Making Good Corp. Citizenship Pay Off.
In the depths of recession, it’s tough for companies to think about something as removed from the bottom line as being a good corporate citizen. Yet doing so actually improves P&L. – By Isaac Rudik
A sure sign that the world is changing comes from a study done by the Centre for Corporate Citizenship at Boston College. Nearly one-third of companies surveyed said good “corporate citizenship” is a key component in recruiting and retaining quality employees. Yet just five years earlier, less than 10% of companies in a similar study said it was important.
Moreover, other surveys of customers, investors or lenders, and other stakeholders show that a plurality of them prefer doing business with responsible companies. Indeed, an increasingly common question in consumer market research asks if respondents avoid companies that don’t reflect their values and, consistently, more than half say they do.
Admittedly, in the depths of a strangling recession, it’s tough for companies to think about something as seemingly ethereal and removed from the bottom line as being a good corporate citizen. Yet doing so actually shows up on the P&L statement, either because loyal customers who like a company are more likely buy from them again, or – and this is just as likely – because an irresponsible company can end up paying hefty fines for a cavalier attitude.
Brewing Trouble
There isn’t a better example than the Lorne Street Brewery in Sudbury.
In August, 2006, a utility company worker arrived at the brewery to cut its hydro. The once-successful Northern Breweries, which operated the Lorne Street Brewery, was far behind in bills. A smell of ammonia permeated the area and maintenance worker explained that compressors that circulated concentrated ammonia through the brewery’s coolers had been offline since June. The gas warmed and expanded until it ruptured one of the aging system’s pipes.
Sudbury Hydro alerted the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), which immediately notified local police and fire departments. MOE staff collaborated with local agencies, enhancing municipal manpower with ministry expertise. The area was evacuated but not before a number of first responders required medical attention.
Once the situation was normalised, the MOE tracked down a Northern employee at another brewery in Sault Ste. Marie that was also being closed. Claiming the company had no money to pay for clean-up, the MOE issued an order and filed a complaint.
Leo Schotte, Northern’s owner, told MOE investigators that he had a “hands-off” approach to running – or not running – the company. When he failed to attract investors, Schotte said Northern Breweries locations were simply abandoned with any dangerous materials on-hand still inside.
“I just don’t think he really thought much about it or cared much about it,” MOE investigator Rick Besner, who handled the inquiry, told reporters.
As a result of ignoring the dangers lurking inside his failed businesses, a $100,000 fine was imposed on Northern Breweries for disrupting local business and for the health risks caused by the leak. Shutting down the Sault brewery landed Schotte back in court, where he pleaded guilty on charges relating to leftover ammonia in that facility’s coolers.
Controlling Risks
Used in countless industrial processes, ammonia can be deadly if handled improperly – not just to employees exposed to it but the surrounding community, as well. And it can be just as deadly to a company’s coffers, as Leo Schotte discovered the expensive way.
Yet it’s not difficult to control the risk posed by a compound such as ammonia.
For instance, the Reed GD 3300 detects a wide variety of gases including some that are toxic along with nuisance vapours. It includes noise and visible alarms, running off a low-power, semi-conductor sensor. Besides ammonia, it can alert businesses to a wide range of aromas that signal something is leaking amiss:
• Natural gas
• Propane
• Butane
• Methane
• Acetone
• Alcohol
• Carbon Monoxide
• Gasoline
• Jet fuel
• Hydrogen Sulfide
• Naphtha
• Lacquer thinner
• Smoke
• Industrial solvents
A good corporate citizen knows that doing the right thing is sometimes the hardest but done for all the right reasons. Taking proactive and preventative steps to ensure hazards don’t harm the local environment, local community and help build a sustainable future for employees while also having a positive impact on a company’s profit picture.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Straighten Up Or Pay The Price
Straighten Up Or Pay The Price
Muscular-skeletal disorders account for 40% of workplace injuries, costing the economy $2-billion annually. But proper workplace ergonomics has proven repeatedly to repay itself in higher profits and less lost time due to entirely avoidable injuries.
- By Isaac Rudik
When business executives and owners hear someone mutter the word “ergonomics,” too often their eyes glaze over, their mind wanders, and they dismiss the whole notion as another buzzword dreamed up consultants who have no idea what’s really involved in running a business and turning a profit.
Unfortunately, in many cases they’d be correct – but only because the word has been co-opted by advertising to plug fuzzy features of everything from cars to shoe inserts.
