Ergonomics debate closes

By Staff -- Industrial Distribution, 5/1/2000

Hearings on OSHA's hotly contested ergonomics proposal are drawing to a close: the last hearings will be held May 8-12 in Washington, D.C.

It's impossible to generalize as to where distributors sit on the ergonomics fence: reactions range from staunch advocates for worker safety who firmly believe in the ergonomics standard to fervent opponents who don't believe enough scientific evidence exists to create a standard that is just.

What's in question is whether the ergonomics proposal meets the goal OSHA assistant secretary Charles Jeffress has described as providing "a practical, flexible approach to preventing musculoskeletal disorders" in a way that is also reasonable and economically feasible. OSHA predicts the standard will spare 300,000 workers from injury and save the U.S. economy $9 billion each year.

During OSHA's comment period, Dirk Van Dongen, president of the National Assn. of Wholesaler-Distributors submitted a letter on behalf of NAW members strongly opposing the ergonomics proposal. The letter states that OSHA's comment period was inadequate, that there is insufficient science to support the conditions and risk factors that would be regulated by the standard, that the proposal's work restriction provision conflicts with states' workers' compensation laws, and that the standard is too vague and is not economically feasible.

Leonard Eaton, vice president of operations for T.W. Metals, a metals processor and distributor headquartered in Exton, Pa., believes that more evidence is needed.

"As employers, we want to protect our employees to the best of our ability," Eaton says, "[but] there's not a lot of agreement on the causes of a lot of these disorders and injuries they are asking us to address.

"I think they're trying to impose laws that go beyond what the current medical and scientific communities have agreed on the causes of these injuries," Eaton says. "You can't object to the intent of the proposal, but I think we need a lot more study and information before we have a standard that is promulgated and enforced."

Meanwhile, distributors like Cameron & Barkley have been helping customers address ergonomics issues for years.

Jay Arnold, CamBar's safety marketing and sales manager, says that many of the company's customers with manufacturing, assembling or processing processes are well on their way to addressing ergonomics issues. CamBar provides customers with ergonomics seminars and brings in key manufacturers with ergonomics expertise to help customers recognize hazards and address them.

CamBar looks at the ergonomics proposal from two viewpoints: as an employer and warehousing operations owner, and as a provider of safety, personal protection and other equipment designed to meet ergonomic needs, such as ergonomically designed tools, anti-vibration gloves and even an ergonomic welder's chair.

"Looking at the ergonomics proposal strictly [as an] owner of warehousing operations, I could see where there may be some concerns. There may be a need by the time it gets to a final rule to have the standard tightened up a bit," Arnold says.

However, Arnold says many CamBar customers are already addressing ergonomics issues and the proposed standard.

"There are many companies that have done much in preparation for the standard because it's been talked about for years," Arnold says. "It's just good business to be as productive as possible while working as safely as you can, which includes addressing ergonomic issues."

To learn more, visit OSHA's Web page, www.osha-slc.gov/ergonomics-standard, or visit the Web site of opposition group, National Coalition on Ergonomics, www.ncergo.org.