Safe Workplace and Safety News

This time of year I wonder whether I should stay on the lighter side and "be happy." In past years I've used the last week of the year to focus on posts about new videos I've run into throughout the year. But... yes there is a but, I'm struck by the number of fatal accidents I'm reading about in today's news reports. I wonder if instead of just being happy for the holidays, there should be an extra emphasis on safety... just so we don't lose our focus, miss a detail and someone gets hurt or killed.

There's a line in the following story, dated December 22nd, that bothers me.

In an apparent freak accident, a construction worker was killed by slabs of granite in a New York City construction supply store.

The New York Post reports that the 47-year-old man was killed when a number of the heavy slabs used to make bathroom and kitchen countertops fell on him, with one striking him in the head.

What bothers me is that the story quotes David Perecman, a New York personal injury attorney, as saying: "There are so many ways and means people can be injured. Some, like this one practically defy categorization. However an injury accident is an injury accident and if the workplace is at fault, the family of the victim deserves rightful compensation for the death. Was it a fluke accident or was it due to a lack of safety regulations?"

Are there any "fluke" accidents? By that I mean, are there accidents that are just going to happen and nothing could have been done to prevent them? Maybe from an attorney's perspective there are fluke accidents, but from a safety point of view I don't think there are fluke accidents. I'll grant that there may be what are called acts of God (an unexpected high wind blows over a tree, for example), but that's the exception to the rule.

What do you think?

Labels: safety management, workplace fatalities, workplace injuries

OSHA has cited Endres Processing LLC, headquartered in Rosemount, Minn., and its subsidiary, Endres Processing Ohio LLC, with safety and health violations that include exposing workers to combustible dust hazards. The firm manufactures an animal feed supplement from unsold bakery products. Proposed fines total $472,900.

OSHA began a health inspection in June after receiving information that fires had occurred in the Ohio plant, and that large amounts of dust from the manufacturing process had accumulated throughout the worksite.

"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration will not tolerate the exposure of workers to preventable hazardous conditions," said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. "The destructive and violent power of dust explosions is clear, and employers have an obligation to keep workers safe."

Following the health inspection, OSHA issued four willful violations with penalties totaling $252,000 and five serious violations with penalties totaling $14,900. The willful violations allege the lack of explosion protection, the failure to equip process equipment with combustible dust collection systems, hazardous accumulations of dust, and the use of electrical equipment that was unsafe to use in areas with combustible dust accumulation. The serious violations address hazards from workers breathing the dust, allowing combustible materials in areas where workers were welding, and unsafe electrical equipment and practices. The proposed health violation fines total $266,900.

A safety inspection was also initiated, and OSHA issued two willful violations with penalties totaling $126,000 and 21 serious violations with penalties totaling $80,000 following that inspection. The willful violations allege confined space hazards and failing to train employees in using the fire fighting system. The serious violations allege a variety of hazards. They include fall hazards, problems with emergency exit lighting, failure to train on and exposure to hazardous machine-energy sources, and additional unsafe electrical equipment and practices. The proposed safety violation fines total $206,000.

A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law's requirements, or with plain indifference to employee safety and health. An OSHA violation is serious if death or serious physical harm can result if an accident were to occur from a hazard an employer knew or should have known exists.

The Upper Sandusky site, then owned by Advanced Organics Inc., has been inspected twice since 2004, with serious citations issued for fall protection, combustible dust issues, electrical hazards, machine guarding and fall hazards following the earlier inspections.

The safety and health fines total $472,900 and the company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with the OSHA area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Labels: combustible dust, OSHA Citations, safety management

Today's issue of Construction Magazine includes an article with the Top Seven Tips
For Effectively Managing OH&S. Although written for the construction industry these are excellent tips for any workplace.

The seven top tips are:

1. Understand your responsibilities
2. Consult your workers
3. Identify, assess and control risks
4. Inform, train and supervise
5. Manage incidents and injuries
6. Keep records
7. Monitor, review and improve

To get the details read this article online at: Seven OH&S Management Tips

Labels: Industrial Health, Industrial Safety, safety management

An article on HealthCarePOV, an online blog of Advance News magazines, provides a overview of the "new" OSHA. The article opens with the statement:

The Obama administration's "new OSHA" has a simple message for U.S. industry. This message has been delivered loudly and clearly by both Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis and Acting Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Jordan Barab. Their message: "There is a new sheriff in town." And we all know what sheriffs do. They aggressively enforce the law. That is exactly what the new Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) intends to do.

Written by James A. Lastowka, a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP, the article discusses the new OSHA's leadership team; the Top priorities for the new OSHA; and What companies must do to prepare for the new OSHA

You can read the entire article here: The New OSHA

Labels: OSHA, osha information, safety management, safety politics

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration recently revised the steel erection compliance directive for the agency's Steel Erection Standard to change two enforcement policies related to tripping hazards and installation of nets or floors during steel erection.

One of the revised policies addresses the standard's requirement that employers install a floor or net within two stories or 30 feet, whichever is less.

The other policy states that employers must comply with the requirement that steel studs, known as shear connectors, be installed at the worksite. Shear connectors bind concrete to the steel.

"Falls are the leading cause of death among construction workers," said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. "We are intent on reducing the number of injuries and fatalities in the construction industry and believe these policy revisions will help us attain that goal."

Bureau of Labor Statistics 2007 data show that 1,204 fatalities occurred in the construction industry, 447 of which resulted from falls. The steel erection standard sets forth requirements to protect workers from the hazards associated with steel erection activities when constructing, altering, and repairing single and multi-story buildings, bridges, and other structures where steel erection occurs.

Labels: Construction / Installation, Construction Safety, hazard prevention, safety management

A worker's habits outside the workplace affect their safety and health in the workplace. An article in the Business Ledger points out that two-thirds of American's are overweight, and employers are impacted by these employee's weight-related injuries and illnesses.