That’s too bad because the fact is ergonomics has a direct bearing on profitability. In fact, ergonomics often affects everything from productivity to the rate of workplace injuries. And it’s not just because employees might get a sore back from sitting in a poorly designed chair or lifting a heavy box improperly. Correct workplace ergonomics extends across the shop floor, encompassing everything from tool design to the layout of factories and warehouses.
In short, investing in proper workplace ergonomics has proven repeatedly to repay itself in higher profits and less lost time due to entirely avoidable injuries.
Immediate Payback
Several years ago, a 200-year old manufacturer became alarmed at its injury rate for muscular-skeletal disorders (MSD), which was nearly three times the norm for all industries. To figure out what was wrong, it created a series of “ergonomic committees” that included employees from every department, an assessment of every task performed in the plant, an annual discomfort survey of workers and an enhanced training and communications plan.
Over a five year period, the company spent $2.5-million on its ergonomic programme. The company calculated that its annual return-on-investment was 40% – a whopping 40% per year. At the same time, it reduced workplace MSD injury rate by the 40% as well and, where workstation improvements were made and MSD factors reduced, productivity climbed by an astronomical 100%.
Another manufacturer, this one high tech, realised that most workplace injuries that resulted in lost time related to lifting, fastening and keyboarding. It conducted a study, led by an outside advisor, to determine where workstations and tasks created the greatest risk for MSD injuries. As a result, adjustments were made in both workplace design and employee training.
In the first year alone, the cost of worker compensation claims plummeted 75%, to $94,000 from more than $400,000. The following year, additional improvements were made and claims fell again to $12,000. The company estimates that it saved nearly $1.5-million over four years in direct costs alone; the programme cost $500,000.
Simple First Steps
A business doesn’t have to begin with a six-figure investment to improve ergonomically-driven productivity increases. New resources are available to workers and employers to help prevent ergonomic-related injuries, which accounts for 40% of time lost from injuries and cost the Canadian economy $19-billion over the 10 years from 1996 to 2006:
Conventional Ergonomic Chair: They provide optimal support to every part of the body. They are fully adjustable in many different directions, enabling workers to get the perfect seating position, offering excellent support for both the back and legs.
Saddle Seat: As its name suggests, the chair’s shape resembles a horse saddle. It keeps the pelvis in its natural position so that, when leaning forward, the user moves from the hips and not the waist.
Recliner Chair: Reclining is the most relaxing position for the back, especially for people who suffer spine-related problems such as lumber spinal stenosis. While not well-suited for tables or desks, these chairs usually feature detachable or swivel tables for holding a laptop and files.
Solid Solution
A high backed synchronized glider chair such as one designed with the Moller® back support system is a commonly-used, solid solution because it employs a physician-designed approach that is clinically proven to reduce back and neck pain, fatigue and headaches by encouraging proper back alignment.
The spinal column is fully supported and maintains a natural lower spine configuration. Compression on the veins is reduced and circulation improved while strain on the lower back muscles is decreased, reducing fatigue and discomfort. Moreover, such a chair allows for multiple adjustments for maximum, personal comfort.
Given the high cost to companies of entirely preventable workplace injuries from MSD’s, the relatively low cost – and almost immediate payback – of avoiding the problem makes total sense.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Muscular-skeletal disorders account for 40% of workplace injuries, costing the economy $2-billion annually. But proper workplace ergonomics has proven repeatedly to repay itself in higher profits and less lost time due to entirely avoidable injuries.
- By Isaac Rudik
When business executives and owners hear someone mutter the word “ergonomics,” too often their eyes glaze over, their mind wanders, and they dismiss the whole notion as another buzzword dreamed up consultants who have no idea what’s really involved in running a business and turning a profit.
Unfortunately, in many cases they’d be correct – but only because the word has been co-opted by advertising to plug fuzzy features of everything from cars to shoe inserts.
That’s too bad because the fact is ergonomics has a direct bearing on profitability. In fact, ergonomics often affects everything from productivity to the rate of workplace injuries. And it’s not just because employees might get a sore back from sitting in a poorly designed chair or lifting a heavy box improperly. Correct workplace ergonomics extends across the shop floor, encompassing everything from tool design to the layout of factories and warehouses.
In short, investing in proper workplace ergonomics has proven repeatedly to repay itself in higher profits and less lost time due to entirely avoidable injuries.
Immediate Payback
Several years ago, a 200-year old manufacturer became alarmed at its injury rate for muscular-skeletal disorders (MSD), which was nearly three times the norm for all industries. To figure out what was wrong, it created a series of “ergonomic committees” that included employees from every department, an assessment of every task performed in the plant, an annual discomfort survey of workers and an enhanced training and communications plan.
