Will Workers Compensation injuries be on the increase, merely because we have an aging workforce?

We hear it constantly – the aging workforce – and for some of us that are of the baby boomer generation we don’t like hearing it!  We can’t stop the aging process, but we do actually have some control over the WC injuries that can result.

Whether you work at a desk, in commercial construction, or in manufacturing, it’s unfortunate but true that as you age your body parts just get worn out!  Years of typing can cause repetitive motion issues; years of lifting or digging trenches can cause repetitive traumas, as well as knee, back, and shoulder issues.   But it comes down to the fact that even though just the aging process may weaken the body part, if the “final straw” happens on the job, it’s a workers’ comp claim.

It is evident that the baby boomer generation is willing to learn new techniques, take care of us both physically and mentally, and they don’t want to give in to the idea of getting older so they can’t do certain tasks.  They are highly motivated to keep going, but without pain.

So, what can an employer do to help the aging workforce not get injured?  First of all observe how tasks are performed and be open to having them done a different way to alleviate stress on certain body parts.  Enlist assistance with this evaluation from those who actually do the job and have done the job for many, many years.

For repetitive motion issues, it can merely be an ergonomics issue.  Still even in 2010 we should be looking at how an individual’s workstation is set up and if they have the proper tools.   From a construction standpoint it can be holding training sessions regularly on proper lifting techniques, or merely telling your employees it’s okay to ask for assistance when lifting items of a certain weight – in fact encourage or insist they ask for help!

By providing your employees with training on correct body mechanics, healthy eating habits, support in joining a gym, more employees may come to realize that they do have control over their personal discomfort and/or pain and see that they can prevent and alleviate the physical stresses or work and personal life!

To take it a step it a step further let’s look at the worker compensation cost to a company.  To get a more accurate figure the company should  multiplying the number of injuries by the average costs of such injuries. Direct average costs for medical care were drawn from the National Council on Compensation Insurance Ultimate Reports. Lifetime medical costs for deaths were valued at $17,226; for Permanent Total at $113,372; for Permanent Partial at $15,342; for Temporary Total and Partial at $2,782; and for no work loss at $294. The average cost per hour is estimated to be abut $30 per hour worked for injuries.  The medical expenses were drawn from workers’ compensation accounts and did not require adjustment for charges versus payments since workers’ compensation paid virtually 100 percent of medical bills that is, very few co-payments or deductibles were charged to clients.

The bottom line is as we get older we have more incidents and  it takes us longer to heal.  The cost of healthcare continues to rise.  Therefore, companies can expect a rise in worker compensation cost which goes directly to the bottom line.  For the safety professional, this present a greater challenge to reduce incidents and injuries in the workplace.

Have you every heard of Safety Toolbox Talks?

If you are part of the safety team for your company or organization, this is a free safety resource exchange for safety professional.  The site give you all kinds of information and it is FREE!

From their website, “Safety Toolbox Talks was started in 2007 as a portal for safety professionals to share and exchange free safety topic resources . . . specifically Toolbox Topics, Toolbox Talks and other free safety resources. If you’re like so many companies these days, the daily safety meeting has proven very effective in reminding employees about the importance of safety in their daily tasks.”

Safety Toolbox Talks offers a wide  variety of topic which include:

• toolbox talks
• home safety
• driver safety
• safety videos
• safety news
• OSHA quick takes
• and much more.

With the safety budget shrinking, we need a place to get information and resources with as little cost as possible.  So check out Safetytoolboxtalks.com.  I think you will find it helpful and informative.

What do you about WISQARS? What type of animal is this? What does it do?Where can you find it? Why do I need it? How can I use it?

Hopefully you can answer a few of these questions. If not maybe The Compliance Resource Center can help.

What is WISQARS?

WISQARS is Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System from the CDC (that’s a mouth full) that is an interactive, online database that provides fatal and nonfatal injury, violent death, and cost of injury data from a variety of trusted sources.