The article points out that researchers have "found the worker’s compensation claim rate for the heaviest employees to be twice that of the recommended-weight workers. The number of lost workdays was almost 13 times higher, medical claims costs were seven times higher, and indemnity claims costs were 11 times higher among the heaviest workers. "

It then recommends ways to control and reduce weight-related safety and healthcare costs.

You can read the Business Ledger article here.

Safeway is becoming highly recognized for its approach to improving employee safety and reducing health care costs, and also improving safety. For example, Safeway found that an "obese employee can require 10 times the number of doctor visits in a year than someone of healthy weight." The created a health program that rewarded employees for improving their health. This is how an article in the Wall Street Journal described Safeway's program:

"The result was Safeway's "Healthy Measures" program, which is voluntary. Employees are tested for smoking, weight, blood pressure and cholesterol. Every area they 'pass' results in a reduction in their premium, of as much as $1,560 for a family, a year. Those who fail but prove progress can get refunds. Safeway complements this with an intense culture of health: weight-loss tips, fitness competitions and smoking cessation programs."

Read the Wall Street Journal article.

Labels: Industrial Health, safety management

The bill that passed the Texas House last week allows some workers, who are covered by Worker's Comp., to also sue the work site owner for negligence or to obtain additional compensation for an on-the-job injury.

A Houston Chronical article explains that this change applies to contract workers. It states "The bill by Rep. Helen Giddings, D-Dallas, changes the Labor Code to clarify that plant owners aren’t immune from lawsuits merely because they buy workers’ comp coverage for their contracted workers."

You can read the entire Houston Chronicle article here.

The Southeast Text Record also reported on this providing some background information. They said:

"Last month, the state Supreme Court considered whether a contract employee injured at a work site can sue the site owner for negligence if the owner has workers' compensation insurance."

"On April 3, the court decided that the worker did not have the right to sue because the law does not explicitly prohibit a work site owner like Entergy from being considered a general contractor. General contractors are protected from workplace injury suits."

Labels: politics, safety management, Workers' Comp

A special worker health and safety program that targets employers that repeatedly put their workers in harms way is not working and needs to be refocused, witnesses told the Workforce Protections Subcommittee of the House Education and Labor Committee today.

"After six years of operation, it’s clear that the Enhanced Enforcement Program original design is flawed, and that OSHA under the Bush administration did not implement the program as intended," said U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), chair of the subcommittee. "We need to know why the program is not working and what we can do to fix it. The EEP has failed hundreds of workers like Jesus Rojas, and that is just not acceptable."

The Enhanced Enforcement Program, created in 2003 by the Bush administration after an exposé into the poor safety and health record of the McWane Corporation, identifies high risk employers by their past behavior and targets them for additional scrutiny. However, the U.S. Department of Labor Inspector General found the Bush federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration did not properly carry out the initiative and it failed to effectively deter employers from putting workers’ lives at risk.

"It is essential that OSHA target its limited resources to inspect workplaces with the highest risk of hazardous conditions that have greater potential to cause injuries and fatalities," said Elliot Lewis, assistant inspector general for audits at the U.S. Department of Labor. "While we cannot conclude that the enhanced enforcement would prevent subsequent fatalities, full and proper application of EEP procedures may have deterred and abated workplace hazards at the worksites of 45 employers where 58 subsequent fatalities occurred."

The Inspector General report also referenced additional businesses that should have been included in the Enhanced Enforcement Program, but never were. The report cited the death of Raul Figueroa, a mechanic at Waste Management in Florida who was killed while repairing a truck. OSHA cited Waste Management for a serious violation that resulted in the death of Figueroa.

"For some time before his death, my stepfather complained about safety problems at the facility,” said Jesus Royas, Figueroa’s stepson. "Companies like Waste Management should not be allowed to cut corners and compromise safety."

Witnesses also said the current program is too limited in scope because it does not focus on corporate-wide investigations and does not focus on the most flagrant violations that occur before workers are killed.

"What is needed is a more systemic, holistic examination of the current OSHA enforcement regime," said Eric Frumin, director of health and safety at Change to Win. "Waste Management's OSHA violations increased by 28 percent over the period 2003 to 2007. If Waste Management had implemented a comprehensive safety program, and held its managers accountable, Raul Figueroa might well be alive today."

The current head of OSHA testified that the agency is working on improving the Enhanced Enforcement Program.

"The Enhanced Enforcement Program was designed…to focus enforcement efforts on recalcitrant employers," said Jordan Barab, acting head of OSHA. "OSHA is exploring ways to reinvigorate the EEP, and the OIG report provides a starting point for our efforts to do this in the most effective way."

Labels: OSHA, osha information, OSHA Inspections, safety management, safety regulations

If you have not heard about it, this is legislation you'll need to know about. The following is quoted directly from the House Committee on Education and Labor. Keep in mind this represents how your elected representatives describe this legislation:

The Protecting America's Workers Act will strengthen and modernize the Occupational Safety and Health Act, our nation's law that ensures the health and safety of American workers. Significant progress has been made on protecting the health and safety of American workers since the creation of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration almost four decades ago. According to studies, nearly 400,000 workers' lives have been saved as a result.

However, too many workers are still dying, getting injured or become ill by working in unsafe and unhealthy conditions. The Protecting America’s Workers Act will provide additional tools to ensure that OSHA can fulfill its duty enforce safe and healthy workplaces for all American workers.

Protects More Workers

• Expands OSHA coverage to include state and local public employees and federal government workers.


• Expands coverage to millions of other workers inadequately covered such as airline and railroad employees, and Department of Energy contractors.

Strengthens Health and Safety Penalties

• Raises civil penalties and indexes those penalties to inflation.


• Establishes mandatory minimum penalties for violations involving worker deaths.