Over a five year period, the company spent $2.5-million on its ergonomic programme. The company calculated that its annual return-on-investment was 40% – a whopping 40% per year. At the same time, it reduced workplace MSD injury rate by the 40% as well and, where workstation improvements were made and MSD factors reduced, productivity climbed by an astronomical 100%.
Another manufacturer, this one high tech, realised that most workplace injuries that resulted in lost time related to lifting, fastening and keyboarding. It conducted a study, led by an outside advisor, to determine where workstations and tasks created the greatest risk for MSD injuries. As a result, adjustments were made in both workplace design and employee training.
In the first year alone, the cost of worker compensation claims plummeted 75%, to $94,000 from more than $400,000. The following year, additional improvements were made and claims fell again to $12,000. The company estimates that it saved nearly $1.5-million over four years in direct costs alone; the programme cost $500,000.
Simple First Steps
A business doesn’t have to begin with a six-figure investment to improve ergonomically-driven productivity increases. New resources are available to workers and employers to help prevent ergonomic-related injuries, which accounts for 40% of time lost from injuries and cost the Canadian economy $19-billion over the 10 years from 1996 to 2006:
Conventional Ergonomic Chair: They provide optimal support to every part of the body. They are fully adjustable in many different directions, enabling workers to get the perfect seating position, offering excellent support for both the back and legs.
Saddle Seat: As its name suggests, the chair’s shape resembles a horse saddle. It keeps the pelvis in its natural position so that, when leaning forward, the user moves from the hips and not the waist.
Recliner Chair: Reclining is the most relaxing position for the back, especially for people who suffer spine-related problems such as lumber spinal stenosis. While not well-suited for tables or desks, these chairs usually feature detachable or swivel tables for holding a laptop and files.
Solid Solution
A high backed synchronized glider chair such as one designed with the Moller® back support system is a commonly-used, solid solution because it employs a physician-designed approach that is clinically proven to reduce back and neck pain, fatigue and headaches by encouraging proper back alignment.
The spinal column is fully supported and maintains a natural lower spine configuration. Compression on the veins is reduced and circulation improved while strain on the lower back muscles is decreased, reducing fatigue and discomfort. Moreover, such a chair allows for multiple adjustments for maximum, personal comfort.
Given the high cost to companies of entirely preventable workplace injuries from MSD’s, the relatively low cost – and almost immediate payback – of avoiding the problem makes total sense.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
When Thinking You’re Doing Everything Right - Isn’t Enough
When Thinking You’re Doing Everything Right - Isn’t Enough
Following regulations when something is first installed may no longer be adequate because a company grows, employing more people, or the regulations are tougher yet the business doesn’t keep up-to-date. The result can be a shockingly expensive work order – and an even more expensive fine.
– By Isaac Rudik
While the news media likes to portray companies who get fined for violating health and safety rules as cold-hearted, money grubbing, villains, the truth often is very different. In fact, each year many businesses believe they are doing everything correctly, working hard and spending money to protect workers and the environment, yet still get cited and fined.
The reason? What they thought was properly following regulatory procedures and requirements when something was first installed – say, an eyewash basin – or protective regimens are no longer adequate because the company grew and employs more people, or the regulations themselves became tougher and the business didn’t keep up-to-date.
In fact, there are plenty of occasions when thinking you’re doing the right thing simply is not enough – and it could end up costing even the most diligent business serious money.
Playing Safe
The process at an Ontario manufacturer required that parts be put through an acid bath during assembly. The businesses was painstakingly thorough in ensuring that exposed employees wore goggles and face shields, and insisted that a supervisor check several times each shift that they were being used – and used correctly. As a result, the company never suffered an injury or an incident.
During a routine visit, a Ministry of Labour inspector toured the plant. Much to the surprise of everyone, before leaving the inspector wrote out a work order and cited the plant, making it subject to a hefty fine. The reason? Even though the facility had two eyewash stations – neither of which had ever been used – the water flowed slowly and some of the treatment supplies on hand were well beyond their “use by” date.
Moreover, the work order noted that the company needed to have as many operable eyewash facilities as necessary to enable a worker to reach it within 10 seconds from wherever they’re stationed. Because the plant grew in size over the years, one of the eyewash stations was now 30-to-60 seconds from hazardous work areas, and on the other side of a partitioning wall.
