Pump Down The Volume: Noise Pollution Is Serious Stuff.
While it’s impossible to make a factory blasting at full output TV studio quiet, steps can be taken to reduce noise as much as possible – which translates into high productivity and fewer worker’s comp claims for hearing loss.
– By Isaac Rudik
In a world where workplace and outside noise can seem like an unyielding din, it is easy to take hearing for granted. Moreover, symptoms of hearing loss can be overlooked since they appear gradually and are seldom associated with pain. As a result, increasing deafness remains unnoticed often for years until it’s too late.
In fact, among all occupational hazards, noise is the biggest cause of permanent disability claims settled by Ontario’s Worker’s Compensation Board. According to WSIB, hearing loss due to high workplace noise levels resulted in roughly $100-million in claims paid out over a recent 10 year period.
As a result, Ontario’s Ministry of Labour introduced strict limits for workplace noise exposure. Among other things, the government reduced the allowable exposure time to noise by workers in half. The Environment Ministry deals with preventing excessive noise in Ontario, and sounds produced by human activity is controlled by the laws in the Ontario Environmental Protection Act (EPA), which holds that noise is a contaminant with adverse effects on workers.
Why? Because researchers proved that an individual exposed to 85dba for eight hours a day, week after week, will suffer hearing loss. The louder the sound, the less time it takes. Thus, the noisier the workplace, the fewer exposures and time it takes to produce significant – and, for employers, costly – hearing loss.
Achieving Results
While it’s impossible to make a factory blasting at full output TV studio quiet, steps can be taken to reduce noise as much as possible.
Executives at an Ontario tool-and-die maker knew they were in a noisy business; it’s in the nature of what the company does. But they were intent on reducing noise levels as much as possible. For one thing, they didn’t want to be socked with expensive worker’s comp claims if employees started suffering hearing problems; for another, they recognised that high noise levels meant lower productivity.
The company developed a three-prong strategy: Remove, Reduce, and Rest.
The company removed as much noise as possible from its plant and then reduced the amount of noise entering the workplace. Following exposure to loud noise, auditory rest is crucial to allow recovery time for the hearing system.
The plant formed a management-worker committee and following guidelines created by the Canadian Hearing Society.
First, noise was reduced at the machinery sound source, either by isolating machines or installing insulating materials to muffle sound and vibration.
Next, within the plant sound barriers made of acoustic materials were installed along with adding machine enclosures, equipment mounts, exhaust silencers and mufflers. Where possible, sound-absorbing coatings were applied to machines and plastic gears substituted for metal ones. Each helped reduce noise.
Finally, schedules were re-configured to allow workers to rotate to less noisy areas during their shift. They were also provided personal hearing protection and instructed on its proper use.
Primary Solution
The company used a variety of SONEX Panels which provided it with a range of acoustic solutions that met both functional and aesthetic requirements. The panels are used in everything from industrial facilities to manufacturing plants, warehouses, schools and universities, churches, multi-purpose rooms, cafeterias, offices, retail stores, recording studios and many other locations requiring acoustical control.
SONEX panels were chosen for their adhesive-applied installation and are all made with Willtec® foam, which is fire rated Class 1. At the same time, SONEX Valueline Baffles helped improve communication, reducing echo and reverberation in large open areas such as the production plant and warehouse.
Although the company absorbed an up-front investment, it noticed improved productivity on the plant floor almost immediately. Moreover, it received a number of points towards its LEED certification as an all-around healthy and green workplace – which is paying off in employee retention.
Coupled with reducing the likelihood of joining a long line of companies facing worker comp claims for hearing loss, the company is delighted it pumped down the volume.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Taking The LEED In Controlling Indoor Air Quality And Pollution
Taking The LEED In Controlling Indoor Air Quality And Pollution
A growing number of people work in “sick buildings” that cause problems for workers ranging from simple fatigue to complex respiratory illnesses.
- By Isaac Rudik
When judges and support staff working in the historic Alberta Court of Appeal building in Calgary began experiencing fatigue, respiratory illnesses, and eye, ear, and nose irritation, they wondered if the famous building in which they worked was causing their multiple health complaints.
So building managers brought in Professor Tang Lee, a University of Calgary specialist in sick buildings to conduct air sampling. He confirmed high levels of a toxic microbe growing as mould throughout the building, recommending the building be closed until the toxin could be removed.
It turned out that the court house was a veritable Petri dish of bacteria, thanks to an improperly installed air intake system. Not only were toxins alive and well and living in the building’s air conditioning, they took up residence and were multiplying in the furniture and carpets – even the court’s files and books. Making matters worse, when judges took files home with them, they inadvertently carried toxins to their residences, in some cases making family members ill.
In effect, the historic building was like a setting for an absurd horror movie: The Spores That Consumed Calgary.
Common Problem
In fact, the Appeals Court building problem is not an isolated, one-off incident. Indoor air pollution causes 14-times more deaths than outdoor air pollution according to the WHO, and Washington’s EPA reports indoor air pollution is one of five top environmental threats to human health.
It turns out that many commercial offices are highly toxic environments from the glues, paints, organic chemicals, adhesives and formaldehyde used during construction and finishing. These contribute to indoor air pollution through off-gassing that may continue years after new construction or renovations are completed.
The problem is both widespread and deadly: Statistics Canada reports that, in 2003, some 1.3- million people were diagnosed with Multiple Chemical Sensitivities from working or living in what the media dubs “sick buildings.” Since most of us spend roughly 90% of our day indoors, indoor air quality is a serious health risk factor.
Healthy Buildings Increase Profits
Enter the Canada Green Building Council (CGBC). Although the acronym could be mistaken for an Eighties heavy metal band, CGBC actually manages LEED Canada for new construction and major renovations; LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, a green building rating system.
