Welcome to the August 2010 OH&S Newsletter
In this issue we look at - Managing change & iPad posture; Eye protection; Carpal tunnel; Proaction; Product safety; Waste; Cacti; BP; Non- compliance human factors; Bladder cancer; Miner’s jail sentence cancer; Sitting link & Designer's fine.
The challenge of managing change in preventing fatalities not just talking about it!
A SA court has found that BHP Billiton's (BHPB) decision to alter the order of a written work system meant "incompatible" tasks were performed simultaneously with 
fatal results & fined the employer $76,000. In 2007, a BHPB Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd employee was killed while working inside a humidifier during a routine smelter shutdown. According to BHP's shutdown plan, water spray nozzles were required to be removed by a crane crew from the roof of the humidifier before repairs were carried out below. On the day of the incident however the crane was delayed & management changed the order. When the crane crew eventually arrived, they were informed the repairs had been undertaken, & began to remove the nozzles. However, a worker had returned to the humidifier to clean the floor, & was killed when one of the nozzles as it was while being raised by the crane became jammed & broke with a piece falling 14 m & fatally striking the worker on the head.
BHPB was subsequently charged with & pleaded guilty to breaching the State OHS Act. Before the Industrial Magistrate, the employer pointed to its "absolute commitment" to safety. Leaders attended safety meetings on a daily basis & spent at least 6 hrs/wk in the field talking to workers about safety. The court accepted the employer had a comprehensive safety system, & had documented the risk of items falling from the roof. Had it adhered to its own work instruction however, the incident would not have occurred. Safety depended on the system being followed & no account was made for any change. The court noted the employer had since developed a task hazard analysis which addressed the specific problem of simultaneous operations, & installed a system of gates to limit access to various raceways, thereby "physically preventing" workers carrying out work in "incompatible spaces". Could this not have been done prior to the incident? How well would you have identified such a risk? Would your permit system have protected you?
iPads- creators of poor posture?
Experts are suggesting that although Apple's new iPad device looks so good you could imagine using it for hours on end, doing so might not be so great for your body. These lightweight, mobile computers (like laptops, net & notebooks) give users’ unrestrained access to the internet anytime anywhere, but many of them suffer from an inherent design flaw, namely the "co-location" of the keyboard & monitor, said Anthony Andre, a professor of Human Factors at San Jose State University.
The posture many of us assume when working on a laptop (LT) or other mobile device can put a strain on our bodies. This position typically involves sitting hunched over, with rounded shoulders, device on lap, & arms held close to the body in the "airport posture." The thinner & more mobile the device, the worse it is, because you end up in more situations where you normally wouldn't even use a LT. So the negative side to mobility & the thin tablet is that you end up in more places with it & you take it out more often than you maybe would a laptop. The iPad includes a bigger version of the virtual keyboard used in Apple's iPhone, but typing on the iPad's glass display might not prove as comfortable as on the iPhone. Andre suggests that with the phone, you can bring it up to your face, but with the iPad you have to put it on your lap if you're going to do some serious 2 handed typing. Once you do that however, you have a little flat disk on your lap which is the opposite off the computer workstation set up with articulating keyboard trays that try to put you in a good posture. Apple does sell keyboards that work with the iPad, however Andre suggests that the majority of people who use the iPad won't use these accessories.
David Rempel, a physician at the University of California, is seeing much LT related pain in his consulting work, also worries about the iPad's ergonomics. He again suggests that while the iPad creates great mobility, it poses a similar type of musculoskeletal problems as the LT These include placing a heavy load on a user's neck & upper back, causing fatigue & pain. He reports that large U.S. based companies that shifted their workforce away from desktops to LT’s to increase productivity have found their workers suffered from more neck & back problems. If you have to be mobile here are a few suggestions for minimizing the burden on your body: Reduce time of use-, 1 hour/day is not a problem; 8 hours is. Minimize the amount of time you spend on it in a given instance & take frequent micro-breaks- do something opposite with your body; stretch neck & arms in opposite direction!
Why your eye protection has to be the right type!
A 25 year old man left with an injured tear duct & needs to permanently treat his eye with lubricating drops after acid entered his right eye at work. He was injured at Omya UK Ltd while moving a drum of liquid acid with a colleague. As they tried to get the cap off the drum, acid splashed into his face, entered his mouth & his right eye. He was wearing prescription safety glasses which weren't sealed but had guards on the side. His lawyer suggests that Omya UK failed to provide a safe container for the acid & had failed to provide proper fitting goggles for the job. After court proceedings were issued the case settled for £10,000.