In fact, one of the most-common ways an organisation can find itself in trouble is over something very simple such as it emergency eyewash and shower facilities.
Easy Steps
The most-obvious rule of thumb is ensuring that each emergency shower or eyewash station is easily identified. A sign should use a symbol that does not require workers to have specific language skills to understand it, and the location should be well lit.
Other recommendations include emergency showers or eyewash stations should:
• Be located as close to the hazard as possible
• Not be partitioned off from hazardous work areas.
• Have an unobstructed path between the hazard and aid.
• Be located where workers can easily see stations.
• Be on the same floor as the hazard, as near an exit as possible so that emergency response teams can reach the victim easily.
• Provide a drainage system for excess water because, once used, the water itself may be a hazardous waste and special regulations apply.
• Not come in contact with electrical equipment.
• Be protected from freezing when installing emergency equipment outdoors.
It’s not just factories that are at risk.
For instance, a London ON nursing home was fine $55,000 recently for exposing workers to eye injury because of a disinfectant used in cleaning the facility. And a Markham food processor was hit with a $75,000 fine after a worker cleaning a food preparation tank was injured when a disinfecting line broke, injuring the employee’s eyes. In both cases, the company was committed to providing a safe workplace and found out, too late, that more needed to be done.
The fact is that any business may find itself at risk – even when it is striving to do the right thing.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Following regulations when something is first installed may no longer be adequate because a company grows, employing more people, or the regulations are tougher yet the business doesn’t keep up-to-date. The result can be a shockingly expensive work order – and an even more expensive fine.
– By Isaac Rudik
While the news media likes to portray companies who get fined for violating health and safety rules as cold-hearted, money grubbing, villains, the truth often is very different. In fact, each year many businesses believe they are doing everything correctly, working hard and spending money to protect workers and the environment, yet still get cited and fined.
The reason? What they thought was properly following regulatory procedures and requirements when something was first installed – say, an eyewash basin – or protective regimens are no longer adequate because the company grew and employs more people, or the regulations themselves became tougher and the business didn’t keep up-to-date.
In fact, there are plenty of occasions when thinking you’re doing the right thing simply is not enough – and it could end up costing even the most diligent business serious money.
Playing Safe
The process at an Ontario manufacturer required that parts be put through an acid bath during assembly. The businesses was painstakingly thorough in ensuring that exposed employees wore goggles and face shields, and insisted that a supervisor check several times each shift that they were being used – and used correctly. As a result, the company never suffered an injury or an incident.
During a routine visit, a Ministry of Labour inspector toured the plant. Much to the surprise of everyone, before leaving the inspector wrote out a work order and cited the plant, making it subject to a hefty fine. The reason? Even though the facility had two eyewash stations – neither of which had ever been used – the water flowed slowly and some of the treatment supplies on hand were well beyond their “use by” date.
Moreover, the work order noted that the company needed to have as many operable eyewash facilities as necessary to enable a worker to reach it within 10 seconds from wherever they’re stationed. Because the plant grew in size over the years, one of the eyewash stations was now 30-to-60 seconds from hazardous work areas, and on the other side of a partitioning wall.
In fact, one of the most-common ways an organisation can find itself in trouble is over something very simple such as it emergency eyewash and shower facilities.
Easy Steps
The most-obvious rule of thumb is ensuring that each emergency shower or eyewash station is easily identified. A sign should use a symbol that does not require workers to have specific language skills to understand it, and the location should be well lit.
Other recommendations include emergency showers or eyewash stations should:
• Be located as close to the hazard as possible
• Not be partitioned off from hazardous work areas.
• Have an unobstructed path between the hazard and aid.
• Be located where workers can easily see stations.
• Be on the same floor as the hazard, as near an exit as possible so that emergency response teams can reach the victim easily.
• Provide a drainage system for excess water because, once used, the water itself may be a hazardous waste and special regulations apply.
• Not come in contact with electrical equipment.
• Be protected from freezing when installing emergency equipment outdoors.
It’s not just factories that are at risk.
For instance, a London ON nursing home was fine $55,000 recently for exposing workers to eye injury because of a disinfectant used in cleaning the facility. And a Markham food processor was hit with a $75,000 fine after a worker cleaning a food preparation tank was injured when a disinfecting line broke, injuring the employee’s eyes. In both cases, the company was committed to providing a safe workplace and found out, too late, that more needed to be done.
The fact is that any business may find itself at risk – even when it is striving to do the right thing.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Cancer In The Workplace: “Safe Enough” Can Hide Dangers.
