In this month’s Professional Safety magazine, they
highlight Rubbermaid’s new material handling product line with a range of
application-specific designs.
Jump to view this part of the Rubbermaid website by clicking here.
In this month’s Professional Safety magazine, they
highlight Rubbermaid’s new material handling product line with a range of
application-specific designs.
Jump to view this part of the Rubbermaid website by clicking here.
Posted by Kent Hatcher on November 06, 2009 at 11:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Hello everyone,
If ergonomic improvements have stalled at your facility due to budget constraints, we wanted to direct you towards these resources that provide some "experienced" manual material handling equipment.
American Surplus Inc
(800) 989-7176
1 Noyes Avenue; East Providence, RI 02916
SJF Material Handling Equipment
(320) 485-2824
211 Baker Ave. W; Winsted, MN 55395
Posted by Kent Hatcher on October 29, 2009 at 02:55 PM in Ergonomics, Lean Manufacturing, Safety | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Contributed by Christy Lotz, CPE
The current ASSE online e-magazine The Monitor (http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/357229e6) includes an article titled Is Your Stretch and Flex Program Cutting-Edge? In it, Deborah Reed (MOTR/L) quotes several studies with respect to the effectiveness of stretching at work on reducing injuries. The article alludes to those injuries caused by poor ergonomic conditions.
After an extensive literature review, the author states that there is not a lot of evidence to support static stretching as a means of reducing injuries. This is true for both an athlete and the industrial worker. Stretching programs have recently become popular as a means to prevent injury in industry. Sometimes these static stretches are performed in a group at the beginning of a shift or individually at the workstation throughout the shift.
The author does state, and I am in agreement, that there is a clear difference between static and dynamic stretches. Dynamic or ballistic stretching is more like a “warm-up” for the muscles as opposed to static stretching. This is beneficial for both athletes and industrial workers. The goal is to get the blood flowing to the muscles that will be taxed during the activity or work. Blood flow is beneficial for a number of reasons including the transport of oxygen and nutrients to muscles and removal of waste. This has a positive impact in terms of preventing injuries of muscle tissue. Therefore, if you are going to provide any stretching program, it should be approached more like a “warm-up” session as opposed to just a static stretching program. In addition, stretching throughout the day is much better than one session at the beginning of the shift, but that is not usually the approach in industry to these types of programs.
It is my experience that a well-designed workstation (i.e., based on good ergonomic principles) has an even bigger impact on injury reduction than a stretching program. If a workstation is designed to keep the operator working in a neutral posture and reduce stressors that contribute to injury, the operator will feel a positive impact for an entire 8-hour shift. Whereas a stretching program is often performed for the first 10-15 minutes of the shift and the effects are supposed to last for the remainder of the day. Of the research cited in this article, none of the studies mentioned the benefits of short stretching periods for long durations of work. The author compared the sports athlete to the industrial worker throughout the article, but an athlete often exercises for 2 hours per day, so stretching may show benefits, whereas an industrial worker works 8-hours per day so the benefits of stretching must last much longer and this impact is not shown in the cited articles.
Overall, I agree that ballistic stretching and warm ups throughout the shift is beneficial, but proper workstation setup (i.e., reducing the risk factors of MSD injuries), minimizes the need for employees to warm up in the first place. Considering ergonomics early in the process will benefit the operator and show a more significant impact in terms of decreased cost and increased productivity.
Posted by Kent Hatcher on October 20, 2009 at 09:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Did you know that October is National Ergonomics Month? Beginning in 2003, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) designated October to formally recognize the countless hours of research that go into the ergonomics profession. The goal is to promote the application of ergonomics through teaching, learning, networking, service, and fun!
Stay in the loop by becoming an HFES member today, or check out the National Ergonomics Month website at: http://hfesnem.org/
Thanks to Greg Cresswell of Humantech for this post.
Posted by Kent Hatcher on October 07, 2009 at 01:05 PM in Aging Workforce, Ergonomics, Lean Manufacturing, Office Ergonomics, Safety, Training | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Submitted by Kevin Perdeaux, Humantech Consultant
I was recently traveling through Turkey, and was amazed at the number of kebab shops. This staple snack includes shredded chicken,
beef or lamb from a vertical rotating spit, packed into bread with onions,
tomatoes, lettuce and topped off with lemon juice and salt.
With such high demand, kebab shopkeepers spend hours with their arms at shoulder level shaving meat with large knifes and cutting utensils; a definite ergonomic risk! This shop decided to replace the manual tools with an electric planar to ease meat shaving and improve task efficiency.
We are always interested to hear about improved work engineering from outside North America, so feel free to post any photos or stories.
Posted by Kent Hatcher on October 06, 2009 at 03:17 PM in Ergonomics, Food and Drink, Safety, Travel | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
A common misconception in industry
is that an unsuccessful ergonomics process is due to a lack of the necessary tools to
make it successful. However, many companies have the tools in house to advance their
ergonomics initiatives - they just need to recognize the successes from their other
processes and apply the same concepts to their ergonomics initiative!
Set goals and create leading
metrics (risk reduction, number of individuals trained, number of “red” jobs) –
the first step in any ergonomics process is to set goals that are achievable
and measurable. Without this, the success of an ergonomics process has to rely
on lagging metrics (e.g.
injury reduction) which
can take years to measure accurately.
