CHAPTER 1
THE SAFETY AND HEALTH MANAGER
Everyone wants a safe and healthful workplace, but what each person is willing to do to achieve this worthwhile objective can vary a great deal.
Management of each firm must decide at what level, along a broad spectrum, the safety and health effort will be aimed..... A continuum between personal freedom and individual responsibility.
It has been proven that the attitude of the worker is the most important determinant for his or her safety, but attitude alone cannot make a dangerous job safe.
The safety director or industrial hygienist, sets the tone of the safety and health program within a firm.
It was not unusual for a safety director's work to be typified by public relations activities, such as posting motivational signs and compiling statistics.
In the 1970’s the passage of the occupational safety and health act of 1970 created the occupational safety and health administration (OSHA), a federal agency whose regulations would have a large impact on the role of the typical safety director.
There is little doubt that OSHA enhanced the authority of
the safety manager in the typical industrial plant in the
This text will use the designation safety and health manager, recognizing the dual nature of the job.
The purpose of this book is to provide tools and guidelines to safety and health managers to help them execute their enlarged duties. Dealing with applicable standards is one of the greatest challenges facing today's safety and health manager.
10% of the standards generate 90% of the frequently cited standards and receive prime attention.
Safety and health managers need to know the "why" behind the standards.
A Reasonable Objective
In the real world we must choose between these three categories of hazards with respect to feasibility of correction:
1. Hazards that are physically infeasible to correct
2. Hazards that are physically feasible, but are economically infeasible to correct
3. Hazards that are economically and physically feasible to correct
This book does not really advocate elimination of all workplace hazards. Such a goal is unattainable, and to reach for it is poor strategy because it ignores the need for discriminating among hazards to be corrected.
Case Study 1.1 Page 3
By reacting to every hazard that happens to show up, the safety and health manager may be missing opportunities to have a really significant impact on worker safety and health.
Even the law does not call for the elimination of all hazards, just the "recognized" ones.
The goal of this book is to assist the safety and health manager in detecting hazards and in deciding which ones are worth correcting.
Safety Versus Health
What is the difference between safety and health? A machine guard is a safety consideration, and airborne asbestos is a health hazard, but some hazards, such as those associated with paint spray areas and welding operations, are not so easy to classify. Some situations may be both a health and a safety hazard.
This book will draw the following line between safety and health: safety deals with acute hazards, whereas health deals with chronic hazards.
An acute effect is a sudden reaction to a severe condition; a chronic effect is a long-term deterioration due to a prolonged exposure to a milder adverse condition.
Noise can be both acute and chronic; sudden exposure to high decibels or long term exposure to 90-100 decibels.
Degree of hazard is another point of contention between safety and health: both sides think their hazards are more grave. Safety professionals can point to fatalities on the job and feel an urgency in protecting the worker from imminent danger from accidents.
However there are probably more occupational health fatalities than safety fatalities, but the statistics will not reflect this difference because the health fatalities are delayed and are often never diagnosed.
Role In The Corporate Structure
Some safety and health managers are also personnel managers, and even more frequently they report to the personnel manager.
They can be responsible for training, statistics, job placement and industrial relations with respect to safety and health. Purchasing, however, is never associated with the safety and health manager’s responsibilities …..but according to the text should be. With respects to the purchase of new equipment, the sooner the Safety Manager gets involved in the purchasing process the sooner he can inject his opinion as to what is the safest equipment to purchase based upon a safety analysis.
A recent concept of the safety and health manager is as a liaison with government agencies, a condition brought about by the arrival of OSHA. Some safety and health managers have a dual responsibility for environmental protection (EPA) activities.
The consumer product safety commission (CPSC) concentrates on the responsibility of the manufacturers of the machines and equipment, whereas OSHA concentrates on the responsibility of the employer who places the equipment into use in the workplace.
Resources At Hand (Page 6)
A variety of resources have arisen to meet these needs of the Safety and Health Professional.
• Professional Certification
• Professional Societies
• National Safety Council
• Standards Institutes
• Trade Associations
• Government Agencies
- free consultation
- The National Institute For Occupational Safety And Health (NIOSH) has a wealth of research data on the hazards of specific materials and processes.
-NIOSH uses these data to write criteria for recommended new standards.
- OSHA itself can be of value to the safety and health manager who seeks information.
Chapter 2
Development of the safety and health function
To make workers aware of hazards, supervisors and the workers themselves need regular training in hazard recognition and correction.
Statistics and accident records are needed to keep management and operating personnel advised of how well the company and its departments are doing in achieving their safety and health goals.
Workers' Compensation
Workers' compensation provided an initial structure to industrial safety. The first such laws were introduced in state legislatures in 1909, and now all states have comparable legislation.
The purpose of workers' compensation legislation is protecting the worker by providing statutory compensation levels to be paid by the employer for various injuries that may be incurred by the worker.
This provokes labor to be dissatisfied with the workers' compensation system. Table 2.1 lists examples of statutory compensation levels.
Typically, the firm does not pay the workers' compensation payments directly; rather, it carries insurance against compensation claims.
"Experience Rating," expressed as a decimal fraction to be multiplied by the standard premium rate. The experience rating is based upon a three-year average of the firm's actual claims experience and can be less than or greater than 1.00.
The number of employees is not criteria used in the computation of premium rate (see Page 33).
A good insurance company will make regular inspections of facilities to be sure that installations and practices are safe. This is a direct and measurable monetary stimulus to the safety program.
Some companies choose to self-insure against workers' compensation claims. The insurance companies are valuable sources of technical advice to their clients.
The number of companies that have elected to self-insure has led to a new type of consultant called a Loss Control Representative. This consultant's objective is to keep workers' compensation claims low by supplying the type of services normally provided by the insurance carrier.
Recordkeeping
The national safety council established the first national system of industrial safety recordkeeping. This system was standardized and designated the z16.1 system by the American National Standards Institute.
In the 1970s, the Federal OSHA agency set mandatory recordkeeping requirements very similar to the z16.1 system.
Traditional Indexes
Familiar statistical measures are frequency and severity. Frequency measured the numbers of cases per standard quantity of workhours, and severity measured the total impact of these cases in terms of "lost workdays" per standard quantity of workhours.
Incidence Rates
The total injury/illness treatment incidence rate includes all injuries or illnesses which require medical treatment, plus fatalities.
Medical treatment does not include simple first aid, preventive medicine (such as tetanus shots), or medical diagnostic procedures with negative results.
First aid is described as "one-time treatment and subsequent observation of minor scratches, cuts, burns, splinters, and so forth, which do not ordinarily require medical care" and is not considered medical treatment even if it is administered by a physician or registered professional personnel.
Regardless of treatment, if an injury involves loss of consciousness, restriction of work or motion, or transfer to another job, the injury is required to be recorded.
The U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics has listed sample types of medical treatment, as shown in Appendix b considered to be recordable.
