Safe Workplace and Safety News
This is the safety news blog for the Safe Workplace web site. We cover workplace safety related news with a focus on how safety, or a lack of safety, impacts employers, employees and their families. We also cover topics such as safety training, safety tools, and legal issues related to safety. For regular safety news and information enter your email address in the box above the Subscribe button to the right (then click on the button).
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Respirator Safety - Using Respirators
Labels: PPE, Safety Training, safety videos
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
The Difference Between Respirators and Surgical Masks
Labels: hospital safety, Industrial Health, PPE, Safety Training, safety videos
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Friday, December 18, 2009
White Paper Details Best Practices of US Airways Occupational Hearing Conservation Program
In the world of personal protective equipment, bad assumptions are hazardous and can result in injury — or worse. Unfortunately, despite 25 years of solid regulation, some persistent bad assumptions are very widespread in Hearing Conservation Programs (HCPs). A new white paper identifies six of the most common bad assumptions about hearing protection for noise-exposed workers. Perpetuated unchecked, these assumptions torpedo an otherwise healthy Hearing Conservation Program, and leave the door open for hearing loss among workers exposed to hazardous noise.
The white paper titled, "Best Practices in a Hearing Conservation Program: US Airways," details how the merger between US Airways and America West led the newly formed company to enhance its occupational Hearing Conservation Program.
The white paper examines how, in the time since America West merged with US Airways to become the number four carrier in the United States, the new US Airways endeavored to consolidate and enhance its corporate safety program — and specifically its Hearing Conservation Program.
The white paper identifies and discusses the best practices of an occupational Hearing Conservation Program including:
* Involving employees in the hearing protection device process.
* Making audiometric testing accessible to all employees.
* Using motivational materials to support employee understanding of the Hearing Conservation Program.
"The program was developed by combining the strongest and most effective elements of each of the two original airlines’ programs. The result is a lesson in best practices management," said Renee S. Bessette, COHC, Marketing Manager, Howard Leight/Sperian Hearing Protection, LLC.
"All workers have a role in making a Hearing Conservation Program successful. By educating employees about noise-induced hearing loss, hearing safety and hearing protection devices, and by making the knowledge regarding the program and its components accessible, the company is able to not only strengthen its Hearing Conservation Program but improve overall personal safety awareness in the workplace as well," she said.
To download the new white paper, click here: "Best Practices in a Hearing Conservation Program: US Airways,”.
Labels: Industrial Health, PPE, Transportation Safety
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
OSHA Issues final Rule Updating Personal Protective Equipment Standards Based On National Consensus Standards
OSHA is updating the references in its regulations to reflect more recent editions of the applicable national consensus standards that incorporate advances in technology. OSHA requires that PPE be safely designed and constructed for the tasks performed.
"Workers exposed to occupational hazards requiring head, foot, or eye and face protection will now be provided protection based on a standard that reflects state-of-the-art technology and materials," said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. "This final rule is another step in OSHA's efforts to update or remove references to outdated national consensus and industry standards."
Amendments to the PPE standards include a requirement that filter lenses and plates in eye-protective equipment meet a test for transmission of radiant energy such as light or infrared.
The final rule will become effective on Oct. 9. For technical inquiries, contact Ted Twardowski, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, at 202-693-2070.
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Free Safety Guides Available
OSHA Safety Signs Best Practices - this guide describes the OSHA and ANSI requirements for safety signs, including required colors and the new ANSI pictograms.
OSHA Safety Sign Guide (Poster) - this 24" x 18" poster is very unique and eye-catching. It describes the various types of safety signs, including signal word requirements. It provides a quick, easy-to-read overview of safety signs. This is a limited edition poster.Top Ten OSHA Violations in 2008 - the top ten types of violations are covered based on the most frequent violations. A second list shows the top ten types of violations based on the proposed fines. Descriptions and references to the appropriate OSHA regulations are provided.
Guide To Required PPE - a one page quick reference to required PPE based on the hazard category. It also provides a cross-reference showing the hazard categories each type of PPE.