Carpal tunnel risk related to exposure duration!
In 50 female workers of a manufacturing plant employed on the assembly line of metal and plastic products with cloth covering, we found a high prevalence of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome -CTS(16 cases, 32%, 5 of whom had already undergone surgical treatment). The subjects with positive diagnosis of CTS also had a longer occupational exposure to repetitive movements, compared to the other subjects. Among the subjects with this disorder, the length of exposure was also significantly associated with the reported symptoms and the extension threshold measured on the 2nd finger of the dominant hand. Ergonomic assessment of the assembly lines revealed high- frequency repetitive movements & application of force, with insufficient rest intervals.
Focus on prevention not response saved money
Australian Air Express (AAE) has reversed a workplace culture that was more concerned with responding to OHS incidents than preventing them, & saved millions of dollars in the process, according to their GM of safety, Dominic Andreachhio. In the 1990s AAE was faced with an ageing workforce & escalating compensation claims, but had a " offhand " attitude towards safety. The approach was, "just budget for it" & pay "along the way" with an emphasis on the quick response.
In 1998/99 the employer had 117 compensation claims, costing a total of $2.2 million, & an LTIFR of 104. In order to meet stringent licensing requirements (to become a Commonwealth self-insurer), the AAE needed to shift its focus from treatment to prevention. Linking safety outcomes to the bottom line, made it an integral part of the board's decision making processes. Their move to include OHS targets in senior executives' KPIs was a "turning point". They also engaged external consultants to train everyone & appointed an EHS coordinator in each state. An early intervention program ensured workers experiencing aches & pains received physiotherapy & were given the option of job rotation, & a "stretch express" program which saw those from the factory floor to those in the corporate office stretching "like elite athletes" on a daily basis.
The employer also invested in new "state-of-the-art" manual handling systems, made OHS an "integral" consideration in the design of new distribution centres, and introduced a suite of workplace policies encouraging workers to report incidents and hazards and be proactive about OHS. Subsequent employee surveys have shown that workers, who once thought their employer wouldn't even "spend a dollar to change a light globe", now commend its commitment to safety. In the last 10 years, claims have been "trending down" by 72% and the company has saved an estimated $15.9 million in direct costs.
Outsourcing may lead to product safety issues!
In tough economic times, many companies slash staff & outsource, yet that may doom their products due top loss of control over critical components contributing to failure, according to Prof Bigelow, of the Utah University’s David Eccles School of Business. Her latest study on product in-house manufacture, analysed product performance in more than 100 U.S. auto manufacturers during the years 1917 to 1931, in order to study the industry’s shift from innovation to production efficiency.
In a previous study, she found that companies were more likely to fail when they outsourced components critical to their competitive position with statistically significant increases in the failure rate for firms that didn’t consider transaction costs in their outsourcing decisions as they need to consider poor quality, delivery delays & risk of price increases by suppliers. This work showed that failure rate (either firm bankruptcy or liquidation) increased between 5% & 70% more than companies that did not outsource, depending on the risk associated with making technological changes, the product type & the company’s market share. The current economic environment is similar to the period studied in that it is highly competitive & is forcing firms to focus on reducing costs while maintaining value to customers.
Two modern examples cited were Toyota & Boeing. For Toyota, those specialised components were the electrical system & the accelerator which required 8.5 million vehicle recalls due to problems with floor mat interference & a sticky accelerator pedal. The company recently announced the recall of another 412,000 cars for steering problems. All this in an environment where the company vision was to overtake GM as quickly as possible For Boeing, the interconnections among the Dreamliner’s wings, fuselage, engines & software were crucial. In a bid to reduce production costs & increase aircraft interest among foreign nations, Boeing outsourced more than 70%. The outsourcing savings in components were more than offset by the increased re-design costs & expensive delays. Is outsourcing affecting your products with an increase in potential law suits from product safety issues?
How well do you manage your waste?