Appendix C gives examples of first aid given for injuries that are not normally recordable unless they qualify for recording for another reason, such as loss of consciousness or transfer to another job.
To compute the incidence rate, the number of injuries is divided by the number of hours worked during the period covered by the study and then is multiplied by a standard factor to make the rate more understandable.
Thus the total injury/illness incidence rate represents the number of injuries expected by a 100-employee firm in a full year, if injuries and illnesses during the year follow the same frequency as observed during the study period. A typical data collection period is one year.
The term incidence rate is really a general term and in addition to the total injury/ illness incidence rate includes the following:
1. Injury incidence rate
2. Illness incidence rate
3. Fatality incidence rate
4. Lost-workday-cases incidence rate (LWDI)
5. Number-of-lost-workdays rate
6. Specific-hazard incidence rate
Note the difference between rates 4 and 5. Rate 4 counts cases in which one or more workdays were lost or in which the worker was transferred to another job. Rate 5 counts the total number of workdays lost or in which the worker was transferred to another job.
In counting the number of lost workdays, the date of the injury or onset of illness should not be counted, even though the employee may leave work for most of that day.
The specific hazard incidence rate is useful in observing a narrow slice of the total hazards picture. For specific hazards, injury incidence, illness incidence, fatality incidence, and all of the other rates can be computed.
The most widely recognized standard incidence rate is the lost-workday-cases incidence rate, commonly known as the LWDI. A somewhat surprising characteristic of the LWDI is that it considers injuries only, not illnesses.
The LWDI is considered a more precise and robust measure of the effectiveness of the firm's overall safety and health program. Also, perhaps for the same reasons, the LWDI considers only lost-time injuries, not all injuries.
The LWDI was once used by OSHA as a criterion to determine whether to conduct a general inspection.
Today, the LWDI is applied to entire industries, as designated by the four-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) number
Whether an individual company actually receives an inspection, however, is subject to several additional factors, such as in which OSHA region and area it is located, the available inspection resources in that region or area, how recently the firm has received an inspection, the number of high-priority requests such as major accident investigations or employee complaints that arise in that region or area, and the number of resources already committed for named target areas such as construction.
Recordkeeping Forms
The basic form is the log of occupational injuries and illnesses, OSHA Form 300 is displayed in Figure 2.3. Figure 2.4 shows the OSHA Form 300A which is a summary to required to be posted annually.
The summary is required to be posted in a prominent position in the workplace on February 1 each year and to remain posted until April 30. It is the employer's responsibility to enter data correctly into the log/summary. General records are required to be saved for a period of at least five years.
The person responsible for completing the log/summary may need some guidance in distinguishing between occupational injuries and illnesses.
Occupational injuries include lacerations, fractures, sprains, and amputations that result from a work accident or from an exposure involving a single incident in the work environment.
An illness is any abnormal condition or disorder, not classified as an injury, caused by exposure to environmental factors associated with employment. Illnesses are usually associated with chronic exposures, but some acute exposures can be considered illness if the exposure is the result of more than a single incident or accident.
Calculation of Incidence Rates from Case 2.1 Page 25-29
LWDI (injuries only) = 0.8
Injury Incidence Rate = 1.2
Illness Incidence Rate = 0.8
Fatality Incidence Rate =0.4
Number-Of-Lost-Workdays Rate =10.4
Specific Hazard Incidence Rate = 0.4
(eye injuries)
The LWDI is calculated in a prescribed way that excludes all fatalities and all illnesses regardless of whether time was lost or not.
The LWDI is an incidence rate and should not be confused with the number-of-lost-workdays rate.
OSHA considers both days away from work and restricted work activity days as lost workdays. It is important to note that with respects to lost time calculations the new OSHA Standard uses calendar days instead of work-days. If, for instance, a worker was injured on Thursday and was not able to return to work on Monday the number of lost-time days is three (3); Friday, Saturday and Sunday.
The File 11 eye injury satisfied the Appendix c definition of first aid and thus, as a nonrecordable injury, was excluded from the calculation.
The required retention period for these general records is five years. However, in the early 1980s, special recordkeeping requirements were established for toxic chemicals, in the movement that became known as "right-to-know." The recordkeeping requirements for toxic chemicals are much more comprehensive and have led to the development of computer information systems for safety and health. The required retention period for hazardous chemical exposure records and medical records under the "right to-know" standards is 30 years instead of five years.
Accident Cause Analysis
One of the important tasks of a safety manager is a thorough analysis of the potential causes of injuries and illnesses that have already occurred in the plant to prevent their recurrence.
Accident cause analysis and subsequent dissemination of this information to personnel who will be exposed to the hazards in the future is believed to be the most effective way of preventing injuries and illnesses.
Case Study 2.2 Page 31
Thus accident cause analysis is the foundation on which safety and health engineering, capital investment planning, training, motivation, and other functions are constructed.
Organization of Committees
Committees are appointed from the ranks of the operating personnel of the organization.
Sooner or later, everyone has his or her turn on a safety committee, which means that the direct activity of the safety and health program is a product of plant-wide participation.
Despite its advantages, there are pitfalls to the committee approach. The safety and health manager should provide resources and guidance to the committee so that it will have the necessary tools and knowledge to function effectively.
Safety And Health Economics
Safety and health managers sometimes base safety and health decisions on dollars and cents.
The prevention of employee injuries and illnesses can be formulated as an economic objective; such a formulation is more meaningful to management than vague humanitarian aspirations. Accidents, injuries, and illnesses have undeniable costs that contribute nothing to the value of products manufactured by the firm or services performed.
One category of costs from injuries and illnesses is the payment of workers' compensation insurance premiums, which are based on the firm's injury and illness experience.
Workers' compensation costs typically range from 1 to 2% of the total payroll of the firm.
Certain hazardous industries may have workers' compensation costs of around 3% of payroll; not the number of employees.
The national safety council, lists the following categories of hidden costs of accidents not covered by workers compensation:
1. Cost of wages paid for time lost by workers who were not injured.
2. Cost of damage to material or equipment.
3. Cost of wages paid for time lost by the injured worker, other than workers' compensation payments.
4. Extra cost of overtime work necessitated by the accident.
5. Cost of wages paid supervisors for time required for activities necessitated by the accident.
6. Wage cost caused by decreased output of injured worker after return to work.
7. Cost of learning period of new worker.
8. Uninsured medical cost borne by the company.
9. Cost of time spent by higher supervision and clerical workers on investigations or in the processing of compensation application forms.
10. Miscellaneous usual costs.
These are visually presented in Figure 2.8 on page 34.
Training
Training or training support may be the most important staff function to be performed by the safety and health manager.
The principal trainers in safety or health or in any other aspect of the job are first-line supervisors.
Recognizing that most training takes place between supervisor and worker, there is still a need for classroom training in safety and health principles, standards, and hazards recognition, especially for supervisors.
Drug and Alcohol Abuse
Drug and alcohol abuse has been shown to be a greater problem than was once thought.
