Safety Phoenix

Massey Math

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 16:25:00 +0000

Massey Energy Company (NYSE:MEE) today reinforced its total commitment to safety and provided additional context to the safety history of its mining operations.

– Since January 2009, UBB has had less than one violation per day of
inspection by MSHA, a rate consistent with national averages. Most of
the citations issued by MSHA to UBB in the last year were resolved on
the same day they were issued.

read the press release here.

I’m not a math wiz by any means, but….

As far as "less than 1 violation per day of MSHA inspection":

Mines are only required to be inspected 4 times per year. This year, MSHA enforcement personnel have already spent 51 days and have logged 803 hours inspecting the Upper Big Branch site and issued 124 citations. That works out to 2.4 per day of MSHA inspection.

In 2009, MSHA enforcement personnel logged 180 days and 2,999 hours at the Upper Big Branch mine and issued citations for 515 violations. That works out to 2.8 violations per day of MSHA inspection.

From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/09/AR2010040905117.html – “MSHA said that in the past year, the Upper Big Branch mine exceeded national averages in eleven citation categories and that for the most serious type of safety violation the mine had more than 11 times the national rate.”

As far as the lost-time incident rate being better than the industry average for 17 of the past 19 years – one has to wonder if under-reporting and “encouragement” not to claim a valid work injury is more likely.

Labor Department: Massey ‘dragged its feet’ on getting nitrogen for W.Va. mine rescue

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 12:07:00 +0000

I'm sure everyone is still reading about the Massey mine disaster at Montcoal, WV. There is quite a bit of information on all of the news wires. However, I came across this tidbit on Ken Ward's Coal Tattoo blog that I found especially disturbing:

Labor Department: Massey ‘dragged its feet’ on getting nitrogen for W.Va. mine rescue

From: Coal Tattoo

If you watched or listened to the mine rescue briefing that just ended, you heard MSHA’s Kevin Stricklin talk about plans to pump nitrogen into the Upper Big Branch Mine to “inert” the toxic and explosive gases that are keeping rescue crews from resuming their work.

One reporter asked Stricklin why they didn’t try this nitrogen pumping earlier, like Tuesday morning, after rescue teams were initially ordered out of the mine for their own safety. Kevin — who is a real professional and a good fellow — was pretty diplomatic:

I can’t answer that. We’ve been talking about it for a couple of days and it just hasn’t been made available yet.

Well, I asked the Department of Labor Public Affairs office for an official answer to that question, and this is what I got via email just now from Carl Fillichio:

We asked the company for it 2 days ago. Company dragged their feet. We had to keep asking for it.

read more at Coal Tattoo.

Combustible Dust Standard - Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:04:00 +0000

From: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=16623

US Labor Department's OSHA addresses need for combustible dust standard
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking solicits comments from public

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will publish an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) in the Oct. 21 edition of the Federal Register as an initial step in development of a standard to address the hazards of combustible dust.

"It's time for workers to stop dying in preventable combustible dust explosions," said U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "Workplace safety is not a slogan. It's a priority clearly embodied in our laws."

"Last year, 14 workers lost their lives in a combustible dust explosion at Imperial Sugar in Port Wentworth, Ga. Since 1980, more than 130 workers have been killed and more than 780 injured in combustible dust explosions," added acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab.

OSHA has been conducting a Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program (NEP) since October 2007; a status report is available on OSHA's Combustible Dust Safety and Health Topics page. The NEP has resulted in an unusually high number of general duty clause violations, indicating a strong need for a combustible dust standard. The general duty clause is not as effective as a comprehensive combustible dust standard would be at protecting workers. Responses to questions posed in the ANPR will help the agency propose an effective combustible dust standard.read more here.

Protecting America’s Workers Act of 2009: A Plan to Give OSHA A Lot More Teeth

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:48:00 +0000

From: McDermott Newsletters

"Just weeks before his death, the late Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), with the help of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), introduced legislation to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act), which has not been significantly altered since its inception. The proposed legislation, S. 1580, is known as the Protecting America’s Workers Act of 2009 (PAWA). A companion bill, H.R. 2067, has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA).

...Previous versions of PAWA, introduced in 2004, 2007 and 2008, gained increasing support, including co-sponsorship by then-Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden. What makes this legislation different is that it actually may make it out of committee and, with the blessing of the current administration, be passed by Congress in some form.

PAWA would make a number of major changes to enforcement of the OSH Act. This On the Subject, however, focuses on the very significant changes to criminal and civil penalties under the OSH Act proposed in this legislation.

More “Meaningful” OSHA Penalties

Penalty amounts under the current OSH Act regime have been criticized as too small to effectively promote worker safety. Congressman George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, recently wrote on the Hill’s Congress blog: “Penalties are the key enforcement mechanism under the OSH Act. They must be real. They must be meaningful. They must function to deter violations. They must get people’s attention. And, these enforcement mechanisms must not be a mere cost of doing business.” PAWA increases the size and application of penalties in several important ways. The penalty increases contained in this bill, in conjunction with OSHA’s new “per employee” penalty rule issued in December 2008 (the final rule subjects employers to “per employee” penalties for violating a large number of existing standards and permits OSHA to propose a separate penalty with respect to each employee not trained or not equipped with personal protective equipment) would dramatically increase the penalty amounts that may be assessed against employers. Under the OSH Act, OSHA has the authority only to propose penalties. Penalties are assessed by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, an independent agency that is not part of OSHA. See 29 U.S.C. § 666(j).

Criminal Penalties

PAWA would greatly expand the availability of criminal penalties against employers. The bill proposes to change the criminal charge for willful violations that result in an employee death from a misdemeanor to a felony. This change would make the prosecution of such charges much more attractive to local U.S. attorneys and give them an incentive, at OSHA’s urging, to bring more criminal charges. Furthermore, for the purposes of felony OSHA prosecutions only, the legislation expands the definition of “employer” to include “any responsible corporate officer.”

The maximum prison sentence for a willful violation that results in the death of an employee would increase under the bill from six months to 10 years for the first offense and from one year to 20 years for repeat convictions. The maximum prison term for knowingly making a false statement, representation or certification to OSHA also would be increased by the legislation from six months to two years.

