Ergonomic Program

Developing an ergonomics program should consist of these six program elements  

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT A PRACTICAL APPROACH 

Once MSD hazards have been identified, the next step is to eliminate or control than. An effective hazard control process involves identifying and implementing control measures to obtain an adequate balance between woricer capabilities and work requirements so that MSDs are not reasonably likely to occur. 

During the identification and analysis of hazards, you should do the following  

Ergonomics hazard identification and analysis are processes for pinpointing work-related hazards or causes of MSDs and involve examining the workplace conditions and individual elements or tasks of a job to identify and assess the ergonomic risk factors that are reasonably likely to be causing or contributing to the reported MSDs. They can also be preventive measures used to identify jobs and job tasks where MSDs and MSD hazards are reasonably likely to develop in the future. Job hazard analysis is an essential element in the effective control of MSD hazards. In many situations, the causes of MSD hazards are apparent after discussions with the employee and observation of the job, but in other jobs the causes may not be readily apparent. In part, this is because most MSD hazards involve exposure to a combination of risk factors (i.e., multifactorial hazard). For example, it may not be clear in a repetitive motion job whether exposure to repetition, force, or awkward postures is the risk factor that is causing the problem. 

---

Ergonomics program. Final rule removal. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Fed Reg 2001 666 20403. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Elements of ergonomics programs. A primer based on workplace evaluations of musculoskeletal disorders. Centers for Disease Control (NIOSH) Publication No. 97-117. Atlanta, GA Centers for Disease Control, March, 1997. 

Cohen, A. L., Gjessing, C. C., Eine, L. J., Bernard, B. P., and McGlotWin, J. D. (1997), Elements of Ergonomics Programs A Primer Based on Workplace Evaluations of Musculoskeletal Disorders, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati. 

Haims, M. C., and Carayon, P. (1998), Theory tuid Practice for the Implementation of Tn-house, Continuous Improvement Participatory Ergonomic Programs, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 461-472. 

An important component of musculoskeletal disorders management efforts is development of a well-structured and comprehensive ergonomic program. According to Alexander and Orr (1992), the basic components of such a program should include ... 

The standard applies only to the jobs specified in Section 1910.901, not to the entire workplace or to other workplaces in the company. The standard does not apply to agriculture, construction, or maritime operations. In the proposed standard, a full ergonomics program consists of these six program elements ... 

The employer should set up the complete ergonomics program if either the quick fix controls do not ehminate the MSD hazards within the quick fix deadline (120 days) or another covered MSD is reported in that job within 36 months. 

Finally, it should be noted that the OSHA s Final Ergonomic Program Standard took effect on January 16, 2001. 

Alexander, D. C., and Orr, G. B. (1992), The Evaluation of Occupational Ergonomics Programs, in Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting, pp. 697-701. 

GAO (1997), Worker Protection Private Sector Ergonomics Programs Yield Positive Results, GAO/ HEHS-97-163, U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington, DC. 

Ideally, an audit system would be broad enough to cover any task in any industry, would provide highly detailed andysis and recommendations, and would be applied rapidly. Unfortunately, the three variables of breadth, depth, and application time are likely to trade off in a practical system. Thus a thermal audit (Parsons 1992) sacrifices breadth to provide considerable depth based on the heat balance equation but requires measurement of seven variables. Some can be obtained rapidly (air temperature, relative humidity), but some take longer (clothing insulation value, metabolic rate). Conversely, structured interviews with participants in an ergonomics program (Drury 1990a) can be broad and rapid but quite deficient in depth. 

The ergonomics program was similarly diverse. It started with a corporate launch by the highest-level executives and was rolled out to the divisions and then to individual plants. The pace of change was widely variable. AU divisions were given a standard set of workplace analysis and modification tools (based on Drury and Wick 1984) but were encouraged to develop their own solutions to problems in a way appropriate to their specific needs. 

The major user concern at the plant level was time devoted to ergonomics by providers. At the corporate level, the need was seen for more rapid job-analysis methods and corporate policies, such as on back belts or good chairs. Overall, 94% of users made positive comments about the ergonomics program. 

On another level, the audit was a useful reminder to the company of the fact that it had incurred most of the up-front costs of a corporate ergonomics program, and was now beginning to reap the benefits. Indeed, by 1996, corporate injury costs and rates had decreased by about 20% per year after... 

Verma, S. (2000), Introduction of Context in Human Performance Models as Applied to Dynamic Resectorization, Master s thesis, San Jose State University, Human Factors and Ergonomics Program, San Jose, CA. 

With much of the OSHA debate focusing on the value of ergonomic programs, many astute business leaders began to look at the business effects of ergonomically bad jobs in their organizations. For some, this appears to have resulted in a shift of the drivers behind ergonomic processes... 

---