What does it do?

Users can search, sort, and view the injury data and create reports, charts, and maps based on the following:

• Intent of injury (unintentional injury, violence-related, homicide/assault, legal intervention, suicide/intentional self-harm)
• Mechanism (cause) of injury (e.g., fall, fire, firearm, motor vehicle crash, poisoning, suffocation)
• Body region (e.g., traumatic brain injury, spinal cord, torso, upper and lower extremities)
• Nature (type) of injury (e.g., fracture, dislocation, internal injury, open wound, amputation, and burn)
• Geographic location (national, regional, state) where the injury occurred
• Sex, race/ethnicity, and age of the injured person

Where can you find it?

At the CDC website  http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/facts.html

How can I use it?

• Show the size of the public health and economic impact of the injury problem
• Describe, compare, and monitor trends in unintentional and violence-related injuries
• Identify new or developing injury problems
• Identify persons at risk of injury
• Provide reliable surveillance data for program and policy decisions

Why do I need it?

What better way to sell safety programs than to show management how much an injury or death can cost a company. Using WISQARS you can calculate the cost of an incident and project how the impact will affect your company or organization.

We are always looking to tools to help increase our safety budget and have better programs. Now you can add WISQARS to your toolkit.

In a recent letter to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) on the proposed “Walking-Working Surfaces and Personal Protective Equipment” rule (29 CFR, Part 1910), the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) urged OSHA to utilize existing fall standards and the voluntary consensus standards process widely used in industry as it develops the new rule.

Speeding is one of the primary factors leading to vehicle crashes. In 2008, 31% of all fatal crashes were speeding-related. The estimated economic cost to society for speeding related crashes is $40.4 billion per year.

Driving at higher speeds reduces the ability of drivers to avoid obstacles or react to sudden changes in the roadway environment and increases crash severity. The pervasiveness of speeding behavior is reflected in a recent national survey that showed that approximately 75% of all drivers reported speeding in the past month. Since most drivers often do not see speeding as risky or dangerous behavior, it is imperative that

NHTSA gain a better understanding of the motivations for speeding behaviors in order to develop and refine effective interventions and countermeasures.

NHTSA proposes to conduct follow-up focus groups with 72 participants from an earlier on-road instrumented vehicle data collection conducted in Seattle, WA and College Station, TX.

Focus group recruitment will be based on participants’ speeding patterns in the on-road data. The focus groups will contribute to a better understanding of speeding and speeders, a more accurate taxonomy of high/low speed driver subgroups, and a better understanding of the motives, attitudes and habits of these subgroups. The focus groups will explore speed choices and speeding behaviors and the factors that influence them, beliefs and attitudes toward speeding, reactions to and discussions about specific driving scenarios, and individual/group responses to various speeding countermeasures. The focus groups are expected to provide data relevant to descriptions of key motivations, attitudes, normative commitment to law, driving habits relevant to speeding and speeding

countermeasures; descriptions of countermeasures with the greatest likely benefits; implementation issues and concerns associated with the countermeasures; and key advantages and disadvantages associated with various countermeasures.

Affected Public: NHTSA plans to conduct six focus group sessions, three in Seattle, WA and three in College Station, TX. Each focus group will consist of 8–12 participants and last approximately 80 minutes. Participants will be recruited by e-mail or telephone based on their driving behaviors in the earlier on-road phase of the study and their demographic characteristics. Participation by all respondents would be voluntary and confidential.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: The total estimated annual burden is between 64 and 96 hours, depending on the number of participants (range 8–12) in each group. The respondents would not incur any reporting cost from the information collection. The respondents also would not incur any record keeping burden or record keeping cost from the information collection.

Comments are invited on the following:

(i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(ii) The accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection;

(iii) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(iv) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication.