PAWA would also expand potential criminal liability for willful violations to include circumstances that do not involve the death of an employee. Under PAWA, employers or responsible corporate officers who commit a willful violation that results in the serious bodily injury of an employee would be subject to a felony criminal prosecution, with imprisonment up to five years for a first offense and up to 10 years for subsequent convictions.

Civil Penalties

Civil penalties for willful and repeated violations would be increased under PAWA from a current maximum of $70,000 to a new maximum of $120,000 per violation. The bill would also increase the minimum penalty for a willful violation from $5,000 to $8,000 per violation. If a willful or repeated violation results in the death of an employee, PAWA would increase the penalties even higher, to a minimum of $50,000 and a maximum of $250,000 per violation. In conjunction with OSHA’s new “per employee” penalty rule, these increases could result in enormous proposed penalties.

Under the bill, the maximum civil penalty for serious and other-than-serious violations, and the maximum daily penalty for a failure to abate, would increase from $7,000 to $12,000 per violation. Should an employee death result from such a violation, the minimum penalty under the legislation would be $20,000 and the maximum would be $50,000 per violation.

Finally, regarding penalty amounts generally, PAWA would require OSHA to adjust these civil penalty minimums and maximums at least once every four years to account for increases or decreases in the Consumer Price Index..."

read more here.

6.2 Million Reasons to Implement a Proactive Workers Compensation Return to Work Program

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:56:00 +0000

The following article was written by Margaret Spence, a Worker's Compensation expert, founder of National Return to Work Week, and author. The article talks about the recent discrimination court case of EEOC vs. Sears, Robuck & Co.

Margaret says much of what I've been saying in various places for awhile. She just says it better. It's a long read, but well worth the effort, and something safety professionals need to be aware of.

The article can be found at: http://margaretspence.com/6-2-million-reasons-to-implement-a-proactive-workers-compensation-return-to-work-program/

The court case can be found at: http://www.eeoc.gov/press/9-29-09.html

6.2 Million Reasons to Implement a Proactive Workers Compensation Return to Work Program

Employers are so focused on managing workers compensation injuries that they often forget that the injury itself is the gateway to employment litigation. Until now, employers have systematically overlooked and downplayed the link between the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and workers compensation. As employers were asleep at the switch, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was working diligently to remind us that the ADA is the 6.2 million dollar elephant in the workers compensation room.

On September 29, 2009, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced a record-setting consent decree resolving a class lawsuit against Sears, Roebuck and Co. (Sears) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for $6.2 million. The consent decree, approved by Federal District Judge Wayne Andersen, represents the largest ADA settlement in a single lawsuit in EEOC history. The EEOC’s suit alleged that Sears maintained an inflexible workers’ compensation leave exhaustion policy and terminated employees instead of providing them with reasonable accommodations for their disabilities, in violation of the ADA.

This case not only highlights the link between workers compensation and the ADA but it magnifies the fact that twenty years after the ADA was enacted employers are still struggling to understand the process. Even large employers have a hard time balancing and defining the ADA exposure as they manage the work related disability. The EEOC Chicago District Director John Rowe, who supervised the agency’s administrative investigation preceding the lawsuit, said that the case arose from a charge of discrimination filed with the EEOC by a former Sears service technician, John Bava. According to Rowe, Bava was injured on the job, took workers’ compensation leave, and, although remaining disabled by the injuries, repeatedly attempted to return to work. Sears, Rowe said, “Could never see its way clear to provide Bava with a reasonable accommodation which would have put him back to work and, instead, fired him when his leave expired.”

The underlying issue that this case raises is the importance of having a proactive return to work program that not only satisfies the workers compensation exposure but addresses the looming ADA accommodation requirements. It’s quite simple when employees are injured on the job employers must have a predefined plan, in place, that addresses return to work options as well as ADA accommodations. We can no longer discard injured employees from the workforce, we have to make a valiant effort to get injured employees back to work and keep them there successfully.

If it’s so simple, why do employers struggle to create proactive return to work opportunities? And why do they fail to understand how the ADA exposure is created?

Let’s walk though a typical case that illustrates how intertwined and complicated the ADA exposure is, especially when you are balancing State workers compensation and Federal Leave guidelines.

Ouch, I’m Injured – The ADA Exposure Begins – Now!

David is a warehouse clerk, with a large multi-state employer; his job requires lifting up to 75 pounds. David lifts a box and injures his back – a workers compensation claim is filed and David is referred to an orthopedic surgeon, who eventually recommends surgery. David has back surgery and is left with significant lifting restrictions that not only affects his major life activities, but may prevent him from doing his pre-injury job without some accommodation. Several weeks after surgery and rehabilitation David’s orthopedic surgeon releases him to return to work light duty with restrictions of no lifting over 15 pounds.

David contacts his employer to return to work and he is told that they can not accommodate his light duty restrictions. His employer request that he stay at home, continue to collect workers compensation and contact them when he is feeling better – a typical conversation that occurs when employers do not have effective return to work policies or procedures – strike one in the ADA compliance process.

David continues to contact his employer because he wants to return to work, he is told repeatedly that there is no job available to accommodate his restrictions – strike two in the ADA compliance process.

Eventually, David is released to return to work full duty with permanent restrictions of no lifting over 20 pounds. David contacts his employer to return to work and he is told that they do not have a job available within his permanent restriction. David advises his employer that he can do his regular job if, he can use a Forklift to lift any items over his lifting restriction. The employer says no – they are afraid David will have another injury because his pre-injury job requires lifting up to 75 pounds – strike three in the ADA process – the employer is now out of compliance.

To further complicate matters, while the workers compensation process was under way, David’s employer puts him on Family Medical Leave (FMLA) which provides David with 12 weeks of job protection. The company’s leave policy mandates termination at the end of the 12 weeks of FMLA protection. Based on their leave policy, David is slated for termination because his FMLA protection has expired. The employer promptly contacts their insurance carrier attempting to settle David’s workers compensation claim – there’s no need to discuss return to work because David will be offered a monetary settlement –at this point the EEOC is knocking on the employers’ door.