Cancer In The Workplace: “Safe Enough” Can Hide Dangers.
This is the third in our series on how workplace health and safety can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on hidden cancer dangers lurking in occupation safety issues.
– by Isaac Rudik
Only a madman or a fool would work with dimethyl sulphate without wearing a certified safety mask to protect against inhaling its lethal fumes.
Yet even a conscientious employer may not spot hidden dangers in what is otherwise thought of as a “safe” plant.
Not long ago, a company brought us in to conduct a thorough compliance audit in an attempt to hold the line of its insurance premiums, which the insurer was threatening to hike. As we walked through the facility, the chief operating officer pointed proudly to the numerous health and safety measures the company had installed over the past few years. When we came to a sealed part of the plant where dimethyl sulphate was being used, he began telling me about how insistent the supervisors, managers and executives are about workers being masked at all times.
That’s when I grabbed the man’s arm and pulled him hard towards the exit. Shocked and surprised, as I tugged him away he gave me one of those “are you nuts or something?” looks that comes from disbelief and what, to him, was my incomprehensible behaviour. Once we were safely outside the workspace, I removed my mask and told him, “That place is a breeding ground for cancer.”
What caused me to backtrack so rapidly was the stunning sight of a half dozen workers, all wearing proper breathing apparatus, yet some were working in short sleeved shirts and none wore adequate eye protection. I pointed out that regardless of how powerful the ventilating system is in the room, particulate-sized carcinogens from dimethyl sulphate can enter the body through the skin and eyes.
Never Safe Enough
Needless to say, the COO who was so proud of what his company does to protect workers was stunned. He admitted that it never occurred to him or anyone else at the factory, whether shop floor workers or corner office executives, that they were unknowingly creating a risk despite their sincere, best efforts to create and maintain a safe workplace.
The problem is that dimethyl sulfate and many other common chemicals used in a number of manufacturing processes can cause severe external burns when skin contact is made and damages internal organs if it enters the body through the skin. As a result, strong ventilation systems and individual breathing apparatus for workers are not enough to remove the danger.
Consequently, anyone working around such compounds needs more protection including overalls, and goggles. The entire workplace should be fitted with a spill contamination system. In fact, the government lists 60 precautions that companies need to undertake. Some of these include:
• Always keep the material locked inside proper storage containers when not being used.
• Always store according to MSDS.
• Keep the material away from break rooms and cafeterias.
• Store containers in a well-ventilated place.
• Be sure that ignition sources are kept far from the material.
• Never eat or drink when using the compound.
• Whenever leaving the work area, remove clothing that may be contaminated.
• If a worker begins to feel ill, seek medical advice immediately.
• Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on recycling.
Real Risks
The risks from dimethyl sulphate and other cancer-causing chemicals are very real yet the dangers can be totally hidden – even from companies that believe they are taking care to protect vulnerable workers.
When so many types of protection are relatively inexpensive and easy to use, there is no excuse for a business of any size not to ensure that workplace health and safety issues are thoroughly addressed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
This is the third in our series on how workplace health and safety can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on hidden cancer dangers lurking in occupation safety issues.
– by Isaac Rudik
Only a madman or a fool would work with dimethyl sulphate without wearing a certified safety mask to protect against inhaling its lethal fumes.
Yet even a conscientious employer may not spot hidden dangers in what is otherwise thought of as a “safe” plant.
Not long ago, a company brought us in to conduct a thorough compliance audit in an attempt to hold the line of its insurance premiums, which the insurer was threatening to hike. As we walked through the facility, the chief operating officer pointed proudly to the numerous health and safety measures the company had installed over the past few years. When we came to a sealed part of the plant where dimethyl sulphate was being used, he began telling me about how insistent the supervisors, managers and executives are about workers being masked at all times.
That’s when I grabbed the man’s arm and pulled him hard towards the exit. Shocked and surprised, as I tugged him away he gave me one of those “are you nuts or something?” looks that comes from disbelief and what, to him, was my incomprehensible behaviour. Once we were safely outside the workspace, I removed my mask and told him, “That place is a breeding ground for cancer.”
What caused me to backtrack so rapidly was the stunning sight of a half dozen workers, all wearing proper breathing apparatus, yet some were working in short sleeved shirts and none wore adequate eye protection. I pointed out that regardless of how powerful the ventilating system is in the room, particulate-sized carcinogens from dimethyl sulphate can enter the body through the skin and eyes.