• Allows felony prosecutions against employers who commit willful violations that result in death or serious bodily injury, and extends such penalties to responsible corporate officers.


• Requires OSHA to investigate all cases of death and serious injuries (i.e. incidents that result in the hospitalization of 2 or more employees).
  

Improves Whistleblower Protections

• Codifies regulations that give workers the right to refuse to do hazardous work.


• Clarifies that employees cannot be discriminated against for reporting injuries, illnesses or unsafe conditions, and brings the procedures for investigating and adjudicating discrimination complaints into line with other safety and health and whistleblower laws.

Allows Workers and Their Families to Hold Dangerous Employers Accountable

• Provides workers and employee representatives the right to contest OSHA's failure to issue citations, classification of its citations, and proposed penalties.


• Gives injured workers, their families and families of workers who died in work-related incidents the right to meet with investigators, receive copies of citations, and to have an opportunity to make a statement before any settlement negotiations.


• Clarifies that the time spent by an employee accompanying an OSHA inspector during an investigation is considered time worked, for which a worker must be compensated.


• Prohibits OSHA from designating a citation as an "unclassified citation" where an employer can avoid the potential consequences of a "willful" violation, the most serious violation.


• Allows any worker or their representative to object to a modification or withdrawal of a citation, and entitles them to a hearing before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Labels: politics, safety management, safety politics, safety regulations

Safety consulting firm BST announced five recommendations for business leaders wishing to protect worker safety and health during the economic downturn. The recommendations, released in a new white paper titled "Leading Safety in a Downturn," outlines the effects of a recession on workplace safety and proposes five actions to address them.

According to the paper, common downturn events, such as job reassignments and layoffs, can increase employee exposure to injury just as many organizations have fewer available resources to manage those risks. According to BST vice president Don Groover, fewer resources are only part of the problem. "A downturn can also have significant cultural implications for a business," he says. "What leaders do now with respect to safety and the business sends a message to employees about what really matters. That message will resonate long after the outside situation improves." In the paper, BST recommends that leaders:

1. OPEN UP AND COMMUNICATE WHY SAFETY MATTERS NOW. Employees anxious about the impact of the economy on the company, and on them personally, can be at increased risk for injury. Leaders need to be out front, demonstrating concern, listening, and taking appropriate actions.

2. CONSIDER THE EFFECTS OF YOUR ACTIONS ON THE CULTURE. How leaders "do the hard stuff" - layoffs, job assignments, budget cuts - will dictate how people engage in safety and the business now and down the road.

3. REFINE YOUR STRATEGY. Oftentimes safety performance can become bogged down, both financially and functionally, by legacy systems that no longer meet the needs of the business. Many companies find that their actual needs dictate an investment in fewer (or different) systems than they have right now.

4. WORK THE FUNDAMENTALS. Survival in a downturn, for any part of the business, is about targeting the core elements that sustain the enterprise. In safety performance, that means protecting the lives and livelihoods of employees. Life-altering injuries and fatalities must be a primary concern.

5. DEMONSTRATE - AND DEVELOP - TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP. Leaders who use a transformational style are more successful at creating the will to go "above and beyond" self-interest and give people a sense of purpose, belonging, and understanding regarding the work they do.

The full paper and recommendations are available at BST’s website: http://www.bstsolutions.com/perspectives.

Labels: safety management, Safety Training, VPP Safety Articles and Papers, workplace safety

The following is from the April 8th Wall Street Journal. It discusses how concerns about changes in workplace laws will impact the workplace from a legal perspective. Here is the opening paragraph:

"U.S. businesses, fearful of rising union influence and a crackdown by the Obama adminstration on workplace practices, are scrambling for legal advice and training, creating a windfall for labor consultants and law firms."

You can read the complete article here.

While most of the article focuses on the "Employee Free Choice Act," it does note that increased safety inspections may also be coming. While we all are working to have the safest possible workplace, in these changing times we'll need to be aware of what the government is doing in the areas such as new regulations and inspections, as well as changes in what they are looking for during inspections.

Labels: safety management, safety politics, safety regulations

In a webinar held last Friday Edwin Foulke Jr. warned that we can expect OSHA to become more aggressive. An article in Occupational Health and Safety reports:

"OSHA is likely to be more aggressive in various ways, from filing more egregious cases in which an employer is cited on a per-instance basis to pushing harder for employers to pay for and provide PPE and training, filing more General Duty Clause cases, pressuring the 26 state plans to be more aggressive, and putting more emphasis on key areas such as combustible dust, amputations, and recordkeeping."

Faulke was joined by Howard A. Mavity in a 65 minute Fisher & Phillips LLP webinar. A second webinar will be held Thursday, March 26 - 12:00 p.m. EDT / 9:00 a.m. PDT.

This webinar will briefly review the essential elements of OSHA compliance and an effective workplace safety and health program, with an eye to preparing for increased civil and criminal enforcement, as well as the use of safety issues by unions and a growing group of whistleblowers. The webinar will also explain how, when used properly, safety compliance can be a "profit center" and not another administrative cost.

For information about this Thursday webinar contact Gail Rice at 404-231-1400 or grice@laborlawyers.com.

Related previous posts:
Increased Funding For OSHA
Can OSHA Be Fixed?
Obama Administration to Shift Regulatory Approach To Safety

Labels: OSHA, OSHA Inspections, safety management

While the increase in older workers in the American workforce could suggest a corresponding decrease in workplace productivity and increase in accident claims, the opposite has proven to be true. Older workers are a benefit to the companies that employ them. However, injuries to older adults tend to be of higher severity, so U.S. companies should consider making workplace modifications that prevent injuries.

These conclusions were published in a new white paper by the PMA Companies, "Capitalizing on an Aging Workforce." The paper, which is the first in a quarterly series by the PMA Companies called PMA Insights, can be viewed at www.pmagroup.com.