In this example, the employer does not evaluate reasonable accommodations that could help David return to work light duty, they did not have the interactive conversation with David to evaluate the type of the accommodations he is requesting, which is required under the ADA. David, a long term employee, feels that there are other ways to accommodate his restrictions but his employer is not willing to work with him so he hires an attorney and the ADA Elephant is now in the room.

Most employers do not understand the difference between workers compensation disability and qualifying for ADA protection. The key difference between workers compensation and ADA is: workers compensation was designed to provide injured employees with medical and financial assistance following a work related accident. The ADA was enacted by Congress to protect individuals from discrimination associated with their disability and to provide reasonable work accommodation, if the employee qualifies for this protection. The exposure is created when employers do not have proactive return to work policies, when they deny reasonable accommodation and when they are more interested in terminating injured employees who have work related disabilities than brining them back to work.

David’s employer incorrectly assumes that because he did not qualify for permanent disability under workers compensation he does not qualify for Americans with Disabilities Act protection or accommodation. The confusion, under the workers compensation system, David has a permanent impairment, he is not considered permanently disabled – this technicality does not mean that he does not meet the definition of disabled under the ADA. In the eyes of David’s employer, his work status is a workers compensation issue. Wrong – this is where the wheels come off the ADA accommodation car and the employer is sailing toward a costly reality check.

In our example, the ADA exposure started when David’s employer was notified that he had restrictions that would limit his ability to perform his regular job. The key reminder for employers, the ADA exposure can start with the injury itself because the injury can meet the definition of disabled under the ADA – example: an amputated arm.

Another key point, the workers compensation system, mandates that treating physicians address the employees ability to return to work and we further ask the doctor to address the employee ability to do their regular job, we then ask the physician to address permanent restriction and we get these notices routinely – yet we don’t have a plan to evaluate accommodations that will result in injured employee retention and successful reintegration into the workforce. I am constantly amazed by the disconnect that occurs when employers are clueless about the information sitting in their files.

In essence, workers compensation is the gateway to ADA accommodation. Employers incorrectly assume that the workers compensation system will protect them from ADA litigation – surprise, surprise, it will not! In fact, the workers compensation system does little to explain the exposure and they will not provide employers with a defense for inadequate ADA policies – the two systems are independent and co-dependent on each other.

During fiscal year 2008, disability discrimination charges rose to 19,453 – an increase of 10 percent from the prior fiscal year and the highest number of disability charges filed with the EEOC in 14 years. One factor that may be contributing to this rise, the economy. As the economy forced employers to make adverse employment decisions, many did not equate terminating injured employees with ADA litigation.

We know the wrong way – so what is the right way to handle the ADA Exposure?

The solution is simple injured employees can return to work if employers make a valiant effort to bring them back to work. Your injury management program should be cohesively blended into your regular employment practices. When evaluating job accommodations, employers must focus on ability, not disability – what can the employee do and how can we keep them working?

Remember, the workers compensation system is built to provide notification of injured employees medical and work status after each doctor’s visit. These notifications address the employee’s ability to return to work with or without restrictions. If the employee has restrictions, the restriction may eventually affect the employee ability to perform the essential functions of their pre-injury job – creating the ADA exposure. You have to have a plan before this happens. You must evaluate each injury independently and determine if the injured employees qualification for ADA protections. Then you must review the pre-injury job description, evaluate the essential functions or duties required to do the job and you must complete the interactive process with the injured worker to determine how you can accommodate them in the workforce. Is there request for accommodation reasonable and can we provide it? Without these key ingredients more employers will find themselves on the EEOC radar.

If you are still struggling with this process – there is fantastic information available at the Job Accommodation Network’s website – http://www.jan.wvu.edu/

It’s unfortunate for Sears that they had to be the one to turn the return to work light bulb on for other employers. Employers now have 6.2 million reasons to evaluate their workers compensation return to work polices and simultaneously evaluate how they comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

EEOC -- H1N1 Flu Virus Workplace Rules Now Available for Employers

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:22:00 +0000

From: http://newsok.com/qa-with-tony-puckett/article/3400040

Q&A with Tony Puckett -- Q: Has the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued guidelines for employers to address the H1N1 flu virus and remain in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?

read more here.

CSB Releases New Safety Video, “Combustible Dust: An Insidious Hazard”

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:00:00 +0000

From: http://www.csb.gov/newsroom/detail.aspx?nid=269

Washington, DC, July 28, 2009 – The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) today released a new safety video depicting how accumulations of combustible dust at worksites can provide the fuel for devastating explosions that kill and maim workers, shut down plants, and harm local economies.

Entitled, “Combustible Dust: An Insidious Hazard,” the new video is available online at www.CSB.gov, and on YouTube. It can also be ordered free of charge on a new two-DVD set of all CSB safety videos by filling out the CSB’s online DVD request form.

“Combustible Dust” features all-new CSB computer animations which illustrate three major dust explosion accidents the CSB has investigated: West Pharmaceutical Services in Kinston, North Carolina; CTA Acoustics in Corbin, Kentucky; and Hayes Lemmerz International, in Huntington, Indiana.

For each accident, the animations show how explosive dust accumulated over years on plant equipment, pipes, floors, ducts, dust collectors, and other areas. The video shows how conditions develop needing only an ignition source to set off a primary explosion, which lofts the accumulated dust, leading to deadlier secondary explosions. Read more here.

Obama taps epidemiologist to lead OSHA

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:36:00 +0000

From: http://blogs.hcpro.com/osha/2009/07/obama-taps-epidemiologist-to-lead-osha/

President Obama wants David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH to serve as the next head of OSHA, according to the Associated Press.

Michaels is currently the research professor and interim chair of the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services. Read more here.

More Companies Should Be Preparing for an Influenza Pandemic

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:34:00 +0000

From: http://online.wsj.com

Few companies have made preparing for a potential influenza pandemic a top priority. Perhaps more of them should.

The World Economic Forum earlier this year put the adverse economic impact of an influenza pandemic at around $500 billion. That was before the recent outbreak of swine flu sickened more than 28,000 people world-wide, leading the World Health Organization on June 11 to declare its first pandemic in 41 years. While WHO officials emphasized that most of the people infected so far have experienced mild symptoms and recovered quickly, they say the outbreak could become more serious.