The Health Protection Agency has been fined £25,000 ( £20,166 in costs) for a spillage of the deadly bacterium E.coli 0157 at its centre in Colindale, north London. Three employees were put at risk of contamination although nobody was infected, the Old Bailey heard. Prosecutors described a "general complacency" about the way infectious waste was handled at the Colindale centre. Judge Stephens said the agency should feel "acute embarrassment" over its failings. The bug was being carried in bins which had defects, even though these faults had been noted 18 months earlier. Between 100ml & 200ml of liquid was spilt, containing up to 10bn E.coli organisms. E. coli O157 is a highly infectious & potentially deadly bacterium. In the US, new rules on biotech safety are under consideration after a series of incidents including a US Agriculture Department scientist who spent a month in a coma after being infected by the E. coli bacteria being used in experiments conducted by her colleagues.
Do you have cacti at your workplace or at home?
Beware- a worker was hospitalised & suffered long- term eye damage after being squirted with cactus juice. The technician working for Ambius, a subsidiary of Rentokil Initial UK Ltd, was working at a Milton Keynes (MK) shopping centre in October 2008, to carry out pruning on several large cacti, one of which had become unstable. After pruning several of the cactus plants he cut into a branch & liquid sap squirted into his right eye & splashed his face, neck & arm, causing a rash. He was taken to MK Hospital & treated for his injuries. Investigators from MK Council found Rentokil Initial UK Ltd had failed to provide adequate information, instruction & training to ensure the safety of its staff carrying out their work. The company pleaded guilty & was fined £12,000 plus costs.
Old story of production vs safety!
A safety culture report of the Deepwater Horizon incident has revealed that workers were concerned about safety practices & fear tactics prior to the oil rig accident that caused 11 fatalities & an environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). The New York Times last month published details of the safety culture report & an equipment assessment commissioned by the rig owner Transocean, following the oil rig explosion. According to the equipment assessment, 26 or more of the rig’s components & systems were in poor condition. Workers who were interviewed & participated in focus groups for the first report expressed a belief that “drilling priorities took precedence over planned maintenance” & that they feared the reaction of managers off the rig if they raised safety concerns. They reported that almost everyone felt they could raise safety concerns & these would be acted upon if this was within the immediate control of the rig however, the workforce felt that this level of influence was restricted to issues that could be resolved directly on the rig, & that they had little influence at Divisional or Corporate levels. Only half those interviewed said they felt they could report actions leading to a potentially ‘risky’ situation without reprisal. The investigators found that most believed that the system for tracking OHS issues was “counterproductive”. They added that workers had added fake data to the system, which distorted Transocean’s perception of rig safety. What happens at your workplace?
Who ends up paying for BP’s oil spill?
If you thought the multibillion dollar costs of destroying refineries & oil rigs (killing workers, ruining livelihoods & wrecking the environment in the process), might have an effect on BP, you may need to consider the comments of US journalist Thom Hartmann: 'It looks like the ironic outcome of the BP mess will come in the form of a truly poetic gesture that involves a middle finger offered by BP's treasurer to British & American taxpayers.' The commentary cites the Financial Times, which reported that 'BP is forecast to pay about $10bn less tax over the next 4 years as it meets the costs of its huge oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, hitting the revenues of Britain & the US that receive hundreds of millions of dollars from the company each year.' Because the laws of both the US & the UK allow companies to deduct from their taxes what are called 'business expenses' which includes cleaning up messes caused by doing business the wrong way, cutting corners & violating safety & environmental laws - 'BP will transfer about a third of all their costs of dealing with the GOM oil disaster away from the company & directly onto the taxpayers of the US & the UK by deducting all these costs from their taxable profits,'. The Financial Times noted: 'Of its principal expected liabilities, only the fines that might be imposed by the US authorities would definitely not be tax- deductible.'
Make sure you can prove non-compliance in the workplace before taking action against them!
A NSW employer has been ordered to withdraw a warning notice issued to a worker for supposed speeding in a front-end loader, after the IRC found there was inadequate proof he had gotten out of second gear where speed was unable to reach over 15 km/hr. In December 2009 a BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd manager observed the front-end loader travelling at what he believed to be a high speed along a wharf, around a corner and across a pedestrian crossing. He issued the driver with a formal written warning, & the Australian Workers' Union, in response, lodged a notification of an industrial dispute. Are your safety warnings always valid?
