Skip to main content

Establishment profile

THE NEW YORK TIMES

NEW YORK TIMES PLAZA, NEW YORK, NY, 10036
Operated by The New York Times · 1 of 5 establishments

Download as PDF →

OSHA inspections
4
over 42 years
Violations
7
$4,500 in penalties
SVEP
YES
Severe violator program
Violations across 2 federal agencies
Enforcement actions from multiple agencies may indicate systemic compliance issues across functions.
Accident investigations on record
2 National Emphasis Program inspections

Summary

THE NEW YORK TIMES has accumulated 7 OSHA violations across 4 inspections over 42 years of recorded history, with $4,500 in total assessed penalties.

The establishment sits in the 81st percentile for violations within its industry-state peer group of 132,443 employers. Inspection frequency runs at the 94th percentile. The most recent enforcement activity was recorded 25 years ago.

Federal records were found in 2 of 15 sources. Sources without matching records returned empty for this establishment.

Agency coverage

THE NEW YORK TIMES appears in OSHA workplace safety and NLRB labor relations records only. No matching records were found in WHD wage enforcement, MSHA mine safety, EPA environmental compliance, OFLC visa and labor certification (historical), FMCSA motor carrier registration, SAM.gov federal debarment, CMS nursing home enforcement, UVA Corporate Prosecution Registry, CPSC product recalls, or NHTSA vehicle recalls.

OSHA workplace safety

Inspections
4
0.1 / yr · last 42 yrs
Violations
7
0.2 / yr
Penalties
$4,500
$643 avg / violation
29% serious71% other
Inspection trigger · complaint
2 of 4
Inspection trigger · planned
2 of 4

75% of inspections at this establishment produced violations, with 3 inspections producing serious-or-greater violations.

Most-cited OSHA standards

Top OSHA standards cited at this employer, ranked by citation count. Standards (CFR sections) cluster citations into safety themes -- machine guarding, lockout-tagout, hazard communication, fall protection, process safety, etc. A concentration on one or two sections reveals a pattern that individual citations don’t. 7 distinct standards shown · 7 citations in this view · $4,500 in penalties.

CFR sectionCitationsInspectionsTotal penaltyFirst citedLast cited
29 CFR 1910.0212 A0111$3,500Feb 1997Feb 1997
29 CFR 1910.0037 Q0211$800Aug 2001Aug 2001
29 CFR 1910.1200 E0111$200Aug 2001Aug 2001
29 CFR 1910.1200 H0111Aug 2001Aug 2001
29 CFR 1910.0303 F11Aug 2001Aug 2001
29 CFR 1910.1200 G0111Aug 2001Aug 2001
29 CFR 1910.0332 B0111Feb 1997Feb 1997

Source: OSHA inspection citations (violation_detail). CFR section codes can be looked up at osha.gov/laws-regs for the formal standard text. Per-inspection detail and the specific violation descriptions are available by expanding individual inspections below.

Peer comparison

81st

Worse on violations than most other employers. Peer group: 132,443 employers. This establishment has 7 OSHA violations; peer median is 2.

Fewer violationsMore violations
Penalty percentile
97th
peer median: $0
Inspection frequency
94th
peer median: 1

Safety self-report (OSHA 300A)

Recordable injury rates the employer filed with OSHA’s Injury Tracking Application. DART covers cases with days away, restricted, or transferred; TRIR is the total recordable case rate.

DART rate
0.2
vs industry
TRIR
0.3
vs industry

Reported for 2,503 average annual employees at this establishment.

Source: OSHA ITA Form 300A (employer self-reported). Rates are per 100 full-time equivalent workers. Establishments below the ~10-FTE threshold are not required to report.

Inspection breakdown

Planned
2
Complaint
2

Complaint- and accident-triggered inspections are stronger risk signals than routine planned inspections.

OSHA severe injury reports

No severe injury reports (hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye) on file under 29 CFR 1904.39 for THE NEW YORK TIMES. Verify directly with Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Activity timeline

Data refreshed
Weekly
First OSHA inspection
Most recent activity
25 years ago

No federal enforcement activity has been recorded against this establishment in 25+ years. Most recent activity: 25 years ago. Data on this page is refreshed weekly.

Wage & Hour Division (WHD)

No WHD wage, overtime, or child-labor enforcement cases on file for THE NEW YORK TIMES. Verify directly with Wage and Hour Division

Mine safety (MSHA)

No MSHA mine safety violations on file for THE NEW YORK TIMES. Verify directly with Mine Safety and Health Administration

Labor relations (NLRB)

Company-level in NY — for The New York Times, not this location alone

Total cases
47
Unfair labor practice
44
Representation (union)
2

National Labor Relations Board — unfair labor practice charges and union representation cases. The NLRB records cases at the company/regional level (no worksite address), so these are matched by company name and state and may span other The New York Times locations in the same state.