Never Safe Enough
Needless to say, the COO who was so proud of what his company does to protect workers was stunned. He admitted that it never occurred to him or anyone else at the factory, whether shop floor workers or corner office executives, that they were unknowingly creating a risk despite their sincere, best efforts to create and maintain a safe workplace.
The problem is that dimethyl sulfate and many other common chemicals used in a number of manufacturing processes can cause severe external burns when skin contact is made and damages internal organs if it enters the body through the skin. As a result, strong ventilation systems and individual breathing apparatus for workers are not enough to remove the danger.
Consequently, anyone working around such compounds needs more protection including overalls, and goggles. The entire workplace should be fitted with a spill contamination system. In fact, the government lists 60 precautions that companies need to undertake. Some of these include:
• Always keep the material locked inside proper storage containers when not being used.
• Always store according to MSDS.
• Keep the material away from break rooms and cafeterias.
• Store containers in a well-ventilated place.
• Be sure that ignition sources are kept far from the material.
• Never eat or drink when using the compound.
• Whenever leaving the work area, remove clothing that may be contaminated.
• If a worker begins to feel ill, seek medical advice immediately.
• Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on recycling.
Real Risks
The risks from dimethyl sulphate and other cancer-causing chemicals are very real yet the dangers can be totally hidden – even from companies that believe they are taking care to protect vulnerable workers.
When so many types of protection are relatively inexpensive and easy to use, there is no excuse for a business of any size not to ensure that workplace health and safety issues are thoroughly addressed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
When Looking For Small Risks, Don’t Ignore The Big Ones.
When Looking For Small Risks, Don’t Ignore The Big Ones.
While work-related accidents sidelining employees for fewer than 20 days are down sharply, there is a dramatic rise in more serious injuries. Is the provincial ministry partially to blame?
– By Isaac Rudik
Here’s a bit of good news for companies and their workers: Non-fatal accidents and injuries in Ontario that result in fewer than 20 days away from work are declining rather dramatically. But there is also some bad news: Incidents serious enough to keep an employee off work for 21 or more days are up sharply – as much as 23% for injuries where someone is on accident leave for more than one month.
The question is to what extent is the Ministry of Labour responsible for the numbers? In its zeal to compel businesses to suss out big risks that cause relatively minor injuries, it has created the unintended consequence of enabling companies to overlook more serious but less frequent potential accident and injury risks that happen less frequently but cause more damage.
But regardless of the ministry’s emphasis, businesses must continue to reduce the risk from potential accidents that create long-term recovery and may cause environmental damage.
Ergo, Ergonomics
It turns out that one of the biggest causes of serious accidents and injuries comes when handling high risk material. Too many businesses use a standard dolly – pretty much the same style your neighbour rents when he asks you to help him move a few boxes to the cottage – even when hauling gas cylinders, drums and other hazardous material around a factory or warehouse. But there’s a relatively simple and inexpensive way to prevent more serious injuries and accidents: Use ergonomically correct equipment, especially when handling hazardous materials.
The harsh fact is that one size does not fit every handling situation.
Take a typical, 55 gallon storage drum as an example. Depending on what is being done with it, there are at least four different ergonomically correct devices to move the drum without risking an injury to a worker – or a potential environmental hazard because the wrong equipment was used to transport the drum from one place to another and the drum tips, rolls and opens. The list of correct equipment includes a truck, a dolly, a cradle and a stacker.
Yet when we are asked to do a safety compliance audit, more often than not one of the things we find is the wrong equipment being employed improperly. In one instance, we found a pallet stacker being used to stack drums despite the fact that there is no way to secure a drum to a pallet lifting device. As a result, workers are at risk of injury, the company is at risk of hefty fines if there is an accident and the environment may be at risk from an avoidable spill.
Smart Moves
It’s just a smart business move to ensure that a material handling solution fits the specific situation.
The smart way to protect both the company and its employees is to always use ergonomically proven material handling solutions. Normal dollies should only move non-gas, non-hazardous and not-liquid materials. Everything else requires a specialised piece of equipment.
Using the correct handling cart for different applications does require a small investment in material handling and during a recession holding down costs is especially important. But the price for the correct material handling equipment is peanuts compared with the huge cost of a worker suffering a debilitating, long term disability, the price of cleaning up the environment after a spill and paying out cold cash to the government for the fines it levies.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
While work-related accidents sidelining employees for fewer than 20 days are down sharply, there is a dramatic rise in more serious injuries. Is the provincial ministry partially to blame?
