Every year since 1996 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has collected work-related injury and illness data from more than 80,000 employers. For the first time, the agency has made the data from 1996 to 2007 available in a searchable online database, allowing the public to look at establishment or industry-specific injury and illness data. The workplace injury and illness data is available at http://www.osha.gov/pls/odi/establishment_search.htmlas well as Data.gov.

A new “Warehouse Safety Hazards and Solutions Guide” is now available free from Graphic Products, Inc. It lists common warehouse safety hazards, presents safety solutions and provides “Think Safety” checklists for avoiding certain hazards.

18 states and Washington DC have now passed laws prohibiting drivers of a moving vehicle to text while driving. Yet over 10% of all drivers still continue to text. Many of these drivers are under the age of 29. The University of Utah recently published a study (December 16, 2009) Text Messaging During Simulated Driving, which found that drivers who texting have a much greater chance for an vehicle incident (6 times) than those who use a hand-held cell phone.

Recently I have been speaking at regional and local safety conferences on the topic of driver distraction, You Can Drive Me To Distraction. During these presentations I ask the audience how many people either text or use a cell phone (hand-held or hands free) while they drive. When I ask them to be honest, more than 60% of the people raise their hands.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration defines distraction as:

Distraction is anything that diverts the driver’s attention from the primary tasks of navigating the vehicle and responding to critical events.  To put it another way, a distraction is anything that takes your eyes off the road (visual distraction), your mind off the road (cognitive distraction), or your hands off the wheel (manual distraction).  So when you think about tasks that can be a driving distraction, you can see that they often fit into more than one category: eating is visual and manual, whereas using a navigation system is all three.

Both the National Safety Council and the NHTSA have become very active in awareness programs and getting laws passed which prohibit the used of any electronic device while driving a motor vehicle.  To make the point much clearer click on this link and watch this video (hint; it is a little hard to watch, be prepared).

So, what’s that message here?  Any time you lose focus on driving for only 2 seconds, your reaction time to avoid an incident is the same as if your blood alcohol level is .08 or the DUI limit.  We must stay alert and focused to stay alive and keep others from getting killed or injured.

MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISIONS ARE THE #1 CAUSE OF EMPLOYEE DEATH AND INJURY.

More people have died in 1 year from texting related incidents in the US, than all the service people who have died in the middle east conflict since 2003.

NIOSH Update: Aging Workers at Higher Risk of Death, Severe Injury, Conference Report Suggests Ways to Keep Workers Healthy and Productive

Policy Shifts on Work Environment, Health Promotion, Continued Research Needed to Maintain Healthy U.S. Workforce

A report of conference presentations and discussions among participants from the National Academies of Science, universities and research institutions, and representatives of professional associations, industry and labor, recommends attention to workplace environments to maintain “work ability” as workers age, along with legislative fixes and research to fill in knowledge gaps for keeping workers healthy and productive.

According to researchers using U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, older workers are more severely injured and die with greater frequency from work-related injuries than younger workers. Older workers also have longer recovery periods than younger workers. These findings raise health care delivery and economic issues for the nation, as more workers are choosing to delay retirement due to collapsed 401(k) plans and savings. BLS uses workers age 55 and older in its calculations, although the rates rise sharply for those workers over age 65. Other agencies and organizations define the term as age 50 or 55 and up. The Department of Labor uses age 40 as a starting point for “older worker.”

“The issue of healthy aging is critically important as the U.S. economy is revitalized. As we go forward in time, the demand for workers will grow but fewer workers will be entering the workforce and a larger proportion of the workforce will be older. This is a simple reality of demographics,” said National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Director John Howard, M.D. “Having a healthy, productive workforce will help sustain economic growth in the decades ahead. We must take steps now to help all workers stay safe and healthy at work as they age. We must also take steps to address the special needs of older workers who, more and more, will be staying on the job past traditional retirement age.”

The conference, held Feb. 17-18, 2009, at the National Labor College in Silver Spring, Md., paid particular attention to workers in physically demanding jobs, such as construction and health care. Health care cost-containment has meant longer work hours and increased stress among health care workers, which has led to a shortage of nurses. Thirty-nine percent of RNs were 45 years or older in 2002.

Construction workers already suffer the highest number of fatalities in any U.S. industry.  But the death rate among construction workers 55 years and older was nearly 80% higher than that of construction workers under 35 in 2007. And like the rest of the workforce, the average age of a construction worker is rising; it was 40.4 in 2008, which is 4.4 years older than in 1985. The average retirement age among construction workers is 61.