Consider the experience of the Aluminum Company of
Alcoa hired 130 of the 750 applicants who passed the test and, according to the personnel manager, found the people hired to be better workers than the company had before the drug screening program had been added to the hiring process.
There is no choice in certain sectors of the transportation industry subject to mandatory testing for marijuana, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines, and PCP, under rules issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The program prescribes random, pre-employment, periodic, reasonable cause, and post-accident testing.
A key question to ask management is whether they can imagine a situation in which the firm might some day need to terminate an employee because excessive drug or alcohol abuse has affected his or her job. If the answer is yes, the firm is exposed to litigation risks if a policy on drug and alcohol abuse is not in place.
EAP’s are organized to deal with the difficulties of employees who have a recognized drug or alcohol abuse problem.
The Smoke-Free Workplace
OSHA has already taken steps to deal with smoking in the workplace in advance of any workplace standards that deal specifically with this problem. OSHA officials have testified before congressional subcommittees addressing this problem.
In 1994 OSHA published a proposed rule on indoor air quality in the federal register. Although other indoor air contaminants are addressed, it is clear that tobacco smoke is the primary target of this proposed standard. In the case of tobacco smoke, employers would be required either to prohibit smoking in the entire building or to establish designated smoking areas.
Blood Borne Pathogens
The HIV virus has the spotlight because of the alarming growth of the epidemic. In the occupational arena the hepatitis B virus (HBV) actually kills more victims than does HIV.
Although the medical professions are the primary focus, the OSHA standard is not limited to these workplaces. The question to be asked is whether the worker will be exposed to blood or other potentially infectious materials, which includes some wastes and tissues of infected animals.
For workplaces that have one or more employees who may encounter occupational exposures, OSHA expects the employer to have a written exposure control plan. This plan must be accessible to employees and is subject to update at least annually. The employer must identify and list those jobs that are subject to exposure.
Workplace Violence
Workplace violence is the leading cause of occupational fatalities for working women and 2nd leading cause for men.
No standard exists yet but one is in the making.
Six risk factors:
1. Exchange of money with the public.
2.
Working alone or in small numbers.
3. Working late at night or during early am.
4. Working in high crime areas.
5. Guarding valuable property or possessions.
6. Working in community settings.
Safety
managers need to be alert and proactive with regards to these risk factors.
Chapter 3
Concepts of Hazard Avoidance
The objective of this chapter is to present four approaches that safety and health managers can use as tools to deal with the unknown elements of worker safety and health.
1. The Enforcement Approach
2. The Psychological Approach
3. The Engineering Approach
4. The Analytical Approach
1. The Enforcement Approach To Hazard Avoidance
Initially taken by OSHA, but OSHA was not the first to employ it; safety rules with penalties have existed almost since people first began to deal with risks.
The enforcement approach is simple and direct; there is no question that it has an impact.
Using the enforcement approach, OSHA has forced thousands of industries to comply with regulations that have changed workplaces and made millions of jobs safer and more healthful.
The enforcement approach has failed to do the whole job. It is difficult to see any general improvement in injury and illness statistics as a result of enforcement, although some categories, such as trenching and excavation cave-ins, have shown marked improvement.
Weaknesses of the enforcement approach include:
• Mandatory standards must be worded in absolutes, such as "always do this" or "never do that."
• Requires the anticipation of every circumstance to be encountered. Within the framework of the stated scope of the standard
Consider the following case study. Case Study 3.1 Page 50.
Now consider the following actual case. Case Study 3.2 Page 51.
A similar case. Case Study 3.3 Page 51.
Although OSHA later rescinded the fines in the
2. The Psychological Approach To Hazard Avoidance
The psychological approach is an approach that attempts to reward safe attitudes. Elements of the psychological approach are posters and signs reminding employees to work safely. A large sign may be at the front gate of the plant displaying the number of days since a lost-time injury. Safety meetings, departmental awards, drawings, prizes, and picnics can be used to recognize and reward safe attitudes.
• Emphasizes the religion of safety and health versus the science. And are typified by attempts at persuasion, sometimes called "pep talks."
• Its very sensitive to the support of top management, and if such support is absent, the approach is very vulnerable. I. E. Management does not wear safety glasses when visiting the production floor.
• Young workers are especially influenced by the psychological approach. I. E. If highly respected co-workers laugh at or ignore safety principles, young workers may get off to a very bad start, never taking safety and health seriously.
Case Study 3.4 Page 53.
3. The Engineering Approach To Hazard Avoidance
For decades, safety engineers have attributed most workplace injuries to unsafe worker acts, not unsafe conditions. The origin of this thinking has been traced to h. W. Heinrich. His studies resulted in the widely known ratio 88:10:2:
Unsafe acts 88%
Unsafe conditions 10%
Unsafe causes 2%
Total causes of workplace accidents 100%
The current trend is to give increasing emphasis to the workplace machinery, environment, guards, and protective systems.
Accident analyses are probing more deeply to determine whether incidents which at first appear to be caused by "worker carelessness" could have been prevented by a process redesign. This development has greatly enhanced the importance of the "engineering approach" to dealing with workplace hazards.
Three Lines Of Defense
When a hazard is identified the firm should first try to redesign or revise the process to "engineer out the hazard. Thus engineering controls receive first preference in what might be called three lines of defense against health hazards.
1. Engineering controls
2. Administrative or work practice controls
3. Personal protective equipment
Engineering controls deal directly with the hazard by removing it, ventilating it, suppressing it, or otherwise rendering the workplace safe and healthful.
Safety Factors
Engineers have long recognized the chance element in safety and know that margins of error must be provided.
The selection of safety factors is an important responsibility. It would be nice if all safety factors could be 10:1, but there are trade-off’s which make such large safety factors unreasonable, even infeasible, in some situations. Cost is the obvious, but not the only trade off. Weight, supporting structure, speed, horsepower, and size are all factors that may be affected by selection of too large a safety factor.
Fail-Safe Principles
These are additional principles of engineering design that consider the consequences of component failure within the system.
1. General fail-safe principle: the resulting status of a system, in event of failure of one of its components, shall be in a safe mode. Case Study 3.5 Page 55 & 3.6 Page 56.
2. Fail-safe principle of redundancy: a critically important function of a system, subsystem, or components can be preserved by alternate parallel or standby units.
3. Principle of worst case: the design of a system should consider the worst situation to which it may be subjected in use (Murphy's law).
Some Design Principles listed to stimulate thinking on how to reduce hazards:
1. Eliminate the process or cause of the hazard
2. Substitute an alternate process or material.
3. Guard personnel from exposure to the hazard.
4. Install barriers to keep personnel out of the area.
5. Warn personnel with visible or audible alarms.
6. Use warning labels to caution personnel to avoid hazard.
7. Use filters to remove exposure to hazardous effluents.
8. Design exhaust ventilation systems to deal with process effluents.
9. Consider the human interface.
Engineering Pitfalls
1. Certain unusual circumstances can make the engineering solution inappropriate or even unsafe.
2. Workers remove or defeat the purpose of engineering controls or safety devices. Case Study 3.7 Page 59.
3. The engineered system can sometimes cause a hazard. Figure 3.1 Page 60.
4. The Analytical Approach To Hazard Avoidance
The analytical approach deals with hazards by studying their mechanisms, analyzing statistical histories, computing probabilities of accidents, conducting epidemiological and toxicological studies, and weighing costs and benefits of hazards elimination.