Authored by Ken Nogan, Risk Control Consultant at PMA Insurance Group, the paper reports that since 1977, the number of people 65 and older in the workforce has increased more than 100 percent. In addition:

• It is estimated that workers in the age groups 65-74 and 75 and up will grow more dramatically than any other workforce age group - more than 80 percent.
• More than half of older workers are working full-time, up from 44 percent in 1995.

"Not surprisingly, as people age, their skills and faculties, including strength, range of motion, motor skills, sensory acuity and ability to heal, diminish," Nogan wrote. "While this may suggest that older workers would have a negative effect on workplace productivity and safety, statistics prove otherwise."

In fact, the paper notes that as over-55 workers increase in the workplace, so does productivity and overall workplace safety. However, when older workers do experience injuries, severity can be significant, which is an issue that must be considered by safety professionals.

These findings lead to two conclusions, according to the paper: one, older workers are a benefit to the company that employs them and, two, it pays to make modifications to work environments to prevent injuries and limit the severity of injuries commonly sustained by older workers.

Key Preventative Measures

The chief risk management concerns that were identified in the paper for older workers are increased falls, increased fatality rates, longer healing times, greater overall severity of injuries and more severe musculoskeletal disorders. The paper recommends that companies consider implementing risk control measures designed for the needs of older workers. Among the specific recommendations are:

• Slip and fall prevention - Falls alone account for more than one-third of all injuries sustained by workers 65 and older, and it takes an older worker two to three times longer to recover from an injury than a younger counterpart.
  
  
• Ergonomics - Ergonomic evaluations of workstations and workspaces can identify causes of fatigue and strain for older workers.
  
  
• Safe driving - Death rates for work-related roadway crashes increase steadily beginning at around age 55, and older drivers (55 and above) are more likely than other drivers to have a crash at an intersection or when merging or changing lanes on a highway.
  
  
• Return to work - Because claim statistics reflect a connection between increased healing time and age, there is a need for highly responsive return to work efforts for older workers.

Related previous posts:
Adult ADHD Is A Risk To Workplace Safety
Top Ten Most Disabling Injuries

Labels: fall protection, Industrial Safety, safety management, Vehicle Safety

An article in yesterday's online edition of EHS Today reports on a February 26th decision by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court ruled on the validity of OSHA's multi-employer citation policy. The ruling stated that:

"The Department of Labor's regulation 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1910.12(a) is unambiguous in that it does not preclude OSHA from issuing citations to employers for violations when their own employees are not exposed to any hazards related to the violations; even if the regulation was ambiguous, the court would defer to the Secretary's reasonable interpretation of the regulation; as a result, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission abused its discretion in determining that the controlling employer citation policy conflicted with the regulation." (Read the court decision here.)

Summit Contractors Inc. was cited for a safety violation by a subcontractor based on the "controlling employer" aspect of OSHA's multi-employer citation policy. This court ruling supports the multi-employer citation policy as being valid.

You can read the complete EHS Today article here.

Labels: OSHA, OSHA Citations, safety management

Workday Minnesota reports that former MNOSHA inspectors testified yesterday that the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry alters OSHA reports and citations. The article reports that:

"...two former Minnesota Occupational Safety and Health Administration inspectors testified that the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry has engaged in a number of fraudulent activities. Among the charges brought by the whistle-blowers are:

• Changes have been made to final OSHA inspection reports even after the OSHA inspector has signed the report;

• Documents have been removed from inspection files:

• Inspectors have been pressured to not find violations against MNSTAR companies or issue citations to them."

You can read the complete article here.

Labels: safety management, safety politics, safety statistics

Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety has released the 2008 Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index which includes a list of the top ten most disabling workplace injuries. The opening sentence states that "The estimated direct U.S. workers compensation costs for the most disabling workplace injuries and illnesses in 2006 were $48.6 billion. This finding and many others are presented in the 2008 Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index."

The complete report is available here.

The most recent information is for 2006. The top ten causes of the most disabling workplace injuries in 2006 were:

Overexertion - 25.7%
Fall On Same Level - 13.3%
Fall To Lower Level - 10.8%
Bodily Reaction - 10.0%
Struck by Object - 8.9%
Struck Against Object - 5.1%
Highway Incident - 4.9%
Caught In/Compressed By - 4.4&
Repetitive Motion - 4.0%
Assaults/Violent Acts - 0.9%

Labels: hazard identifcation, Industrial Safety, safety management, workplace safety

ONTARIO SAFETY BLITZ TARGETS INDUSTRIAL WORKPLACES

The Ontario provincial government is cracking down on hazards involving forklifts and lifting devices at industrial workplaces during February, Labour Minister Peter Fonseca announced yesterday.

Inspectors will focus on ensuring employers are inspecting and maintaining lifting devices in good condition, using competent persons to operate the equipment and ensuring that the equipment is being used in a safe work environment.

For each conviction, the court can impose a fine of up to $500,000 against a corporation convicted under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Individuals face a fine of up to $25,000 or imprisonment of up to 12 months, or both.

This initiative is part of the province’s new Safe At Work Ontario blitz strategy, announced on July 23, 2008. Keeping more workers safe means increased productivity for Ontario’s economy and less strain on the health care system.

“Forklifts and other lifting devices are a significant cause of serious worker injury and deaths,” said Labour Minister Peter Fonseca. “The Government of Ontario and its workplace partners are committed to eliminating all workplace injuries, including those related to these lifting devices. Workers have a right to come home each day to their families, safe and sound.”

QUICK FACTS

* The Ministry of Labour compliance program that ran from April 1, 2004 to March 31, 2008 reduced the workplace injury rate by 20 per cent, or more than 50,000 incidents.