Management support and approval –
ensure management has a strong desire to make the process successful. Put
information into terms they can stand behind (return on investment, waste
reduction, increased productivity). With management buy-in, the uphill battle
becomes a smooth sail.
Financial sense – everyone needs
to understand the importance of ergonomics to the bottom line and to the safety
of operators. With workers compensation costs often costing millions of dollar annually, it is easy to realize that if your
ergonomics process is costing you money, you’re doing it wrong.
Follow a process (plan, do, check,
act) – create and follow a model to be able to continuously improve. This will
allow you to easily identify opportunities for improvement and ensure that the
most effective countermeasures are implemented.
Employee involvement – employees
are the absolute experts at their jobs and often have the best improvement ideas. Their involvement is therefore a key element
to the success of an ergonomics initiative. Focusing on the 30-inch view
between the operators and their work environment will often result in cost savings due to rework,
increased productivity, and overall improved morale.
Following these steps is a great way to kick-off an ergonomics process.
Submitted by Christy Lotz, CPE
Posted by Kent Hatcher on September 23, 2009 at 12:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Submitted by Walt Rostykus, B.S., MSPH, CIH, CSP, CPE
Continued from my previous post on the “Safety Pays” article in the May edition of Today’s Facility Manager magazine.
What really caught my attention in the article is the complete lack of attention to engineering controls to improve safety. The author used the example of injuries caused by poor ergonomic conditions and recommends training, back belts, revised job descriptions to limit the allowable weight lifted, and to rotate jobs… Whatever happened to the Hierarchy of Controls? Facilities Managers are the key decision makers and influencers to ensure the workplace, equipment layout, and tools are designed to fit the capabilities of people, and to identify and eliminate ergonomic risk factors.
The author primarily recommends administrative and personal protective equipment controls - recommendations that either don’t work or have limited effectiveness! A few key points to consider:
The lesson here is “Go back to your roots; Engineering. Pursue engineering controls in the design and layout of your facility that reduce the risk factors of awkward posture, high force, and long duration/high frequency”. By providing a low risk workplace you will recognize ROI through injury prevention, decreased training time, decreased time spent by supervisors correcting unsafe behaviors, eliminate spending money on PPE and back belts, cost of additional breaks, and cost of retraining people to perform other jobs (rotation) to name a few.
Posted by Kent Hatcher on September 20, 2009 at 06:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Submitted by Walt Rostykus, B.S., MSPH, CIH, CSP, CPE
The article titled “ Safety Pays” caught my eye in the
May edition of Today’s Facility Manager magazine.
It is comforting to know that facility managers are engaged with and know that
they can impact safety in the workplace. But as I read the article I
realized the need for these and other managers to be up to date and current on
effective and valid safety practices.
Watch for an upcoming post about the lack of engineering approach...
Posted by Kent Hatcher on September 16, 2009 at 10:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Submitted by Josh Kerst
I just returned from the 25th Annual
National Voluntary Protection Programs Participants’ Association Inc. (VPPPA)
conference in San Antonio last week and it is clear that the pendulum of direction
at OSHA is changing rapidly. In the
opening session, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, Jordan Barab
talked about the current challenges OSHA faces and the changes that are
forthcoming. The message was very clear
that OSHA’s role in the near future will emphasize increased inspections and
more aggressive enforcement rather than relying on cooperative programs such as
the VPP. Barab indicated that nearly
200 new federal OSHA inspectors will be brought on staff and that assessed
fines and penalties will be higher in the future. Indications are that the administration will also
attempt to get legislation passed criminalizing managers whose employees are
killed or seriously injured, making them felons subject to imprisonment.
Barab’s comments come on the heels of a
report released by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) last spring that
takes issue with OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program. The report questions OSHA and Regional VPP staff’s ability to verify that
internal controls are sufficiently robust to ensure that only qualified
worksites participate in the VPP. The report further states that “OSHA has not
developed the proper goals or measures to assess the performance of VPP”. OSHA seems to have adopted the old British
Navy adage which says “People tend to respect
what they expect you will inspect”.
A follow-up VPPPA panel session given by
four of OSHA’s Directorate personnel announced that OSHA will begin conducting a comprehensive
evaluation of VPP safety and health systems beginning as early as September.
These reviews will seek to verify if proper oversight and controls are in place
and that appropriate follow-up actions are taken in response to incidents, such
as fatalities and serious injuries, at VPP sites. The panel indicated that OSHA would check to
see if VPP companies are “cooking the books” and if so appropriate actions will
be taken with regards to the VPP program in response to recommendations made in
the GAO report.
Posted by Kent Hatcher on September 01, 2009 at 03:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Don't ask me how, but we found a relevant article worth posting from the American Agriculturist website.
The article describes the new John Deere CommandView II Cab as an exercise in ergonomics, where virtual reality tools were put to work on a wide range of design issues.
The new 8R and 8RT series features a redesigned console that swivels with the seat, as well as its own
computer information screen for tractor monitoring. According to the article, the base- model starts at around $165,929.
We didn't appreciate the sting about the cup holders though.
Comments?
Posted by Kent Hatcher on August 21, 2009 at 10:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Recent Comments