Tag: OSHA

Ergonomics Can Help Decrease OSHA Reporting

One way to keep your company out of OSHA’s crosshairs (see our previous post) is to embrace ergonomics. Using ergonomic principles to design equipment, plan workstations and structure task performance has been proven to significantly decrease worker injuries and fatalities. Businesses reap additional benefits in decreased medical, insurance, disability and worker’s compensation costs. Fewer man-hours are lost to injury where ergonomics are practiced.

Lifting, repetitive motion, overextension and overexertion are common injuries in material handling, warehousing and logistics environments.  Injuries to the back, neck, shoulders, hands and wrists can result in serious, long-term disabilities — and the hefty medical and insurance expenses that go with them. Back injury is the most cited injury in worker’s compensation claims. Many of these injuries are preventable when ergonomic equipment and strategies are employed.

Making an investment in ergonomics is making an investment in your workforce. Demonstrating concern in your employees’ health and welfare has a direct and highly positive effect on worker morale and productivity. DJ Products can help you determine your ergonomic needs. Use our handy Ergonomic Load Calculator to estimate the force needed to move loaded carts, castered equipment and wheeled machinery. Our experienced staff can help evaluate your ergonomic needs and recommend ergonomically designed carts and tugs geared to improve the safety of your facility and protect the health of your employees. Your initial investment in ergonomics will be quickly balanced by savings in medical, insurance and disability expenses. Visit our website today for complete information.

Using Ergonomic Equipment to Reduce Injury Rates

In our last post we talked about the challenges of managing a multicultural workforce in material handling, logistics, warehousing, fulfillment and other businesses. OSHA has reported higher than normal injury and on-the-job death rates for foreign-born Hispanic workers who comprise a growing segment of America’s hourly workforce. While language and cultural differences appear to be at the root of the problem, injury and death rates can be cut by using intuitive, ergonomically-designed, powered equipment to meet your material handling needs.

When communication is an issue, equipment that is easy to operate can improve training speed and reduce potential worker operation errors that can lead to injury. When controls are intuitively designed, communication gaps are narrowed further. What might not be grasped or fully remembered in verbal communication can be intuited by gesture or familiarity with similar equipment. This is not to say that a thorough training and safety program is not necessary, only that easy-to-operate equipment shortens the time between initial training and competent operation. Ergonomically-designed equipment is built around the worker, not the task, making it extremely user-friendly and an excellent choice in multicultural work environments.

Ergonomic material handling equipment that is electric or battery powered can further reduce injury and workplace death rates. In material handling situations, most injuries come from pulling, pushing or lifting loads and are the result of over-stretching or over-straining muscles. Powered equipment removes most of the need for heavy physical exertion from pulling, pushing and lifting tasks. By allowing the equipment to do the heavy lifting, so to speak, fewer situations are presented during the workday that might place workers at risk of injury.

To find out more about ergonomically-designed material handling equipment, visit the DJ Products website.

Michigan Proposes Ergonomic Regs to Curb Injuries

In response to concern about workplace injuries, Michigan plans to institute new state regulations targeting repetitive-stress job injuries. Under the proposed rules, employers would be required to offer ergonomic training and work to correct reported injuries. State regulators would have the power to punish employers for repeated worker injuries. Critics are concerned that the rules will place another financial burden on Michigan’s already struggling economy.

California is the only other state with similar regulations, despite the fact that repetitive-stress job injuries are estimated by OSHA to cost America more than $20 billion annually, or about one-third of the total workers’ compensation costs paid by employers. “It’s a significant issue, even though the standard is fairly minimal,” said Doug Kalinowski, director of MIOSHA. “It’s been very contentious.”

In 2001, repetitive-stress injury regulations proposed by federal regulators were estimated to cost employers $5 billion. Those regulations were blocked by Congress. Michigan’s Small Business Association is concerned that the costs of training and reporting procedures will place a significant burden on small businesses and make it harder for them to compete nationally. Larger companies that have ergonomics programs in place would be exempted under the proposed rules.

Manufacturers are similarly concerned. “It’s a pretty broad issue and there are a lot of costs involved,” noted Amy Show of the Michigan Manufacturers Association. “We don’t know what true costs are going to be until we know how strict the department is going to be in enforcing this.”

The proposed rules would only apply to general industry. Construction, agriculture, mining and domestic employment are specifically excluded. But the construction industry and labor representatives believe that if the rules are adopted, it will only be a matter of time before they are expanded to include construction. “There are many within the building trades, or ironworkers, that suffer from repetitive-motion injuries,” said William Borch, president of Ironworkers Local 25 in Saginaw, Michigan and one of the labor representatives who reviewed the proposed rules.