* Thirteen workers died between 2003 and 2007 as a result of industrial incidents involving lift trucks, reach trucks, forklifts and tow motors, according to ministry statistics.

* In total, there were 10,308 forklift–related incidents where there was a lost time injury between 1996 and 2008, an average of 793 incidents a year, according to the data compiled by the Occupational Health and Safety Council of Ontario (OHSCO).

* Because of the drop in the annual rate of lost–time injuries, employers have avoided about $5 billion in direct and indirect costs during the four years ending March 31, 2008. Reduced injuries also result in less strain on the health care system, and fewer workers off the job means increased productivity for Ontario’s economy.

Learn more about Ontario’s new four year plan, Safe at Work Ontario, that will help strengthen workplace safety.

Labels: Canadian Safety Standards, safety management, safety statistics, Vehicle Safety, workplace safety

Liberty Mutual has made available a free online system for calculating the percentage of the population that can perform a specified lifting, lowering, pushing or pulling task.

The "Liberty Mutual Manual Materials Handling Tables" can be used to perform ergonomic assessments of lifting, lowering, pushing, pulling, and carrying tasks with the primary goal of supporting ergonomic design interventions.

The online calculator is available here.

Labels: Free Safety Guides, Industrial Health, safety management

"A recent survey conducted by Kimberly-Clark Professional found that 89% of safety professionals polled have observed workers failing to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) when they should have been. This is the third consecutive year that the Kimberly-Clark survey has revealed a high rate of PPE noncompliance. In 2007, 87% of respondents said they had observed PPE noncompliance in the workplace, while 85% answered yes to this question in 2006."

The above is from the blog for Today's Facility Manager magazine.

The following is the press release from Kimberly-Clark:

U.S. workers are risking workplace injuries by not complying with important safety procedures, according to a survey released today by Kimberly-Clark Professional. The survey found that 89 percent of safety professionals polled at the 2008 National Safety Council (NSC) Congress have observed workers failing to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) when they should have been.

"We find it disheartening that people continue to put themselves at risk by failing to wear PPE when undertaking hazardous tasks," said Randy Kates, general manager of the safety business for Kimberly-Clark Professional. "Despite the importance of PPE, there is still an unacceptably high rate of noncompliance in the workplace."

This is the third consecutive year that the Kimberly-Clark survey has revealed a high rate of PPE noncompliance. In 2007, 87 percent of respondents said they had observed PPE noncompliance in the workplace, while 85 percent answered yes to this question in 2006.

Given the high rate of noncompliance over the past three years, it is not surprising that when asked to name the top workplace safety issue in their facilities one third of respondents cited worker compliance with safety protocols. Next was insufficient management support and/or resources for health and safety functions (27 percent). Under-reporting of workplace injuries and illnesses was third (14 percent), followed by training a multilingual, multicultural workforce (7 percent) and escalating worker compensation costs (5 percent).

Is the Economy a Factor?

One potential explanation for continuing problems with compliance could be the economy. Thirty-four percent of respondents said the economy had affected worker safety training programs or resources. Fifty-nine percent said it had not. Of those who said the economy had impacted safety training or resources, the survey found that:

• 63 percent said it had led to less money for education and training.
• 42 percent said it had resulted in reduced personnel to handle safety training tasks.
• 33 percent said the faltering economy had led to business concerns taking precedence over safety concerns.

This year’s survey also polled safety professionals about the steps they have taken or intend to take to encourage greater PPE compliance. The top response was "improving existing education and training programs," followed by "purchasing more comfortable PPE." Increased monitoring of employees was third, followed by tying compliance to individual performance evaluations and purchasing more stylish PPE.

"Work-related injuries in the U.S. cost more than $50 billion a year," said Kates. "Our research has shown that comfort and style are major drivers for compliance with PPE protocols. In the current economic climate it is more important than ever to invest in PPE that workers will want to wear."

Focus on Environmental Sustainability

The environment was another topic covered in this year’s survey. Fifty-nine percent of respondents reported that their companies had formal corporate sustainability goals, while 22 percent said they did not. (Twenty percent said they did not know the answer to this question.)

Respondents from companies with corporate sustainability goals were asked what their facilities were doing to become more environmentally responsible. The top choice was reducing the waste generated by a facility’s processes. It was followed by:

• Reducing energy consumption.
• Reducing the waste associated with supplies and other items that they purchased.
• Reducing water consumption.

All respondents were asked what their facilities had done to encourage or require suppliers to assist them in becoming more environmentally responsible. The top selection was increasing the amount of recycled content in the products supplied to them (39 percent). Tied for second place were: reducing packaging materials for the products supplied to them and having suppliers "demonstrate or state/warrant that they have environmentally responsible business practices" (29 percent). Close behind was delivering more products at one time to reduce fuel usage (27 percent).

Only 6 percent of respondents said environmental responsibility was not a major concern for their organizations. (For this question, respondents were allowed to select more than one answer.)

Health Concerns

When asked if they were concerned about the potential health and safety issues for their workers posed by oil, grease, heavy metal residues or toxic elements on re-usable rental shop towels, 63 percent of respondents answered yes. This compares with 73 percent of respondents answering yes to the same question in 2007.

When asked what might encourage them to switch from re-usable rental shop towels to
disposable wipers, the survey found:

• 35 percent of respondents cited concerns about the health and safety issues
mentioned above.
• 28 percent chose a closed loop solution for disposable wipers, in which used wipers
are recycled or converted to energy and diverted from landfills.
• 10 percent were concerned about water pollution from laundering re-usable rental
shop towels.
• 29 percent said they did not use rental shop towels.

Safety Philosophy

This year respondents were asked to describe their personal safety philosophy from a list of choices. Two responses tied for first place: "Safety doesn’t cost it pays" and "Organizations must create safety based cultures" (43 percent each). Only 10 percent selected the statement "Safety begins and ends at the top" and just two percent chose "Safety is a pain, but so is my boss."