Human factors considerations by key decisionvery effective in enhancing understanding of process makers (KDM) in high risk industries
Recent research by the UK’s HSE has explored how KDMs are tackling human factors (HF) in process safety, revealing that they are tackling a broad spectrum of issues & to some extent apply a range of recognized HF related techniques. Consultation with workers was frequently cited but there was less use of guidance or standards. Findings suggest that there is much variation in how well HF issues are tackled & some of the reasons do not necessarily relate to the risk priority. These included:
- More or better guidance available on certain topics (alarm handling) in comparison to others (organisational change);
- Discreet topic areas e.g. easily identifiable as a separate entity not impacting directly on other parts of the business (e.g. control room interface design as opposed to staffing levels);
- Tangible topic areas that are easy to evaluate so measurable change of success could be demonstrated (e.g. training & competence);
- “Big bangs drive behaviour” so past incidents have focused attention on a particular issue;
- Clear regulation underpinning (e.g. organisational change in the nuclear sector);
- High profile issues with industry body interest to promulgate knowledge on a particular issue (e.g. safety culture).
The variation in how issues were addressed was also hampered because even though KDMs may know about safety culture surveys they are still not always applying the recommendations emerging from these surveys. They become aware of the HF issues but do not know how to apply HF knowledge effectively to their business.
The direct interaction of the regulator with individual work sites has been undoubtedly effective at influencing decision making. It is also largely welcomed by KDMs. This way of working, however, places a potentially high workload on regulatory inspectors (stretching an already limited resource) & seems a less efficient way of getting change than influencing decision making at a more corporate level through the more senior levels of management. These senior managers have an important role in setting the business agenda & licensing resource but the findings suggest they may get less exposure to HF principles & techniques than other KDMs within an organisation.
The review found repeated reference to the benefits of learning from courses & training, & that the provision of further (more practical & specific support) would help people advance the management of human error. Currently KDMs tend to learn about HF through on the job training or ad hoc attendance of external training courses, rather than through more formal training needs analysis. KDMs also learn about HF & process safety by reviewing investigative reports from high profile accidents, such as the Baker report into the Texas City explosion. Peer review was considered to be safety & HF. KDMs trusted peers & felt the reviewers understood their industry & the issues they faced. There were a number of barriers which were identified as likely to affect the greater uptake of HF in decision making. Some of these were concerned with the nature of the subject area which is difficult to change. Others barriers, however, appear easier to overcome such as: uncertainty about training quality & a perceived lack of practical & comprehensive guidance. Identifying ways to help address these barriers might be one way regulators might usefully help to achieve a greater uptake of HF.
The majority of KDMs indicated a high awareness of HF and overall, it is implicit within the responses that people recognise the need to consider and manage human error & human performance. This is in line with previous research that found that there was significant value placed on HF in controlling the factors that contribute to accidents. A key issue emerging from the findings regards the application of HF. Overall comments made indicating that KDMs want more help to better apply HF to their workplaces. Improving the application of HF would also help better integrate HF into day-to-day management. In the future we need to aim for HF being fully integrated into safety management & applied systematically. How well do your KDn’s understand HF?
Higher risk of bladder cancer in painters
A new study has confirmed that painters are at a significantly increased risk of developing bladder cancer. The research is based on almost 3,000 cases of the disease in professional painters reported in 41 separate studies carried out between the 1950s & 1990s. The large scale 'meta-analysis', found those with more than 10 years as painters were more likely to develop bladder cancer than those who had been doing so for less time. Authors found the risk arises not solely from exposure to paint but to factors that can occur in the work environment such as the stripping of old paintwork, sanding or exposure to asbestos. After taking tobacco use into account, painters were still 30% more likely to develop bladder cancer than the general population. They found that while harmful chemicals like benzene & lead had been reduced or removed from paints in developed countries, it was too soon to say whether new, 'greener' paints would reduce the risk of bladder cancer as the disease takes between 10 - 50 years to develop. Those working in high-risk environments should wear gloves & keep skin covered, wear a mask or respirator, should not to eat in the area & should ensure the buildings were well ventilated.