OSHA publishes proposed rulemaking to prevent injuries from slips, trips and falls on walking-working surfaces

OSHA Release: OSHA has announced in a notice of proposed rulemaking published in yesterday’s Federal Register its plans to require improved worker protection from tripping, slipping and falling hazards on walking and working surfaces. A public hearing on the revised changes will be held after the public comment period for the NPRM.

“This proposal addresses workplace hazards that are a leading cause of work related injuries and deaths,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels.

The NPRM describes revisions to the Walking-Working Surfaces and Personal Protective Equipment standards to help prevent an estimated annual 20 workplace fatalities and more than 3,500 injuries serious enough to cause people to miss work. For example, in July 2009, a worker at a chocolate processing plant was killed after falling from an unguarded work platform.

“This is a clear and grave example of the human cost incurred when fall protection safeguards are absent, ignored or inadequate,” said Michaels. “The loss of a worker’s life might have been prevented if the protective measures in these revised standards had been in place and in use.”

The current walking-working surfaces regulations allow employers to provide outdated and dangerous fall protection equipment such as lanyards and body belts that can result in workers suffering greater injury from falls. Construction and maritime workers already receive safer, more effective fall protection devices such as self-retracting lanyards and ladder safety and rope descent systems, which these proposed revisions would also require for general industry workers.

The current walking-working surfaces standards also do not allow OSHA to fine employers who let workers climb certain ladders without fall protection. Under the revised standards, this restriction would be lifted in virtually all industries, allowing OSHA inspectors to fine employers who jeopardize their workers’ safety and lives by climbing these ladders without proper fall protection

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.

Hepatitis B Vaccination and Post-Exposure Follow-Up Procedures

Q. Who must be offered the hepatitis B vaccination?

A. The hepatitis B vaccination series must be made available to all employees who have occupational exposure. The employer does not have to make the hepatitis B vaccination available to employees who have previously received the vaccination series, who are already immune as their antibody tests reveal, or who are prohibited from receiving the vaccine for medical reasons.

Q. When should the hepatitis B vaccination be offered to employees?

A. The hepatitis B vaccination must be made available within 10 working days of initial assignment, after appropriate training has been completed. This includes arranging for the administration of the first dose of the series. In addition, see page 17 for vaccination of designated first aiders.

Q. Can pre-screening be required for hepatitis B titer? Post-screening?

A. No. The employer cannot require an employee to take a pre-screening or post-vaccination serological test. An employer may, however, decide to make pre-screening available at no cost to the employee. Routine post-vaccination serological testing is not currently recommended by the CDC unless an employee has had an exposure incident, and then it is also to be offered at no cost to the employee.

Q. If an employee declines the hepatitis B vaccination, can the employer make up a declination form?

A. If an employee declines the hepatitis B vaccination, the employer must ensure that the employee signs a hepatitis B vaccination declination. The declination’s wording must be identical to that found in Appendix A of the standard. A photocopy of the Appendix may be used as a declination form, or the words can be typed or written onto a separate document.

Q. Can employees refuse the vaccination?

A. Employees have the right to refuse the hepatitis B vaccine and/or any post-exposure evaluation and follow-up. Is important to note, however, that the employee needs to be properly informed of the benefits of the vaccination and post-exposure evaluation through training. The employee also has the right to decide to take the vaccination at a later date if he or she so chooses. The employer must make the vaccination available at that time.

Q. Can the hepatitis B vaccination be made a condition of employment?

A. OSHA does not have jurisdiction over the issue.

Q. Is a routine booster does of hepatitis B vaccine required?

A. Because the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) does not recommend routine booster doses of hepatitis B vaccine, they are not required at this time. However, if a routine booster dose of hepatitis B vaccine is recommended by the USPHS at a future date, such booster doses must be made available at no cost to those eligible employees with occupational exposure.

Q. Whose responsibility is it to pay for the hepatitis B vaccine?

A. The responsibility lies with the employer to make the hepatitis B vaccine and vaccination, including post-exposure evaluation and follow-up, available at no cost to the employees.

