RSS
Home
A new study on ergonomics and the role of government in enforcement
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
The current issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine has an article on the importance of government-imposed ergonomics standards. The article, written by Michael Foley, Barbara Silverstein, Nayag Polissar, and Blazej Neradilek, is entitled, Impact of Implementing the Washington State Ergonomics Rule on Employer Reported Risk Factors and Hazard Reduction Activity. The study focuses on a rule adopted in the state of Washington in 2000, which required employers to search for and fix hazards before they caused work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Ergonomics, according to its Wikipedia entry, is the scientific study of conforming work (tasks, equipment and the workplace) to the needs of the human body.
The state rule was to be phased in over time to apply to the largest and most hazardous workplaces first. In 2003, before the rule became applicable to all workplaces, it was repealed by an industry-financed voter initiative. The study looked at injury rates before the rule took effect, during its operation, and after the repeal. The study found that the rule was effective to protect workers from musculoskeletal injuries and saved employers money, but it also found that companies were unlikely to implement such measures on their own--or maintain them once initiated--without a plausible threat of enforcement.
The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration experimented with promulgating ergonomics standards a number of years ago, and it continues to work on a four-pronged approach:
1. developing industry or task-specific guidelines for a few industries;
2. conducting inspections for ergonomic hazards and issuing citations under the General Duty Clause where appropriate;
3. creating a National Advisory Committee to research the issue and identify gaps in research on ergonomics in the workplace;
4. and engaging in outreach and assistance to help small businesses develop better ergonomic practices.
This study suggests that as a matter of public policy and even economic sense at the firm level, encouragement may not be enough to promote good practices. Despite the fact that the practices saved the employers money, once the rule was repealed, employers stopped their good practices. This result has got to be surprising to just about everyone.
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