1. Accident analysis: no safety and health program within an industrial plant is complete without some form of review of mishaps that have actually occurred.
2. Failure modes and effects analysis: sometimes a hazard has several origins, and a detailed analysis of potential causes must be made. Engineers use fmeFMEA to trace the effects of individual component failures on the overall or "catastrophic" failure of equipment. I.E. Preventive & Predictive Maintenance.
3. Fault tree analysis: concentrates on the end result, which is usually an accident or some other adverse consequence. Accidents are caused at least as often by procedural errors as by equipment failures. And fault tree analysis considers all causes—procedural and/or equipment.
Figure 3.3 Page 63 shows a sample fault tree diagram of the network of causal relationships that contribute to electrocution of a worker using a portable electric drill.
4. Loss incident causation models: is closely related to both the fault tree analysis and FMEA.
It’s a model that emphasizes the causes of "loss incidents," from a universal perspective in which the entire causal system is examined: primary causes (proximal causes) and secondary causes(distal causes) and the point of irreversibility.
5. Toxicology: is the study of the nature and effects of poisons. Industrial toxicology is concerned especially with identifying what industrial materials or contaminants can harm workers and what should be done to control these materials.
6. Epidemiological studies: epidemiology studies are strictly of people, not animals. Is derived from the word “epidemic” and in the literal sense is the study of epidemics.
The epidemiological approach is to examine populations of people to associate various patterns of possible disease causes with the occurrence of the disease. It draws heavily on the analytical tools of mathematical statistics. Case Study 3.8 Page 69.
Safety and health managers do not typically perform these studies, but they provide the basis for mandatory standards which are subsequently used in the enforcement approach.
7. Cost-Benefit Analysis: safety and health managers do make cost judgments on occupational safety and health issues because funds have limitations.
A cost-benefit analyses can be used to compare capital investment alternatives to justify capital investment proposals that can be shown to have the possibility of preventing injuries and illnesses
The biggest difficulty with cost-benefit analysis is the estimation of the benefit side of the picture.
Case Study 3.9 Page 70.
Hazards Classification Scale
OSHA recognizes four categories of hazards or standards violations as follows:
• Imminent Danger
• Serious Violations
• Non-Serious Violations
• De Minimus Violations
Loosely defined these are distinguished chiefly by the extent of the penalty authorized for each type.
A 10-point scale is recommended by this author. Table 3.1 Page 72 is a first attempt to describe subjectively each of 10 levels of hazards. Hazards classification scale
One critical test is met by the proposed scale, within each hazard type, each successive level of the scale describes a progressively more severe hazard.
Chapter 4
Impact of federal regulation
Federal safety and health regulations also include:
• MSHA- The Mine Safety And Health Administration
• TOSCA- The Toxic Substances Control Act
• CPSC- The Consumer Product Safety Commission
Standards
The most significant change that OSHA brought to industry was a book of federal standards; mandatory rules for worker safety and health.
This set of rules formed the basis for inspection, citations, penalties, and virtually every activity in which OSHA is engaged.
One rule, however, was not in the book;
General duty clause
Congress decided to set up one general rule for all to follow, and this rule was included in its entirety in the text of the law that created OSHA. This rule, called the general duty clause, might be called the first commandment of OSHA. It is quoted as follows:
Public
Law 91-596
Section 5(a) each employer . . .(i) shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees....
The General Duty Clause is cited by OSHA whenever a serious safety or health violation is alleged for which no specific rule seems to apply.
Public Law 91-596
Section 5(b) each employee shall comply with occupational safety and health standards and all rules, regulations, and orders issued pursuant to this act which are applicable to his own actions and conduct.
Note that section 5(a)(1) describes a responsibility for employers, whereas section 5(b) pertains to employees.
Structure
The general book of standards, General Industry, Part 1910, was published to cover virtually all industries.
The construction industry’s book of standards, Construction Standards, Part 1926.
But even special categories of industries (i.e. construction) are also covered by the more General Part 1910 with respect to any hazard for which no standard exists.
Another classification for standards divides them into specification standards versus performance standards.
The specification type is easier to enforce because it spells out in detail (i.e. methods) exactly what the employer must do and how to do it.
The performance type permits the employer latitude in devising innovative ways to eliminate or reduce hazards (i.e. results).
Example 4.1 (Page 84-85)
(a) Example of a
specification standard leaves no doubt in the reader's mind as to what must be
done and specifies exactly the limitations of containers and manifolds within
the room.
(b) Example of a performance
standard it can be seen that employers have all kinds of latitude to set up
their buildings in ways to avoid "undue danger."
NIOSH
The national institute for occupational safety and health (NIOSH) was established by the OSHA law to carry on research, training, and develops the criteria for new standards. NIOSH recommends new standards to OSHA which has the sole authority to promulgate new standards.
Enforcement
Inspections
OSHA has been given the authority to inspect, at a "reasonable time," industries and issue citations with monetary penalties.
Employers may invoke their fourth amendment rights and require OSHA to obtain a search warrant.
Priorities that generated OSHA inspections:
1. Imminent Danger: a situation in which death or serious physical harm could be expected to occur immediately. Time is of the essence. OSHA has a policy of investigating within 24 hours of notification.
2. Fatalities And Major Accidents: OSHA requires a telephone call or other notification within 8 hours upon occurrence of fatal accidents or accidents in which three or more persons are hospitalized. OSHA has a policy of investigating within 24 hours of notification.
3. Employee Complaints: an employee can request that OSHA investigate a hazard by filing with OSHA a complaint describing a hazard believed to exist in the workplace. To be valid, the complaint must be signed by the employee. OSHA is bound by law to keep the origins of an employee complaint confidential if the employee requests.
4. High-Hazard Industries: industries that are shown by statistical records to be particularly hazardous referred to as target industries whose national LWDI average (sic classification) is higher than the national average LWDI for all industries.
Citations
OSHA may issue a citation for alleged violations of the standards or of the general duty clause. The statutory limit is six months, so if no citation has been received within six months, the employer can be assured that a citation will not be forthcoming.
OSHA may issue a de minimus notice (a violation of the letter of the law) in lieu of a citation which do not carry a monetary penalty.
The citation must be prominently posted near where the violation occurred.
Table 4.1 OSHA Penalties (Page 88)
Although most OSHA penalties are small, it is possible for fines to become quite severe. Note that the failure-to-abate penalty is assessed for every day a violation remains uncorrected. Although rare, some willful and repeat violations have resulted in fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars assessed on a single firm.