Phosphorescent Marking White paper - this white paper discusses the NFPA 101 requirements for phosphorescent markings in stairwells and exit ways. Local and state requirements are also mentioned.
All of the above are available at no charge from Graphic Products. The links will take you to an online order form.
Labels: Free Safety Guides, OSHA Signs, PPE, safety labeling
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Arc Flash Blast Video
Related past posts:
Is Your Electrical PPE Adequate?
New (arc flash) Safety Sign and Label Printer
Arc Flash Warning Labels
Labels: Arc Flash, Electrical Hazards, electrical safety, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
RFID Helps Satisfy OSHA Rules for Industrial Respirators
3M was the provider of the respirators. The article quotes Larry Ptastenski, the new business development manager of 3M's Occupational Health & Environmental Safety division as saying: "'The key is that RFID allows the customer to know when something is happening.' The information is stored on 3M's cloud-computing internet-based system, he indicates, and can be customized for the needs of a specific client. Some of 3M's respirator customers are maintenance service providers, while others are the manufacturing sites that use the respirators themselves. In each case, Ptastenski says, the needs for data related to inspections differ slightly. The system enables the customers to create user-defined fields—such as alerting them in advance when, for instance, an air filter cartridge needs to be changed."
Read the complete article in the RFID Journal.
Related Past Blog Posts:
Mandatory Respirator Selection Provisions
Respirator Protection An Important Safety Issue
Respirator Training Scripts Available
Labels: Construction / Installation, PPE, Safety Software
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Thursday, April 02, 2009
OSHA's New Guidance Document Focuses On Mandatory Respirator Selection Provisions Added To The Existing Respiratory Protection Standard
OSHA revised its existing Respiratory Protection standard in 2006 to add APFs and Maximum Use Concentration (MUC) provisions. APF means the workplace level of respiratory protection that a respirator or class of respirators is able to provide to workers. The higher the APF number (5 to 10,000), the greater the level of protection provided to the user. APFs are used to select the appropriate class of respirators that will provide the necessary level of protection against airborne contaminants. Such exposures can come from particles or a gas or vapor.
MUC represents the limit at which the class of respirator is expected to provide protection. Whenever a hazard's exposure level exceeds MUC, employers should select a respirator with a higher APF. MUC means the maximum atmospheric concentration of a hazardous substance for which a worker can be expected to be protected when wearing a respirator.
"Proper respirator selection prevents exposure to hazardous contaminants and is an important component of an effective respiratory protection program," said Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Donald G. Shalhoub. "This guidance document serves as another useful resource for protecting the health and safety of workers at risk for respiratory illnesses."
APF and MUC are mandatory respirator selection requirements that can only be used after respirators are properly selected and are used in compliance with the entire standard. The Respiratory Protection standard requires fit testing, medical evaluations, specific training and proper respirator use. The standard applies to general industry, construction, longshoring, shipyard and marine terminal workplaces.
Related Past Posts:
OSHA Issues Final Rule On PPE
Is PPE Compliance A Challenge In Your Facility?
PPE Compliance, A Top Workplace Concern
Labels: OSHA, osha information, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Monday, December 15, 2008
Universal Personal Decontamination System
(In the photograph to the right LLNL chemical engineer William Smith holds a decontamination system currently used by the military -- called Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion -- in the green packet and a sponge from the system. LLNL's Forensic Science Center evaluated 30 different decontamination materials for removing gross chemical contamination from surfaces, including the nonwoven dry wipe material with an activated carbon core sandwiched between two absorbent layers shown in the plastic package.)The scientists have reported on the development of a layered wipe that can be used to rapidly decontaminate people and equipment exposed to a wide range of military and industrial chemicals, including the blister agent sulfur mustard. These wipes could assist in saving the lives of soldiers and civilians.
Their research results are described in an article slated for online publication today in the American Chemical Society journal, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, a bi-weekly publication.
Under a study conducted by LLNL’s Forensic Science Center, researchers evaluated 30 different decontamination materials for removing gross chemical contamination from surfaces.