“Our nation loses an average of four construction workers every workday to a job-related incident – and that’s been consistent for more than a decade,” said Pete Stafford, executive director of CPWR – The Center for Construction Research and Training, one of the conference’s co-sponsors. “As we start to rebuild our nation’s crumbling infrastructure and venture into green jobs, we want to make sure jobsites do not become a source of pain and death for older workers who have so much to contribute, especially in mentoring younger workers.”

Howard believes the conference confirms and expands on a 2004 report from the National Academies of Science that recognized the deteriorating conditions facing an aging workforce, to the detriment of workers, their families, and businesses. “Health and Safety Needs of Older Workers” made clear recommendations to increase research efforts toward preventing work-related injury, illness and fatality among aging workers.   These recommendations have yet to be adopted.

“The discussions and recommendations from the conference point to steps that can be taken to address needs identified in the 2004 report  that were never acted upon,” said Jordan Barab, acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for  the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). “As those discussions make clear, a sustainable workforce will be a critical component of a secure and prosperous 21st century economy. The work we do now is an investment in a stronger workforce for tomorrow.”

The Healthy Aging for Workers conference was funded through grants from NIOSH and CPWR. The Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics and the Society for Occupational and Environmental Health were conference sponsors. Additional co-sponsors were AARP, OSHA, the American Public Health Association, the Veterans Administration, and the University of Maryland Work and Health Research Center.

The full conference report and presentations from national and international researchers on occupational health and safety issues can be found on the Society for Occupational and Environmental Health’s Web site.

Winter is almost here.  Some places have already experienced snowfall and hazardous roads.  Here are some winter driving tips for you to consider.

Tip #1: First, check to make sure your vehicle is mechanically ready for the winter.

• Make sure your windshield wipers work properly. For some, snow blades may be a better choice than the all season blades. Visibility is key for driving in not-so-good weather conditions

• Take your vehicle in for a mechanical check up on anti-freeze/coolant, oil changes, windshield wiper fluid, and take care of any major vehicle issues that could possibly become hazardous during the winter season.

• Also, check to make sure that your tires are properly inflated, under or over inflation can reduce the gripping action of the tires due to the tread not meeting the road surface which may cause or increase your chances of getting into an accident.

• Keep your gas tank at least half full. More fuel in your tank will help reduce moisture problems and also helps to add weight.

• For RWD vehicles, extra weight may be necessary. Make sure it is distributed evenly and securely fastened. Bags of sand or kitty litter are great choices and help provide traction in case you go into the ditch or become stuck.

Tip #2: During snowy winter months, set your alarm clock to an earlier time leaving you with plenty of time to get to work in case of accidents and traffic back-ups.

Tip #3: Start your vehicle 10 minutes before leaving to get the vehicle warmed up. Also make sure that you fully brush off your windshield, all windows, mirrors, brake lights and headlights. Do not brush off little patches, you want to be noticed when your driving down the road and it can become very dangerous.

Tip #4: Always wear your seatbelt!

Tip #5: Choose the best route for work. Avoid hills, crowded areas and bridges.

Tip #6: Do not use a cell phone while driving in the snow or on ice. Concentrate on driving not the conversation. Your life could depend on it. (Note: See blog “Is Texting While Driving Deadly?”)

Tip #7: Drive with caution, be aware of posted speed limits and leave enough room for the driver in front of you in case you have to stop abruptly. Be advised that during serious weather conditions, it is best to slow down even in posted areas to help prevent accidents.

Tip # 8: Importantly, stay alert to the actions of other drivers. You do not know what their next move could be. Anticipate vehicles from side streets, in front of you, as well as behind you.

Tip #9: Keep your vehicle stocked with simple emergency equipment in case you do get into an accident or stall. Consider having these essentials tucked away in your vehicle:

• Blankets

• A small shovel

• Tow rope

• Bag of sand or kitty litter for traction

• Long jumper cables

• Flashlights

• Flares or neon sticks

• A cell phone, C.B. Radio or ham radio

• A windshield scraper and brush

• Snacks (it’s best if you leave energy or snack bars in a place like your glove compartment or center council compared to a backpack or storage place where they could ultimately be left for a period of time and could stale.)

• Non-alcoholic beverages (also should be left up front where could be visibly seen. You don’t want to drink anything that’s been sitting for a while.)

• Candles and matches

• An extra or old pair of winter boots

• Gloves, hats, scarf’s, etc (you wouldn’t want to be outside in a harsh winter with just your work cloths on.)

• And anything else you may consider to be part of your emergency kit.

