Tag: repetitive stress injury

Ignoring Ergonomics Exacts High Financial Toll

In our last post, we noted that Michigan has proposed regulations that would mandate ergonomic training and penalize employers for ignoring repetitive-stress injuries. While cognizant of the health and safety benefits to their workers, employers are understandably concerned about the cost. What they may fail to realize is that the cost of implementing and maintaining an ergonomic program pales in comparison to the exorbitant costs of ignoring ergonomics.

The annual price tag for workplace injury and illness is estimated at $171 billion. Back injuries, tendonitis, carpal tunnel syndrome and other repetitive-stress injuries result in decreased productivity, poor product quality, increased medical costs, higher insurance payments, inflated workers’ compensation costs, low morale and high absenteeism. According to an American Medical Association study, 6,500 people die from workplace injuries each year and non-fatal injuries afflict another 13.2 million. The total cost of workplace injuries is nearly equal to the combined annual profits of America’s 20 largest companies.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg! Workers’ compensation claims cost U.S. businesses $60 billion annually, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. More than 25% of those claims are for back injuries from repetitive lifting, pulling, pushing and straining, reports the National Council on Compensation Insurance. Back injuries, which involve lengthy and costly treatment, affect more than 1.75 million workers each year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. OSHA estimates that 1 in 5 disabling worker injuries is a back injury. Back injuries alone cost American businesses more than $12 million in lost workdays and $1 billion in compensation costs each year. The estimated time-lost cost for a single injury is $26,000.

Numerous studies have proved that ergonomically-designed equipment and systems can significantly decrease worker injury. Many manual tasks necessary during the handling of materials require repetitive motions — pushing, pulling, bending, lifting and carrying — that place undue strain on the human body. These actions can result in sprains, strains, back pain and other musculoskeletal injuries.

Installing ergonomically designed pushers, pullers and carts can save thousands of dollars a year in decreased medical, insurance and disability costs resulting from repetitive-stress musculoskeletal injuries. Implementing ergonomic practices in the workplace can improve worker morale considerably while increasing efficiency and productivity significantly. Retraining staff to utilize recognized ergonomic practices generally produces an immediate savings in reduced worker injuries and associated medical costs.

DJ Products specializes in providing affordable ergonomic solutions to material handling applications. Our highly trained staff can assist you in assessing your material handling needs and design ergonomic solutions tailored to the specific needs of your business.  For more information, visit the DJ Products website.

Does Obama Have Muscle to Win Ergonomics Fight?

Like actor Mickey Rourke’s amazing return to the Hollywood ring in The Wrestler, labor is back; and President Obama is in its corner cheering its revival. After eight years struggling on the ropes during the Bush administration, labor has bounced back into the Washington ring and is gaining strength — and it’s bringing the ergonomics fight with it.

“I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem; to me it’s part of the solution,” President Obama was widely quoted as saying recently. During his campaign, Obama repeatedly promised American workers a safer, healthier work environment. Industry watchers have taken that to mean a return to and an expansion of the ergonomic standards initiated during the Clinton administration but quickly rescinded under Bush. With a Democratic-controlled Congress backing him up, Obama appears to have the muscle to force ergonomics back into the legislative ring.

By naming California Democratic Representative Hilda Solis as his new Labor Secretary, Obama appears to be saying to U.S. industry and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a long-time vocal foe of ergonomics legislation, “Bring it on!” Although she’s still running the confirmation gauntlet, Solis has received the recommendation of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and is expected to be confirmed, possibly as soon as tomorrow.

The daughter of immigrants and union workers, Solis has long ties to labor groups and has been a champion of ergonomics in the workplace since joining the House of Representatives in 2001. Her home state of California is the only state in the U.S. that mandates ergonomic standards that force employers to provide a safe and healthy work environment for their workers. Concerned about the cost of implementing ergonomic standards, those opposed to ergonomic legislation fear that California’s tough ergonomics rules will be used to create a national model.

That Obama would eventually grapple with ergonomics to improve labor conditions has been a given since his campaign days. But there’s been a lot of speculation in the industry and in Washington about how and when Obama would try to take down ergonomic opponents. By calling Solis into his corner, Obama seems to be getting ready to enter the ring. It will be interesting to listen to the President’s State of the Union speech tomorrow night. A direct statement about ergonomics or workplace safety could indicate that the fight is on!

Ergonomics Opponents Girding for Battle

California Democratic Representative Hilda Solis was confirmed yesterday as President Obama’s Secretary of Labor by a Senate vote of 80-17. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is already said to be marshalling its forces. With a very pro-labor Solis at the helm, the chamber is anticipating a pitched battle over reinstatement — and probably toughening and expansion — of ergonomics laws instituted under Clinton but quickly wiped off the books by Bush.

Solis hails from California, the only state with ergonomics laws that have any bite to them — though Michigan is struggling to pass similar measures. California forces employers into compliance when workplace practices are found wanting. Business leaders and chamber executives fear that Solis will use the tough California model to craft national laws mandating ergonomic practices. Solis has been a persistent champion of labor rights and national ergonomics laws since her election to the U.S. House in 2001.

Solis can expect to have the President’s backing. On the campaign trail last year, Obama discussed the need to address musculoskeletal injuries, telling the Charlotte Observer that OSHA “must attack this problem with all of the tools at its disposal — regulations, enforcement, training and compliance assistance.” He is expected to reverse the Bush administration’s stance on national ergonomic standards.

The chamber considers national ergonomics standards to be “the mother of all regulations,” charging that they would cost businesses millions of dollars, which they call unconscionable at any time, but particularly given the current economy. In stumping against ergonomics regulations, the Chamber cites not only prohibitive expense, but suggests potential for substantial abuse. Opponents of ergonomics laws fear that businesses will be held legally liable for employee musculoskeletal and repetitive motion injuries that happen off the job.

“Let’s fact it: We all go through things in our lives as simple as bad sleeping habits or exercise or recreational activities that would cause our bodies to feel discomfort,” Mare Freedman, director of labor law policy for the chamber told Rob Hotakainen, a reporter with McClatchy Newspapers.

Supporters of national ergonomics laws cite rising health care costs and continuing workplace hazards that take a serious toll on U.S. workers as compelling reasons for instituting national ergonomics standards. Freedman said the chamber doesn’t dispute that providing a safe and healthy workplace is good business practice; however, the group thinks efforts should be voluntary, not mandated. Supporters of ergonomics, charge that many employers won’t act unless forced.