The study results showed that a nonwoven dry wipe material with an activated carbon core sandwiched between two absorbent layers turned in the top performance. It is designed by researchers at The Institute of Environmental Health and Human Health (TIEHH) at Texas Tech University.
The decontamination system currently used by the military – called Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion (RSDL) – is effective for a small subset of industrial chemicals and chemical warfare agents.
However, according to LLNL chemical engineer William Smith, one of the study’s co-authors, “By combining the existing military decontamination system with this wipe, there is promise for treating nearly every chemical. You’re in much better shape using both technologies than with either one alone.”
The Lab’s Forensic Science Center evaluated existing and novel materials for their chemical decontamination capabilities. They looked at the ability of the combined system – the TIEHH-developed layered wipe followed by use of RSDL -- to absorb sulfur mustard, a toxic liquid that causes skin blistering, as well as four other chemicals – sulfuric acid, nitric acid, methylparathion and phosphorous trichloride.
The Forensic Science Center studies found:
* The newly developed fabric exhibits excellent resistance to corrosive chemicals and minimizes vapor hazards after decontaminating toxic chemicals;
* The layered wipe can absorb a large volume of most liquids, while maintaining its integrity;
* The fabric is flexible so that it conforms to the surface being cleaned
The next steps for advancing the decontamination system, in Smith’s view, are to conduct field trials of the wipe and RSDL used in conjunction to evaluate their usability, and to test the two systems’ efficacy with other chemical agents and industrial chemicals.
The project was funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2004 and has been managed by the Technical Support Working Group, a joint venture between the U.S. State Department and the military.
Other LLNL researchers who co-authored the study include chemists Carolyn Koester and Adam Love, and former Laboratory employee Garrett Keating.
Labels: hazard prevention, hazardous materials, Industrial Health, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
OSHA Issues Final Rule On PPE
The final rule on Clarification of Employers' Duty to Provide Personal Protective Equipment and Train Each Employee was published in Friday's Federal Register. The rule revises OSHA standards to clarify that, for employers to be in compliance, they must provide personal protective equipment (PPE) and hazards training for each employee covered by the standards.
Each employee not protected may be considered a separate violation and penalties assessed accordingly. This revised language is consistent with language in other standards for which per-employee citations have been upheld.
The final rule amendments do not add new compliance obligations. Employers are not required to provide new kinds of PPE or hazards training or use a different approach than what is already required. Additionally, employers are not required to provide PPE or training to employees not already covered by existing requirements.
"This technical correction to the PPE standard brings it in line with other OSHA safety and health standards," said Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Thomas M. Stohler. "By making this change, those few employers who egregiously violate the OSHA PPE standard can be held fully accountable for violations affecting each employee who is not provided proper PPE. This kind of vigorous enforcement is a vital component of OSHA's balanced approach to workplace safety and health."
Labels: OSHA, osha information, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
OSHA's Proposed Rule On Remedies For Violations of PPE and Training Standards
"We want employers to understand the importance of complying with OSHA’s PPE rule for each and every one of their employees," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Edwin G. Foulke, Jr. "Without question, providing PPE for all employees will reduce costs, save money and, most importantly, save lives."
The proposed rule affects OSHA’s general industry, construction, and maritime standards. In many cases, OSHA combines separate violations of a single requirement in a standard into a single penalty. However, under the instance-by-instance penalty policy, OSHA may propose a separate penalty for each specific violation where the employer demonstrates a flagrant disregard for safety and health.
The proposed rule makes clear that failure to provide appropriate PPE or training may result in per-instance penalties in appropriate cases. The proposed rule does not add new compliance obligations, nor are employers required to provide any new type of PPE or training. The amendments merely clarify that a separate penalty may be assessed for each employee not provided the required PPE or training.
The agency will accept public comments on the proposed rule until Sept. 18. Interested parties may submit comments electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, the Federal eRulemaking Portal; by sending three copies to the OSHA Docket Office, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room N-2625, Washington, DC 20210; or by FAX at (202) 693-1678 if the comments and attachments do not exceed 10 pages. Comments must include the Agency name and Docket Number for this rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA-2008-0031).
