injured worker

The last two blogs have focused on why employees, despite knowing policies and processes and even paying attention to them most of the time still consciously choose to take risks.  The next question that should be considered looks at the flip side, “Why companies/CEOs/directors/managers, even if there’s great evidence that safety solutions are cost effective, will lead to more productivity and profitability, consciously decide to ignore those solutions and continue to permit risky situations?”

Why employees, even when they know the safety policy, they’ve been properly trained in the policy and even paid attention to it, still might consciously choose to take risks?  Part 2

In the Kelby Ergo Design Ergo Advantage March 2013 newsletter the title of the feature article was “Safety is #1”:  Why Employees Don’t Believe It”.  In it we covered the most common reasons why employees don’t believe safety truly is a priority for management despite what the fact that management says they do.  There are two additional questions that should be asked and answered that pertain to this topic.  The first question is the title to this blog, “Why

What is the age that you use to define for an “older” worker?  Is it 45, 50, 55 or 65?  Employers across the nation are seeing the average age of their work force getting older each year as people are delaying retirement more than ever before.  This is a trend that has employers concerned for several reasons with two being the most impactful—potential injury/safety ramifications and upcoming knowledge loss.  The “common wisdom” has been that older workers don’t get hurt often but when they do the expenses are very high.  Is this “common wisdom” true?  A

Many companies devote time to training their employees on back safety in which they teach the basics of back anatomy and safe lifting techniques.  The question I have had on this training “Is the time and money spent on back injury prevention worth it?”  Of course, this question (“Is it worth it?”) should be asked of any training.  After all, training takes time, takes employees away from their jobs and therefore is a significant investment by the company in their personnel as well as financially.

It is well known that obesity is an epidemic in America with over 60% of Americans either overweight or obese. (1) Recently there have been two studies published which caught my attention due to fact that both were in regards to obesity and driving.  Both studies left me to believe that ergonomics and wellness are imperative for employers as well as communities.  Let me explain why.

Pushing and pulling is involved in many tasks and jobs in a wide variety of industries.  In order to avoid injuries and optimize efficiency it is important to properly design pushing and pulling tasks.  A good online resource that explains the ergonomics of material handling in general and then goes into the details of pushing and pulling tasks is called “

Light—it’s necessary for humans.  It effects people mentally, physically, physiologically and their overall performance.  The impact of lighting in the workplace is very important to understand—not only to achieve energy savings but also to influence worker performance.  Intuitively we know that lighting is of value but it is often overlooked in the workplace, especially the value related to productivity.

As an ergonomist, I am often asked what my opinion is on post-offer, pre-work (POPW) screens for new hires.  My first response is to ask why they are asking that question.  The normal answer is because they have a injury rate higher than what they’d like and wonder if it’s related to their workers’ fitness for work.  I have several follow up questions that help me understand the root cause of their injuries.  As much as possible work should be designed so that the majority of the population can perform the job.   This is becoming more and more important and imperative to organizations due t

In my previous blog I discussed the indisputable fact that working extended hours causes worker fatigue and lowers performance.  This was regardless of the time of day that was worked.  Another aspect to consider is the effect of shift work on worker performance.  I will define shift work as either the night shift or rotation shifts working normal amount of work hours (8-10 hours/shift).  A recent study of Canadian workers shows some interesting results in regards to work injuries.  The study covered a 10 year period, 1996-2006, and examined the injury rates of workers differentiated by the