OSHA chief vows final ergonomics rule in 2000
Political opposition remains intense
Confirming his agency’s commitment to ergo-nomics, Charles Jeffress, assistant secretary of labor for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), vowed the ergonomics standard would become final by the end of the year. "I want to make it very clear: We [will] complete an ergonomics standard this year," Jeffress said at the Frontline Healthcare Workers Safety Conference in Washington, DC, in August. (For more on the conference, see special four-page supplement, inserted in this issue.)
"Our team is committed to that. The president, the vice president, and the secretary of labor are committed to that. We will develop a standard to protect workers from MSDs [musculoskeletal disorders]," he stated.
OSHA completed its hearings on the ergonomics standard in July. Political opposition to a standard has been intense since OSHA first announced proposed rulemaking in 1992. A rider on a federal appropriations bill in 1995 delayed the regulation by prohibiting OSHA from developing a rule before Sept. 30, 1998.
Since OSHA released its proposed standard last fall, industry groups have charged it is too costly and is not based on firm science. "The language is so vague, employers can never know when they’re in full compliance," says John Eisen, spokesman for the National Coalition on Ergonomics in Washington, DC.
Ergonomics critics have powerful allies in the Republican-led Congress. President Clinton has vowed to veto the most recent efforts in Congress to block completion of the regulation. Both the House and Senate approved language in an appropriations bill to bar OSHA from spending funds to complete or implement any ergonomics standard.
With the presidential race looming and the possible change to a Republican administration, OSHA’s actions have a sense of urgency.
Jeffress defended the ergonomics standard as a critical effort to protect workers and decrease workers’ compensation costs. "The ergonomics proposal we have out there is sensible. It’s like the exposure control plan in the bloodborne pathogen standard. We have a plan that you have to design to fit your workplace. You analyze what works in your workplace. The proposal, we believe, will eliminate 200,000 serious injuries every year and will save more than $10 billion for the American economy."
Supporters of ergonomics are urging OSHA to finish its work.
"I think it’s unfortunate that the ergonomics [standard] has become such a political hotbed," says Guy Fragala, PhD, PE, CSP, director of environmental health and safety at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center in Worcester and a leading ergonomics expert. "If most people look at the needs and benefits of an ergonomic management program, they realize it does make sense," he says. "The issues that are controversial are only a small part of what the entire standard is."
Fragala says he understands that employers prefer to act without the restrictions of regulation, but ergonomics simply won’t get as much attention and resources without a standard. "Health care has so many issues it needs to deal with. By making this a regulation, it’s going to push it up on the list of priorities."
You have reached your article limit for the month. Subscribe now to access this article plus other member-only content.
- Award-winning Medical Content
- Latest Advances & Development in Medicine
- Unbiased Content