Labels: OSHA, PPE, safety regulations, Safety Training
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Monday, January 21, 2008
PPE Compliance A Top Workplace Concern
"So it's not surprising that when asked 'what' could be improved about the PPE they were currently purchasing, three quarters of survey respondents said they would make it "more comfortable." Safety professionals also gave the nod to more fashionable PPE. Eighty-four percent said that they would be more apt to purchase fashionable and attractive PPE if workers would be more likely to wear it and the price was comparable to what they were currently paying for similar products."
For more information read the entire article at:
http://www.safetyonline.com/content/news/article.asp?docid=a9441b5b-0008-48a3-8c71-79ae2c948182
Labels: PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Thursday, November 15, 2007
OSHA Announces Employer-Paid Personal Protective Equipment Final Rule
"Employees exposed to safety and health hazards may need to wear personal protective equipment to be protected from injury, illness and death caused by exposure to those hazards," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Edwin G. Foulke Jr. "This final rule will clarify who is responsible for paying for PPE, which OSHA anticipates will lead to greater compliance and potential avoidance of thousands of workplace injuries each year."
The final rule contains a few exceptions for ordinary safety-toed footwear, ordinary prescription safety eyewear, logging boots, and ordinary clothing and weather-related gear. The final rule also clarifies OSHA's requirements regarding payment for employee-owned PPE and replacement PPE. While these clarifications have added several paragraphs to the regulatory text, the final rule provides employees no less protection than they would have received under the 1999 proposed standard.
The rule also provides an enforcement deadline of six months from the date of publication to allow employers time to change their existing PPE payment policies to accommodate the final rule.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA's role is to assure the safety and health of America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards; providing training, outreach and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging continual process improvement in workplace safety and health. For more information, visit www.osha.gov.
Labels: PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Is Your Electrical PPE Adequate?
"Recent research into arc flash phenomena, however, indicates that workers could be under-protected against the heat generated during an arc flash event. Test results presented at IEEE conferences and at the 2007 IEEE Electrical Safety Workshop show that different configurations of electrodes (conductors) yielded heat energy higher than current predictions due to the directional nature of the arc development. Additionally, initial tests of PPE, when placed within this directional plasma fl ow, did not provide the level of thermal protection predicted by its APTV."
You can read the article at: http://www.mt-online.com/articles/0507_electricalsafety.cfm
Labels: Arc Flash, Electrical Hazards, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Kimberly-Clark Professional Safety Knowledge Network
Topics covered include:
- Eyewear Technical Guide
- Evaluating Chemical Splash Protection
- Chemical Barrier Performance & Protective Apparel Selection
- Safety Doesn't Cost: It Pays
- Katrina Clean-up Crews Threatened by Lack of Personal Protective Apparel
- Protecting Workers From Bloodborne Pathogens
- How To Select The Right Protective Clothing For The Job
- Interactive Chemical Selector Tool
Labels: Industrial Safety, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Public Hearing on OSHA's Controversial PPE Proposal
Anyone wishing to testify at this public hearing must file a written notice by October 1st.
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Monday, July 30, 2007
ISEA Invites Review of Chemical Protective Clothing standard
Members of ISEA Protective Apparel Group developed this standard to present a testing philosophy based on garment category and performance level. This approach was modeled after activities ongoing within the European (CEN) and international (ISO) standards communities, and represents one of the first attempts at harmonizing testing and labeling of chemical protective clothing worldwide. Garment categories (e.g., US Category 1, gas-tight) are defined by matching the expected chemical exposure scenario with various material swatch and finished garment item test requirements. This standard uses multiple performance levels (e.g., three levels of performance for permeation testing) for the majority of properties. Thus the standard will provide the end-user with a tool that helps define adequate protection by matching a unique exposure scenario to a specific garment configuration (category) and a minimum level of performance (level).
According to ISEA technical director Janice Comer Bradley, CSP, "This standard will fill a gap in that's existed since OSHA issued its regulations for personal protective equipment." OSHA requires employers to conduct documented hazard assessments in the workplace, and select personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriate to the hazard. "Although OSHA provides references to performance-based standards for certain types of PPE such as eye and face protection, until now there has been no consensus standard for the majority of chemical protective clothing worn by the US workforce," Bradley said.
