OSHA & Ergonomics - An Update

As most of the readership is aware the original OSHA Ergonomic Rules were rescinded by the US Congress (Senate Joint Resolution 6) in 2001. Since this time there have been changes to the approach and methods proposed by OSHA in their effort to decrease the costs associated with Musculoskeletal Disorders in the workplace. The results of this are now being noted in the release of the Draft Ergonomic Guidelines for the Poultry Processing Industry; Draft Guidelines for Retail Grocery Stores; and the Ergonomic Guidelines for Nursing Homes. These three areas have been targeted by OSHA as they tend to be industries which realize a great deal of cost associated with MSD's.

Although these guidelines originate in the US, given the number of companies in Canada who are US based or owned it is important for the Canadian HR and OH&S Professional to be aware of the OSHA Draft Guidelines as it relates to your workplace. These guidelines and changes should form part of your company's ergonomic program including the development of internal and national ergonomic guidelines.

It is important to commence this article with some clarification of definitions. OSHA refers to the word "Rules" - in my previous article I described the difference between Standards and Guidelines - the term "Rules" is interchangeable with "Standards" for the sake of this article. And it is for this reason that I believe the original OSHA Rules were not permitted by Congress to pass. That being, the science of ergonomics is not able to clearly show a cause and effect relationship between job demands, poor design and MSD's and MSI's. The relationship is fuzzy at best given the long list of personal, psychosocial, physical and health causes for the development of MSD's and MSI's. The workplace is only one factor and even OSHA is acknowledging that "MSD's can and do develop outside of the workplace" Ergonomic FAQ's 6/21/03.

OHSA's current approach includes their "Effective Ergonomic Strategy for Success". This is comprised of a four-pronged comprehensive approach to ergonomics. The four segments include:

• Guidelines
• Enforcement
• National Advisory Committee
• Outreach and Assistance

The most important part of this approach at this point in time is the use of guidelines versus Rules or standards - some of the reasons OSHA states for not bringing Rules back to Congress includes:

• There are a variety of hazards and combinations of hazards that need to be addressed as part of an ergonomic assessment
• Exposure to ergonomic hazards is not always easy to quantify
• The cost and feasibility for hazard control and elimination is often uncertain and high for some employers
• It is difficult to prescribe "remedies" to control and eliminate hazards within the context of one single rule

From these four statements it would seem that OSHA has listened to the groups of people who had taken issues with the Rules in the first place. At the end of the day these and other considerations really make it difficult for OSHA, or for that matter the Ministry's of Labour or the Compensation Boards in Canada to ask employers to be in compliance with rules or standards that are broadly applied and not always based on the best research or evidence.

Now that this part of the argument has passed OSHA has moved toward the development of industry and task specific guidelines. These are easier to develop and can be more flexible in their application. Guidelines are the most realistic method for approaching ergonomic problems ion the workplace - and as you know from reading this column OPC Inc has been talking about this approach for many years now and applies this in its own day to day practices.

The four pronged comprehensive approach which comprises OHSA's overall strategy to reduce MSD and MSI's are outlined more fully here:

Guidelines

• OSHA has developed four Draft Ergonomic Guidelines, which are industry specific. These industries were targeted based on current incident rates. Some of these guidelines are based on the Meatpacking Guidelines issued in 1990 by OSHA.
• OSHA is then going to encourage other industries to develop ergonomic guidelines to meet their specific needs. It may be of interest to employers in Canda that we (OPC Inc) are currently working with the compensation board in BC along with a large BC based employer to develop guideliens specific to the transportation industry. This is a great example of private industry, consultants and the compensation boards working together to develop guidelines and solutions to their ergonomic problems.
• OHSA's goal is to have industry implement measures as quickly as possible to reduce MSI's and MSD's. These first four guidelines are to be used in the next 6 months.

Enforcement

• OSHA is letting employers know their primary goal is to reduce MSI's and MSD's in the workplace
• Employers are obligated to ensure their workplaces are free from recognized hazards under the OSH Act General Duty Clause - this includes ergonomic hazards
• OSHA is not going to focus enforcement activities on employers who have implemented effective ergonomic programs
• OSHA is going to conduct inspections and issue citations under the General Duty Clause and will issue ergonomic hazard alert letters. A follow up will occur within 12 months of an employer receiving the Alert Letter.

Outreach and Assistance

• OSHA is going to provide businesses with assistance to help them address ergonomic issues in the workplace. This may include advice and training on the guidelines.
• OSHA is going to develop a complete set of compliance assurance tools including Internet based training and information.
• OSHA is going to focus on developing partnerships to implement and highlight the value of the guidelines to employers.
• OSHA will be developing recognition programs to highlight employers who have exemplary approaches to ergonomics

Research

• There already exists a large body of research on the topic of ergonomics. OSHA intends to build upon this by noting where gaps exist - the National Academy of Science will identify these gaps. OSHA is going to encourage researchers to design studies where these gaps exist.
• OSHA is going to charter an advisory committee that will identify gaps in research related to ergonomics and ergonomics in the workplace.
• OSHA will be working closely with NIOSH to encourage research in the areas identified as having gaps.

For those of you who followed the lead up to the release of the Ergonomic Rules and the ensuing discussions, papers and arguments for and against the use of Rules, you will note a major shift in methodology and approach to ergonomics in the workplace on the part of OSHA.

As I have stated before in previous articles - MSI's and MSD's arise for a myriad of reasons. Ergonomics is not a science in the way that Occupational Hygiene is - in the sense that we are not at a point where we can state that "so many parts per million of exposure to a hazard will result in a specific injury or illness". In my experience and opinion the best route and the most effective is to work closely with compensation boards, employers and unions as well as consultants and research experts to provide employers and unions with appropriate and well researched guidelines.

Of course THE best method still seems to be educating employers about the cost savings associated with good design and the application of these guidelines at all points in the process. This always motivates employers to move forward in the development of ergonomic processes and design, which positively impacts all stakeholders. After all money does talk!