“The problem is that … these types of injuries are not an imminent danger [to life], even though they can be career-ending types of injuries and cause long-term pain and suffering,” Borch said. Considering the risk to workers, Borch felt the proposed rules provided minimum standards. “It doesn’t seem like a lot to ask,” he said.

Advocates of the proposed rules argue that the implementation of ergonomics creates a safer work environment, increases productivity, minimizes downtime and decreases workers’ compensation costs — all formidable inducements to embracing ergonomics.

Managing a Multicultural Workforce

America’s workforce is becoming increasingly multicultural. At this year’s MHEDA convention, keynote speaker Steven Little predicted that changing demographics will redefine material handling workers and change the way we do business. As Baby Boomers retire and the U.S. workforce shrinks, industry will need to turn increasingly to foreign and immigrant workers. Within a decade, Little said, Spanish will be the primary language spoken in 20% of U.S. homes. Overcoming the language and cultural barriers presented by a multicultural workforce is expected to present a significant challenge for many industries, including material handling, warehousing and logistics operations.

As they have since the founding of America, immigrants bring with them a wealth of diverse languages, cultural traditions and customs. However, communication, productivity, and worker morale can suffer when differences are not addressed. This problem is already being experienced by businesses in the West and Southwest who employ Hispanic workers. Hispanics are one of the fastest-growing groups in the U.S. workforce. Unusually high injury rates and on-the-job deaths among foreign-born Hispanic workers prompted business owners to ask OSHA for help. In response OSHA is starting to offer classes on the social hierarchy of Latino and Asian cultures, both of which are more highly structured and rigid than American culture.

Accommodating the language, customs and social structure of foreign workers is necessary if immigrant workers are to be effectively integrated into the U.S. workforce. Material handling, logistics and warehousing firms that are proactive in accommodating language and cultural differences into their workplace routine will be able to profit from the increasing diversity of America’s workforce.

Proactive Problem Solving Reduces Workplace Injuries

Reducing workplace injuries is every responsible business owner’s goal. Not only do you value your employees’ health and safety, but the cost of ignoring workplace safety — high medical, insurance, workers’ compensation and lost man-hour costs — can be staggering. It pays to be proactive in looking for potential injury-causing problems and coming up with ergonomic solutions that improve the fit between the work and the worker.

Developing a proactive plan to reduce workplace injuries is a four-step process:

  1. Observe and question
  2. Set priorities
  3. Implement improvements
  4. Follow up

1. Observe and question.

Look for clues to possible problem areas in available statistical data. Check injury reports for patterns that indicate higher injury rates for certain tasks or in certain areas. OSHA logs, worker reports and complaints, absence rates, and workers’ compensation reports are good starting points. Ask if your workers’ compensation insurance carrier provides workplace assessment surveys as part of their risk-management services.  

Look at production reports for bottleneck areas. Check quality control reports for poor quality product or service. Problems can indicate areas where workers are having difficulty completing tasks effectively under current conditions. The root cause of such problems is often poorly designed equipment or task procedures.

Spend some time following the entire process of your business from start to finish. Pay particular attention to areas highlighted by the data review. Observe the way workers do their jobs. Watch for risk factors such as awkward postures, repetitive motions, forceful exertions, pressure points or extended periods spent in the same position. Watch for signs of worker discomfort or pain such as self-restricting movements, efforts not to move certain body parts or massaging hands, arms, legs, necks or backs. Pay attention to unnecessary handling and duplication of material or product movement.

Look for ways in which workers have modified standard procedures to make it easier to do their work, including modifications to tools, equipment, workstations or task performance. Talk to managers but also talk to the workers who actually perform the tasks. Ask workers how they would change the work process, operations, tools or equipment to make their jobs less physically demanding and more efficient. You’ll get a clear idea of what isn’t working and may get some excellent suggestions for improvement.

Continued next time

Ergonomics Opponents Girding for Battle

California Democratic Representative Hilda Solis was confirmed yesterday as President Obama’s Secretary of Labor by a Senate vote of 80-17. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is already said to be marshalling its forces. With a very pro-labor Solis at the helm, the chamber is anticipating a pitched battle over reinstatement — and probably toughening and expansion — of ergonomics laws instituted under Clinton but quickly wiped off the books by Bush.