The ANSI/ISEA 103 standard is applicable to the vast majority of chemical protective clothing used within industry including, but not limited to, the following applications: agricultural, chemical processing, hazardous materials redemption, pharmaceuticals operations, paint spraying, tank cleaning, laboratory operations, cleanroom operations, petrochemical operations, waste collection/recycling, general manufacturing, bulk chemical transfer/handling operations, general maintenance and clean-up, etc. It would not apply to hazardous materials or emergency response operations covered by National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards.
To obtain a review copy of the draft standard contact Cristine Fargo, ISEA manager of standards programs. There is a $30 charge, payable by check or credit card.
Labels: PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
ISEA Challenges OSHA Standards Proposal
The International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) has challenged a U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) proposed rule to regulate the use of safety eyewear and hard hats, and offered an alternative approach that ISEA says would maintain worker protection.
In comments submitted July 16, ISEA said OSHA's May 17th proposal to change the way it recognizes product performance standards for personal protective equipment (PPE) could potentially reduce the level of protection for workers and make compliance with the rule more difficult for employers.
Current OSHA regulations require that eye and head protection devices meet product performance standards issued under the banner of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). ANSI standards are voluntary, but they are widely accepted in the United States and are recognized by OSHA and numerous other regulatory agencies.
OSHA adopts specific product performance standards. Those standards may go through several revisions before OSHA is able to update its rules to incorporate the newer versions. Under the OSHA proposal, however, references to these standards would be replaced with a requirement that PPE meet “good design standards,” an approach that ISEA says offers no assurance of a minimum level of protection.
ISEA’s alternative would maintain the reference to the current version of the standard, and include a method by which OSHA could evaluate standards that offer equivalent protection and allow employers to use products meeting those standards.
This approach “maintains the level of performance of PPE that meets the consensus standard in the current regulation, so that worker protection is not compromised,” according to the ISEA submission. It gives employers the flexibility to select PPE that best meets their workers’ needs, based on hazard assessment. And it gives OSHA the flexibility to update references to consensus standards when they are revised, and add new product standards as they are issued without a lengthy and laborious regulatory process.
“We fully appreciate what OSHA is trying to do in this rulemaking,” said ISEA President Dan Shipp. “They aren’t able to keep up with revisions to the product standards they reference in their regulations, and they’re searching for a way to keep the rules current without having to go through a full rulemaking every few years for each standard.
“But to take those references out of the regulation, and replace them with the requirement that PPE comply with some vaguely defined good design standard shows a lack of understanding of the role of performance standards and their use in regulation.”
In its comments, ISEA points out that there are hundreds of PPE product standards around the world that might qualify as good design standards, but that they are not equivalent to the ANSI standards that have been part of the regulation. Without the reference to a specific standard in the regulatory text, OSHA would provide no baseline performance requirements for PPE, ISEA said.
“If the rule is published the way OSHA is proposing it, the ANSI standards would still be the baseline, and OSHA would include them in an appendix as examples of what makes a good design standard,” Shipp said. “But what happens in the future?”
The proposed requirements for a good design standard are that it incorporate safety, that it is recognized as providing an adequate level of protection, and that the standards-developing organization use an open process that considers the views of a broad constituency.
“There’s nothing in this proposal that says the standards recognized in the future have to be as protective as standards recognized today,” Shipp said. “That’s why we’re trying to convince OSHA not to take the reference to a specific standard out of the regulatory text.”
ISEA asked OSHA to convene an informal public hearing to discuss all the aspects of this proposed rule.
Labels: PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 1 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
OSHA PPE Guide
Hazards exist in every workplace in many different forms: sharp edges, falling objects, flying sparks, chemicals, noise and a myriad of other potentially dangerous situations. Controlling a hazard at its source is the best way to protect employees. When engineering, work practices and administrative controls can’t protect employees, employers must provide personal protective equipment (PPE) to their employees and ensure its use.
PPE is equipment worn to minimize exposure to a variety of hazards.