Much of the cost associated with a pandemic involving a more virulent strain of flu would stem from employee absenteeism. It is estimated that 15% to 30% of employees would stay home during such a pandemic due to illness, family-care responsibilities and fear of being infected at work. The result would be to cripple operations and disrupt global supply chains. As in the credit crisis, the fallout likely would spread rapidly because of how connected the world’s economies are.

The good news is that employee absenteeism—and its financial toll on employers—may be controlled to a large extent with adequate planning and stockpiling of antiviral medication, masks and gowns.

The bad news is that few companies have taken steps to protect themselves. A 2007 survey reported at a Harvard Business School conference on pandemic planning found that while 88% of companies seemed prepared to deal with a power disruption and 70% with a technological failure, only 13% were prepared for the kind of labor-force disruption that would come with a pandemic....

Being unprepared carries potential risks, even legal ones....read more here.

Talk of pandemic preparedness within the safety community has slowed to a trickle. While the current H1N1 Pandemic is a mild one, this is the perfect time to get plans in place. The H1N1 has already begun to mutate (see http://www.medicalnewstoday.com). There are many companies still without a pandemic preparedness plan. I previously blogged about how to write one here, including some excellent resources: Swine Flu and Pandemic Preparedness in the Workplace - Part II. Now is the time to make sure we all have that Pandemic Preparedness Plan in place.

Safety Rap

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:00:00 +0000

I'm not much for Rap, but this has to be one of the coolest videos. This video was produced by Virginia Dominion Power. Talk about employee engagement! Please watch this video and think about how effective producing your company's safety video could be if you got your employees involved.

World Health Organization Calls Swine Flu Outbreak a Pandemic

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:53:00 +0000

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com

The World Health Organization yesterday declared the seven-week-old outbreak of the novel H1N1 influenza virus a pandemic, marking it as a historic global health event, one whose consequences may not be known for years.

The announcement -- expected for weeks but made with some reluctance -- essentially warns the WHO's 194 member nations to get ready for the new flu strain, which is likely to infect as much as one-third of the population in the first wave and return in later waves that may be more severe. read more here.

While this strain of the flu is still mild, it could mutaute into something more deadly. It is a definite wake-up call to workplaces to prepare a Pandemic Plan. Businesses and organizations need to consider how a pandemic will affect business continuity. How would a business continue day to day operations if much of their workforce were sick?

If your company still does not have a pandemic plan, now is the time to do so. A quick Google search of "Pandemic Preparedness Plan" will result in excellent ideas and tutorials to make the task easier.

Does Your Safety Plan Include a Rubber Duck?

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:52:00 +0000

From: http://news.aol.com/article/woman-survives-3-days-in-bathtub/518245/a>

"(June 8) -- A 90-year-old woman spent three days trapped in her bathtub after becoming too weak to pull herself out...

Shirley Madsen, of Walnut Creek, Calif., survived her ordeal by drinking water from a rubber duck with a hole in the bottom.

When Madsen got into the tub on May 27, she forgot to put her phone within reach and could not call for help when she got trapped.

Madsen survived for three days stuck in the bathtub by continually replacing the cooling bath water with fresh water from the tap to stay warm. She also used one of her collection of rubber ducks as a drinking cup to keep hydrated during her confinement.

"I have never been so terrified in my life," Madsen later told the Mercury News.

After three days with no word from their mother, Madsen's two daughters grew concerned. Daughter Diane Weber went to Madsen's home where she found her mother trapped in the bathroom and summoned an ambulance.

Following a three-day hospital stay, Madsen was sent home to recover from minor injuries. She worked out a routine to check in with relatives and is getting a waterproof medical alert device. But Madsen also advocates an easy safety plan: "Get a bunch of rubber duckies and make sure one of them can't swim," she joked.

Read the full story here.

One quote from the original story stuck with me: "We had a routine, but we did not have a plan".

How many companies have a routine, but not a plan?

How many employees stick in an unsafe routine, but there is no safer plan, or there is no definitive training of a safer plan?

How many employers or employees are as resourceful as Shirley Madsen?

Would you want to pin all of your hopes of survival on a rubber ducky?

Webinars

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:48:00 +0000

Webinars are a great way to keep up on safety and industry related topics in this time of economic cutbacks. A webinar is a presentation presented via the internet. Many are free or relatively low cost. Most take just an hour, including a question and answer session.

Some webinars for June include:

The Value of Assessing Your Injury Management Practices: Building Front-end Processes to Reduce Back-end Costs - June 24, 2009, 2pm EDT - $59.95 OHSOnline

Rapid Action Pandemic Planning: Taking the Next Step - June 24, 2009, 2pm EDT - FREE OHSOnline

Preventing and Enforcing Musculoskeletal Hazards in the Workplace - June 17, 2009 2pm EDT - FREE - http://www.ccohs.ca

The 3 A's of Arc Flash - Awareness, Analysis, Action - June 13, 2009 2pm EDT - FREE - http://www.EHSToday.com

If you can't make a certain date or time, or miss a webinar, don't worry. Most webinars are available to watch on demand.

Here are a few places that provide both upcoming and on-demand webinars:

http://www.ccohs.ca/products/webinars/

http://ohsonline.com/Webcasts/List/Webinars.aspx/

http://www.asse.org/education/virtualclassroom.php

http://www.necanet.org/job/safety/webinars/

http://ehstoday.com

http://www.ishn.com

June is National Safety Month

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:39:00 +0000

June is National Safety Month. This year's event focuses on four themes, each with its own week—teen driving (June 1-7), falls prevention (June 8-14), overexertion (June 15-21), and distracted driving (June 22-28).

This week focuses on teen driving.

Traffic crashes are the number-one cause of teen fatalities -- an estimated 38 percent of all teen deaths occur from crashes. Inexperience, speeding, cell phone use/texting and alcohol are some of the leading factors that can heighten young drivers’ risks. As parents, your employees can take steps to help keep young drivers safe.