"These results did not surprise us," said Scott Gaddis, global safety leader for
Kimberly-Clark Professional. "Workplace safety must be managed like every other strategic business objective that is important to an organization’s success."

Survey Methodology

The survey was undertaken at the NSC Congress in Anaheim, Calif., on September 23,
2008. The survey questionnaires were filled out by 153 safety professionals who reported being responsible for purchasing, selecting or influencing the purchase or selection of, or compliance with, PPE. The respondents included safety directors and managers, industrial hygienists, environmental managers and purchasing professionals. For full survey results, visit www.kcprofessional.com/us/mkt/2008nscpressrelease .

Labels: Industrial Health, Industrial Safety, safety management, Safety Training, workplace safety

A new doctoral thesis from Karolinska Institutet reveals that professionals may overlook important information when they search for research findings about injury prevention and safety promotion. The typical search uses no more than one or two online databases, and often only familiar search terms are used thereby limiting the search even further.

"Our findings are compelling because we were able to identify problems both with how professionals look for published research about safety and with the way that the online literature databases is organized," says Dr David Lawrence, Postgraduate Student at Karolinska Institutet. "This knowledge should be helpful in teaching people to be better searchers and for making improvements to the design of databases."

The researchers conducted six studies of the information-seeking behaviors of professionals who work in the fields of injury prevention and safety promotion. They used subscribers to the weekly SafetyLit Literature Update Bulletin as a pool for a survey. Subscribers included attorneys, engineers, staff members of legislative and other government offices, community planners, physicians, psychologists, workplace safety specialists, consumer product safety specialists, building codes and standards professionals, academic researchers and others. Among the respondents there where professionals from 173 countries represented. All terms used to search the SafetyLit database during the years 2000-2005 were registered. During the six years that the web logs were examined the site averaged 2500 searches each week.

The researchers found that when injury prevention professionals search for information, they typically search no more than one or two online databases. They only use familiar search terms and often exclude professional terms commonly used by professionals in other fields. Because at least thirty distinct professional disciplines contribute to what is known about injury prevention and safety promotion topics, this means that the searchers are self-limiting their ability to find new information. Further, professional journals exist to serve researchers in each of these disciplines but online literature databases tend to focus on the perceived needs of researchers in a single specialty and exclude journals from other disciplines.

"A large proportion of injury prevention and safety promotion professionals may hold a biased view of the full nature of injury problems and the options for prevention", says Dr Lawrence. "When they search a database they find a satisfyingly large list of articles and conclude that they must have received comprehensive information, unintentionally missing information from other perspectives."

David Lawrence is also affiliated to Center for Injury Prevention Policy & Practice, San Diego State University Graduate School of Public Health. For further information, please contact: Dr David Lawrence Mobile: +1-619-322-4917 (US) or +46 76-2817009 (Sweden) Work: + 1-619-594-1991 (US) E-mail: david.lawrence@sdsu.edu

Doctoral thesis:

David Lawrence. The information-seeking behaviors of professionals and information sources in the field of injury prevention and safety promotion.

Read thesis

Labels: hazard prevention, safety management, workplace safety

The following is a press release from OSHA:

ARLINGTON, Texas -- The U.S. Department of Labor has entered into a settlement with Encore Management Co. in Arlington to resolve findings by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) that the company illegally terminated an employee because she complained about safety and health issues.

OSHA whistleblower investigators found that Encore Management terminated the employee, who served as the community director at one of the apartment complexes it managed, after discovering she filed a complaint with the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) regarding possible asbestos exposure.

"Employees should be free to exercise their rights under the law without fear of termination or retaliation by their employers," said Dean W. McDaniel, OSHA's regional administrator in Dallas. "This settlement underscores the Labor Department's commitment to vigorously take action to protect those rights."

The employee expressed concerns to her supervisor that a renovation project at the complex was exposing workers to asbestos. When Encore Management failed to address the employee's concerns, she filed a complaint with DSHS, which conducted an inspection and found the apartment complex had not performed sufficient asbestos testing prior to beginning its renovation and had hired an unlicensed contractor to remove known asbestos material.

After being terminated, the employee filed a whistleblower complaint alleging she had been fired by Encore Management in retaliation for filing the complaint with DSHS. OSHA investigated the complaint and determined that Encore Management's termination of the employee was in violation of the whistleblower provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act.

The company entered into a voluntary settlement after OSHA referred the case to the Labor Department's Solicitor's Office for enforcement. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement, Encore Management paid the complainant $25,000 for lost wages, job seeking expenses, out of pocket medical expenses and a year of future lost earnings. The company also agreed to provide the complainant with a neutral job reference and remove derogatory information related to her termination from her personnel file.

Encore Management, headquartered in California, provides property management services to several apartment complexes throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, area.

OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of the OSH Act and 16 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various trucking, airline, nuclear power, pipeline, environmental, rail and securities laws. Detailed information about employee whistleblower rights, including fact sheets, is available online at: http://www.osha.gov/dep/oia/whistleblower/index.html.

Labels: OSHA, safety management

Laws, codes, rules and requirements sometimes conflict such that to obey one you most likely will break another. You can end up in a situation in which there is a potential for a lawsuit no matter what you do. Finding the middle ground can be difficult, or impossible.

Last Wednesday's Houston Chronicle has a good example. An employee of an Animal Health Clinic became pregnant. When her employer became aware of the pregnancy they took actions to protect the employee's health. The article states:

"Lisa Davila [the clinic manager] said she went through all the chemicals to identify which ones were dangerous, changed the employee's work duties to eliminate exposure to radiation or cat litter, and checked the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Web site to make sure the clinic in College Station was taking the necessary precautions to keep its employee safe."