Solis hails from California, the only state with ergonomics laws that have any bite to them — though Michigan is struggling to pass similar measures. California forces employers into compliance when workplace practices are found wanting. Business leaders and chamber executives fear that Solis will use the tough California model to craft national laws mandating ergonomic practices. Solis has been a persistent champion of labor rights and national ergonomics laws since her election to the U.S. House in 2001.

Solis can expect to have the President’s backing. On the campaign trail last year, Obama discussed the need to address musculoskeletal injuries, telling the Charlotte Observer that OSHA “must attack this problem with all of the tools at its disposal — regulations, enforcement, training and compliance assistance.” He is expected to reverse the Bush administration’s stance on national ergonomic standards.

The chamber considers national ergonomics standards to be “the mother of all regulations,” charging that they would cost businesses millions of dollars, which they call unconscionable at any time, but particularly given the current economy. In stumping against ergonomics regulations, the Chamber cites not only prohibitive expense, but suggests potential for substantial abuse. Opponents of ergonomics laws fear that businesses will be held legally liable for employee musculoskeletal and repetitive motion injuries that happen off the job.

“Let’s fact it: We all go through things in our lives as simple as bad sleeping habits or exercise or recreational activities that would cause our bodies to feel discomfort,” Mare Freedman, director of labor law policy for the chamber told Rob Hotakainen, a reporter with McClatchy Newspapers.

Supporters of national ergonomics laws cite rising health care costs and continuing workplace hazards that take a serious toll on U.S. workers as compelling reasons for instituting national ergonomics standards. Freedman said the chamber doesn’t dispute that providing a safe and healthy workplace is good business practice; however, the group thinks efforts should be voluntary, not mandated. Supporters of ergonomics, charge that many employers won’t act unless forced.

Congress Debates Increasing Fines for Worker Injury, Death

Congress is being urged to increase financial penalties for workplace injuries and deaths, according to congressional testimony reported by McClatchy Newspapers. In last week’s hearing before the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee, workers’ advocate groups squared off against industry safety experts to debate increasing penalties when employers don’t protect their workers against hazardous conditions.

Workers’ advocates pressured the federal government to drastically increase fines and implement possible criminal prosecution for senior executives when workers are killed or seriously injured on the job. “The thought process has to be, ‘If I keep doing this, and I keep letting this happen. … I could go to jail,'” David Uhlmann of the University of Michigan School of Law and a former U.S. Department of Justice official, told the House Committee.

Speaking for the opposing view, a workplace safety attorney who helps businesses figure out how to respond appropriately to U.S. labor laws, recommended more clearly defined labor safety laws and more stringent enforcement of existing penalties for employers who exhibit a “callous disregard” for workers’ safety. “There needs to be a balance,” Lawrence Halprin, a lawyer with Keller and Heckman, told the House Committee, noting that confusing labor regulations often contribute to the creation of workplace hazards.

Last week’s hearing was one more volley in the Congressional debate that is accompanying preparation of anticipated legislation to overhaul the 39-year-old Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). With the Obama administration’s apparent blessing, House Democrats are preparing to give OSHA a new and sharper set of teeth. New regulations being considered would dramatically increase employers’ penalties, increase business owners’ accountability and protect workers who speak out about workplace violations. OSHA penalties have not been updated since 1990, and financial penalties were never indexed to inflation. Current penalties for the injury or death of a worker often total just a few thousand dollars.

“Penalties must be meaningful,” said Rep. George Miller, a California Democrat and chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “They must function to deter violations. They must get people’s attention.”

However, some committee members are concerned that their Congressional peers may be unduly swayed by the many stories of personal tragedy that have peppered the hearings. Rep. Tom Price, a Georgia Republican, noting that workplace fatalities have declined since 1994, said, “Sometimes Congress gets emotional and draws the wrong conclusions and makes the wrong laws.” Time will tell what happens here, but you might want to weigh in with your Congressman and tell him how you feel.

The Rise of Ergonomics in Industrial Design

The staggering cost to American industry (see our previous post), coupled with the movement to make the workplace healthier and safer gave rise to the use of ergonomics in industrial design. Ergonomics is the science of fitting the job to the worker with an emphasis on worker safety and comfort. Its goal is to maximize efficiency and productivity by reducing worker fatigue and discomfort. The implementation of ergonomic principles in America signifies a radical change in the way industry approaches equipment design.

