Stretching as Ergonomics??

I was in Orlando, FL last week for the Applied Ergonomics Conference.  I had the privilege to present as well as attend other sessions and the exhibit hall.  To my disappointment there were sessions that promoted stretching programs in the workplace as a form of applied ergonomics.  Am I the only one who found this to be the antithesis of ergonomics?  The purpose and focus of ergonomics is to design the work and work environment to fit the people and the machines they use and systems wherein they function.  An oft used cliché of ergonomics is to “fit the work to the person”.  If this is the accepted definition and purpose of ergonomics then I fail to see how stretching programs fits this definition.

One session in particular stated the purpose of the stretching program was to increase the flexibility of the workers to decrease injuries.  Their stretching program had been in existence for about 1 year.  One of the presenters stated that every employee completed flexibility testing prior to and after 12 weeks.  The main flexibility tests were the sit and reach test to measure hamstring flexibility, Appley’s test to measure shoulder flexibility and grip strength (I wasn’t sure how that related to stretching).  The employees performed stretches for 15 minutes each shift.  The post-test showed employee’s had gained flexibility after the end of 12 weeks.  The employees were not tested again after the 12 weeks but continued to do the stretching program.  Their results to date were no injuries in the areas in which the stretching program was implemented; however, they also stated those areas had very low injury rates to begin with.  The one tidbit they added, which I feel is the true purpose of stretching programs, was that the biggest difference they seen since implementing the stretching program was higher scores in employee morale and engagement.  Employees were happier and that their company cared about them more.  At no time during the session did the presenters address the work performed and if there were attempts to modify the work to reduce the need to bend, reach, twist and maintain awkward positions for prolonged periods of time. 

Let me say first and foremost that I don’t find fault with the presenters.  They submitted a topic and it was approved to be included in the conference.  I talked with one of the presenters about how stretching wasn’t ergonomics and she said that from my point of view that she agreed.   I found it disappointing that at no time during the Q&A immediately after their presentation did anyone question stretching as ergonomics.  All of the questions were about when to do stretching, how to find time for stretching and how did you get executive buy-in for stretching. 

This session and the others on stretching basically explained how they were doing their best to change their workers to fit the work conditions instead of trying to fit the work to the workers.  That to me was very unfortunate.  There are already too many “myths” of ergonomics the way it is (that ergonomics is “the chair”, “the posture police”, among others) and now we have an ergonomics conference that essentially supports stretching as ergonomics.   

You may think that I am completely against stretching programs.  Not true!  Actually I like them for engaging employees, team building and improving morale.  I wouldn’t give 15 minutes/shift to accomplish this but 5 minutes to set the tone and focus for the shift seems about right.  Just don’t call the time spent stretching “ergonomics”.

In my next blog we’ll focus on the ergonomics that could be done if an ergonomist was given “15 minutes/shift”.   I am totally fine with it as long as they don’t attach ergonomics to stretching.  They ay have