An additional category, egregious violation, was
established administratively in the 1980s by the agency. Worse than a willful
violation, an egregious violation is a glaring or flagrant violation, which may
invoke even higher penalties. Citation of egregious violations requires
clearance from OSHA's national headquarters in
The following questions are frequently asked in seminars about OSHA:
1. Who in the organization goes to prison when the "employer" is found to be guilty of a willful violation resulting in death?
2. Where does the money collected in OSHA fines go—to OSHA's budget to pay inspectors?
There is a 15-day period (working days) after receipt of the citation during which a decision must be made whether or not to contest the citation.
Employee Discrimination
Employers
are subject to punishment if they are found to have discriminated against an
employee because that employee filed an OSHA complaint or answered the OSHA
compliance officer's questions during an inspection or exercised any other
right afforded employees under the OSHA law.
OSHA takes seriously these examples of employee discrimination with respects to OSHA:
•
termination
•
demotion
•
assignment to an undesirable job or shift
•
denial of promotion
•
threats or harassment
•
blacklisting the employee with other employers
Safety and health managers should ensure that all managers and careful not to discriminate either directly or indirectly against any employee for complaining about safety and health violations.
Role of The States
The OSHA law provides for state plans to be submitted to OSHA for approval.
Enforcement
OSHA itself has been given no authority to regulate state agencies, counties, or municipalities. Even federal agencies are exempt from regular OSHA enforcement.
The OSHA law does provide for federal agency coverage as a part of the responsibilities of the heads of the various federal agencies.
If a state submits a plan for occupational safety and health standards and enforcement, they must be at least as effective as the corresponding federal standards and enforcement usually they are identical to the federal OSHA standards (Appendix g).
Consultation
OSHA delegates to states authority and responsibility for consultative assistance in occupational safety and health to employers upon request. There is no charge for state consultation, and as of this writing it was available in some form in every state.
Political Trends
OSHA appears to be quite durable and has survived repeated attempts to repeal or modify it.
Positive Developments
The number of university academic programs in safety and health had tripled since 1970.
OSHA has become increasingly interested in training and in the effectiveness of employee committees for safety and health.
SHARP Program is designed to provide recognition to small companies that cooperate and participate in OSHA’s consultation program. The employer must:
1. receive a comprehensive safety and health consultation visit.
2. correct all workplace safety and health hazards.
3. adopt and implement effective safety and health management systems.
4. agree to request further consultative visits if major changes in working conditions or processes occur that may introduce new hazards.
The reward is an exemption from OSHA programmed inspections for a period of one year.
VPP Program is the Voluntary Protection Program which involves a serious commitment on the part of the employer to maintain an exemplary safety and health program for its employees. There are three steps of recognition:
Step 1. Demonstration which identifies the company as seeking recognition from the VPP program.
Step 2. Merit is awarded after lengthy series of steps and the firm qualifies for the next rating.
Step 3. Star (the highest) which is reserved for outstanding safey and helath programs.
Ergonomics
Ergonomics is the study of human capability in relation to the work environment, and solutions to ergonomics problems usually require a sophisticated analysis involving perhaps a redesign of the work station to fit the process. An example is the problem of carpal tunnel syndrome, a chronic illness of the wrist that occurs due to repetitive hand motion.
Extra-Hazardous Employer Status
An employer receives this designation when notified by the Workers' Compensation Commission of the state of the company's residence. The designation is determined by a calculation of the company's lost-time injuries incidence rate and comparison with the "expected rate" for that company's industry (SIC). When the company's rate exceeds the level that can "reasonably be expected" for that industry, the company is designated an "Extra-Hazardous Employer."
Being dubbed "extra hazardous" carries with it certain responsibilities for management. The first of these is to have a safety consultation within a short time period, usually 30 days. Options for this consultation may include the state labor department, the company's insurance carrier, or a professional consultant approved by the Workers' Compensation Commission of the state of residence.
The written report of the safety consultant is then used by the company as a basis for the development of a mandatory "accident-prevention plan." The plan must be more than a general document; it must address each of the hazards or unsafe practices identified in the safety consultation report. The plan must also include provision for the following:
1. statement of company safety policy
2. analysis of hazards
3. recordkeeping
4. education and training
5. in-house audits or inspections
6. accident investigations
7. periodic review of abatement effectiveness
8. implementation schedule
Americans With Disabilities Act (
The
Case Study 4.1 page 100 gives insight into these practices and the ramifications of such.
Chapter 5
Information Systems
Because it is impossible for the employer to completely eliminate all hazards OSHA shifts some of the responsibility to the employee by requiring information systems that educate employees about the nature and degree of hazards associated with the job. Employees are thus given the necessary data with which to evaluate the risks and take action accordingly.
Thus began; the Right-To-Know, regulations requiring Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs), and the labeling of hazardous materials to which employees or the public might become exposed. Note: not all materials only hazardous ones.
Hazard Communication
Container Labeling
The hazard communication standard placed the labeling and MSDS responsibility upon the manufacturer or importer of the substance.
Some substances are excluded:
•
pesticides
• food,
drugs, or cosmetics
•
alcoholic beverages
•
substances covered by the labeling requirements of the consumer product safety
commission (CPSC)
•
hazardous wastes
•
tobacco or tobacco products
• wood
or wood products
•
"articles"
In some cases it may be difficult to distinguish between articles and materials.
Material Safety Data Sheets
The standard lists specific categories of information that must be included in the MSDS.
Figure 5.1 (Page 107-108) is an exhibit of a blank form in a generic format.
Employee Hazard Communication Program
The responsibility for protection of employees from potential exposure becomes the responsibility of the employer. A principal requirement is that employers have a written hazard communication program.
One required component is a list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present in the workplace and a MSDS must be on hand and available to employees
Federal standards permit the MSDS to be kept in any form, even within operating procedures.
The safety and health manager should ensure that the required information is available for each hazardous chemical and that the information is readily accessible to employees of each work shift.
In addition, the employer must maintain the labels provided by the manufacturer or importer of the substance, except that labels are not required for portable, in-house containers intended for immediate use.
Record Retention
Records information systems should be present that trace the identities, location of use, and time of use for hazardous substances, along with each employee exposure, for a retention period of at least 30 years.
Employee medical records must be preserved and maintained for the duration of employment plus 30 years.
Environmental Protection Agency
Medical Surveillance
Fundamental to the right-to-know concept is the employees' right of access to their personal medical records held by the company that employs them. A medical surveillance program is required for
1. All employees who may be exposed to health hazards at or above the established permissible exposure limits for 30 days or more a year, whether or not the employee uses a respirator for protection against the hazards.
2. All employees who wear a respirator for 30 days or more a year.
3. Employees designated by the employer to plug, patch, or otherwise temporarily control or stop leaks from containers that hold hazardous substances or health hazards (i.e., members of hazardous material (HAZMAT) teams).