According to Wikipedia, “The term ergonomics is derived from the Greek words ergon (work) and nomos (natural laws)” and was first coined by Wojciech Jastrzebowski in an article written in 1857.  But the idea of ergonomics is not new. In the 5th century BC, the ancient Greeks used ergonomic principles in designing tools and performing certain tasks. Hippocrates’ description of a surgeon’s workplace shows ergonomic principles at work. Frederick Taylor, who pioneered Scientific Management in the late 1800s, sought the optimum method of performing a task. In experiments, he was able to triple the amount of coal workers could shovel by reducing the size and weight of the shovel. In the early 1900s, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth built on his method with their Time and Motion Studies. The Gilbreths worked to increase task efficiency by eliminating unnecessary steps and movements. In application, they reduced the number of motions required to lay bricks from 18 to 4.5, tripling hourly productivity. But it was the industrial demands of World War II that allowed the principles of ergonomics to be applied across a broad range of applications, heralding the modern birth of this new branch of applied science.

California was the first state to adopt an ergonomics standard in 1997, prompting other states to consider similar standards. While there is no overriding federal ergonomic safety standard, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has developed ergonomic standards for specific industries and tasks. Compliance is addressed under OSHA’s General Clause.

Next time: The practical benefits of ergonomics

Ergonomics Can Significantly Decrease Worker Injuries

Material handlers and laborers suffer more injuries and illnesses than construction workers, truck drivers or, indeed, any other category of workers, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. Material handlers and laborers miss more work days and therefore cost U.S. businesses more money in lost man-hours and higher insurance and healthcare costs than any other worker class.

Numerous studies have proved that ergonomically-designed equipment and systems can significantly decrease worker injury. Many manual tasks necessary during the handling of materials require repetitive motions — pushing, pulling, bending, lifting and carrying — that place undue strain on the human body. These actions can result in sprains, strains, back pain and other musculoskeletal injuries. Back pain is by far the most commonly reported workplace injury in the material handling industry. Treatment is generally lengthy and expensive, gobbling up the lion’s share of healthcare and workers’ compensation costs.

The implementation of an ergonomics program can significantly reduce injuries and their associated costs while improving productivity and worker morale. The Material Handling Industry of America (MHIA) has published a 68-page booklet of tips for improving ergonomics in the material handling industry. Click this link to download MHIA’s free Ergonomic Guidelines for Manual Material Handling. For more information on ergonomically-designed electric and motorized carts, pushers and tuggers, visit the DJ Products website.

Next time we’ll share some of MHIA’s best tips for improving ergonomics in the material handling industry and reducing worker injury and its associated costs.

Does Obama Have Muscle to Win Ergonomics Fight?

Like actor Mickey Rourke’s amazing return to the Hollywood ring in The Wrestler, labor is back; and President Obama is in its corner cheering its revival. After eight years struggling on the ropes during the Bush administration, labor has bounced back into the Washington ring and is gaining strength — and it’s bringing the ergonomics fight with it.

“I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem; to me it’s part of the solution,” President Obama was widely quoted as saying recently. During his campaign, Obama repeatedly promised American workers a safer, healthier work environment. Industry watchers have taken that to mean a return to and an expansion of the ergonomic standards initiated during the Clinton administration but quickly rescinded under Bush. With a Democratic-controlled Congress backing him up, Obama appears to have the muscle to force ergonomics back into the legislative ring.

By naming California Democratic Representative Hilda Solis as his new Labor Secretary, Obama appears to be saying to U.S. industry and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a long-time vocal foe of ergonomics legislation, “Bring it on!” Although she’s still running the confirmation gauntlet, Solis has received the recommendation of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and is expected to be confirmed, possibly as soon as tomorrow.

The daughter of immigrants and union workers, Solis has long ties to labor groups and has been a champion of ergonomics in the workplace since joining the House of Representatives in 2001. Her home state of California is the only state in the U.S. that mandates ergonomic standards that force employers to provide a safe and healthy work environment for their workers. Concerned about the cost of implementing ergonomic standards, those opposed to ergonomic legislation fear that California’s tough ergonomics rules will be used to create a national model.

That Obama would eventually grapple with ergonomics to improve labor conditions has been a given since his campaign days. But there’s been a lot of speculation in the industry and in Washington about how and when Obama would try to take down ergonomic opponents. By calling Solis into his corner, Obama seems to be getting ready to enter the ring. It will be interesting to listen to the President’s State of the Union speech tomorrow night. A direct statement about ergonomics or workplace safety could indicate that the fight is on!