The new ergonomics work standards issued on November 14, 2000 was the center of intense polar reactions even before they were unveiled. Controversy is not new to the ergonomics rule. President Clinton was adamant that the rules be implemented in 2000, and ergonomics was a key issue over a federal budget $350 billion bill to fund labor, education, and health programs in fiscal 2001. The president met with fierce objections from the GOP majority in Congress, which was just as determined to put off the new rules until after the then upcoming November elections that, they hoped, would find a Republican in the White House more sympathetic to the business community’s strong opposition to the rules. President Clinton finally received Congress’s approval of the federal budget with ergonomics part of it.
Controversy still continues. Unions such as the AFL-CIO strongly favor the new ergonomics work standards developed by the US Department’s Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA). Diametrically opposed to the stance of many unions, industry and business groups fiercely attacking the OSHA standards have formed a coalition challenging it as unconstitutional.
Ten years in the making, the OSHA rule is setting standards for the way companies deal with workers’ health problems stemming from repetitive-motion tasks. It addresses musculoskeletal disorders (MSD). OSHA reports that 1.8 million workers a year report work related MSD such as carpal tunnel syndrome, tendonitis, and back injuries caused by repetitive motion, and about 600,000 MSDs are serious enough to result in workers having to take time off from work to recover. The solution, according to OSHA, lies with ergonomics, which it describes as the science of fitting the job to the worker. OSHA maintains the final ergonomics program standard will significantly reduce the number and severity of MSD.
Secretary of Labor Alexis M. Herman, in a November 22, 2000 statement, said 1.9 million sites would be affected and more than 27 million workers would be protected by the standard. “Implementing these measures,” he said, “would generate average savings of $9 billion annually in workers’ compensation and other direct costs alone.” He added that fewer than 30 percent of general industry employers have effective ergonomics programs in place.
According to OSHA, musculoskeletal disorders cost the nation up to $50 billion a year. The standards would cost employers about $4.5 billion annually.
But business groups opposing the standard say the cost would be far higher, putting it between $18 billion and $120 billion.
The US Chamber of Commerce and other organizations, contending that the OSHA ergonomics rule is unconstitutional, have petitioned the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to review the regulation. The petition represents about 60 industry leaders, among them are Federal Express Corp., Anheuser-Busch Cos., and Air Conditioning Contractors of America.
Occupational Physicians withdrew its support citing the standard’s lack of a sound medical foundation. The National Restaurant Association views the ergonomic standards as “bureaucratic madness,” saying that the rules do not take into account industry efforts. The Associated General Contractors of America maintains that the standard would take businesses many years and as much as $100 billion annually to implement.
Support comes from American Occupational Therapy Association, which applauds the standard as a measure to help Americans stay healthy and productive. Similarly, the American Industrial Hygiene Association supports the need for the ergonomics standard, adding that although ergonomics is an evolving science, proper application of its principles can achieve benefits. The AFSCME regards the new standard as a truly historic victory for worker safety.
How does this standard apply if companies have an ergonomics program in place? OSHA says those companies may continue to implement if it meets parts of the standards.
The debates about the new OSHA rules will no doubt continue for extended periods, and FMLink will report on news as it occurs.
OSHA has printed its ergonomics rule on its Website, www.osha.gov.
This article was prepared by the editors of FMLink and is based on a number of major sources. Among them are The New York Times; the Washington Post; Daily Regulatory Reporter; on-line press releases from associations, both pro and con the standards. • Let’s hear from you! You are invited to continue this discussion by expressing your opinions on FM Forum, under the December Featured Topic-of-the-Month. Here are some topics you might want to address: Does your company have an ergonomics program in place? When was it started? For what kind of facilities (office; factory; etc.)? Do you find that it has been effective? Who, by title or department, in your organization is responsible for your ergonomics program? What is your opinion of the new OSHA rules (check the OSHA Web site if your not familiar with them)? Has your management reacted to the new OSHA rules, and if so, in what way? Share your concerns and reactions with other subscribers, and perhaps a consensus can be reached among FMLink subscribers.
