Workplace Safety & Health Co. Inc. Blog

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

As part of National Safety Month in June, the National Safety Council updated its annual list of the Odds of Dying from various causes.

Some key comparisons of lifetime odds of dying from common activities are:
-Motor vehicle crash (1-in-112) vs. commercial airplane crash (1-in-96,566)
-Overdosing on opioid prescription painkillers (1-in-234) vs. being electrocuted (1-in-12,200)
-Falling (1-in-144) vs. a catastrophic storm (1-in-6,780)
-Being a passenger in a car (1-in-470) vs. a lightning strike (1-in-164,968)
-Walking along or crossing the street (1-in-704) vs. a bee, wasp or hornet sting (1-in-55,764), and
-Complications from surgical or medical are (1-in-1,532) vs. an earthquake (1-in-179,965).

http://www.nsc.org/act/events/Pages/Odds-of-Dying-2015.aspx

When making sure first aids kits are properly stocked, it’s also a good idea to make sure they are up to date. As part of a revision to the 2014 edition, the International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) has received American National Standards Institute (ANSI) approval for ANSI/ISEA Z308.1-2015, American National Standard-Minimum Requirements for Workplace First Aid Kits and Supplies.

The standard was put together by members of ISEA’s First Aid Group and industry stakeholders and was approved by a consensus review panel of health and safety experts, unions, construction industry and other user groups, test labs, and government agencies. According to ISEA, the 2015 revision corrects a minor measurement conversion error with respect to the U.S. measurement for minimum application for antibiotic and antiseptic supplies that appeared in the 2014 edition.The effective date of the new standard is June 2016.

A major change from previous editions is the introduction of a multi-tiered approach to kit designations. According to ISEA, the new designations were based on a review of workplace injuries in which first aid was administered and a consideration of current practices in treating them. The revision introduces two classes of first aid kits, further divided into four types.

The classes are based on the assortment and quantity of the supplies the kits contain. Class A kits are aimed at dealing with most common workplace injuries, including minor cuts, abrasions and sprains. Class B kits are designed with a broader range and quantity of supplies to deal with injuries in more complex or high-risk environments.

First aid kits are further designated by Type (I, II, III or IV) depending on the work environment in which they are to be used. A Type I kit is meant for indoor use and for and permanent mounting to a wall or other structure. In contrast, Type IV kits are suitable for outdoor use and required to pass corrosion-, moisture- and impact-resistance tests.

Many of the first aid supplies previously identified as being recommendations in the 2009 standard are now required for both of the newly-designated kit types. In addition, scissors are to be included in both classes of kits and a splint and a tourniquet are both required for a Class B first aid kit.

For more information, visit www.safetyequipment.org

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced in late May that it will continue its partnership with Health Canada to align United States and Canadian regulatory approaches to labeling and classification requirements for workplace chemicals.

OSHA aligned its Hazard Communication Standard with the GHS in March 2012 to provide a common, understandable approach to classifying chemicals and communicating hazard information on labels and safety data sheets. Canada published a similar regulation in February 2015.

The goal of the partnership is to implement a system allowing the use of one label and one safety data sheet (SDS) that would be acceptable in both countries. In 2013, OSHA and Health Canada signed a Memorandum of Understanding to promote ongoing collaboration on implementing the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) in their respective jurisdictions.

https://www.osha.gov/newsrelease/trade-20150528.html

Tagged in: OSHA

The National Safety Council (NSC) has added its voice to the call for companies to use the latest science and not just OSHA’s limits when it comes to protecting workers from hazardous chemicals.

For Workers’ Memorial Day this year, the NSC urged employers to address workplace illnesses and to “consider the latest scientific research … which should go beyond OSHA’s Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs).”

Workplace illnesses result in 53,000 deaths and 427,000 nonfatal injuries each year, compared to workplace injuries which lead to 4,500 deaths and 4.8 million injuries requiring medical attention annually.

The NSC issued a new policy position recommending that employers:
-Use consensus standards, employer best practices and information from the American Conference of Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for determining the most effective control strategies, which should go beyond OSHA’s PELs, Hazard Communication Standard and the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS)
-Improve reporting and tracking of occupational illnesses
-Share information and practices on prevention of occupational illnesses
-Reduce risks of exposure to chemicals by using the hierarchy of controls
-Contribute to the review and update of existing standards that protect workers from harmful exposure to chemicals, and
-Consider total worker health factors that may exacerbate occupational illness exposures.

OSHA just closed the comment period in its Request for Information on revising PELs. The next step is for the agency to publish the results of the RFI, which could happen before the close of 2015.

http://www.nsc.org/NewsDocuments/Occupational-Illness-125.pdf

 

Tagged in: OSHA

A bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives recently would codify the Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP), a safety and health program overseen by OSHA. The programs are aimed at preventing workplace injuries and fatalities while increasing productivity, employee engagement and lowering costs for companies and taxpayers.

The Programs recognize employers and workers in the private industry and federal agencies who have implemented effective safety and health management systems and maintain injury and illness rates below national Bureau of Labor Statistics averages for their respective industries. In VPP, management, labor, and OSHA work cooperatively and proactively to prevent fatalities, injuries, and illnesses through a system focused on hazard prevention and control, worksite analysis, training, and management commitment and worker involvement.

To participate, employers are required to submit an application to OSHA and undergo an onsite evaluation by a team of safety and health professionals. Union support is required for applicants represented by a bargaining unit. Program participants are re-evaluated every three to five years to remain in the programs. VPP participants are exempt from OSHA programmed inspections while they maintain their VPP status.

The bipartisan Voluntary Protection Program Act (H.R. 2500) was introduced by Congressman Gene Green (D-TX), Congressman Todd Rokita (R-IN) and Congresswoman Martha Roby (R-AL). In presenting the bill to the House, the representatives highlighted VPP's track record of improving safety and health at worksites across the U.S.

"We all want to ensure worker safety, and VPP seeks to achieve that through partnerships, not penalties,” Roby said in a statement. “VPP helps companies become compliant with workplace safety rules on the front end to avoid costly fines and harmful penalties on the back end. VPP is a smart way to ensure a safe and productive workplace, and I’m proud to be a part of this bipartisan legislation to finally codify it."

"VPP has been a great success in Indiana, including worksites like Cintas in Frankfort and Nucor in Crawfordsville,” said Rokita in a statement. “It is one federal program that works well, fostering cooperation between private businesses and a government regulator. This collaboration is good for employees, employers, and the American economy."

According to a statement from Rokita’s office, VPP currently covers nearly a million employees. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) estimates that tens of millions of taxpayer dollars are saved annually through VPP, calculating government savings to be more than $59 million a year. Private sector savings total more than $300 million annually.
For more information on the programs, navigate to https://www.osha.gov/dcsp/vpp/.

certifications

Go to top