The First Facility Management Blog

For the protection of frontline healthcare and emergency medical workers at high risk of infection, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a compliance directive to ensure uniform procedures when conducting inspections to identify and minimize or eliminate high to very high risk occupational exposures to the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus.

The directive closely follows the Centers for Disease Control’s guidance.

“OSHA has a responsibility to ensure that the more than nine million frontline healthcare workers in the United States are protected to the extent possible against exposure to the virus,” said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. “OSHA will ensure healthcare employers use proper controls to protect all workers, particularly those who are at high or very high risk of exposure.”

In response to complaints, OSHA inspectors will ensure that healthcare employers implement a hierarchy of controls and encourage vaccination and other work practices recommended by the CDC. Where respirators are required to be used, the OSHA Respiratory Protection standard must be followed, including worker training and fit testing. The directive also applies to institutional settings where some workers may have similar exposures, such as schools and correctional facilities.

The CDC recommends the use of respiratory protection that is at least as protective as a fit tested disposable N95 respirator for healthcare personnel who are in close contact (within 6′) with patients who have suspected or confirmed 2009 H1N1 influenza. Where respirators are not commercially available, an employer will be considered to be in compliance if the employer can show a good faith effort has been made to acquire respirators.

Where OSHA inspectors determine that a facility has not violated any OSHA requirements but that additional measures could enhance the protection of employees, OSHA may provide the employer with a hazard alert letter outlining suggested measures to further protect workers.

The 2009 H1N1 influenza is transmitted via direct or indirect person-to-person spreading of infectious droplets passed when an influenza patient coughs, sneezes, talks, or breathes. Transmission occurs when expelled infectious droplets or particles make direct or indirect contact with the mucus membranes of the mouth, nose or eyes of an uninfected person. The OSHA directive and other guidelines show steps to eliminate the hazard.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to promote safe and healthful working conditions for America’s men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, outreach and education.

Safetycare takes the subject of workplace safety very seriously. The organization’s blog and forum is a resource for safety videos, tips, photographs, and relevant news from all over the world. It’s also the source of funny safety, videos, and jokes.

One such item is a video entitled “You and Office Safety.” This description comes from the folks at Safetycare:

“You and Office Safety” is the most hilarious video on office safety you will watch! Made in the 1950s, this film is perfect as an eye catching ice breaker when delivering office safety training. Although the fashions have long gone, and some of the behaviors in the workplace have changed, this program still addresses the following topics which are just as relevant today. It’s easy to consider the office a perfectly safe work environment, and forget about the hazards that can exist. Just because you work in an office, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be concerned for your own health and safety, and that of your colleagues.

Take a look at this gem, which is part of the Safetycare channel on YouTube.

The American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) President C. Christopher Patton, CSP, noted in a letter sent recently to Assistant Secretary for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) David Michaels that ASSE supports the goal of the Hazard Communication proposed rule, a rule that seeks to ensure that the hazards of all chemicals produced or imported are evaluated and communicated to employers and employees. ASSE notes that modifying OSHA’s existing Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) is a step forward in harmonizing chemical hazard communications worldwide and will help U.S. employers compete in the international marketplace as well as increasing work safety.

“Modifying OSHA’s existing HCS to incorporate major portions of the United Nations’ (UN) Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) is necessary to help this nation’s workers deal with the increasingly difficult challenge of understanding the hazards and precautions needed to handle and use chemicals safely in the world marketplace,” Patton wrote. “At the same time, harmonizing hazard communications with GHS will help U.S. employers compete in that marketplace by lessening the burden of conforming with different regulations and by ensuring their products will meet hazard communication requirements in other nations.”

Patton applauded OSHA for its leadership in undertaking the HCS rulemaking and urges every possible step be taken to achieve a final rule as soon as practical.

“However, ASSE is disappointed to see that control banding has been largely ignored in the development of the revised standard,” Patton said.

In June 2005, ASSE published Control Banding and the Future of the HazCom Standard, a position paper that urged OSHA and the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) to consider the use of Control Banding (CB) models in a revised HCS. From the ASSE review of the leading international resources on CB—the HSE/COSHH-Essentials process as well as the International Labor Organization’s Tool Kit—ASSE believes OSHA should update the HCS to incorporate elements of CB.

CB is a technique used to guide the assessment and management of workplace risks. It is a generic technique that determines a control measure (for example dilution ventilation, engineering controls, containment, etc.) based on a range or “band” of hazards (such as skin/eye irritant, very toxic, carcinogenic, etc) and exposures (small, medium, large exposure), according to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). It is an approach that is based on two pillars; the fact that there are a limited number of control approaches, and that many problems have been met and solved before. CB uses the solutions that experts have developed previously to control occupational chemical exposures, and suggesting them to other tasks with similar exposure situations. It is an approach that focuses resources on exposure controls and describes how strictly a risk needs to be managed.

