Businesses eager for word from OSHA on safety rules

Grace Leong

Friday, Dec. 14, 2001 | 10:52 a.m.

Gene Raltz is eagerly awaiting a signal from the Bush administration about its direction on worker safety regulations that businesses must comply with.

He's not alone.

Raltz, an ergonomics consultant, said Thursday that he was disappointed at the Occupational Health and Safety Administration's apparent failure to come up with new ergonomics rules after a repeal in March of worker safety rules imposed by the Clinton administration.

The U.S. Labor Department, which was supposed to have announced a new plan in September, postponed the announcement to later this year because of its involvement in the rescue efforts at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the bioterrorism threats including the anthrax scare.

Raltz, a general manager of AllTech Services, a Los Alamitos, Calif.-based occupational ergonomics consultancy, was one of 1,000 participants at the National Ergonomics Conference and Exposition in Las Vegas -- an event for ergonomics professionals and workplace safety experts.

Raltz said he wanted clearer indications from OSHA on whether another federal regulation will be imposed or whether a voluntary policy will be promoted to enforce workplace safety rules.

President George Bush, in signing a measure to repeal the rules issued in November 2000 by OSHA, said the rules would have cost both large and small employers billions of dollars and presented employers with overwhelming compliance challenges.

Raltz also wanted to know whether OSHA's new rules, if imposed, will conflict with existing federal laws including the Americans with Disabilities Act.

"For example, if a worker gets injured on the job and has limited job capability after becoming disabled, does he or she fall under the new OSHA rules or the ADA?"

Davis Layne, OSHA's deputy assistant secretary for labor, had few answers Thursday for the Las Vegas conference participants. He said the Labor Department wants to have a new plan by year-end.

"(Labor) Secretary Elaine Chao held three forums in Virginia, Illinois and California in July to find out what's the best approach to address ergonomics concerns in the workplace." She's been meeting with interested parties and will use that information to make decisions on how she wants to proceed, he said.

Layne said OSHA aims to define what constitutes an ergonomically related injury and wants to propose ways to determine if an injury stems from the workplace or other factors. The plan will determine what constitutes an effective program to address ergonomics hazards at the workplace and the most cost-effective method to deal with ergonomically related injuries.

"Workplace safety and health add value to (businesses') bottom lines and OSHA is looking for ways to show businesses that these shouldn't be seen as just an add-on," he said. "But some major changes on OSHA's regulatory agenda are also needed. We need to use more technology to deliver worker safety requirements to businesses."

"We have to go beyond issuing citations to get businesses to comply with OSHA rules. We want to work with and assist businesses in identifying workplaces with safety hazards to prevent workplace injuries," he said. "Effective enforcement depends also on getting OSHA workers to be professionally certified. And legislation now allows the government to assist federal workers in getting certification."

Robert Vaughn, a physical therapist at a 650-worker Frito Lay plant in Irving, Texas, said he hopes to get "more focused and specific information on where OSHA is going with the ergonomics standards, and less about OSHA's direction in general."

"But I also realize that he couldn't elaborate much yet," he said of Layne's presentation. "Employers are concerned about what constitutes a work-related injury and what constitutes the ergonomics standard because they're afraid they'll be stuck with the responsibility for a lot of problems that may not necessarily be work-related."

Tom Chavez, a safety manager with the Bureau of Land Management in Albuquerque, predicts OSHA may propose a guideline on ergonomics as opposed to a federal regulation -- a move that could win more support from businesses.

He said that's because "guidelines aren't a requirement but a recommendation, and businesses don't like being regulated."

Rick Imker, owner of a Las Vegas-based occupational ergonomics consultancy, agreed.

"The repeal essentially stipulates that any future OSHA standard on ergonomics can't be similar to what was proposed. It's likely that OSHA will move away from a regulatory approach and move towards getting businesses to implement the guidelines it proposes."

"We were opposed to the old ergonomics standard because OSHA didn't properly define what a musculoskeletal disorder was, what the causes were and what preventative measures could be taken," he said.

" We wanted the standards to be more specific. But OSHA can't do that because it doesn't have the data to support a more specific standard. For instance, can OSHA measure how much force can be applied to a keyboard before a person develops a repetitive motion disorder?" he asked.