In the case of Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, Secretary of Labor (1979), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Whirlpool Corporation, overturning a decision by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC). The OSHRC had previously held that Whirlpool was in violation of safety regulations for failing to provide hand protection equipment to its employees who were exposed to harmful substances at work. However, upon review, it was found that there were no specific standards set by the Occupational Safety and Health Act requiring employers to provide such protective gear under these circumstances. Therefore, it could not be concluded that Whirlpool violated any explicit standard or regulation as claimed by OSHRC. Thus, this ruling clarified an employer's obligation regarding employee safety measures when specific guidelines are absent.

In the dissenting opinion for Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, Justice Rehnquist disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). He argued that this section should not be read as a general duty clause requiring employers to provide workplaces free from any recognized hazards. Instead, he believed it was meant to serve as a gap-filler until specific standards could be developed by OSHA or adopted from other sources. Furthermore, he contended that interpreting Section 5(a)(1) in such an expansive manner would give too much discretion to administrative agencies and courts in determining what constitutes a "recognized hazard," potentially leading to arbitrary enforcement actions against employers.