You can find more information and tips here.

I Chose To Look The Other Way

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:06:00 +0000

Because it was requested, today I am posting another poem by Don Merrill.

I Chose To Look The Other Way

I could have saved a life that day,
But I chose to look the other way.
It wasn’t that I didn’t care;
I had the time, and I was there.

But I didn’t want to seem a fool,
Or argue over a safety rule.
I knew he’d done the job before;
If I spoke up he might get sore.

The chances didn’t seem that bad;
I’d done the same, he knew I had.
So I shook my head and walked by;
He knew the risks as well as I.

He took the chance, I closed an eye;
And with that act, I let him die.
I could have saved a life that day,
But I chose to look the other way.

Now every time I see his wife,
I know I should have saved his life.
That guilt is something I must bear;
But isn’t’ something you need to share.

If you see a risk that others take
That puts their health or life at stake,
The question asked or thing you say;
Could help them live another day.

If you see a risk and walk away,
Then hope you never have to say,
“I could have saved a life that day,
But I chose to look the other way.”

by: Don Merrill
J.R. Simplot Co.
Don Plant Training Center
dmerrell@simplot.com

Summer is here - Heat related stress hazards

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 26 May 2009 10:00:00 +0000

Many workers in manufacturing environments are exposed to heat related hazards, especially during hot summer months. The necessity for training and awareness is covered under the General Duty cause in Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act ("General Duty Clause") which requires an employer to furnish to its 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..."

This means that an employer could be cited if:
a) The employer failed to keep the workplace free of a hazard to which employees were exposed;
b) The hazard was recognized;
c) The hazard was causing or was likely to cause death or serious physical harm; and
d) There was a feasible and useful method to correct or control the hazard.

The rising temperature in a manufacturing facility during Summer months is a recognizable hazard that can cause death if control measures aren't established. While you may not be able to control the Summer heat, you can control many aspects of how you deal with this hazard.

1) If you haven't already, and if feasible, install fans. Fans increase air circulation, which promotes body cooling through the evaporation of sweat.

2) Give more frequent breaks away from the heat and heavy work. An air conditioned rest area is not necessary. In fact moving to a too cold area can cause heat shock. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (research arm of OSHA) has determined that 76F is ideal for rest breaks.

3) Provide unlimited water to drink for hydration purposes. While water is the best hydration liquid, offering thirst quencher style drinks such as Squincher may encourage more frequent drinking with the added benefit of replacing electrolytes such as sodium. Discourage caffeinated products as they are diuretics which cause the employee to urinate more often, becoming yet more dehydrated.

4) Train your employees and supervisors to be aware of the symptoms of heat related illnesses. (Cards can be printed here: http://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3154.pdf). Train supervisors to be diligent in monitoring employees for hydration levels and early heat stress symptoms. Additionally train supervisors in the proper treatment of heat related illnesses.

5) Also train supervisors in the necessity of acclimating new hires to the work environment. A person will generally take 5 to 7 days to acclimatize to a hot environment. Have supervisors vary new workers between heavier and lighter work loads. Give more frequent rest breaks, and remind new employees to drink more often. Encourage the worker to drink 5 to 7 ounces of fluids every 15 to 20 minutes just to keep up with fluids lost from sweat.

6) Individual employee factors should additionally be taken into consideration when monitoring for heat related stress. Age, weight, physical condition, recreational activities, and medications are all factors that could contribute to heat the onset of heat related illnesses. Remind workers to ask their doctor or pharmacist if any medication they are taking can contribute to heat stress.

Now is the time to train both general employees and supervisors of the hazards for heat related hazards. A few environmental preparations, training, and monitoring are all proactive approaches that directly lower incidences of heat related illnesses and keep production rates at optimal levels.
Here are some links to more information including some industrial hygiene approaches to determine permissible heat exposure limits.

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hotenvt.html#safety
http://www.csao.org/t.tools/t6.news/heat_stress_faq.cfm#measures
http://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_iii/otm_iii_4.html#iii:4_2

It's Up To Me

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Mon, 25 May 2009 12:32:00 +0000

I found this poem by Don Merrell. It's been floating around the internet for years, but I thought it still very appropriate.

It's Up To Me

I want a workplace, that's Injury Free
And if that's going to happen, then it's up to me.

I can't take for granted, that anyone,
Has done all the things, that I should have done.

I must, take the time, with each task I do,
To look for the hazards, and think the job through.

To check the procedures and follow them all
And reject taking shortcuts, no matter how small.

When I walk through the workplace, I must stay alert
To watch for those things, that could get people hurt.

And if I see a hazard, I won't rest until,
I have made the thing safe, or know someone will.

I must question each unsafe behavior I see,
And encourage all others, to do that for me.

I must always give safety, the best I can do.
And expect that performance of all others too.

I must always remember to let people see,
That their safe behavior, is important to me.

Every act is important, no matter how small.
For the safety of one, is the safety of all

We can all have a workplace that's injury free
If we each one Commit, to Making It Be,

If we all do our part, and each of us see,
If It's Going to Happen, - Then It's Up To Me.

Don Merrell
J.R. Simplot Co.
Don Plant Training Center
dmerrell@simplot.com

College

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Mon, 18 May 2009 10:10:00 +0000

I will be attending a week long intensive class on Safety Management from a Human Relations standpoint.

As such, I won't be posting to the blog every day, but will post updates on Twitter as I can. http://twitter.com/SafetyPhoenix

National Return to Work Week - Part 5

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Fri, 15 May 2009 12:52:00 +0000

A few things I took away from Thursday's virtual conferences:

Doctors: Employers should carefully chose the physician to initially send injured employees. A physician must understand the employer willingness to provide light light duty. Have the physician visit the facility. Also visit the physician's office to determine the accessibility of employers to the doctors.

Employers need to be able to respectfully talk to the treating physician, so that they can ask questions, and discuss concerns. However, an employer must learn how and when it is best to communicate with the doctor. Your employee is not the only person the doctor is treating. As such, the doctor may be overloaded, and your phone call may not be a priority at the time.