Federal standards prescribe intervals at which medical examinations and consultations shall be made. The regular times are as follows:
1. Prior to assignment to duties that may require hazardous material exposure.
2. At least every 12 months during assignment to such duty.
3. Upon termination of such duty, unless the employee has had an examination within the last six months.
A medical examination is required as soon as possible if an employee develops signs or symptoms indicating possible overexposure or if an unprotected employee becomes exposed in an emergency situation.
Reporting
Facilities in the manufacturing industries (sic codes 20xx through 39xx) that use listed toxic substances in quantities over 10,000 pounds in a calendar year are required to submit toxic chemical release forms (EPA Form R) by July 1 of the following year.
For firms that manufacture or process these materials, the threshold quantity is 25,000 pounds per year, for amounts above which the firm is required to submit the toxic chemical release form.
For firms that both manufacture and use the same substance, if the threshold quantity is exceeded in either instance, then the firm must report, a point illustrated by case study 5.1.
Case Study 5.1 & 5.2 Page 113.
Chapter 6
Process Safety and Disaster Preparedness
Of major impact upon the field of safety and health management in the early 1990s was the promulgation by OSHA of the standard for process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals. The decade of the 1980s was witness to major tragedies involving explosions and catastrophic release of hazardous chemicals that resulted in numerous fatalities both to employees and the general public. These tragedies were of such significance as to attract worldwide attention.
These disasters prompted OSHA to seek more than an after-the-fact approach with inspections and fines. The result was a new standard that sought to forestall such catastrophes in the future. The resulting OSHA process safety standard was made effective in 1992.
Chapter 7
Buildings and Facilities
This book now turns to the business of examining hazards in various categories, highlighting applicable standards and suggesting methods of bringing about change to eliminate or reduce hazards.
Safety standards for buildings (municipal, state, or federal) are usually called codes. Building codes usually apply to the construction of new buildings or to their modification.
Some federal standards for buildings have been applied to all buildings, regardless of age. The standards have included matters of relative permanence such as floors, aisles, doors, numbers and locations of exits, and stairway lengths, widths, riser design, angle, and vertical clearance.
Federal standards pertaining to buildings and facilities include the following categories:
1. Walking-working surfaces
2. Means of egress
3. Powered platforms, manlifts, and vehicle-mounted work platforms
4. General environmental controls
1. Walking and Working Surfaces
Many accidents, especially slips and falls, occur on floors, and other walking and working surfaces i.e. mezzanines and balconies, platforms, catwalks, and scaffolds, ramps, docks, stairways, and ladders.
Guarding Open Floors and Platforms
The most frequently cited standard in the walking-and-working-surfaces subpart is indeed one of the most frequently cited standards in all of the OSHA standards. It is repeated here in its entirety, due to its importance.
OSHA standard 1910.23—guarding floor and wall openings and holes (Page 133)
(c) protection of open-sided floors, platforms, and runways
(i) every open-sided floor or platform 4 feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level shall be guarded by a standard railing or the equivalent as specified in paragraph (e)(3) of this section] on all open sides, except where there is entrance to a ramp, stairway, or fixed ladder. The railing shall be provided with a toeboard wherever, beneath the open sides,
(i) persons can pass,
(ii) there is moving machinery, or
(iii) there is equipment with which falling materials could create a hazard.
To many people, 4 feet seems an innocuous height but few adults experience a fall from that height without injury. A surprising number of fatalities result from falls at heights of only 8 feet.
OSHA specifies the protection of personnel from falls from:
• Loading docks by the installation of removable railings, and/or chain-type gates.
• Rooftop unless:
1. The roof has a parapet.
2. The slope of the roof is flatter than 4 inches in 12 inches.
3. The workers are protected by a safety belt attached to a lifeline.
4. The roof is lower than 16 feet from the ground to the eaves.
• Top of tanks are considered a “working surface.”
The term standard railings mentioned in the platform guarding standard is further clarified by federal standards, and salient features are shown in Figure 7.1.
In OSHA standard 191 0.23(c)(1) sites three conditions which calls for a toeboard. Toeboards are vertical barriers along the exposed edges of the walking or working surface to prevent falls of materials. A standard toeboard is 4 inches high and leaves no more than a 1/4-inch gap between the floor and the toeboard. If the toeboard is not of solid material, its opening must not be greater than 1 inch (Figure 7-1 Page 135).
Floors and Aisles
The most important consideration for floors and aisles is how they are maintained. Federal standards for housekeeping require areas to "be kept clean and orderly and in a sanitary condition."
What constitutes "clean and orderly and in a sanitary condition"? There is no clear-cut answer, but some information can be obtained from past OSHA citations:
Example 7.1 Page 136
In the railroad yard area of a steel manufacturing industry, piles of debris such as railroad ties and cables were lying about close to the track and presented tripping hazards to employees who must work in the area of the tracks. A complicating factor was that some of the debris was hidden by weeds.
Example 7.2 Page 136
Dangerous accumulations of grain dust were found in many locations in a grain elevator. The dust was sufficiently concentrated so as to not only be a health hazard to cleanup personnel but also to present a serious explosion hazard. Since the condition had been cited before, the citation was established as "serious and repeat," and the penalty was set at $10,000.
Example 7.3 Page 136
A cluttered workshop had obstructions that some of the employees had to step over or go around to do their jobs.
Example 7.4 Page 137
Leaking hydraulic cylinders dripped oil on the floor in a work area. No one was responsible for cleaning up the leaked oil.
Excessive is generally considered to be a material accumulation (in the immediate work area) in quantities in excess of what is actually required to do the given job, or scrap material lying hazardously about the work area in excess of a day's accumulation.
A prime measure of whether a housekeeping program is inadequate is the number of accidents such as trips and falls occurring in the area.
Water on the floor is a problem in many industries, and constant surveillance becomes necessary to assure that the floor is kept clean and dry.
Trip hazards due to uneven floors can result in serious injury.
Standards for aisles specify that permanent aisles be kept clear of hazardous obstructions and that they be appropriately marked.
Conspicuously absent from federal standards for aisles is a specific minimum width for aisles.
State codes which reflect the National Fire Protection Association's Life Safety Code often specify a minimum exit access width of 28 inches. But the federal code is silent on this point except to use the language ". . . Sufficient safe clearances shall be allowed . . ."
These standards are therefore good examples of "performance standards."
The aisle-marking standard was formerly a specification standard but is now a performance standard.
Federal standards require marking plates for floor loads approved by the "building official."
Consulting a competent professional engineer would show a good-faith effort to comply with the standard and would virtually eliminate the possibility of a hazard.
Stairways
Building codes and standards for stairways are well established.
If the stairways have four or more risers, they need standard railings or handrails and must be kept clear of obstructions.
A handrail, as used in this standard, is a single bar or pipe supported on brackets from a wall to furnish a handhold in case of tripping.
A railing is a vertical barrier erected along the exposed sides of stairways and platforms to prevent falls.