“When this nation is so close to harmonization with GHS, it would be unfortunately short sighted not to take the extra step of incorporating control banding since many of the necessary tools to do so are already included in this rulemaking,” Patton said. “To do so would advance harmonization a significant step further and avoid the need for future rulemaking, which ASSE firmly believes will be necessary as control banding becomes more widely accepted in the international marketplace.”

In his letter, Patton outlined ASSE’s more specific comments concerning issues and questions asked in the rulemaking. Those comments include need and support for the standard; its economic impact and economic feasibility; implementation resources; reducing the impact on small businesses; opposing the exclusion of three physical and health hazard classes and overall hazard classification; label layout; safety data sheets; references—ASSE suggests OSHA reference in the standard a variety of scientific and authoritative references for end users; earlier effective dates; outreach needs; and proposed alternative implementation approaches.

In conclusion, Patton noted, “Harmonizing this nation’s hazard communications with the international marketplace is both a safety and health issue for this nation’s workers and a competitive issue for its employers. Daily, our members experience the reality that we live in a world of commerce that is becoming more and more interconnected. They need the tools to help both the employees and employers with whom they work. To that end, all employers should be required to adopt a revised HCS.”

The U.S. Department of Labor recently announced a broad array of efforts designed to improve the public’s accessibility to its agencies and ensure the department can function more effectively. The work is part of the Obama Administration’s continued commitment to improved accountability, transparency, and service to the American public.

“True progress is not something that happens to people. It happens because of them. And, it all begins with information that can be shared in a timely and effective manner,” said U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. “People deserve to know what their government is doing on their behalf, and what they can do to participate actively in that work. I am proud of the steps we are taking to make that possible, and I look forward to broadening our efforts further.”

Previously, only the Labor Department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration posted worker fatality data on its Web site. Now, the Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration is also systematically publishing employer–specific information about occupational fatalities online and making these data available for easy download. Comprehensive, weekly reports on this topic are now available online. Employers with reported fatalities will have an incentive to take steps to improve safety and prevent future accidents. In addition, responsible employers will be able to use the database to identify dangerous conditions and take precautions.

Other agencies at the department are also making additional information available to the public. The Bureau of Labor Statistics is contributing a vast array of new information, enhancing its already impressive searchable databases. The Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration, meanwhile, recently launched a Web-based competition. It enlists entrepreneurs and technology firms, workforce professionals, and the public to help identify the best online tools to enable America’s job seekers to connect with jobs quickly and easily.

The department’s commitment to enhance participation also extends to the regulatory arena. On Monday, December 7, 2009 the department rolled out its regulatory agenda entirely online. All of the information—including more than eight hours of Web chats with the secretary of labor and other Department of Labor officials—can now be viewed here. The Web page also contains links to resources and testimonials, and it even helps visitors submit comments to specific regulations.

“As a legislator, I always felt it was essential for people to take part in the processes of their government. As a regulator, I feel exactly the same way,” added Solis.

The department also has launched a weekly e-newsletter, which offers readers the latest details in everything from the department’s enforcement and compliance assistance to job openings at its various agencies. Not content with one-way communication, however, the department is also using social media tools to engage the public online—and tapping into the power of crowd sourcing. In fact, the Department of Labor’s presence on Facebook and Twitter is already helping to link knowledge communities together and speeding up the sharing of valuable information among the department, state workforce agencies, a variety of stakeholders and, most importantly, the American public.

For the protection of frontline healthcare and emergency medical workers at high risk of infection, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a compliance directive earlier this week to ensure uniform procedures when conducting inspections to identify and minimize or eliminate high to very high risk occupational exposures to the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus.The directive, which closely follows the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) guidance, is available as a PDF.

“OSHA has a responsibility to ensure that the more than nine million frontline healthcare workers in the United States are protected to the extent possible against exposure to the virus,” said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. “OSHA will ensure healthcare employers use proper controls to protect all workers, particularly those who are at high or very high risk of exposure.”

In response to complaints, OSHA inspectors will ensure that healthcare employers implement a hierarchy of controls, and encourage vaccination and other work practices recommended by the CDC. Where respirators are required to be used, the OSHA Respiratory Protection standard must be followed, including worker training and fit testing. The directive also applies to institutional settings where some workers may have similar exposures, such as schools and correctional facilities.

The CDC recommends the use of respiratory protection that is at least as protective as a fit-tested disposable N95 respirator for healthcare personnel who are in close contact (within six feet) with patients who have suspected or confirmed 2009 H1N1 influenza.

Where respirators are not commercially available, an employer will be considered to be in compliance if the employer can show a good faith effort has been made to acquire respirators.