The result of Ms. Davila's actions was a lawsuit and a settlement to the employee of $15,000.

What went wrong? The manager may have violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which states that you can not treat a pregnant woman any different than anyone else... even if you are trying to protect the health of that person or the baby.

You can read the article at: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/sixel/5956708.html#none

I suggest also reading the comments at the end of the article. Hare2share has a reasonable suggestion for how this situation might have been handled better. Although I still think the door would have been open for a lawsuit or OSHA fine.

Labels: Industrial Health, safety management, safety politics, safety regulations

Research published in the latest edition of Communication Currents has found that:

"The availability of safety information and the willingness of individual workers to seek it out play an important role in safety. In the workplace, employees have to believe that there is reliable and useful safety information available before they can be expected to seek it and act on it. This is important because workplace injuries and fatalities have many ramifications beyond individual suffering."

The articles points out ways that organizations can effectively communication safety information:

1. Organizations should make the safety information personal by using first-line supervisors to deliver safety-related messages, both in word and by example.

2. Safety messages should be simple and to the point.

3. Positive safety behaviors should be encouraged and safety messages should focus on how to initiate safety behavior.

4. Safety messages should be delivered through more than one medium.

The complete article is available on the Communication Currents web site.

Labels: safety, safety management, Safety Training

The following is a press release from OSHA:

FREEHOLD, N.J. -- The U.S. Department of Labor has filed suit against Exclusive Decorators Inc.; Interiors Furniture, LLC; and its vice president, Garrett Ney, on behalf of an employee who was terminated in violation of the whistleblower provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act.

The complaint alleges that the employee was terminated after complaining to the employer about the lack of ventilation in the workplace. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) previously had cited the employer for ventilation violations. OSHA conducted an inspection of the worksite in response to a complaint about safety and health practices.

The former employee filed a complaint with OSHA alleging retaliation by the defendants in violation of Section 11(c) of the OSH Act. OSHA investigated the complaint and determined it had merit. After being notified of OSHA’s findings, the defendants refused to reinstate the employee to the same or a substantially equivalent position of employment, and declined to pay back wages or other employment benefits.

"Every employee should be free to exercise his or her rights under the law without fear of termination or retaliation by their employers," said Robert Kulick, OSHA’s regional administrator in New York. "The Labor Department is committed to protecting those rights."

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, the complaint seeks to reinstate the employee; secure compensatory damages, lost back pay and punitive damages; and require the company to post a notice in a prominent place for 60 days that explains employee rights under Section 11(c) of the OSH Act.

Exclusive Decorators Inc. specializes in manufacturing and installing wood cabinets and furniture.

OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of the OSH Act and 15 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various trucking, airline, nuclear power, pipeline, environmental, rail and securities laws. Detailed information on employee whistleblower rights, including fact sheets, is available online at: http://www.osha.gov/dep/oia/whistleblower/index.html.

Labels: employment, safety management

On Tuesday, July 29, 2008, a hearing was convened in the Dirksen Office Building of the U. S. Senate, by the Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The subject of the hearing was “Dangerous Dust: Is OSHA Doing Enough to Protect Workers?” The panel was led by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), joined by Subcommittee Members Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) and Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), and with Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) as an invited panel member.

Among the witnesses who provided expert testimony at the hearing was Richard W. Prugh, Senior Process Safety Specialist, Chilworth Technology, Inc. The testimony of the Chilworth representative may be observed at the following link: http://help.senate.gov/Hearings/2008_07_29/2008_07_29.html. A copy of the full written testimony is available from Chilworth by emailing safety@chilworth.com.

The other witnesses at the hearing were Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), John S. Bresland, Chairman and CEO of the U.S. Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board, Amy Spencer, Senior Chemical Engineer, National Fire Protection Association and Graham H. Graham, Vice President for Operations, Imperial Sugar Company.

Below is Richard Prugh’s Testimony at the U.S. Senate Hearing on Dust Explosion Hazards.

Introduction

The “fire triangle” shows the necessary components of a fire. Similarly, the “explosion pentagon” shows the necessary components of a combustible-dust explosion.

The concentration of fuel in the oxidant is very important. For example, the Lower Flammable Limit (the “lean” limit) for gasoline is about 1% in air, and the Upper Flammable Limit (the “rich” limit) is about 6%; if the concentration is not between these limits, the mixture will not burn.

There is also a lower limit for combustible dusts, and it is termed the Minimum Explosible Concentration. For example, the lower limit for many dusts corresponds to two pounds of very-fine dust suspended in a 10’x12’x8’ room, like a small bedroom.

There is a “rule of thumb” for explosible-dust concentrations. If you can see the thumb at the end of your outstretched arm, the concentration of dust is too low to propagate combustion; that is, too low to cause an explosion or a flash-fire.

All materials that are combustible can explode, under “the right” set of conditions.

The Right Concentration

Concentrations above the Minimum Explosible Concentration occur in many items of process equipment, and in dust collectors when the collected dusts are shaken or blown-back from the filters.

Very high concentrations of dust within rooms or buildings can occur when accumulations of dust are dispersed: from mechanical shock, a blast of air, dumping bags of powder, and vigorous sweeping.

Dense dust clouds also can occur when accumulations of dust at high elevations in rooms or buildings are disturbed by a “primary” explosion, and ignition of the descending and suspended dense dust cloud can result in a damaging “secondary” explosion.

High-elevation accumulations of dust can result from use of compressed air for cleaning equipment and surfaces. This results in lofting of very small particles to upper elevations, where they may settle onto horizontal surfaces. Such accumulations are a secondary explosion “waiting to happen”.

A Sufficient Source of Ignition

If the energy of an ignition source is not sufficient, propagating combustion cannot be initiated. For many combustible dusts, the Minimum Ignition Energy is very low, such that the electrostatic energy on the human body can cause propagating combustion. Other ignition sources are electrical arcs, flames, hot surfaces, and the electrostatic energy on ungrounded equipment.