The placement of stairway landings is a safety consideration. The main purpose of the stairway landing is to shorten the distance of falls, and thus landings play an important role in building and facilities safety. Extremely long flights of stairs are obviously more dangerous than stairs interrupted by landings. To be effective they must be no less than the width of the stairway and a minimum of 30 inches in length measured in the direction of travel.
Ladders
Safety and health managers should make sure that the ladders were constructed and maintained properly and are used in a safe fashion.
Defective ladders must be either repaired or destroyed, and while awaiting either fate they must be tagged or marked "dangerous; do not use.
Portable metal ladders conduct electricity.
Rubber or otherwise nonconducting feet are a good precaution on metal ladders, but the hazard is still present.
A common error is to use ladders that are too short. When accessing a roof, the ladder needs to extend at least 3 feet above the upper point of support.
The first consideration in the use of a portable ladder is its condition, especially the rungs. Next is weather or not it is insecurely positioned. The proper slant is 4 feet vertical to l foot horizontal. A safe practice is to tie off the ladder at the top so that it cannot tip or slide down.
Fixed Ladders
With fixed ladders, the emphasis is on design and construction.
Problems they may be encounter with fixed ladders are illustrated in Figure 7.3 (Page 142).
Ladder standards prescribe breaking long lengths, and separating successive lengths, of a ladder by using an offset equipped with a landing platform.
Such offsets are required every 30 feet of unbroken length. When the fixed ladder is more than 20 feet long but less than 30 feet long, protective cages are needed. On tower, water tank, and chimney ladders over 20 feet in unbroken length, ladder safety devices may be used in lieu of cage protection. A ladder safety device is illustrated in Figure 7.4 (Page 143).
Exits
Exits are usually doors to the outside and from a safety standpoint are considered a means of escape, especially from fire.
The more general term means of egress to include
1. The way of exit access
2. The exit itself
3. The way of exit discharge
The safety and health manager should analyze the entire building to determine whether every point in the building has a continuous and unobstructed way of travel to a public way.
Outside the building one must think of yards, exterior storage of materials, fences, courtyards, and shrubbery.
Exits that are locked can be a two-edged problem because many safety and health managers are also responsible for plant security.
Facilities designers are turning more and more to the use of unlocked, automatic-alarm-sounding emergency exit doors.
More frequently encountered are exits that are cluttered or blocked by obstructions.
According to OSHA these are four major (or biggest) problems with exists:
1. locked exits
2. cluttered or blocked by obstructions
3. inadequate lighting, or the lack of it
4. improper exit signs and/or not suitability illuminated
Americans With Disabilities Act
Attention to buildings and facilities assumed increased significance with passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990.
Many changes to walking and working surfaces, exits,
drinking water fountain levels, rest rooms, and other facilities became
mandatory instead of voluntary. Often, the safety and health manager has been
assigned the responsibility for compliance with
Illumination
Lighting, or the lack of it, can be a safety hazard, but there is no code for minimum safe lighting except for specialized areas.
Every exit sign should be suitably illuminated by a reliable light source giving a value of not less than 5 foot-candles on the illuminated surface. Table 7.1 on page 145 gives some examples.
Miscellaneous Facilities
Maintenance Platforms
Typical problems with these platforms are missing guardrails, missing toeboards, missing side mesh, disabled safety devices, inadequate inspections or records of inspections, and for not having load-rating plates on the platform.
Workers on some types of powered platforms need to wear safety belts
Public-utilities workers and tree trimmers often use platforms that are vehicle: mounted, such as aerial baskets, aerial ladders, boom platforms, and platform-elevating towers. The most serious hazard with vehicle-mounted platforms is contact with high-voltage power lines.
A safe distance must be maintained at all times, the accepted standard is a 10-foot distance in the case of a 40-kilovolt line.
Elevators
Elevators must be inspected both when new (or altered) and periodically thereafter. Many states even require construction permits from the authorized elevator inspection agency before elevator construction is begun. Elevator operating permits and fees are also required by some states.
Chapter 8
Ergonomics
A. FACETS OF ERGONOMICS
Ergonomics is a multidisciplinary science that studies human physical and psychological capabilities and limitations. This body of knowledge can be used to design or modify the workplace, equipment, products, or work procedures to improve human performance and reduce the likelihood of injury and illness.
From the definition, it can be seen that the field of ergonomics covers a broad spectrum of activities involving human activity. Reducing the likelihood of injury or illness, as beneficial as that goal is, is only one of the objectives of the field. Improving human performance is another key objective, and, historically, may even be more important to the field of ergonomics.
1. Ergonomic Vehicle Design for
Human Performance
Is the appropriate interface between human and machine to achieve the best possible result of the machine performing the intended task for the operator controlling it. If the equipment being designed is a vehicle, there are obvious implications for safety, not only of the operator, but also of the general public.
2. Designing Safety Features
into Workplace Machines
In the design of machine controls, there are many features which are specified by safety standards. One example is the design of punch press footswitches. A properly designed standard footswitch for activating a mechanical power press has a cover to prevent the operator or other personnel from accidentally stepping on the pedal or switch, thus causing an accidental cycle of the press ram, which could have disastrous results. Another example is the requirement that crane pendant controls be "dead‑man" controls. Case Study 8.1 Page 154-155 as a example.
3. Controlling the Work
Environment
Focuses on the physical environment that surrounds the worker in the workplace. For most workplaces, the most important consideration in this regard is temperature. What limits of hot and cold temperatures are reasonable for the work environment, and what temperatures are optimal for various tasks? Ergonomics attempts to scientifically determine these temperature parameters and apply them to the workplace. Humidity is also a factor. Sometimes the demands of the job require a worker to work in a hot or a cold environment, and the consideration then becomes a matter of appropriate duration.
Another aspect of the air, besides its temperature or humidity, is pollution. In this regard, OSHA and other regulatory agencies pay close attention to acceptable levels of pollution by various toxic air contaminants.
4. Manual Lifting
Ergonomics is more focused upon lifting, because it depends upon the human operator and applies stresses upon the human body. Manual lifting is one of the most studied subjects in ergonomics, but to date the studies are still inconclusive.
4. Back Belts
Supporting belts worn around the waist are often worn by persons who do heavy lifting as a part of their job. The implication is that such belts prevent injury to the lower back. NIOSH decided to test this assumption in a preliminary study reported in 1994 and again in the late 1990s in what has been described as "the largest study of its kind ever conducted." The study examined incidence rates for workers' compensation claims for back injuries. The following comparisons were made:
(a) workers who wear back belts everyday vs. those who never wear them or, if they do wear them, do so only occasionally (once or twice per month);
(b) employers that require back belts vs. employers for whom back belt use is voluntary.
Both hypotheses showed no statistical significance in the difference between the groups in the incidence rates for workers' compensation claims. Besides the workers' compensation claims, the study also examined "self‑reported back pain" and again the results showed no statistical significance in the difference between the groups. The study lasted two years and involved interviewing 9377 employees at 160 stores nationwide.