– By Isaac Rudik
Here’s a bit of good news for companies and their workers: Non-fatal accidents and injuries in Ontario that result in fewer than 20 days away from work are declining rather dramatically. But there is also some bad news: Incidents serious enough to keep an employee off work for 21 or more days are up sharply – as much as 23% for injuries where someone is on accident leave for more than one month.
The question is to what extent is the Ministry of Labour responsible for the numbers? In its zeal to compel businesses to suss out big risks that cause relatively minor injuries, it has created the unintended consequence of enabling companies to overlook more serious but less frequent potential accident and injury risks that happen less frequently but cause more damage.
But regardless of the ministry’s emphasis, businesses must continue to reduce the risk from potential accidents that create long-term recovery and may cause environmental damage.
Ergo, Ergonomics
It turns out that one of the biggest causes of serious accidents and injuries comes when handling high risk material. Too many businesses use a standard dolly – pretty much the same style your neighbour rents when he asks you to help him move a few boxes to the cottage – even when hauling gas cylinders, drums and other hazardous material around a factory or warehouse. But there’s a relatively simple and inexpensive way to prevent more serious injuries and accidents: Use ergonomically correct equipment, especially when handling hazardous materials.
The harsh fact is that one size does not fit every handling situation.
Take a typical, 55 gallon storage drum as an example. Depending on what is being done with it, there are at least four different ergonomically correct devices to move the drum without risking an injury to a worker – or a potential environmental hazard because the wrong equipment was used to transport the drum from one place to another and the drum tips, rolls and opens. The list of correct equipment includes a truck, a dolly, a cradle and a stacker.
Yet when we are asked to do a safety compliance audit, more often than not one of the things we find is the wrong equipment being employed improperly. In one instance, we found a pallet stacker being used to stack drums despite the fact that there is no way to secure a drum to a pallet lifting device. As a result, workers are at risk of injury, the company is at risk of hefty fines if there is an accident and the environment may be at risk from an avoidable spill.
Smart Moves
It’s just a smart business move to ensure that a material handling solution fits the specific situation.
The smart way to protect both the company and its employees is to always use ergonomically proven material handling solutions. Normal dollies should only move non-gas, non-hazardous and not-liquid materials. Everything else requires a specialised piece of equipment.
Using the correct handling cart for different applications does require a small investment in material handling and during a recession holding down costs is especially important. But the price for the correct material handling equipment is peanuts compared with the huge cost of a worker suffering a debilitating, long term disability, the price of cleaning up the environment after a spill and paying out cold cash to the government for the fines it levies.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Don’t Let A Fork Lift Truck Skewer Your Company.
Don’t Let A Fork Lift Truck Skewer Your Company.
Like so many things, pedestrian and lift truck lane markings become part of the background scenery in most plants: They’re visible but no one really notices them any more. Now, there’s a better way to avoid costly accidents.
– By Isaac Rudik
It doesn’t take much of an accident for a fork lift truck to cause serious injury.
Not long ago, an Ontario woman was severely injured at work when the company’s fork lift swung around suddenly and hit her in the middle of her chest. She was spun around by the impact of the truck and sent flying several feet across the plant. The woman was rushed to hospital for emergency, life saving, surgery. Fortunately, she recovered fully from the accident and was able to return to work within six months.
Also fortunate is that the fork lift was carrying only an empty plastic container. Had the load been any larger or heavier, doctors say that most likely the woman would have been killed instantly.
The accident happened even though the area where she was working had been marked with designated forklift and pedestrian lanes. But like so many things in life, the markings became part of the background scenery in the plant: Yes, they were there but no one really noticed them any more.
Visible – But Invisible
The accident was costly to the company. Not only was the injured employee on Worker Compensation for a half-year, the poor operator was so distraught by causing the accident he was unable to work for two months. But the combined eight months of Worker Comp claims was only a small part of the financial cost to the company. A steep fine was levied by the province and a court awarded hefty damages to both the woman and the fork lift driver.
The accident highlights a major shortcoming of using hanging signs and floor lane markings to create safety zones: They rely almost entirely on a fork lift driver being able to see not only the signage but whether someone has wandered in front of the vehicle. Too often, accidents happen because a large load is being moved and the driver’s view is at least partially blocked. Thus, it’s frequently impossible for the operator to know whether a worker has wandered out of the pedestrian lane – or whether the truck has strayed into the lane.
In effect, the very tools used to ensure safety become their own hazard. Even though they’re visible, they can become invisible for a split second, more than enough time for a serious accident to occur.
