagement and cooperation.

• Cost Assertions: The assertion that there are no additional costs associated with this survey might overlook indirect expenses or administrative challenges that participating organizations could face.

Public and Stakeholder Impact

Public Impact:

The document's findings and adjustments will likely influence the labor and employment landscape in meaningful ways over the coming years. By extending the data collection and seeking public comments, the DOL acknowledges the importance of public input in shaping labor statistics that ultimately affect policy and workforce regulations.

Stakeholder Impact:

• Businesses and Organizations: Some may view the extension of the survey as a means to gain valuable, updated insights that could inform business strategies and workforce planning. Conversely, the lack of a detailed burden breakdown might worry smaller organizations about the additional time and resource commitments required.

• Social Security Administration (SSA) and Labor Specialists: These stakeholders may appreciate the continued data collection, which supports informed policy-making and improvements in occupational standards.

Despite its strengths, the document could greatly benefit from enhanced transparency and detailed explanations regarding its costs, data collection choices, and the anticipated burden on different respondent categories. Engaging effectively with the public and addressing their concerns will be crucial in maintaining trust and cooperation throughout the survey process.

The document from the Department of Labor discusses the Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS), emphasizing the submission of an information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. A critical aspect of this submission is the declaration regarding financial implications, specifically the Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0. This figure indicates that the agency anticipates no additional costs outside of time-related expenditures for the data collection process.

In examining the document's implications:

1. Spending and Cost Implications:

The document explicitly states that there are no other costs associated with the survey apart from the time burden, which suggests that the collection, processing, and reporting activities are expected to occur without necessitating further financial input. However, the absence of an articulated explanation for why supplementary costs are zero could obscure the actual administrative or indirect expenses that are typically inherent in conducting a survey of this magnitude. This might include costs related to housing data, logistical expenses, or compensating survey participants, none of which are explicitly discussed.

1. Connection to Identified Issues:

The mention of zero other costs does not align with the document's vague presentation of the survey's continued timeline, which has been extended to 2031, to publish results by 2032. The lack of clarity on additional financial allocations for such an extended period might raise concerns over potential wasteful spending. Stakeholders may require a more detailed account of how extending the survey's duration adheres to budgetary constraints, particularly given that longer timelines often incur higher cumulative costs.

Furthermore, the document’s reference to eliminating certain data elements, such as job work levels, introduces potential concerns about data completeness, which could affect stakeholders’ assessments of the survey's utility without incurring other costs. The decision to forgo collecting these elements might be viewed as a cost-saving measure, yet without clarity, stakeholders could misinterpret the impact of these reductions on the survey's effectiveness and the administrative savings that justify the zero-cost claim.

In summary, while the assertion of no additional financial burden might seem advantageous, it could benefit from greater transparency and justification, especially in light of the extended survey duration and data collection modifications. Clear communication regarding financial planning and utility would better assure stakeholders of the prudent and efficient use of resources.