5. Accommodating Individual
Worker Characteristics
We know that it is difficult to eliminate the hazards of manual lifting by training in proper lifting techniques or in the screening of personnel for the job. Therefore the engineering approach to eliminate the need for manual lifting or to assist the worker by providing lifting aids is a desirable solution as it eliminates the hazard to the employee. For heavy lifting tasks, simple carts and dollies, as shown in Figure 8.1 on page 159, have been necessary and desirable in general industry for decades, even before the age of ergonomics.
More recently, lift tables, as shown in Figure 8.2 on page 160, have been used to facilitate the manual loading of workstations without requiring the worker to lift from the floor or pallet. The field of ergonomics has provided considerable motivation to use the types of devices shown in Figure 8.2. Sometimes the solution can be as simple as delivering material to be processed onto a platform raised to the proper height without the necessity of employing a lift table. The benefits for large, awkward workpieces is evident in Figure 8.3 on page 160.
B. WORKPLACE MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS
This complicated term is actually a generalization of more specific maladies that have been experienced in the workplace and have received significant attention on the part of both industrial safety and health managers and enforcement authorities. It is this part of ergonomics that has led to so much controversy and subsequent political action reaching a level as high as the U.S. Congress. A little history of the jargon surrounding these specific ailments leading up to the current emphasis on MSDs is in order.
1. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Carpal tunnel syndrome is a painful, possibly disabling dysfunction of the wrist. The condition is not clearly defined, but is generally thought to result from activities that require repetitive hand motion especially when the hands are required to be in an awkward posture. Tasks involving rapid production, such as assembly or typing, are often associated with carpal tunnel syndrome. Figure 8.4 illustrates a cross section of the wrist showing the crowding together of tendons, bones, and nerves within a sheath enclosed by the carpal ligament. The parts of the wrist must move within this sheath to give motion to the fingers in repetitive operations. It is understandable that awkward postures of the hand and wrist would further constrict the carpal tunnel area and give rise to discomfort from the moving parts. It also makes sense that highly repetitive motions would exacerbate the condition.
2. Repetitive Strain Injuries
OSHA reasoned that the carpal tunnel is not the only part of the body that could be irritated by repetitive motion. What about the neck, for instance? Did not workers get sore necks from jobs that required repeated motion of the head? And then there were sore elbows and sore shoulders. Therefore, the target "hazard" was shifted from "carpal tunnel syndrome" to a much broader term: repetitive strain injuries (RSIs).The term carpal tunnel syndrome went completely out of vogue among practicing professionals in the field because it limited the perspective of the practitioner as well as the enforcement powers of the regulatory officials. By the 1990s, the term carpal tunnel had become so out of style that it was conspicuously omitted from the definitions in the ANSI standard for ergonomics, and it is only briefly mentioned in the body of the standard as one of several different manifestations of disorders resulting from ergonomics hazards (ref. Work‑Related).
3. Cumulative Trauma Disorders
Even the term RSI was too limiting in scope. Certainly rapid, repeated motions were the most common exposures associated with sore tendons and joints, but some workers were found to experience symptoms even when their jobs did not require this type of activity. An even broader term was needed that would cover any type of trauma resulting from an accumulation of exposure over a period of time, though the worker is not injured from an occasional exposure. Thus, the term cumulative trauma disorders (CTDs) replaced RSIs. The word cumulative apparently carries more weight than the word trauma, because CTDs are generally considered a chronic exposure, not an acute one. The term CTD had a short life in the late 20th century, but has since been replaced with another term, MSD.
4. Musculoskeletal Disorders
The problem with CTD was that the term itself implied a cause of the condition. It seemed inappropriate to assume that the worker had been injured from an accumulation of exposure to a hazard. Even worse, suppose a worker complained about pain in a joint and it could not be established that the worker had cumulative exposure of any kind?
So as not to overlook any cause of the disorder, whatever the cause might be, the term musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) became the new term used to describe all of the related worker conditions of this type, including carpal tunnel syndrome, rotator cuff syndrome, DeQuervain's disease, trigger finger, tarsal tunnel syndrome, sciatica, epicondylitis, tendinitis, Raynaud's phenomenon, carpet layers' knee, herniated spinal disc, low back pain, bursitis, and tension neck syndrome (ref. OSHA standard 1904.12(b)(1) and Work‑related).
The term MSD was modified slightly in the ANSI standard to narrow the focus to work‑related exposures. Therefore, as of this writing, the term had finally morphed into work‑related musculoskeletal disorders, WMSDs. Figure 8.5 page 164 illustrates the historical progression in recognizing WMSDs.
C. AFFECTED INDUSTRIES
Two landmark citations by OSHA in the area of ergonomics have been used as a model for the formulation of enforcement policy for controlling the hazard of WMSDs.
1.
Beverly Enterprises, a widely distributed provider of healthcare services
(especially nursing homes) headquartered in Ft Smith,
2.
Pepperidge Farms in
D. ERGONOMICS STANDARDS
Citation of Section 5(a)(1) of the General Duty Clause for ergonomics hazards was always a stopgap measure that was used in the absence of a relevant, specific standard for ergonomics. Therefore, throughout the decade of the 1990s, OSHA maintained a goal of developing a standard specifically focused on ergonomics.
1. OSHA Ergonomics Standard
The development effort climaxed in
the waning weeks of the
After nearly a decade of negotiation, the final standard emphasized the following main areas:
1. information to employees
2. quick‑fix action to eliminate reported WMSDs that meet the "action trigger" de
3. fined by the standard or establishment of an ongoing WMSD program
The OSHA Ergonomics standard had a short life. As soon as the new Congress took office in 2001, the new Ergonomics standard was repealed by congressional vote, overriding OSHA’s action. When Congress overrides and repeals any agency action, that agency is prohibited from resubmitting a slightly different version in a new promulgation.
2. OSHA Guidelines
The new OSHA administration ushered in with the Bush administration and the new Congress abandoned the strategy of promulgating a specific standard for ergonomics. In its place, OSHA unveiled a plan to issue guidelines to help control ergonomics hazards. OSHA would issue the guidelines for specific industries and encourage other general industries to construct guidelines of their own. The new strategy emphasized cooperation and the use of exemplary, successful, established ergonomics program as models for assisting other industries. There was a provision for giving recognition to noteworthy ergonomics programs. There is no question that the new "guidelines" program emphasized the positive and relied on the judgment of the industries to take the initiative in developing programs to foster ergonomics solutions to problems and hazards. Indeed, OSHA pointed to Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that a decline in WMSDs had already been observed.
D. WMSD MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
At this point, one may be wondering what plan to follow to have an effective Workplace Musculoskeletal Disorders program within a given company or plant. It is good strategy to have a working, documented program in place in any workplace that has exposure to hazards that can be categorized as related to WMSDs. It m