Moreover, the layout of far too many factories does not take driver visibility into account. Blind corners, a flash of blinding sunlight from a window, a burned out lighting fixture all can make it difficult, if not impossible, for the operator to spot pedestrians crossing the plant floor. Even worse, the recession means most businesses are pushing all-out for productivity, efficiency and speed but these very factors can result in carelessness and not paying attention.
Government regulations mandate that companies take adequate precautions to ensure worker safety. When first introduced decades ago, rules requiring lane markings on a plant floor and posting signs were more than adequate: They were a significant improvement over the era of having no markings and they were the best warning available.
Intelligent Signage
But, thanks to inexpensive new technology, there is a better way to protect workers and help ensure that a fork lift truck out in the plant doesn’t end up skewering an employee or the company.
Now there are traffic signs which sense approaching vehicles and whether people are walking into the path of the fork lift. Once a person is detected, an audio as well as a visual alert is sent out so both know the other is approaching well before they are seen. This greatly increases the ability to avoid an accident. Moreover, unlike signs, the 95db audible alert coupled with a flashing light will never become “just part of the scenery” on a factory floor.
Low cost technology removes the excuse companies have used for some time to prevent accidents. And prevention is always the least costly way of avoiding a lot of needless expense and hassle. Implementing the new generation of warnings now will help ensure that no uncontrollable incident will happen.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Like so many things, pedestrian and lift truck lane markings become part of the background scenery in most plants: They’re visible but no one really notices them any more. Now, there’s a better way to avoid costly accidents.
– By Isaac Rudik
It doesn’t take much of an accident for a fork lift truck to cause serious injury.
Not long ago, an Ontario woman was severely injured at work when the company’s fork lift swung around suddenly and hit her in the middle of her chest. She was spun around by the impact of the truck and sent flying several feet across the plant. The woman was rushed to hospital for emergency, life saving, surgery. Fortunately, she recovered fully from the accident and was able to return to work within six months.
Also fortunate is that the fork lift was carrying only an empty plastic container. Had the load been any larger or heavier, doctors say that most likely the woman would have been killed instantly.
The accident happened even though the area where she was working had been marked with designated forklift and pedestrian lanes. But like so many things in life, the markings became part of the background scenery in the plant: Yes, they were there but no one really noticed them any more.
Visible – But Invisible
The accident was costly to the company. Not only was the injured employee on Worker Compensation for a half-year, the poor operator was so distraught by causing the accident he was unable to work for two months. But the combined eight months of Worker Comp claims was only a small part of the financial cost to the company. A steep fine was levied by the province and a court awarded hefty damages to both the woman and the fork lift driver.
The accident highlights a major shortcoming of using hanging signs and floor lane markings to create safety zones: They rely almost entirely on a fork lift driver being able to see not only the signage but whether someone has wandered in front of the vehicle. Too often, accidents happen because a large load is being moved and the driver’s view is at least partially blocked. Thus, it’s frequently impossible for the operator to know whether a worker has wandered out of the pedestrian lane – or whether the truck has strayed into the lane.
In effect, the very tools used to ensure safety become their own hazard. Even though they’re visible, they can become invisible for a split second, more than enough time for a serious accident to occur.
Moreover, the layout of far too many factories does not take driver visibility into account. Blind corners, a flash of blinding sunlight from a window, a burned out lighting fixture all can make it difficult, if not impossible, for the operator to spot pedestrians crossing the plant floor. Even worse, the recession means most businesses are pushing all-out for productivity, efficiency and speed but these very factors can result in carelessness and not paying attention.
Government regulations mandate that companies take adequate precautions to ensure worker safety. When first introduced decades ago, rules requiring lane markings on a plant floor and posting signs were more than adequate: They were a significant improvement over the era of having no markings and they were the best warning available.
Intelligent Signage
But, thanks to inexpensive new technology, there is a better way to protect workers and help ensure that a fork lift truck out in the plant doesn’t end up skewering an employee or the company.
Now there are traffic signs which sense approaching vehicles and whether people are walking into the path of the fork lift. Once a person is detected, an audio as well as a visual alert is sent out so both know the other is approaching well before they are seen. This greatly increases the ability to avoid an accident. Moreover, unlike signs, the 95db audible alert coupled with a flashing light will never become “just part of the scenery” on a factory floor.
Low cost technology removes the excuse companies have used for some time to prevent accidents. And prevention is always the least costly way of avoiding a lot of needless expense and hassle. Implementing the new generation of warnings now will help ensure that no uncontrollable incident will happen.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)