ehs wire

 

 

blog horizontal banner

Environmental Health and Safety Blog | EHSWire

Safety & Health Training – A Victim of Its Own Success?

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Jun 14, 2010 1:11:20 AM

Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

These are tough economic times and businesses are looking to cut costs and save money. A disturbing trend I have noticed is the willingness of many companies to make cuts in safety programs and employee training in a misguided attempt to improve the bottom line.

Trained workers are safer workers.  The facts bear this out. Shortsighted statements I’ve heard include; “We don’t have problems in that area, so we’re cutting back on training.”, when the training was most likely the reason for the lack of problems.

Often, it is difficult to see how beneficial training can be until you experience the effects of its absence. Negative indications show themselves in higher EMRs, increased workman’s compensation claims, lost production time, and property damage. Only companies actively tracking and trending incidents are likely to realize this. (By the way, such companies would also be the ones least likely to make such cuts in the first place!)

It takes just one serious incident resulting in injuries to quickly eliminate any savings associated with cutting programs and training.  What’s more, most health and safety training is required by regulations, so there is also the risk of fines for non-compliance. These can be hefty and since most companies don’t budget for them, they become an extraordinary cost – right off the bottom line!

At Emilcott, we have seen firsthand the effects that result from a lack of training.  Recently, we were hired by a client who laid-off their safety director a couple years prior.  After starting our work, we informed the client of numerous safety violations throughout their organization. These appeared to be a direct result of the lapse in proper safety training – since they no longer had a safety director to oversee their program.  Through the Emilcott Training Institute, our client was able to receive the training needed to avoid these safety violations – and keep their employees safe and on the job. However, in their attempt to save money, the client ended up spending more in a short period of time just to catch up.

Making drastic H&S budget cuts just never pay off.  As experienced health and safety consultants, we work with our clients to offer solutions when budgets get tight:

  • Outsource until you can hire again – we have provided EHS professionals at our clients’ sites for just this purpose for both short and long term requirements.

  • Prioritize your H&S needs – consider the total reduction in your workforce or operations to determine where you can pull back and where you cannot.

  • Take advantage of training courses open to the public – it may no longer be economically sound to run a training course in-house, but don’t lapse on required courses.

  • Take advantage of FREE resources – many consultants provide lots of free info and OSHA will provide all types of assistance at no cost. As an example, Emicott offers a comprehensive Free Training Needs Assessment at www.emilcott.com!

  • Pool resources – look toward your industry’s professional organizations or neighboring companies to share services. Maybe a part-time Safety Director is better than none at all.

  • Ask a professional – put together a plan and a program to get you through the lean times


Has your company adjusted their health and safety program for leaner times?

Have you seen a direct effect and how are you compensating?
Read More

Topics: OSHA, health and safety, General Industry H&S, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Fire Safety, Occupational Training, Lab Safety, Safety Training in Spanish

Occupational Lyme Disease

Posted by Shivi Kakar

May 10, 2010 2:36:10 AM


<a href="ht tp://ehswire.com/writers/">John DeFillippo, CHMP
Read More

Topics: health and safety, General Industry H&S, Construction H&S, worker safety, Occupational Health, Public Safety

Learning from H1N1 – Employers Need to Consider Continued Pandemic Threats

Posted by Shivi Kakar

May 3, 2010 4:48:24 AM

Genya Mallach - CSP
Most recently, we have had to educate ourselves on the wide-spread outbreak of influenza virus, H1N1, and the precautions necessary to break the pandemic, which is far from over. Not to downplay the risk of the H1N1 virus, a virulent, drug resistant form of Tuberculosis (TB) has appeared in the United States. This disease is so ancient that it has been found in the spine of a 4,400-year-old Egyptian mummy. Tuberculosis is still the top single infectious killer of adults worldwide. According to the World Health Organization, it lies dormant in one out of three people. Of those, 10 percent will develop active TB, and about 2 million people a year will die from it.

It was just six months ago that word was leaked to the public of a case of TB that was originally diagnosed in 2007, and has greatly alarmed the medical community. Oswaldo Juarez, a then 19-year old Peruvian visiting US to study English was diagnosed with XXDR (Extremely Drug Resistant) TB. This is a strain of TB that had never before been seen in the U.S.

Dr. David Ashkin, one of the nation’s leading experts on tuberculosis, described this form of tuberculosis as so rare that only a handful of people in the world are thought to have had it.The treatment of an XXDR TB is an equivalent to aggressive chemotherapy, requires strict quarantine and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat.