Guha. N et al: Bladder cancer risk in painters: a meta-analysis, Occ Env Med, 67: 568-673, 2010
Mine worker’s jail sentence!
who had no history of cancer, heart attack, stroke, or A recent Queensland case, in which a worker, & not his employer, was convicted over a mining fatality, has highlighted the role a robust safety management system plays not only in reducing incidents, but protecting companies from prosecution. According to a Sparke Helmore partner it appeared that the worker had defied instructions, going "off on his own", in the lead up to the incident even thought he was trained the worker had chosen to disregard the training. The employer was not charged because "there was an appropriate health & safety management system (HSMS) in place, & the workers who were involved in the incident had been adequately trained in that system. In January 2008 the worker was driving a Volvo loader with a basket-attachment at BHP Billiton's underground Cannington mine, when a colleague was crushed between the basket & the rear of another vehicle, sustaining fatal chest and abdomen injuries.
An investigation found the worker failed to appropriately operate & apply the loader's brakes, and he was charged with breaching the Queensland Mining and Quarrying Safety and Health Act 1999. In the recent Townsville Magistrates Court proceedings, he was convicted & sentenced to eight months' jail (wholly suspended for 15 months), & ordered to pay more than $13,000 in court and investigation costs. So the lesson from this case is to ensure that you have a robust HSMS, document & follow up to ensure your system matches in practice what it says in documentation, make sure employees are trained & understand the system and if employees do the wrong thing take swift & consistent action.
Sitting & cancer
A new study from US Cancer Society researchers published in the American Journal of Epidemiology found that it's not just how much physical activity you get, but how much time you spend sitting that can affect your risk of death. Researchers say time spent sitting was independently associated with total mortality, regardless of physical activity level. They concluded that public health messages should promote both being physically active & reducing time spent sitting.
A growing epidemic of obesity in the US has been attributed in part to reduced overall physical activity. While several studies support a link between sitting time & obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, & unhealthy dietary patterns in children & adults, few studies have examined time spent sitting in relation to total mortality. Public health guidelines focus largely on increasing physical activity with no reference to reducing time spent sitting. To explore the association between sitting time & mortality, researchers analysed survey responses from 123,216 individuals (53,440 men & 69,776 women) emphysema/other lung disease enrolled in the American Cancer Society's Cancer Prevention II study in 1992. They examined the amount of time spent sitting & physical activity in relation to mortality between 1993 and 2006. They found that more leisure time spent sitting was associated with higher risk of mortality, particularly in women. Women who reported more than 6 hrs./day of sitting were 37% more likely to die during the time period studied than those who sat fewer than 3 hrs./day. Men who sat more than 6 hrs/day were 18% more likely to die than those who sat fewer than 3 hrs/day. The association remained virtually unchanged after adjusting for physical activity level.
Associations were stronger for CVD mortality than for cancer mortality. When combined with a lack of physical activity, the association was even stronger. Women & men who both sat more & were less physically were 94% & 48% more likely, respectively, to die compared with those who reported sitting the least and being most active. Prolonged time spent sitting, independent of physical activity, has been shown to have important metabolic consequences, and may influence things like triglycerides, high density lipoprotein, cholesterol, fasting plasma glucose, resting blood pressure, & leptin, which are biomarkers of obesity and cardiovascular & other chronic diseases." The authors conclude that "public health messages & guidelines should be refined to include reducing time spent sitting in addition to promoting physical activity. Because a sizeable fraction of the population spends much of their time sitting, it is beneficial to encourage sedentary individuals to stand up and walk around in addition to other physical activity."
Patel, A et al: "Leisure Time Spent Sitting in Relation to Total Mortality in a Prospective Cohort of US Adults." Am J Epid July 22, 2010
UK designers partially responsible for fatality
An architects' practice & a construction company involved in a Somerset development have been fined a total of £195,000 following a site fatality. Express Park Construction Company Ltd (EPCC), pleaded guilty to failing to safely manage subcontractors working for it. Oxford Architects Partnership pleaded guilty to breaches of the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 1994, which require designers to take safety considerations into account. EPCC was fined £75,000( £68,000costs)&OxfordA r c h i t e c t s Partnership was fined £120,000 ( £60,000 costs) at Bristol Crown Court. The court heard that on 26 January 2005 David Cairns, 64, was working for EPCC subcontractor H&F Air Conditioning Limited. He was working on the air conditioning plant, which was built on a platform accessed via a ladder at the edge of a flat roof. The roof only had a low parapet, which was not high enough to prevent Mr Cairns falling 9 m.
Written by Julie Armour