Confinement of Combustion

If the combustion of a mixture of dust and air is confined, the resulting hot combustion gases can generate very high pressures. Such pressures can rupture equipment, destroy walls and ceilings of rooms and buildings, and threaten personnel.

Preventing Explosive Combustion of Dust/Air Mixtures

- The oxidant (the oxygen in air) can be forced out of process equipment by an inert gas (such as nitrogen or carbon dioxide).
- An inert powder or mist can quench or suppress the combustion.
- The process equipment can be constructed to “contain” the maximum pressure that could be developed by a dust/air explosion.
- Local exhaust ventilation can be provided at equipment openings where dust is generated or released.
- The explosion can be vented, to minimize the pressure generated by the combustion gases.

Unconfined Combustion

When combustion of a small dense dust cloud occurs in an unconfined space, the result can be a flash-fire. Persons inside the flash-fire are at risk of serious injury, particularly if they are wearing combustible clothing. Thus, persons who handle dusty combustible powders should be wearing flame-resistant clothing.

Models for Control of Combustible-Dust Hazards

At the present time, there exist several legislated and guidance documents that could serve as models for Federal rules for dust-hazard controls.

- The General Duty Clause is often used by OSHA when there is no specific standard that applies to a recognized hazard in the workplace.
- OSHA frequently cites “housekeeping” standards, but these standards do not address the need for preventing and removing accumulations of dusts on elevated surfaces or address many important ignition sources, such as hot surfaces, static electricity, and open flames or welding sparks.
- The OSHA Process Safety Management Standard does not address combustible dusts. However, this standard provides good guidance and could be applied to control of combustible-dust hazards.
- The OSHA Grain Handling Facilities standard could be modified to serve as guidance for control of combustible-dust hazards.
- The “Combustible Dust” NFPA 654 standard provides very good guidance for controlling combustible-dust hazards.
- The Georgia Rules and Regulations of the Safety Fire Commissioner list 76 NFPA Codes and Standards, many with the statement “Facilities . . . shall comply with this standard as a mandatory requirement.”

Key Points in the Prevention of Combustible-Dust Explosions

A. The Problem

1. A very high percentage of dusts are combustible, including solid hydrocarbons (such as polyethylene), carbohydrates (such as grains), and many metals (such as aluminum).
2. Every combustible material will create an explosion with the right conditions.
3. Limited generic data are available concerning the properties of combustible dusts; data may need to be developed through testing.
4. At present, all 50 states “administer” the International Building Code, which contains extensive requirements for explosion protection for combustible dusts, but there is very modest enforcement of this Code

B. The Solution

1. Companies that produce, process, or handle combustible dusts and powders need to determine the explosibility properties of their materials. These data should then be formally communicated within their organizations and to their customers.
2. Plant operators should assess the hazards that are associated with processes that are operating in their plant.
3. Existing today are the technology and knowledge; codes, standards, and guidelines; and engineering expertise that are needed to protect personnel and property from combustible-dust explosions.
4. An objective of the proposed Federal legislation should be to require plant operators to adopt and abide by the above guidance toward solution of the existing dust-explosion “problem”.

Labels: Industrial Safety, safety management

SEOUL, Korea, June 30 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Driving a safety culture across organizations, extending it beyond the workplace and keeping it top of mind with a commitment to collaboration and sharing are critical for keeping employees safe, according to a DuPont-sponsored survey of signers of the World Safety Declaration (WSD).

The survey results are the basis for the 2008 WSD Report, "Instilling a Safety Culture Across Continents: How Collaboration, Commitment and Accountability Help Organizations Achieve Measurable Results in Workplace Safety," which was issued by DuPont at the XVIII World Congress on Safety and Health at Work. The WSD was created by DuPont in 2005 to provide companies with a framework to find common ground in identifying and improving workplace safety.

Among the leading areas of progress reported by WSD signers:

• Driving safety cultures across companies represents the greatest area of improvement, but continues to be an ongoing challenge as organizations strive to keep safety top of mind


• Driving line management accountability for safety was next, indicating that companies are effecting a shift in their organizations


• Reducing occupational accidents and injuries remains the bottom line focus of all safety programs.

"We are very pleased with the 2008 report and the survey results, in particular, because they reinforce the growing focus of safety as a cultural practice in companies around the world," said Mark P. Vergnano, group vice president -- DuPont Safety & Protection. "Safety is a practice that knows no boundaries, in language or country. It is inherent to DuPont
and to a growing list of companies. We will continue to strive to help others to better protect their employees, their customers and their communities."

Held every three years, the World Congress brings together several thousand key leaders and influencers of workplace safety policy from industry, government and labor who present and discuss emerging safety research, trends, best practices and innovations in the workplace. Today's World Day for Safety and Health at Work was established by the International Labour Organization in 2003 to emphasize the prevention of illness and accidents at work.

For a complete copy of the 2008 World Safety Declaration Report visit:
http://www.worldsafetydeclaration.com

Labels: safety management, workplace safety

A current article in Occupational Health & Safety magazine tackles the subject of Budgeting for the Safety Miser.

Linda Johnson Sherrard, Technical Editor of Occupational Health & Safety, writes: "I admit it, I'm a budget miser who is horrible at developing realistic needs analysis. I always hold funds to the last minute, expecting some dire happening or equipment break that needs immediate assistance. I try to obtain at least one meaningful piece of equipment or diagnostic monitoring every year and keep my resources up to date. The costs of a new safety program (or refreshing an older, established one) can be staggering: You have to section it off for several years in order to obtain the items you need."

In this short article she offers a number of bullet points for estimating your safety budget. Read the article here: http://www.ohsonline.com/articles/63420

Labels: safety management, workplace safety