From the defense lawyer side: A proactive, effective return to work program will reduce the settlement amount. An effective return to work program does allow an insure insurance carrier to minimize the time spent on a claim, which is a substantial benefit for everyone.

An employer needs to make an attempt to resolve issues before firing an injured employee. A disgruntled, now fired, employee who feels they may be wronged can cause yet more problems than merely a workers compensation claim, and larger settlement. Retaliation claims may be filed with both the workers compensation system and OSHA, ADA, or Wage and Hour claims may be filed. If the company has less than stellar hiring practices and policies there may be other claims an employee can make. Defending these claims, valid or not, is expensive.

Documentation is imperative. Improper or sloppy documentation can demonstrate to a workers comp or liability judge that the employer doesn't have the proper systems in place, doesn't care, and obviously the employer has some culpability and should be held responsible. The employer must be able to defend by documentation claims filed against them, or the judge will side with the employee. Once a claim against an employer is successful, additional claims may be filed by other employees.

Best Practices:

Plan in place for procedures needed for incidents – everything from who investigates the incident, to making sure the WC carrier and HR are properly notified.

Have employees sign off each week that they were not injured, and did not witness an injury, or if they were or knew of someone who was - how it occurred. That way, in this time of lay-offs, an employer has the documentation necessary to defend a workers compensation claim filed after the lay-off occurred.

Best Practices for Return to Work:

Return to Work must start at the top of the organization to be successful.
Return to Work benefits the employee, the employer, the insurer, the adjuster – the entire system!
Policies need to be in place to facilitate the return injured employees to return as soon as possible to productive meaningful work within their restrictions.
Stop seeing injured employees as damaged good that need to be discarded.
Anticipate what the injured work is likely to do, and prepare for it in your policies.
If you explain your expectations to your employees through-out, they are far more likely to follow those expectations.
Also train your supervisors on the expectations of the return to work policy.
If at all possible have the injured worker stay in their pre-injury production area during light duty. Many tasks can be carved out of the normal work day that meet the restrictions of the injured worker. Similar tasks can be carved out of others stations to keep the employee active.

Burying your head in the sand as far as workplace injuries and return to work does nothing but open yourself to future litigation!

See more here: http://nationalreturntoworkweek.org/events/

National Return to Work Week Part 4 – The Injured Worker

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:00:00 +0000

Yesterday's series of webcasts dealt with return to work from the injured worker's perspective. When a worker becomes injured they may be pulled in multiple directions:

The employer wants them back at work as soon as possible, and may have a different idea of asap than the injured worker's doctor.

Family members wonder what will happen now that a bread winner is injured. They may be the one who pushes for a lawyer.

Supervisors can make or break a safety/WC comp program. If the injured employee doesn't like working for a specific supervisor, they will be far more reluctant to return to that department.

Coworkers can become irritated with an employee because they are now doing extra work.

The employer can also bring in their 'experience' with similar injuries. Employers tend to be motivated to recover due to the fact they own the business and can't afford to take off. Employees do not have the same motivation.

If we as WC professionals have trouble understanding the laws, how much tougher would it be for the injured worker?

This general lack of understanding the process breeds suspicion. When an employer has no, or very limited light duty, and mandates the employee must be 100% recovered to return, the suspicion on the workers part becomes greater as they feel the employer is trying to get rid of them. If the worker doesn't recover as quickly as the employer expects it also breeds the suspicion the employee is malingering. The result is there is now suspicion on both sides that the other party isn't doing their part.

The workers compensation process is made yet tougher with the physician process. Depending on the state, workers may have an unfamiliar doctor chosen for them. Depending on the work load, the doctor may not give the worker much time in diagnosing the injury. The doctor says they can go back to work with certain restrictions. However, the doctor may not have been given a list of essential duties of the job, thus may not fully understand how the job tasks can effect the injury. This breeds suspicion that the doctor is on the employers side, and just pushing them back to work.

The employer may offer light duty, without fully understanding the restrictions. The light duty may require the injured worker to do something that is against the restrictions. When the employee refuses, it just reinforces the suspicion that the employee is malingering and playing the system.

The workers compensation provider also adds to the misunderstanding and suspicion. Tests, and procedures may take weeks to get approved. Both sides are now unhappy with the delays and may blame the “other side”.

All sides agree that the workers compensation system is not user friendly. Employers and Insurers may wrongly deny benefits causing yet more delays in treatment. The system encourages both parties to settle thus disposing of the 'problems' as quickly as possible. The system rewards those that play the system by essentially offering them money to settle and go away. For those that truly are injured to the point of not being able to work, the system can just get more confusing when they apply for Social Security Disability Insurance.

How do you cut through all of this misunderstanding, suspicion, and get the employee back to work as soon as reasonably possible? Check out the webcasts (available on demand) to find out more. Here: Nation Return to Work Week - Free Webcasts.

National Return to Work Week – Part 3 -- JAN

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Wed, 13 May 2009 10:43:00 +0000

The Tuesday webcasts for National Return to Work Week were all very good. It would be a disservice to try to include everything in a quick overview. Instead I'm going to just focus on just one. All previous webcasts are available for immediate viewing here.

The focus of this blog is the webcast - “Creating Positive Return to Work Experiences” with Anne Hirsh and Dr. Beth Loy of the Job Accommodation Network (JAN). The Department of Labor, Office of Disability Employment Policy provides the Job Accommodation as a resource for both employers and employees. JAN is a collaborative effort with the U.S. DOL Office of Disability Employment Policy, the International Center for Disability Information at West Virginia University, and private industry throughout North America. JAN can be found at: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/.

JAN's mission is to facilitate the employment and retention of workers with disabilities by providing employers, employment providers, people with disabilities, their family members, and other interested parties with information on job accommodations, entrepreneurship, and related subjects. Anyone may call JAN for information about job accommodations and the employability of people with functional limitations.

JAN provides consultation to employers in order to:

Increase the hiring, retention, and promotion of qualified employees with disabilities;
Create accommodation solutions to benefit both employer and employee;
Protect their business by educating employers about their responsibilities under the ADA,
Rehabilitation Act and other disability related legislation;
Reduce workers' compensation and other insurance costs; and
Address issues pertaining to accessibility.