The OSHA guide to PPE helps employers and employees do the following:
• Understand the types of Personal Protective Equipment.
• Know the basics of how to conduct a "hazard assessment" of the workplace.
• Know how to select the appropriate PPE for a variety of circumstances.
• Understand what the training that is needed for the proper use and care of PPE
You can download the OSHA guide OSHA 3151-12R - Personal Protective Equipment
Labels: PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Free Guide to Required PPE
The chart shows hazardous material categories across the top, and lists the required PPE for each category. The bottom half of the chart has pictograms for each of the required PPE and for each PPE shows the categories that require that PPE.
This chart is available free to businesses, government agencies, non-profits, schools and the military.
Labels: Industrial Safety, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Unions, Employers Quarrel Over Safety Gear Tab
Unions have sued the government to implement new rules that would require employers to provide needed safety gear. Read about it on Bloomberg News. The opening paragraph of this article states:
"For almost eight years, labor unions have been waiting for the Labor Department to finish a rulemaking that would make it clear employers are supposed to pick up the tab for safety equipment for millions of workers."
The article explains:
"The controversy has a long history. When the initial protective equipment rule was issued in 1994, it said employers had to 'provide' various safety gear. But unlike a series of health-related OSHA standards, it didn't say who should pay the bill, and not every company did."
Labels: PPE, safety regulations
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Winter Is Here - Let's Talk About Gloves
The article is titled: Winter Wear for Safety’s Sake - Cold weather considerations for protecting workers’ hands.
The article points out that "In order to keep the hands warm, gloves are used. Unfortunately, the wrong type of glove can reduce grip strength, and workers may use even more force to compensate for the glove’s effect. In general, the following principle applies:
'When temperatures drop, the likelihood that a previously acceptable level of powered tool use now becomes dangerous increases.'"
Labels: PPE, workplace safety
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Monday, December 11, 2006
Preventing Worker Foot Injuries
You would think that an article about foot injuries would be an article about workboots. But, as the leading paragraph points out, the problem is more commonly found in workplace organization and practices:
"Crushing, punctures, lacerations, sprains, and even aches and pains are common problems workers have with their feet. Footwear that doesn't match their hazard exposures are a leading reason for these, but overall workplace organization and work practices are often at fault."
Learn what can be done to prevent foot injuries. Many of the recommendations in this article should be part of an overall improvement effort. For example, one recommendation is that there be worker involvement. This is exactly what a Kaizen program does... Kaizen is a method for improving safety, productivity, quality, employee retention, and other areas, through continue improvements made as a result of employee suggestions.
Labels: PPE, workplace safety
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Noise Control: It's More than Just Earplugs
The article opens by reporting that "An OSHA inspection at an Atlanta steel mill resulted in a citation for failure to reduce sound levels that could damage employees' hearing. The noise exposures for an 8-hour day were between 91 and 94 decibels (dB)."
It then looks at various ways this noise problem can be addressed, including source controls, path controls, and administrative controls.
It concludes with a summary of the benefits of hearing lose prevention: "A hearing loss prevention program is good business, and it protects employees' hearing and ability to communicate. With no cure for noise-induced hearing loss, preventing exposure is the only way to avoid hearing damage. Because hearing loss creeps up slowly, many individuals are not aware of the damage until it is too late. Long-term noise exposure also may contribute to stress-related disease, especially cardiovascular disease."
"Noise also can affect productivity. Studies show that employees in effective hearing loss prevention programs generally feel less tired and irritable. They report that they sleep better, and do not experience temporary hearing reductions at the end of the day or ringing in the ears that often precedes hearing loss. Companies with effective hearing loss prevention programs also showed reduced accident rates, illnesses and lost time."
Labels: Industrial Safety, PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
Thursday, August 31, 2006
International Safety Equipment Association
The web site features safety equipment related news, information about government regulations, a product and vendor guide, and information about product standards. You'll find their web site at: http://www.safetyequipment.org/
Labels: PPE
posted by Steve Hudgik |
Workplace Safety Post 0 Comments |
Add Comment | links
