Coalition

Ergonomics is the science of designing work systems taking into account the “human factors,” so as to make them efficient as well as healthful. The philosophy is one of “fitting the job to the worker.” A wide variety of ailments can occur when jobs entail repetitive motion, forceful exertions or awkward postures. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported 740,000 lost-workday cases during 1999 due to sprains and strains and another 45 thousand due to carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) or tendinitis, which together accounted for 46% of all lost workday injuries. While sprains and strains are similar in severity to other types of injury (a median of 6 days away from work), CTS cases have a median loss of 25 workdays. As the number of reported cases increased rapidly in the 1980s, OSHA started paying more attention to ergonomics, relying on its general authority pending development of a formal standard. Notable cases were brought and remedial settlements reached in the meatpacking and automotive industries. In 1992, OSHA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking, and in 1994 circulated a draft proposal, and in 1995 a revised draft. The 1994 proposal received a negative reaction from major industry groups, and the National Association of Manufacturers helped form the National Coalition on Ergonomics to oppose its adoption. The 1995 draft was somewhat less extensive, particularly in coverage. Rather than requiring comprehensive action by all employers, the revised approach was to have employers do an initial self-evaluation to identify whether certain “signal risk factors” were present. Although OSHA was prohibited by appropriations riders, during most of fiscal 1995 through 1999, from promulgating formal ergonomics proposals, the agency was able to continue development work, and issued its final standard on November 14, 2000. The final regulation was a program standard, meaning that employers would be required to establish ergonomic programs in their workplaces under the general guidelines of the standard. The specific preventive and corrective measures to be taken were to come out of those programs, rather than being mandated in detail by OSHA. Not all employers would need to establish programs. The obligation to do so would be triggered if and when a work-related “musculoskeletal disorder” (MSD) is reported, if it occurs in a job that has certain risk factors forceful exertions, repetition, vibration and awkward postures playing a significant part in each workday. As soon as the rule was issued, opponents launched actions to overturn it in various forums, both judicial and legislative. Two industry groups filed suit in the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, arguing variously that the standard exceeded OSHA’s authority, that the agency did not follow proper procedure, and that the standard was vague, incomprehensible, and not based on sound medical science or economic analysis. However, the more expeditious course for opponents proved to be the Congressional Review Act. . In the first-ever application of that statute, a “resolution of disapproval,” passed by the Congress President Bush signed the measure into law and the standard was nullified. For more details, go to http://www.policyalmanac.org/economic/archive/crs_ergonomics.shtml . This is clipped from the 1998 OSHA video, Ergonomic Programs That Work. The entire film is available at the Internet Archive.

Duration : 0:0:40

[youtube RCvXlZL0r04]

Leave a Comment