JAN provides consultation to people with disabilities in order to:

Increase the hiring, retention, and promotion of qualified employees with disabilities;
Create accommodation solutions to benefit both employee and employer;
Educate people with disabilities about their rights under the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act and other disability related legislation;
Inform people with disabilities of the local, regional, and national resources that can assist them in pursuing employment opportunities; and
Address issues pertaining to accessibility.

JAN provides consultation to rehabilitation professionals in order to:

Facilitate placement of clients through accommodation assistance,
Brainstorm accommodation options, and
Find local resources for workplace assessment and discover resources for device fabrication and modification.

JAN provides consultation to people affected by disability in order to:

Discover local, regional, and national organizations, resources, and support groups; and
Obtain helpful accommodation and legislative information.

JAN provides a multitude of information to help negotiate the issues involved with the new Americans with Disabilities Act from how to write a job description, to helping an employer determine if their employee is disabled, to how to recognize and deal with an accommodation request. JAN provides employers with accommodation ideas so that injured and disabled employees can return to work in an effective manner. According to JAN, for every dollar an employer invests in an accommodation, the employer will receive back $10 in increased productivity.

I personally have had occasion to discuss accommodation issues with JAN. In all cases the information has been invaluable. Of all of the resources provided in the National Return to Work Week webcasts, this is perhaps the most important.

More information on JAN:

http://www.jan.wvu.edu/

http://www.dol.gov/odep/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_Accommodation_Network

http://www.jan.wvu.edu/soar/index.htm

http://www.jan.wvu.edu/janondemand.htm

http://www.jan.wvu.edu/webcast/archive/index.htm

National Return to Work Week - Part 2

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Tue, 12 May 2009 10:00:00 +0000

The first group of webinar sessions for National Return to Work Week were a great introduction into the why a company should make the effort, perhaps even amid lay-offs, to returning an employee to some sort of productive work.

Annually, 1.1 million employees lose and average of 7 days due to their work injury. When looking at the significant costs of those injuries, one finds that according to the National Safety Council's Accident Facts ® injuries cost US employers $160.4 billion each year in medical and other direct costs, lost productivity and wages. This expense does not count the additional expenses related to adding to the social security systems.

Now not all injuries are workplace injuries. A return to work program can also be effective to keep short-term and long-term disability claims down. Disabling injuries happen off the job as well as on the job. Every 1.3 seconds someone suffers a disabling injury. That's 63,000 people total people injured daily. Almost half of the 6.8 million people who collect Social Security benefits are under the age of 50.

In the current economic downturn both company employers and the insurance industry are showing huge losses. These staggering statistics make an excellent case for an effective return to work programs for employees injured both on and off the job. The new amendments to the ADA and updates to the FMLA that went into effect this year may also substantially affect companies who do not have a progressive return to work program.

Allowing or forcing an employee to stay at home rather than working a modified duty does nothing more than create an end settlement that does one of two things:

Either it rewards those workers who have a tendency to play the system, encouraging them to repeat the actions at their next job.
For those workers with a legitimate injury the settlement is rarely enough to survive on, thus creating an additional burden to society though welfare and social security systems.

An employer must effectively manage the workers compensation process from the date of injury through return to work or settlement. The insurance adjuster is not the employer. The employer has a far better handle on the issues related to the injury. However, a well managed return to work program doesn't have to be a daunting task, as Dennis Chandler – Director of Return to Work Programs with Company Nurse shows.

Attorney Michael Moebes, who has the unique position to have worked on both the employer and worker sides of the workers compensation issues, discussed the mistakes employers make. Attorney Moebes also talked about the current economy and the success of return to work programs.

To learn more a, please review yesterday's webinars and sign up for others happening this week. The webinars will be stored and the recording available for you to watch on-demand.

http://nationalreturntoworkweek.org/register-for-national-return-to-work-week-sessions/

National Return to Work Week – Part 1

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:00:00 +0000

May 10 – 16th is National Return to Work Week. This week is an opportunity for safety professionals and others involved in workers compensation and disability management to demonstrate their commitment to helping injured, disabled or ill employees stay-at-work or return-to-work. By doing so, one of the largest business expenses for a company can also be significantly lowered.

Annually 1.2 million employees loose work days due to workplace injury or illness. Unfortunately once an employee is injured, too many employers feel that person has become a liability. Often the company does not offer light duty, or only for a very short time. When that happens the employee is forced onto workers compensation. Often times the employee is also laid off.

Statistics have shown that 40% of the employees who are off work for over 12 weeks (FMLA time) have serious trouble finding other work. If an employee is out for more than sixteen weeks, there is a good chance that individual will never return to employment. Even if an employee finds a job, it is frequently at a much lower position than held previous to the injury or illness. Employees begin to lose contact with fellow workers and feel shut out.

Unless returned to work as soon as possible, some employees begin to feel that that a workers compensation benefit is better than looking for another job. Workers compensation essentially “rewards” employees for not working. An employee sitting at home is exposed to advertisements from lawyers offering to help them continue to collect workers compensation. This begins to look good as a way to get even with the employer that seemed to discard them as easily as yesterdays trash.

Unfortunately in this system, both employers and injured employees lose. Beyond the initial injury, employees may suffer depression Entire whole families may suffer emotionally and financially if the major bread-winner is injured and off work for any length of time.

The longer an employee is off work, the more expensive a workers compensation (or long-term disability) case becomes. Insurance rates or direct expenses skyrocket. Employers may set themselves up for additional discrimination claims and expensive settlements. Employers lose employee loyalty, and may have under-reporting issues especially if the employee feel their jobs are likely to be lost if they claim a workers compensation injury.

This week's blog will continue the theme of establishing an effective return to work program.

Links:

National Return To Work Week was founded by Margaret Spence, CWC, RMPE - President of Douglas Claims & Risk Consultants, Inc. author of “From Workers’ Comp Claimant to Valued Employee - Employer’s Guide to Implementing a Proactive Return to Work Program - Florida Edition”. - http://margaretspence.com/

National Return to Work Week - http://NationalReturnToWorkWeek.org/.