Where OSHA inspectors determine that a facility has not violated any OSHA requirements but that additional measures could enhance the protection of employees, OSHA may provide the employer with a hazard alert letter outlining suggested measures to protect workers further.

The 2009 H1N1 influenza is transmitted via direct or indirect person-to-person spreading of infectious droplets passed when an influenza patient coughs, sneezes, talks, or breathes. Transmission occurs when expelled infectious droplets or particles make direct or indirect contact with the mucus membranes of the mouth, nose, or eyes of an uninfected person. The OSHA directive and other guidelines show steps to eliminate the hazard.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to promote safe and healthful working conditions for America’s men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, outreach and education.

America’s workers suffer more workplace injury and illness than employers report, and medical professionals are under pressure from employers to misdiagnose and under-treat work related health conditions, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The report confirms what workers and worker advocacy organizations have known for a long time—Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) statistics do not reflect the real risk workers face from workplace hazards.

“The consequences of misdiagnosis, missing medical treatment, and misinformation are real and deadly for America’s working families. Under reporting is not just a technical violation of the law. Resource allocation, from inspections to the targeting of specific hazards, depends on accurate reporting. Injuries and disease that could have been prevented needlessly take a toll in workers’ lives and well being as a result,” according to Eric Frumin, Health and Safety Coordinator for Change to Win.

As the report indicates, the motivation for employer abuse is built into the system. There are few incentives or protections for workers or medical professionals who resist employer intimidation.

For employers, fewer reported injuries often mean fewer OSHA inspections and lower workers compensation costs. For workers, seemingly benign employer sponsored programs to reward work groups with the fewest reported injuries or illnesses are a thinly veiled effort to discourage accurate reporting. And medical professionals report direct pressure from employers to under diagnose or even withhold treatment in order to keep the severity of injuries and illnesses below the reporting threshold.

Most importantly, the report reveals the pervasive level of fear workers have in reporting an injury or illness. More than two-thirds of health professionals observed worker fear in reporting.

“This is an unparalleled abuse of a basic workplace law that is fundamental to the lives and health of America’s working families. Congress should act now on the Protecting America’s Workers Act. The Act would specifically prohibit current under reporting abuses and give OSHA the means to correct the abuses. Workers must also have a voice at work. Too often employers can easily silence workers and suppress their rights. A worker voice means safer workplaces,” said Frumin.

The report was requested by U.S. Sens. Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Patty Murray (D-WA), and U.S. Reps. George Miller (D-CA) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). For a PDF of the report, send an e-mail with the words “GAO/OSHA Injury Report” in the subject line to tfm@groupc.com.

The U.S. Department of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has revealed the preliminary top 10 most frequent workplace safety violations for 2009 as part of a presentation at the NSC’s annual Congress & Expo. The number of top 10 violations has increased almost 30% over the same time period in 2008.

“We appreciate our colleagues at OSHA presenting their new violation data to such a receptive audience,” said National Safety Council President and CEO Janet Froetscher. “The sheer number of violations gives us new resolve in raising awareness about the importance of having sounds safety procedures.”

The workplace violations are:

1. Scaffolding - 9,093 violations
Scaffold accidents most often result from the planking or support giving way, or from the employee slipping or being struck by a falling object.

2. Fall Protection - 6,771 violations
Any time a worker is at a height of four feet or more, the worker is at risk and needs to be protected. Fall protection must be provided at four feet in general industry, five feet in maritime, and six feet in construction.

3. Hazard Communication - 6,378 violations
Chemical manufacturers and importers are required to evaluate the hazards of the chemicals they produce or import and prepare labels and safety data sheets to convey the hazard information to their downstream customers.

4. Respiratory Protection - 3,803 violations
Respirators protect workers against insufficient oxygen environments, harmful dusts, fogs, smokes, mists, gases, vapors, and sprays. These hazards may cause cancer, lung impairment, other diseases, or death.

5. Lockout-Tag out - 3,321 violations
“Lockout-Tag out” refers to specific practices and procedures to safeguard employees from the unexpected start up of machinery and equipment, or the release of hazardous energy during service or maintenance activities.

6. Electrical (Wiring) - 3,079 violations
Working with electricity can be dangerous. Engineers, electricians, and other professionals work with electricity directly, including working on overhead lines, cable harnesses, and circuit assemblies. Others, such as office workers and sales people, work with electricity indirectly and may also be exposed to electrical hazards.

7. Ladders - 3,072 violations
Occupational fatalities caused by falls remain a serious public health problem. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) lists falls as one of the leading causes of traumatic occupational death, accounting for 8% of all occupational fatalities from trauma.