Q. What information must the employer provide to the healthcare professional following an exposure incident?

A. The healthcare professional must be provided with a copy of the standard, as well as the following information:

•A description of the employee’s duties as they relate to the exposure incident;

•Documentation of the route(s) and circumstances of the exposure;

•The results of the source individual’s blood testing, if available; and

•All medical records relevant to the appropriate treatment of the employee, including vaccination status, which are the employer’s responsibility to maintain.

Q. What serological testing must be done on the source individual?

A. The employer must identify and document the source individual if know, unless the employer can establish that identification is not feasible or is prohibited by state or local law. The source individual’s blood must be tested as soon as feasible, after consent is obtained, in order to determine HIV and HBV infectivity. The information on the source individual’s HIV and HBV testing must be provided to the evaluating healthcare professional. Also, the results of the testing must be provided to the exposed employee. The exposed employee must be informed of applicable laws and regulations concerning disclosure of the identity and infectious status of the source individual.

Q. What if consent cannot be obtained from the source individual?

A. If consent cannot be obtained and is required by state law, the employer must document in writing that consent cannot be obtained. When the source individual’s consent is not required by law, the source individual’s blood if available shall be tested and the results documented.

Q. When is the exposed employee’s blood tested?

A. After consent is obtained, the exposed employee’s blood is collected and tested as soon as feasible for HIV and HBV serological status. If the employee consents to the follow-up evaluation after an exposure incident, but does not give consent for HIV serological testing, the blood sample must be preserved for 90 days. If, within 90 days of the exposure incident, the employee elects to have the baseline sample tested for HIV, testing must be done as soon as feasible.

Q. What information does the healthcare professional provide to the employer following an exposure incident?

A. The employer must obtain and provide to the employee a copy of the evaluating healthcare professional’s written opinion within 15 days of completion of the evaluation. The healthcare professional’s written opinion for hepatitis B is limited to whether hepatitis B vaccination is indicated and if the employee received the vaccination. The written opinion for post-exposure evaluation must include information that the employee has been informed of the results of the evaluation and told about any medical conditions resulting from exposure that may further require evaluation and treatment. All other findings or diagnoses must be kept confidential and not included in the written report.

Q. What type of counseling is required following an exposure incident?

A. The standard requires that post-exposure counseling be given to employees following an exposure incident. Counseling should include USPHS recommendations for prevention of HIV. These recommendations include refraining from blood, semen, or organ donation; abstaining from sexual intercourse or using measures to prevent HIV transmission during sexual intercourse; and refraining from breast feeding infants during the follow-up period. In addition, counseling must be made available regardless of the employee’s decision to accept serological testing.

Q. What information about exposure incidents is recorded on the OSHA 300 Log?

Revision 10/02 A. All work-related needlestick injuries and cuts from sharp objects that are contaminated with another person’s blood or other potentially infectious materials must be recorded. Enter the case on the 300 Log as an injury. To protect the employee’s privacy, do not enter the employee’s name. Enter the case on the sharps injury log or enter comparable data on the OSHA 300 Log.

Recently, I have been speaking to various groups about distracted driving.  While speaking at the Chicagoland Safety & Health Conference someone told and sent me the link to this video Teens Texting.

We know that more employees die and are injured from traffic accidents than any other type of incidents.  Distracted driving is done all the time.  The next time you are driving just look at the car next to you.  Within minutes you are bound to see someone either:

• Talking on a cell phone
• Eating/drinking
• Reading
• Putting on makeup
• Shaving
• One of many other things other than just driving

Also, if you have teenagers or someone about to drive you might want to watch this.  There are some graphic scenes, but the point is well done.  17 states have made laws to prohibit texting while driving, and there is a bill in front of congress.  Lastly, a recent study showed that talking on cell phone (regular or hand-free) reduces your reaction time to the same as if your blood alcohol rate is 0.8, or the accepted rate for DUI in almost every state in the US.