| Register/Subscribe Home |
|
ONLINE FEATURES
Book Reviews
BW Video
Columnists
Interactive Gallery
Newsletters
Past Covers
Philanthropy
Podcasts
Special Reports
BLOGS
Auto Beat
Bangalore Tigers
Blogspotting
Brand New Day
Byte of the Apple
Economics Unbound
Eye on Asia
Fine On Media
Green Biz
Hot Property
Investing Insights
Management IQ
NEXT: Innovation
NussbaumOnDesign
Tech Beat
Working Parents
TECHNOLOGY
J.D. Power Ratings
Product Reviews
Tech Stats
Wildstrom: Tech Maven
AUTOS
Home Page
Auto Reviews
Classic Cars
Car Care & Safety
Hybrids
INNOVATION
& DESIGN Home Page Architecture Brand Equity Auto Design Game Room SMALLBIZ Smart Answers Success Stories Today's Tip INVESTING Investing: Europe Annual Reports BW 50 S&P Picks & Pans Stock Screeners Free S&P Stock Report SCOREBOARDS Hot Growth 100 Mutual Funds Info Tech 100 S&P 500 B-SCHOOLS Undergrad Programs MBA Blogs MBA Profiles MBA Rankings Who's Hiring Grads | | AUGUST 22, 2000 MANAGEMENT Headed for an Ergonomics Showdown OSHA's sweeping plan aimed at protecting workers from injury faces a knock-down battle in Congress
So Nobis reversed course. He got rid of the curved keyboards and ordered a dozen, old-fashioned flat ones. "It was easier for me to spend the money than fight it," he says. In the future, Nobis may not have that option. While it may still feel like the sluggish days of August, congressional Republicans and the Clinton Administration are headed for a showdown over a sweeping ergonomics proposal that would affect an estimated 27 million workers at 1.9 million work sites. "We're ready for a tough vote, sort of a who-blinks-first test," says Craig Orfield, a spokesman for the Senate Small Business Committee, whose Republican members have sharply criticized the plan. SYMPTOMS AND SYSTEMS. At stake is a decade-long effort by the Occupational Safety & Health Administration to require a wide swath of businesses to take steps to protect workers from musculoskeletal disorders, which include injuries to muscles, tendons, ligaments, joints, and spinal disks. To be covered, the injuries must stem from actions at the core of a worker's job and be serious enough to require days off or assignment to "light duty." Under OSHA's plan, employers would have to inform workers of the symptoms of possible injuries and set up a system for reporting them. If a musculoskeletal injury does occur, the requirements are far more extensive: Employers must analyze all jobs for possible risks, take action to reduce injuries (including buying special workstations and other equipment), train workers on potential hazards, and reassign injured workers to light duty, or provide as much as six months off, with 90% of salary and full benefits, while they recover. One of the biggest points of contention is how much the program will cost. OSHA estimates that complying with the regulation, the most far-reaching the agency has ever proposed, will cost employers $4.2 billion. Opponents, which include the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business, and a number of large trade groups -- scoff at that figure, saying it's just a fraction of what the true cost will be. "GOOD INVESTMENT." Various trade groups have mounted their own studies. Beer wholesalers put their annual costs above $800 million, while the American Trucking Assn. says the rule would cost its members $6.5 billion a year. OSHA Administrator Charles N. Jeffress calls those numbers gross exaggerations. But he acknowledges that OSHA's figure may not be right on the mark, either. "Even if it's more expensive than what we estimate, it's still a good investment for business," he says. By preventing an estimated 300,000 injuries a year, OSHA estimates the regulation will save employers, on the whole, about $9 billion annually. To many small-business owners, especially in manufacturing, that's little comfort. With just 43 employees, Nobis says he would feel the loss of even a single graphic designer or pressman due to repetitive stress injuries. So he takes steps now to prevent injuries -- updating equipment and encouraging breaks -- but he fears the OSHA regulation will lead to a jump in the number of injuries reported. Supporting an off-the-job employee for six months would be tough, Nobis says, but finding a skilled replacement in today's tight job market would be nearly impossible. For just such reasons, the Small Business Administration has asked OSHA to exempt small business from the ergonomics regulation altogether. But that's not likely. According to OSHA, companies with 20 employees or fewer have been far slower than big business in adopting ergonomics programs. FALL DECISION? Still, regulators insist they're listening to the criticism from business groups. The policy's final version, Jeffress says, will include "substantial changes," including clarification of when a problem is fixed. OSHA is also considering a stair-step system of responses, based on the nature and extent of workers' injuries. Under the current proposal, employers would have to fulfill all requirements of the policy if even a single employee suffers a work-related musculoskeletal injury. The battle is likely to be decided this fall. Both the House and Senate have moved to block OSHA by attaching riders to an appropriations bill that would bar the agency from completing work on the ergonomics rule. The White House, however, has threatened to veto any such attempt. And it appears unlikely that Republicans would have the votes for an override. One added pressure: It's an election year. That means members of Congress from both parties will be anxious to wrap up business and return home as quickly as possible. In the meantime, OSHA is moving ahead, albeit at bureaucratic speed. And while some critics have hinted that the final outcome may hinge on the November election, with a Republican Administration less likely to support ergonomics rules, Jeffress disputes that notion. "With ergonomics," he says, "it's not a matter of whether there will be a rule, it's just a matter of when."  By Julie Fields  | | |
 Copyright 2000, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of Use | Privacy Policy |
Printer-Friendly Version