The questions we must now ask are: Should we consider testing of TB in the work environment? Should periodic testing of all workers be required? Should we be worried of another pandemic?
Read More

Topics: indoor air quality, health and safety, General Industry H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, worker safety, Occupational Health, emergency response training, Exposure, hygiene standard

The Regulators Awake: Proposed Changes to the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Oct 13, 2009 6:50:04 AM

Paula Kaufmann, CIH
Both OSHA and the EPA seemed to have recently awoken from their regulatory slumber. OSHA has announced its first major rulemaking during the Obama administration with a proposed change to the agency’s Hazard Communication (HazCom) Standard.  The existing OSHA HazCom Standard provides workers with the right to know the hazards and identities of the chemicals they are exposed to while working, as well as the measures they can take to protect themselves.  This standard was originally adopted in November 1983 and has been enhanced a few times with the latest revision in February 1994.

The proposed changes set the stage for the United States to catch up with the global community in the use of globally consistent methods for chemical hazard classification, hazard labeling, and the format of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).  The proposed changes will align the HazCom Standard with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling (GHS).  The GHS was adopted by the UN in 2003 with a goal of implementation in 2008.   Most multinational companies have been following both the global system and the current OSHA Hazard Communication Program in recent years.  The US Department of Transportation has already modified the DOT requirements to make them consistent with international UN transportation requirements and the GHS.  Now it is time for OSHA.

The proposed changes will significantly improve the quality and consistency of information provided to workers, employers and chemical user by having a standardized approach to identifying the hazard, labeling the hazard on containers and equipment, and documentation of the hazard on a MSDS.  The most pronounced change that chemical purchasers and workers will see is a consistent hazard warning statements and warnings (including pictograms) along with MSDSs will always have the same information located in the same place.  These changes are critical not only for everyday users of the chemicals but also emergency responders and medical personnel.

However, the changes won’t be required next week and probably not even next year.  The process for moving through a major revision to an established regulation can be long and loud (with input from all vantages points on the changes).  OSHA took the first step of this process in September 2006 with an “Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (ANPR).  The recent step, in September 2009, is detailing the changes to HazCom with the publishing of a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (NPRM). Next is the comment period (90 days – December 29, 2009) and then public hearings scheduled for early 2010.  OSHA will then draft a Proposed Standard which will have to be reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget and will consult with the Small Business Administration.  The Proposal Standard will then get published in the Federal Register, and will most likely have a comment period.  FINALLY, OSHA will incorporate changes from comments into the Final Standard, which will be published in the Federal Register with the provisions taking effect over the following months or years.

It’s a long process.  Regulators don’t have the window of time to slumber.
Read More

Topics: Emilcott, OSHA, DOT, health and safety, General Industry H&S, Construction H&S, EPA, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Hazardous Waste Management, HazCom, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, MSDS, Hazard Communication Standard, Occupational Training, Safety Training in Spanish

Swine Flu Update

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Sep 17, 2009 1:52:33 AM

Read More

Topics: H&S Training, Occupational Health, Webinar, emergency response training, Occupational Training, Safety Training in Spanish, Swine Flu

My Immunity, No More

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Sep 15, 2009 11:27:08 AM

Losing a (Once Winning) Battle with Poison Ivy

Paula Kaufmann - CIH
Read More

Topics: Personal Protective Equipment, General Industry H&S, H&S Training, Occupational Health, Exposure

10 Items You Need To Know About Water and Mold Damage In A Commercial Building

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Sep 1, 2009 2:37:34 AM

Mike Gfroehrer
1. The uncontrolled release of water may result in mold (fungi) growth in a previously non-water damaged area of a building if the water release is not adequately addressed within 48 hours of its occurrence. In addition to mold growth, water damaged can result in structural damage and support the proliferation of other types of biological organisms including dust mites, cockroaches, rodents, algae, and/or bacteria.

2. The uncontrolled release of water in a building with a history of water damage may cause dormant mold colonies from prior water releases to become active in less than 48 hours.

3. One of the most important factors in effectively preventing or controlling mold growth inside a commercial building is to have a written Water Response Plan in place before an uncontrolled release of water occurs.

4. An effective Water Response Plan will include provisions to immediately stop the uncontrolled release of water and prevent its’ reoccurrence.

5. An effective Water Response Plan will include provisions to immediately start removing the water by mechanical means such as extraction with wet vacuums and the use of commercial-grade drying equipment. Areas where drywall (sheetrock) are covered by large pieces of furniture, wallpaper, or cove base/moldings may require special attention that potentially includes removal of sections of the drywall. The source of the water (domestic drinking water vs. rain penetration through the building vs. widespread flooding vs. sewage backup) will also impact the required response activity. Visible inspection, moisture meters, infrared cameras, measurement of temperature and relative humidity are all tools that that may be used to identify where water damaged materials exist.