Tip #10: Use Common Sense. If you feel that you pose a danger while driving or feel that you could be in danger, stay home, its not worth losing your life over it.

Keep you and other drivers safe for the winter season by using these tips.

Nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses among private industry employers in 2008 occurred at a rate of 3.9 cases per 100 equivalent full-time workers — a decline from 4.2 cases in 2007, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Oct. 29th. Similarly, the number of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses reported in 2008 declined to 3.7 million cases, compared to 4 million cases in 2007. The total recordable case (TRC) injury and illness incidence rate among private industry employers has declined significantly each year since 2003, when estimates from the Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) were first published using the 2002 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

National public sector estimates covering nearly 19 million State and local government workers — for example, police protection and fire protection — are available for the first time from the SOII for reference year 2008.  Nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses among state and local government workers combined occurred at a higher rate (6.3 cases per 100 full-time workers) than among private industry workers in 2008.

Key findings of the 2008 Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses:

• Incidence rates for injuries and illnesses combined among private industry establishments declined significantly in 2008 for all case types, with the exception of job transfer or restriction cases whose rate remained unchanged from 2007.  The number of cases of injuries and illnesses combined declined significantly in 2008 for all case types.
• For injuries only, both the incidence rate and the number of cases in private industry establishments declined significantly in 2008 compared to 2007 — each falling 8 percent from the year earlier.
• Looking at illnesses, both the incidence rate and the number of cases declined significantly in 2008 compared to 2007 — mainly the result of a decline among the ‘All other illnesses’ category, which accounted for nearly 84 percent of the decline in illness cases among private industry establishments.
• Manufacturing was the only private industry sector in 2008 in which the rate of job transfer or restriction cases exceeded the rate of cases with days away from work, continuing an 11 year trend.
• The total recordable case injury and illness incidence rate was highest in 2008 among mid-size private industry establishments (those employing between 50 and 249 workers) and lowest among small establishments (those employing fewer than 11 workers) compared to establishments of other sizes.

Slightly more than one-half of the 3.7 million private industry injury and illnesses cases reported nationally in 2008 were of a more serious nature that involved days away from work, job transfer, or restriction — commonly referred to as DART cases.  These occurred at a rate of 2.0 cases per 100 workers, declining from 2.1 cases in 2007.   Among the two components of DART cases, the rate of cases involving days away from work fell from 1.2 to 1.1 cases per 100 workers, while the rate for cases resulting in job transfer or restriction remained unchanged at 0.9 cases in 2008. Other recordable cases — those not involving days away from work, job transfer, or restriction–accounted for the remaining injury and illness cases nationally and occurred at a lower rate in 2008 (1.9 cases per 100 workers) compared to 2007 (2.1 cases per 100 workers).

Private Industry Injuries and Illnesses

Injuries. Approximately 3.5 million (94.9 percent) of the 3.7 million nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses in 2008 were injuries — of which 2.5 million (71.2 percent) occurred in service-providing industries, which employed 80.1 percent of the private industry workforce covered by this survey.  The remaining 1.0 million injuries (28.8 percent) occurred in goods-producing industries, which accounted for 19.9 percent of private industry employment in 2008.

Illnesses. Workplace illnesses accounted for slightly more than 5 percent of the 3.7 million injury and illness cases in 2008. Private industry employers reported 18,900 fewer illness cases in 2008 — down to 187,400 cases compared to 206,300 in 2007. This resulted in a decline in the rate of workplace illnesses in 2008 from 21.8 to 19.7 cases per 10,000 full-time workers.

Goods-producing industries as a whole accounted for approximately 38 percent of all occupational illness cases and were responsible for more than two-thirds of the decline in illnesses reported among private industry workplaces in 2008. Consequently, both the number and rate of illnesses declined significantly for goods-producing industries as a whole in 2008. The manufacturing sector accounted for 31.5 percent of all occupational illnesses cases and reported 12,000 fewer illnesses in 2008 compared to 2007. Both the number and rate of illness cases among service-providing industries as a whole remained statistically unchanged in 2008, compared to 2007.

National Public Sector Estimates

National public sector estimates covering nearly 19 million State and local government workers — for example, Police protection (NAICS 922120) and Fire protection (NAICS 922160) — are available from the SOII for the first time for 2008.

Nearly 940,000 injury and illness cases were reported among State and local government workers combined in 2008, resulting in a rate of 6.3 cases per 100 workers — significantly higher than the rate among private industry workers (3.9 cases per 100 workers). Approximately 4 in 5 injuries and illnesses reported in the public sector occurred among local government workers, resulting in an injury and illness rate of 7.0 cases per 100 workers — significantly higher than the 4.7 cases per 100 workers in State government.