NLRB cases

National Labor Relations Board cases involving this employer. Includes unfair labor practice (ULP) filings and representation election proceedings. NLRB enforcement is process-driven; no per-case monetary penalty is assessed (remedies are case-by-case backpay orders, posting requirements, election re-runs, etc.). 47 cases · 44 ULP · 2 representation

Case numberTypeFiledClosedStatusRegion
02-CA-388333Unfair labor practiceMay 2026OpenRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-387872Unfair labor practiceMay 2026OpenRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-358026Unfair labor practiceJan 2025OpenRegion 02, New York, New York
02-RC-357904Representation electionJan 2025OpenRegion 02, New York, New York
02-UC-354185UCNov 2024OpenRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-352678Unfair labor practiceOct 2024OpenRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-352664Unfair labor practiceOct 2024Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-343109Unfair labor practiceMay 2024Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-337184Unfair labor practiceFeb 2024Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-324466Unfair labor practiceAug 2023Oct 2024ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-323953Unfair labor practiceAug 2023Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-323471Unfair labor practiceAug 2023Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-320152Unfair labor practiceJun 2023May 2024ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-315211Unfair labor practiceMar 2023Jun 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-315209Unfair labor practiceMar 2023Jun 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-310421Unfair labor practiceJan 2023Jun 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-308808Unfair labor practiceDec 2022Jun 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-308788Unfair labor practiceDec 2022Jun 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-295918Unfair labor practiceMay 2022Jan 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-295819Unfair labor practiceMay 2022Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-292360Unfair labor practiceMar 2022Jan 2025ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-290984Unfair labor practiceFeb 2022Jul 2022ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-290964Unfair labor practiceFeb 2022Jul 2022ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-290396Unfair labor practiceFeb 2022Jun 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-289497Unfair labor practiceJan 2022Mar 2022ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-286106Unfair labor practiceNov 2021Feb 2022ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-284871Unfair labor practiceOct 2021Feb 2022ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-281124Unfair labor practiceAug 2021Nov 2021ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-RC-280769Representation electionAug 2021Mar 2022ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-278244Unfair labor practiceJun 2021May 2023ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-273247Unfair labor practiceFeb 2021Apr 2021ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
29-CA-253569Unfair labor practiceDec 2019Feb 2020ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
02-CA-236047Unfair labor practiceFeb 2019Apr 2019ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
29-CA-230979Unfair labor practiceNov 2018Dec 2018ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
29-CA-230930Unfair labor practiceNov 2018Dec 2018ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
29-CA-225668Unfair labor practiceAug 2018Oct 2018ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
29-CA-191717Unfair labor practiceJan 2017Apr 2017ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
29-CA-144030Unfair labor practiceJan 2015May 2015ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
29-CA-126809Unfair labor practiceApr 2014Jul 2014ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
29-CA-120788Unfair labor practiceJan 2014Apr 2014ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
02-CA-119815Unfair labor practiceDec 2013Mar 2014ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
29-CA-109323Unfair labor practiceJul 2013Sep 2013ClosedRegion 29, Brooklyn, New York
02-CA-040222Unfair labor practiceNov 2010Jan 2011ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-039968Unfair labor practiceJun 2010Nov 2011ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-039967Unfair labor practiceJun 2010Nov 2011ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-038222Unfair labor practiceApr 2007Jun 2007ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York
02-CA-035440Unfair labor practiceApr 2003Aug 2003ClosedRegion 02, New York, New York

Source: NLRB case files. Rows shown are those the agency has published. Region numbers (1–31) correspond to NLRB's geographic offices.

Visa & labor certification (OFLC) — historical

No H-1B, H-2A, or H-2B labor condition applications on file (historical data only — DOL ended OFLC publication) for THE NEW YORK TIMES. Verify directly with Office of Foreign Labor Certification

Environmental compliance (EPA)

No EPA inspections or formal enforcement actions on file for THE NEW YORK TIMES. Verify directly with Environmental Protection Agency

Federal criminal prosecution record

No federal criminal prosecutions, plea agreements, or deferred-prosecution agreements on file for THE NEW YORK TIMES. Verify directly with UVA Corporate Prosecution Registry

Inspection history

DateTriggerViolationsSeriousPenalty
2001-06-05Planned21$800
2001-06-05Planned3$200
1996-12-11Complaint21$3,500
1984-05-21Complaint0$0

Source: OSHA IMIS. Citation amounts reflect initially assessed penalties; final amounts after appeal may differ.

In the news

Part of a larger organization

THE NEW YORK TIMES is one of 5 establishments rolled up under the parent organization The New York Times.

Federal enforcement records on this page represent activity at this specific establishment only. The full enforcement footprint of The New York Times across all 5 of its tracked locations is viewable on the parent profile.

Other locations under this parent

Other establishments operated by The New York Times, ordered by federal enforcement volume:

Related searches

About this data

This profile aggregates federal enforcement records on THE NEW YORK TIMES from every major federal compliance and enforcement source plus the UVA Corporate Prosecution Registry. OSHA workplace safety inspections, WHD wage cases, MSHA mine safety, EPA environmental enforcement, NLRB labor relations, OFLC visa/labor certification, FMCSA motor carrier registration, SAM.gov debarments, CMS nursing-home records, BLS industry safety benchmarks, OSHA ITA self-reported injury rates, SEC enforcement and financial disclosures, CPSC and NHTSA recalls.

Establishments are matched across agencies using normalized employer name, state, and ZIP code. This establishment resolves to the parent rollup The New York Times, which operates 5 establishments in our dataset.

OSHA citations typically appear 3–8 months after the inspection, so very recent enforcement actions may not yet be reflected. Profiles may be incomplete if the establishment operates under multiple legal names or files under variations our entity-matching rules don’t yet cover. To report a missing record or correction, email corrections@fastdol.com.

Need API access, bulk download, or licensed redistribution? The website is free. Programmatic and licensed access is handled separately.

Contact sales →

Frequently asked

What is THE NEW YORK TIMES's OSHA violation history?
THE NEW YORK TIMES has 4 OSHA inspections on record with 7 violations and $4,500 in total penalties.