Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Former OSHA, NIOSH Heads Say Federal Ergonomics Standard Unlikely

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Labor Donate to DU
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 09:13 PM
Original message
Former OSHA, NIOSH Heads Say Federal Ergonomics Standard Unlikely

http://ohsonline.com/Articles/2008/12/11-Former-OSHA-NIOSH-Heads-Say-Ergo-Standard-Unlikely.aspx

* Dec 11, 2008

Discussing the future of OSHA and potential changes to the safety industry in general under Barack Obama during a Dec. 9 webinar sponsored by the American Society of Safety Engineers, former NIOSH Director Dr. John Howard and former OSHA Assistant Secretary of Labor John Henshaw agreed that a return to a federal ergonomics standard similar to the one promulgated during the Clinton era was "unlikely."

"We need to do more to educate employers and workers on ergonomics," said Howard, who also is the former head of the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health. "Coming from California, the only state with an ergonomic program, I believe something needs to be done. One third of all workplace injuries are due to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). OSHA could do more in the area of education--provide employers with tools they can use to enable them to afford to address the risks to reduce this injury."

Henshaw and Howard agreed that Congress can help play a role in outlining the priorities for OSHA, but neither saw significant changes on the horizon for the agency, due primarily to the recession. "With this economic downturn, I believe we must do more to reach out to small and medium size businesses to show them the value of developing and implementing workplace safety programs," said Henshaw. "We need to sell it to them. Right now most large and smart companies already know the huge benefits and cost savings of developing and implementing occupational safety, health and environmental programs into the workplace, but we, including OSHA, really need to reach out and show them the benefits of investing in safety--the value it brings and the increased efficiency."

Howard added that changes are needed in the areas of standards development and generating more participation in the process by businesses. "The workplace has changed over the years," he said. "Unlike the 1970s and the years before and after, people aren't with the same company for decades any longer, many work as consultants and contractors. So as the work relationship changes, so too does the nature of the work. Maybe the OSH Act should be revisited and updated to reflect these changes.

FULL story at link.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
economicgeography Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. The only thing it will do to small and medium businesses
is raise their costs of employment while the big greedy businesses will be able to absorb the costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyepaddle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-08 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Hard to believe you got a pizza.
As my employer's ergonomics manager I can pretty much tell you that the amount of money spent on ergonomics interventions is basically chump change on the order of <$1000/year while a single case of surgery for Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorder runs about 15 dimes. Of course I amn excluding things like chairs--which we as an employer would have to provide anyhow. For the most part I just make sure people know how to adjust their workstaion, and help reach on optimum fit. In most cases I don't have to spend any money at all.

Granted, this is in an office environment. In an industrial setting interventions cost significantly more; this is more than balanced out in almost all cases by reducing the negative impacts from lost productivity. I'll cite an example, a local manufacturer of paving machines spent more than $50,000 installing a rotating frame stand. This device clamps on to the unfinished chassis of a paver, milling machine, or steamroller and rotates it so that workers can position the machine so that their task is in front of them--and not overhead.

This is so effective in speeding up the process that that company's bean counters are delighted with it. When factoring the reduced injury costs, and more time on the job for skilled workers (lower defect rates as well as quicker work) it just becomes overwhelmingly positive.

In other words, ther is a reason companies pay ergonomic consultants more than $1000/day to examine their operations--they are well worth it.

In other other words--you are an idiot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Labor Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC