Ergonomics Standard Proposed
by Heidi Ernst
Maximize productivity, reduce discomfort. It's an elementary definition for a word that in other respects is quite complicated: ergonomics.
And making this workplace problem simpler is the goal of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which hopes to approve a long-delayed standard next year. In the meantime, OSHA is sharing research and a draft proposal on its World Wide Web site (www.osha.gov).
The proposal will undergo a series of reviews—the first concerns its impact on small business—and then be published in the Federal Register later this year, after which the agency will open the topic for public comment.
The main reason for the standard, says OSHA information specialist Michael Fluharty, is to reduce the number of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs), a leading cause of lost-workday injuries (647,000 in 1996) and workers' comp-ensation costs ($20 billion annually).
The draft, released Feb. 19, cites "sufficient scientific evidence" to support a standard and identifies six "critical elements" of ergonomics programs many companies would be required to implement under certain circumstances. They are: management leadership and employee participation, hazard identification and information, job hazard analysis and control, employee training, medical management, and program evaluation.
Donald Hensel, NAA manager of environmental and safety services, says he thinks the proposal "certainly has a chance of passing." And while OSHA is considering limiting coverage to "manufacturing operations, manual-handling operations, and other jobs in general industry where there is a demonstrated WMSD problem," Hensel believes newspapers would be covered because they fit each category.
Initial private-industry response to OSHA's draft has been critical. "There isn't a great chance for this proposal, but there is a chance for a proposal," says P.J. Edington, executive director of the Center for Office Technology, a coalition of businesses and associations focusing on workplace health and safety. "What the standard doesn't address—which the newspaper industry is aware of—is that things beyond equipment need to be looked at, whether it's work organization, stress or personal factors. The problem with a program like OSHA's is that it only looks at a small piece."
Other organizations, from the National Association of Manufacturers and the Alliance of American Insurers to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and even the National Coalition on Ergonomics, also oppose parts of the proposed standard.
Whether this particular proposal passes or not, newspapers should prepare by developing ergonomics programs now. Doing so will involve completing stacks of paperwork and dedicating employees to the task, but if a newspaper can show that its program meets OSHA's requirements, it can be grandfathered in if and when the agency's standard is passed.
NAA has produced two ergonomics videos ($99 for members, items #10051 and 10057), a guide called Ergonomics and the Newspaper Industry ($50, item #10040), and a kit that combines all three ($195, item #10058). The guide outlines why a program is necessary and how to establish one—from securing management commitment to analyzing work practices and reaching medical-management goals. To order, visit www.naa.org/products/technology or call (800) 651-4622.
Bear in mind that while establishing an ergonomics program will cost money, safety is the real issue. "The cost was significant," says Julie Porter, human-resources administrator for The Fresno (Calif.) Bee, which has been in compliance with California OSHA requirements for about a decade. "But if you're reducing injuries and improving the process, it's worth it."
Heidi Ernst is a Flushing, N.Y., free-lance writer. E-mail, heidi_ernst@time-inc.com; phone, (212) 522-7437.
Industry Accidents Below Average
by Allen Cooley
The printing and publishing industry's accident rates remained below private-sector averages in 1997, according to statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Safety Council.
Based on OSHA 200 log data, the BLS says the printing and publishing industry's total-cases incidence rate was 6.0, compared to the national private-sector average of 7.4. At the extremes were the legal-services industry with a rate of 1.1, and the air-transportation industry at 17.9.
National Safety Council data places the printing and publishing industry's total case incidence rate at 5.02, considerably lower than the all-industry average of 8.88. General-office industry (1.08) and the motor-vehicle industry (47.28) made up the extremes.
Still, accidents continue to take a heavy toll across all industries. According to the 1998 edition of NSC's Accident Facts:
- Costs for work injuries in 1997 totaled $127.7 billion, including $63.4 billion for wage and productivity costs, $20.7 billion for medical costs, $26.5 billion for administrative expenses, $11.9 billion for employer costs (money value of time lost by workers, etc.), $2.0 billion for damage to motor vehicles, and $3.2 billion for fire losses.
- The economic impact of fatal and nonfatal unintentional injuries amounted to $478 billion in 1997, equivalent to about $4,900 per household.
- The lost quality of life from unintentional injuries in 1997 was valued at an additional $1.1 trillion, making the comprehensive cost $1.5 trillion in 1997.
- On average, 11 unintentional-injury deaths and about 2,200 disabling injuries took place every hour during 1997.
- Between 1912 and 1997, unintentional work deaths per 100,000 population were reduced 90 percent, from 21 to 2.
- More than half of the nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses in private industry involving days away from work result from contacts with objects or equipment, or from overexertion.
For more information or to order a copy of Accidents Facts 1998 Edition, contact the National Safety Council. Internet, www.nsc.org; phone, (800) 845-4672.
Allen Cooley is an NAA industrial hygenist. E-mail, coola@naa.org; phone, (703) 902-1834; fax, (703) 902-1857.