6. Depending on the capabilities of the commercial building’s maintenance staff, the Water Response Plan should anticipate the use of outside contractors such as licensed plumbers, roofing contractors, environmental consultants, water/fire damage restoration contractors, and/or qualified mold remediation contractors. It is advisable to have an established relationship with each type of contractor in order to best control costs once the Water Response Plan requires activation.

7. The most common health effect resulting from indoor mold exposure is an aggravation of allergies and/or asthmatic conditions. Prolonged exposure may cause hypersensitivity in some individuals, resulting in these individuals experiencing a severe respiratory reaction even when very low concentrations of airborne mold are present at work or at home. The variety of responses is often seen when employees working in the same area report a wide range of individual responses when near the water damaged building materials.

8. If an uncontrolled release of water is not properly responded to mold growth will likely result. Once mold growth is suspected or confirmed a qualified individual should conduct an investigation to determine the extent of the mold growth and develop a Mold Remediation Work Plan. The Mold Remediation Work Plan should identify procedures to follow when cleaning or removing mold damaged building materials so that building occupants are protected and not adversely affected by the remediation project.

9. The Mold Remediation Work Plan must include: which building materials require removal; which building materials require cleaning and disinfection; a plan for the isolation of the work area using barriers (polyethylene sheeting) and negative air machines to control airborne dust generation; documentation of worker training in proper mold remediation work procedures; and the criteria of the Post Remediation Assessment. Simply put, spraying with bleach or covering with an anti-microbial paint is not an appropriate response where mold growth is confirmed to be present on installed building materials.

10. A Post Remediation Assessment (PRA) determines if the Mold Remediation Work Plan was successful in returning the area to non-water damaged condition. The PRA must be conducted prior to the removal of isolation barriers and should include: a visual inspection to confirm water and mold damaged has been removed and the area has been appropriately cleaned; a moisture survey, using moisture meters, to document remaining installed building materials are satisfactorily dry; and confirmation that corrective actions are in place to prevent additional water damage. Depending on the extent of the mold damage air and surface samples may be collected as part of the PRA. Whenever air or surface samples are collected a qualified individual, such as a Certified Industrial Hygienist, should be chosen to determine the sample locations and assist with the interpretation of results.
Read More

Topics: health and safety, Construction H&S, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Mold, Occupational Training, Working Green, Water Response Plan

Watch Your Back! 5 Bending/Lifting Techniques

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Aug 27, 2009 8:10:22 AM

Read More

Topics: health and safety, General Industry H&S, Construction H&S, H&S Training, Occupational Health, Occupational Training, Safety Training in Spanish

10 Things EVERYONE Should Know About Fire Safety

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Aug 25, 2009 5:09:58 AM

EHS Top Ten Tuesday: Fire Safety

Eileen Lucier
Read More

Topics: OSHA, health and safety, General Industry H&S, H&S Training, Hazardous Materials, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Fire Safety, Occupational Training, Lab Safety, Medical Records, NFPA

Top 10 Things to Know BEFORE Shipping Hazardous Materials

Posted by Shivi Kakar

Aug 4, 2009 8:34:54 AM

Dian Cucchisi, PhD, CHMM

1. Is the material hazardous? This can be determined by looking at the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) or the label.

2. Does the Department of Transportation consider the material a hazardous material for transportation? Check the Hazardous Material Table (HMT) found in 49 CFR 172.101.

3. Is the material listed by name in the HMT? If so, that would be the proper shipping name.

4. Is the material not listed by name in the HMT but is a hazardous material due to flammability, corrosivity, etc.? If so, a generic proper shipping name would be used. The generic proper shipping names are also located in the HMT.

5. Do you have personnel trained according to 49 CFR 172.704?

6. Do you have the proper label(s) as required by 49 CFR 172.400 - .450?

7. Is the packaging approved for the shipment of hazardous materials according to 49 CFR 173?

8. Have you completed the Shipper's Declaration of Dangerous Goods?

9. Is the listed emergency response telephone number answered by a "live person?"

10. Failure to ship hazardous materials properly has resulted in monetary fines in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Read More

Topics: OSHA, DOT, health and safety, General Industry H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Hazardous Materials, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, emergency response training, MSDS, Respiratory, Occupational Training, Safety Training in Spanish

Subscribe to EHSWire.com!

Search EHSWire.com!

Latest Posts

Posts by category