8. Powered Industrial Trucks - 2,993 violations
Each year, tens of thousands of injuries related to powered industrial trucks (PIT), or forklifts, occur in U.S. workplaces. Many employees are injured when lift trucks are inadvertently driven off loading docks, lifts fall between docks and an unsecured trailer, they are struck by a lift truck, or when they fall while on elevated pallets and tines.

9. Electrical (general) - 2,556 violations
See #6.

10. Machine Guarding - 2,364 violations
Any machine part, function, or process that may cause injury must be safeguarded. When the operation of a machine or accidental contact injures the operator or others in the vicinity, the hazards must be eliminated or controlled.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is initiating a national emphasis program (NEP) on recordkeeping to assess the accuracy of injury and illness data recorded by employers. The recordkeeping NEP involves inspecting occupational injury and illness records prepared by businesses and appropriately enforcing regulatory requirements when employers are found to be under-recording injuries and illnesses.

“Accurate and honest recordkeeping is vitally important to workers’ health and safety,” said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. “This information is not only used by OSHA to determine which workplaces to inspect, but it is an important tool employers and workers can use to identify health and safety problems in their workplaces.”

The inspections include a records review, employee interviews, and a limited safety and health inspection of the workplace. The NEP will focus on selected industries with high injury and illness rates. This directive is available as a PDF OSHA Directive.

At the request of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and the House Committee on Education and Labor, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a study on the accuracy of employer injury and illness records. This NEP will help OSHA work cooperatively with the GAO. It also complements the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) efforts to investigate factors accounting for differences between the number of workplace injuries and illnesses estimated by BLS and those estimated by other data sources.

As of September 1, 2009, seven states now have laws on the books that require construction workers to complete the OSHA 10-hour construction safety training course before they can work on certain construction projects. The states with an OSHA law already in effect are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New York, and most recently, Missouri. The state of Nevada OSHA training law becomes effective January 1, 2010.

Most of the state laws restrict the required training to workers on publicly funded construction sites, such as public roads and bridge construction projects and public school buildings. However, the state of Nevada will require all construction workers to complete the course.

The state laws also vary on exactly which workers need the training, according to Curtis Chambers, vice president of OSHA Pro’s, Inc. “While all seven state laws require the same 10-hour training class, there are slight nuances from state to state. A particular state law may require all labors and supervisors to complete the class, whereas another state law may require the class just for laborers,” says Chambers. “There are also varying thresholds for the dollar amounts of the contracts that dictate when the states’ laws become effective. However,” he warns, “each of these state laws contain a provision that says failure to comply with their rule can result in fines and penalties being assessed, typically to the employer of the non-compliant workers. So affected workers are required to obtain the OSHA 10-hour construction training wallet card to prove they completed the course.”

The OSHA 10-hour construction outreach training course was developed by OSHA as a voluntary safety course to teach workers about the hazards of construction work and the regulations applicable to their work site. But these seven states have decided to make the course mandatory training for construction workers in hopes of reducing the number of injuries and fatalities afflicting construction workers.

The OSHA 10-hour construction outreach training course can be conducted by instructors who are authorized by OSHA to conduct this training and issue the OSHA cards. Some large companies even have their own authorized OSHA trainer on staff.

There are also private safety consultants and companies that conduct the training for a fee for companies or groups needing the course. OSHA has also authorized online OSHA 10-hour construction outreach training courses, allowing a worker to take the required class on the computer via the Internet, and have the wallet card subsequently mailed to the trainee. Carrie Braswell, administrator for the Internet-based online OSHA training Web site, says, “Business has really boomed since these state laws have taken effect. Especially right before a particular state deadline comes along.”

The state laws and links to those laws appear below, as well as resources for the training:

• Massachusetts OSHA Law
• Connecticut OSHA Law
• New Hampshire OSHA Law
• Rhode Island OSHA Law
• New York OSHA Law
• Missouri OSHA Law
• Nevada OSHA Law

Source: Tradeshowsafetyprofessionals.org

Yesterday (9/9/09), the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published in the Federal Register a final rule revising the personal protective equipment (PPE) sections of its general industry, shipyard employment, longshoring, and marine terminals standards concerning requirements for eye- and face-protective devices, and head and foot protection.

OSHA is updating the references in its regulations to reflect more recent editions of the applicable national consensus standards that incorporate advances in technology. OSHA requires that PPE be safely designed and constructed for the tasks performed.

“Workers exposed to occupational hazards requiring head, foot, or eye and face protection will now be provided protection based on a standard that reflects state-of-the-art technology and materials,” said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. “This final rule is another step in OSHA’s efforts to update or remove references to outdated national consensus and industry standards.”

Amendments to the PPE standards include a requirement that filter lenses and plates in eye protective equipment meet a test for transmission of radiant energy such as light or infrared.

The final rule will become effective on October 9, 2009.