Free webcasts as part of NRTWW - http://nationalreturntoworkweek.org/register-for-national-return-to-work-week-sessions/.

More about Margaret Spence - http://workcompseminars.com/about/about-margaret-spence/

Job Hazard Analysis - Introduction

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Fri, 08 May 2009 10:21:00 +0000

The job hazard analysis is an important safety tool. A job hazard analysis (JHA) or job safety analysis (JSA) breaks down a worker's job into specific tasks. From there each task is broken into specific steps. Each step is then analyzed for hazards that may be present.

Since a job hazard analysis takes time, priorities must be set to determine which jobs should take precedence. Review incident and accident logs to see if certain areas come up more frequently. Employee surveys are another way to track areas of greater concern. A job hazard analysis should be performed as part of setting up a new task, or when the area or task is changed. JHA's should be done after a near miss, or accident.

Video taping the employee at work is an excellent way to determine hazards as each specific task can be viewed multiple times. However, one must be sure that workers being video taped understand this is to make their jobs safer and not a critique of the employee. In fact, employees should be included in the entire process of the JHA. Who better knows the job and the tasks that cause pain or awkward positions? Employees have a better understanding of the task, and may offer clues to hazards. Employees should also be encouraged to offer suggested solutions as they may have found “work-arounds” to minimize the hazard. Include supervisors in the JHA as their input may also be valuable.

While each job task must be broken into steps, an overview of the area must also be analyzed. Is lighting adequate? Are there issues with employee or material handling traffic in the area? Once the overview is complete and any hazards noted, the specific task and each step must be analyzed. Writing down each step is important. Note any hazards for each step. Then work on the recommended solutions. Recommendations should:

Eliminate the hazard if at all possible (add guards, add a hydraulic table, use a non-hazardous alternative to a current chemical, etc.).
Provide administrative controls if the hazard cannot be eliminated (job rotations, changes in the way the tasks are performed, etc.).
Provide proper PPE if engineering and administrative controls aren't adequate to eliminate or control the hazard.

Once the solutions are found and the hazards eliminated or controlled, all employees and supervisors will need to be trained in the new procedures. The task should also be revisited to see if the solutions are working, and reviewed yearly.

Here is an excellent video on job hazard analysis: http://revver.com/video/1385172/introduction-to-the-job-hazard-analysis-process

Links:

http://www.safetyworksmaine.com/safe_workplace/safety_management/hazard_analysis.html

http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/job-haz.html

http://www.forensicmag.com/articles.asp?pid=243

http://tinyurl.com/o9lnjw

http://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3071.html

http://www.the-osha-advisor.com/JHA.html

More on Overexertion Injuries: Repetitive Motion Injuries

noreply@blogger.com (Pam Wilkinson) — Thu, 07 May 2009 12:38:00 +0000

Repetitive motion injuries (RMI), are gradually developing injuries of soft-tissue structures such as tendons, nerves, and muscles. Repetitive motion injuries are most common in fingers, wrists, elbows, arms and shoulders. Characterized by pain and discomfort, repetitive motion injuries tend to become progressively worse over time if not treated, and may result in a disabling loss of function of the affected area.

While Tennis Elbow (tendinitis) is a well known as a sports related injury, most RMI's have occupational stressers as the major contributing cause. Unlike other injuries, RMI's do not have a single definitive date of injury. Repeated motion of a body part without time for recovery causes micro-tears in the tissues and nerve. These micro-tears accumulate to cause a permanent cumulative trauma to the area. Repetitive motion injuries are also known as Cumulative Trauma Disorder (CTD). Symptoms include chronic aches, stiffness, sore muscles, decreased coordination, tingling or numbness especially upon waking, and trouble sleeping because of the pain.

Carpal tunnel syndrome (impingement of the nerves in the wrist) may be the best know work related RMI. However, hand-arm vibration syndrome (wrist), radial tunnel syndrome, cubital tunnel syndrome, tenosynovitis of the forearm extensor and flexor muscles (elbow and forearm), tension neck syndrome, thoracic outlet syndrome (shoulders and neck), are also examples of repetitive motion injuries. Repetitive motion injuries are often tough to diagnose and treat. However, once diagnosed, OSHA considers this to be a recordable occupational illness. Due to the difficulty in diagnosis and treatment, RMI's are among the most costly occupational injuries. Preventing these injuries can result in significant cost savings for a company.

The first step in prevention is determining which tasks are at risk. A job hazard analysis with a focus of which tasks are frequently repetitive or tasks that very little throughout the workweek, awkward positions and posture, excessive pinching, frequently raising the arm or shoulder and excessive force needed in the job task. Employee surveys, reviewing incident records, and noting areas where employees leave or bid out to other areas are great ways to pinpoint which areas may need the most attention.

Educate employees to the risks of repetitive motions injuries. Encourage employees to promptly report all concerns with repetitive tasks and aches or pain. Repetitive motion injuries can often be healed quickly if promptly reported.

Train supervisors to be aware repetitive motion tasks and issues employees may have. Supervisors should help evaluate workstations. Encourage and allow supervisors to cross train employees, and vary their tasks through-out the day or week. Supervisors must continually monitor work areas for proper ergonomic work practices.

Once an employee reports a repetitive motion injury or pain and swelling, take them off the task to allow the injury to heal. Before allowing the employee back on the task, adjust the workstation or task to control the hazard. Merely allowing a healed employee back on the same task that caused the issue, doesn't fix the problem. Inevitably the repetitive motion injury will return.

An untreated repetitive motion injury can be disabling for the employee. Controlling repetitive motion injuries can result in a significant cost savings in workers compensation rates, reduced absence rates, and increased productivity. One study estimated that each controlled or eliminated repetitive motion injury saves a company $27700.

Additional Links:

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/97-141/ergotxt1.html

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2006-119/pdfs/2006-119a.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_03/sr03_031.pdf

https://www.hrtools.com/insights/jennifer_blanchard/dont_let_repetitive_motion_injuries_damage_your_workplace.aspx

http://www.scif.com/safety/safetymeeting/Article.asp?ArticleID=99

http://ehstoday.com/news/ehs_imp_37502/

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-122/glossary.html