NC State of Business

I recently learned some staggering statistics.

• In 2007, 400 workers in the US manufacturing industry lost their lives on the job. The leading causes of these fatalities were contact with objects and equipment, transportation incidents, and falls.

• During the same year, 783,100 non-fatal occupational injuries and illnesses occurred, with more than half requiring days away from work, job transfer, or job restriction. The leading causes of these incidents were contact with objects and equipment, overexertion and repetitive motion, and falls.

So how do we reduce these hazards in the manufacturing industry? Two federal agencies were created in 1970 by the Occupational Safety and Health Act with the mission of protecting our workers. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was created to set and enforce workplace standards and regulations. The National institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) was established to help assure safe workplace conditions through research, information, education and training.

NIOSH has established the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) for specific sectors of industry, including the manufacturing sector, to move research results into practice to reduce work-related injury, illness and death. The Manufacturing Sector Council has established 10 preliminary strategic research goals based on the noted staggering statistics. Of these 10 goals,

• Goal 1: Reduce number of injuries and fatalities due to contact with objects and equipment
• Goal 2: Reduce number of injuries and fatalities resulting from falls

How can we get the wonderful research that NIOSH has conducted into the workplace to truly make a difference in the lives of American workers? I’m interested in hearing your thoughts.

What do Mobile Home Manufacturers, Nursing Homes and Marine Cargo Handlers have in common? They, along with 19 other industries, appear on OSHA’s list of industries being targeted for recordkeeping compliance.

In light of several studies suggesting that businesses may be under-reporting workplace injuries and illnesses, OSHA has announced plans to initiate a national emphasis program (NEP) on recordkeeping!In the press release, acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab stated that “accurate and honest recordkeeping is vitally important to workers' health and safety” and indicated that OSHA’s plan involves (1) inspecting occupational injury and illness records prepared by businesses and (2) enforcing regulatory requirements when employers are found to be under-recording injuries and illnesses.

According to the directive released by OSHA, inspections will include a comprehensive records review, employee interviews, and a limited workplace inspection. Records that will be reviewed include medical records, worker’s compensation records, insurance reports, and payroll/absenteeism records. OSHA’s Compliance Officers will use information from these records and interviews with staff to independently construct Form 300 Log entries which will then be compared to the recordable case entries on the employers From 300 Log.

Are you confident of what gets recorded? Consider this: At a company-sponsored Pizza Party celebrating your company’s exemplary safety record, an employee burns the roof of his mouth on the hot cheese! Under OSHA 29 CFR 1904 is this a recordable injury? Submit your answers, thoughts and opinions below.

The famous “Golden Arches” indicate the McDonald’s restaurant, regardless of the country in which you are located. The universal symbol of a cigarette with an X marked through it indicates that smoking is not allowed, regardless of the country. For chemical classification, the symbol for a toxic or flammable chemical may be different in the US than in other countries where chemicals are imported or exported. In fact, within the US we currently are charged with understanding the classification and labeling of hazardous chemicals between various regulatory agencies: Department of Transportation (DOT), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and others.

Enter the Global Harmonization System (GHS), an internationally harmonized approach to classification and labeling of chemicals. This voluntary system provides the foundation for all countries to develop comprehensive national programs to ensure the safe use of chemicals. In other words, a chemical labeled with the words “Highly Flammable”, and a symbol of a flame, has the same meaning in the US as in Italy.

GHS introduces standard elements for chemicals:

• Hazard statement- phrases assigned to hazard categories; e.g. “Harmful if swallowed”
• Pictograms – symbol inside a diamond with a red border; e.g. a skull and crossbone
• Precautionary statement - phrases describing measures to minimize or prevent adverse effects
• Product identifier - Names or numbers used on a hazardous product label or in a safety data sheet
• Signal word - One word used to indicate the relative severity of hazard; e.g. “Warning” or “Danger”
• Supplier Identification - name, address and telephone number of the manufacturer or supplier of the substance

Keep in mind that this system is voluntary, and the US has yet to fully embrace the implementation of GHS. However, in the past week OSHA issued a proposed rule to adopt the Globally Harmonized Hazard Communication System. This is a tremendous step in aligning the OSHA Hazard Communication standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200, with the elements of GHS.

The EPA presents methods for implementation of GHS within their organization.

How does this affect you? If you manufacture, import, and/or export chemicals, you will be classifying and labeling your products according to this international system. Employees that handle or store chemicals will need updated training on the identification of hazardous chemicals in the workplace. And perhaps in the US we can enjoy regulatory agencies that align their definitions of hazardous chemicals.

So often in the past, I have seen companies devote huge amounts of cash, personnel, materials, and other valuable resources on initiatives and strategies without putting forth the upfront work to make sure that all of the effort will yield a bountiful harvest. While I am sure the reasons vary and all appear to be justified, I have always been amazed that so much hinged on so little actual sustenance. I am starting to see a change in this type thinking.

My clients have been much more focused on: what type results they should expect, how they will get the results, what commitment level will be required, and so on. I have always gotten these type questions; but, now I see significantly more focus on the details. This may be one of the few pluses of the current slow economy. Maybe now, leadership is more cost conscience? Maybe it is lack of funds? Whatever it is, folks are asking the right questions.

On your core initiatives, make sure you are asking the right questions. Here are a few that I think need answers:

(1). How and to what extent will this help you? Dig down into the weeds here. Do not just accept that you will benefit. Will this benefit your customers? Your company finances? Your associates?

(2). How much will you have to commit? Time, money, materials, organizational involvement, supplier involvement, customer involvement, etc…

(3). Do you have the expertise to execute the initiative? Can you draw help from other sources in your company? Do you need outside assistance?

(4). Do you have time to make this happen? Most changes do not happen in short periods of time. Avoid running out of gas before you get a successful implementation by making sure you are robust in PDCA.

(5). Will your culture support the initiative in both the short and long term? If not, this will have to be addressed or failure is certainly a likely outcome.

I believe you have to have these and other core questions answered in detail as part of your upfront work. If you do not know where to start or what questions to ask, please call us at IES. We know the questions to ask and can provide real examples and data to support your efforts.

I mean, really? Don’t we have flu season every year?

It appears one difference between seasonal flu and H1N1 is that while many adults have at least some resistance to seasonal flu, this “new” strain of virus leaves many of us at risk. With that in mind, if H1N1 is brought into a workplace there is every reason to believe that many more employees will get sick than with seasonal flu. Uh oh.

How would your business be affected if 30-40% of your workforce were absent for one week while recovering from the flu? Unfortunately for NC businesses, the most recent CDC surveillance reports show our state as having “widespread” H1N1 influenza activity and it is expected to continue rising.

The best time to think through the impact an H1N1 outbreak might have on your operations is now -- before it happens! Does your business continuity plan address significant absenteeism? If yours doesn’t have a page or two devoted to managing pandemic flu, consider these questions:

• Are there things you could do today to assist employees with preventing infection?

• If schools and day cares closed, how would your workforce be affected?

• If the virus spread throughout your workforce how could operations be maintained?

• What can you do to mitigate adverse impact up and down the supply chain?

Check out more information on how your business can prepare for pandemic flu at www.flu.gov.