In addition to the industry-level estimates available for the first time with this release, more detailed national public sector estimates will be available in the future covering case and worker demographics for cases that involved days away from work.

The risk of influenza to healthcare workers is not a new concern, but the ongoing experience with novel influenza A (nH1N1) makes this issue even more urgent. Among the many considerations for the health and well-being of healthcare workers is the question about what types of personal protective equipment (PPE) (respiratory protection, gloves, gowns, eye protection, and other equipment) are needed to protect these frontline workers. PPE needs to be regarded one part of a set of infection control strategies to reduce the potential for infection in healthcare workers. At the request of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) the Institute of Medicine convened the Committee on Respiratory Protection for Healthcare Workers in the Workplace Against Novel H1N1 Influenza A to provide recommendations regarding the necessary respiratory protection for healthcare workers in their workplace against novel H1N1 influenza A.

RESPIRATORY PROTECTION

The committee focused solely on the scientific and empirical evidence regarding the efficacy of various types of personal respiratory protective equipment (e.g., medical masks and respirators). Studies on influenza transmission show that airborne (inhalation) transmission is one of the potential routes of transmission. N95 respirators are documented to filter out 95 to 99 percent of relevant particles and have maximum effectiveness when properly fitted to the face of users. Research results on the filtration and fit of medical masks show wide variation in penetration of aerosol particles and inadequate fit suggesting that the use of medical masks is unlikely to be effective against airborne transmission.

Recommendationation 1: Use Fit -Teste d N95 Respirators espirators

Healthcare workers (including those in non-hospital settings) who are in close contact with individuals with nH1N1 influenza or influenza-like illnesses should use fit-tested N95 respirators or respirators that are demonstrably more effective as one measure in the continuum of safety and infection control efforts to reduce the risk of infection.

• The committee endorses the current CDC guidelines and recommends that these guidelines should be continued until or unless further evidence can be provided to the effect that other forms of protection or other guidelines are equally or more effective.

• Employers should ensure that the use and fit testing of N95 respirators be conducted in accordance with OSHA regulations, and healthcare workers should use the equipment as required by regulations and employer policies.

It is important to note that controversy exists regarding clinical guideline decision making as many factors besides efficacy may affect policy decisions for PPE guidance including economics, equipment supplies, vaccine availability, immunization status, extent of worker compliance, and logistical considerations in the implementation of such guidance. The committee was not charged to address these other issues.

The ASSE recently launched a new interactive online safety game designed to help young workers learn how to protect themselves against the many dangers that face them in the service industry.

AIHA Asks OSHA to Lower Noise Exposure PEL

EHS Today, reported by Laura Walter 

In an April 28 letter to OSHA Acting Assistant Secretary Jordan Barab, American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) President Lindsay E. Booher asked OSHA to take immediate action to lower the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for occupational noise exposure.

AIHA requested the PEL to be lowered to 85 dBA (as an 8-hour time-weight average) and to adopt the 3 dB exchange rate, changes AIHA “strongly believes” are appropriate for both general industry and construction standards.

“One of the greatest challenges and concerns we now face in the United States is the hearing loss that is occurring in our work force,” Booher wrote. “Over 30 million workers are exposed to hazardous levels of noise, and noise-induced hearing loss is one of the most common occupational diseases. Such hearing loss significantly affects the ability to communicate and negatively impacts a worker’s quality of life.”

According to the letter, even a compliant hearing conservation program – where workers are exposed up to 90 dBA TWA with no hearing protection – “will yield up to 26 percent excess risk of material hearing impairment over the course of a working lifetime.” Lowering the PEL to 85 dBA, however, could reduce the number of workers at risk by at least one half.

“The vast majority of the nations of the world regulate workers’ noise exposures at lower levels than the U.S. In fact, the U.S. is one of only two nations that still uses the 90 dBA PEL and is one of only three nations that uses the 5 dB exchange rate,” Booher wrote. “As a result, American workers are allowed exposure to noise levels that would result in more hearing loss than the rest of the world.”

The letter also pointed out that many agencies and organization in the United States use or recommend the lower exposure limit, including the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Furthermore, lowering the PEL could help streamline hearing conservation program management by adopting a single threshold for all engineering controls, training, hearing protection and hearing conservation programs.

“AIHA urges OSHA to take immediate action on this issue to ensure that American workers are afforded the same level of protection from hazardous noise that the majority of the world’s nation provide their workers,” Booher wrote.