Among other things it does, LEED sets an indoor environment quality including carbon dioxide monitoring, ventilation effectiveness, construction management, using low-emitting materials, indoor chemical and pollutant source control, system controls, thermal comfort, and using daylight
to supplant HVAC.
But beyond charts, graphs and reports, LEED has established the economic benefits of healthy buildings. Making general improvements is demonstrated to increase worker productivity of up to 6%. Productivity gains pay for the cost of building and air quality improvements in less than two years.
Fast Payback
Why such a fast payback?
Because the cost of indoor air quality sensors such as a readily available, multi-gas detector models that cost less than $2,500. They monitor everything from carbon monoxide and oxygen levels to hydrogen sulphide, combustibles and exotic, problem-causing gases such as nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, chlorine, ammonia, hydrogen, hydrogen cyanide and chlorine dioxide.
Sick buildings not only produce sick workers, they rob profits from a company’s bottom line – and do so year after year. Yet there are effective, low-cost ways of monitoring an office, factory or warehouse to ensure it stays healthy. They are an easy way to prevent complicated problems.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
A growing number of people work in “sick buildings” that cause problems for workers ranging from simple fatigue to complex respiratory illnesses.
- By Isaac Rudik
When judges and support staff working in the historic Alberta Court of Appeal building in Calgary began experiencing fatigue, respiratory illnesses, and eye, ear, and nose irritation, they wondered if the famous building in which they worked was causing their multiple health complaints.
So building managers brought in Professor Tang Lee, a University of Calgary specialist in sick buildings to conduct air sampling. He confirmed high levels of a toxic microbe growing as mould throughout the building, recommending the building be closed until the toxin could be removed.
It turned out that the court house was a veritable Petri dish of bacteria, thanks to an improperly installed air intake system. Not only were toxins alive and well and living in the building’s air conditioning, they took up residence and were multiplying in the furniture and carpets – even the court’s files and books. Making matters worse, when judges took files home with them, they inadvertently carried toxins to their residences, in some cases making family members ill.
In effect, the historic building was like a setting for an absurd horror movie: The Spores That Consumed Calgary.
Common Problem
In fact, the Appeals Court building problem is not an isolated, one-off incident. Indoor air pollution causes 14-times more deaths than outdoor air pollution according to the WHO, and Washington’s EPA reports indoor air pollution is one of five top environmental threats to human health.
It turns out that many commercial offices are highly toxic environments from the glues, paints, organic chemicals, adhesives and formaldehyde used during construction and finishing. These contribute to indoor air pollution through off-gassing that may continue years after new construction or renovations are completed.
The problem is both widespread and deadly: Statistics Canada reports that, in 2003, some 1.3- million people were diagnosed with Multiple Chemical Sensitivities from working or living in what the media dubs “sick buildings.” Since most of us spend roughly 90% of our day indoors, indoor air quality is a serious health risk factor.
Healthy Buildings Increase Profits
Enter the Canada Green Building Council (CGBC). Although the acronym could be mistaken for an Eighties heavy metal band, CGBC actually manages LEED Canada for new construction and major renovations; LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, a green building rating system.
Among other things it does, LEED sets an indoor environment quality including carbon dioxide monitoring, ventilation effectiveness, construction management, using low-emitting materials, indoor chemical and pollutant source control, system controls, thermal comfort, and using daylight
to supplant HVAC.
But beyond charts, graphs and reports, LEED has established the economic benefits of healthy buildings. Making general improvements is demonstrated to increase worker productivity of up to 6%. Productivity gains pay for the cost of building and air quality improvements in less than two years.
Fast Payback
Why such a fast payback?
Because the cost of indoor air quality sensors such as a readily available, multi-gas detector models that cost less than $2,500. They monitor everything from carbon monoxide and oxygen levels to hydrogen sulphide, combustibles and exotic, problem-causing gases such as nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, chlorine, ammonia, hydrogen, hydrogen cyanide and chlorine dioxide.
Sick buildings not only produce sick workers, they rob profits from a company’s bottom line – and do so year after year. Yet there are effective, low-cost ways of monitoring an office, factory or warehouse to ensure it stays healthy. They are an easy way to prevent complicated problems.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Something In The Air Smells Funny.
Something In The Air Smells Funny.
Chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business. Its use is so widespread that few people even notice “death head” label warnings anymore yet chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and death.
– by Isaac Rudik
You can’t avoid noticing chlorine in the air: It’s pungent, biting, eye-tearing, odour is unmistakable – and potentially very dangerous. That’s why, when a train carrying chlorine tankers derails or a tanker truck overturns, an entire town or neighbourhood is evacuated quickly by authorities, hospitals are put on stand-by and reporters rush to the scene.
For example, not long ago a chlorine manufacturer in Canada was pumping the gas into an awaiting rail tanker. But the coupling was not properly fastened to the train car from the feed pipe and chlorine leaked into the air. Two employees working at tanker plus one who was nearby and rushed to their aid were overcome by the toxic effects, suffering injuries to their lungs, eyes and exposed skin. People in nearby businesses and a few close-by apartment buildings were hustled onto busses and taken to a school as a precaution until the air was cleared of gas and the leak sealed.
As a toxic gas that irritates and can even destroy the respiratory system, chlorine is a potentially lethal industrial ingrediant. Because it is heavier than air, it can accumulate at the bottom of poorly ventilated spaces. Even more dangerous, chlorine gas is a strong oxidizer which can ignite flammable materials.
Easily Overlooked
The risks of chlorine are easily overlooked and even forgotten about until there is an incident.
When most people think of chlorine, they either think of a laundry product as in chlorine bleach or what gets dumps in a swimming pool to control algae and bacteria. Indeed, many of us use chlorine products regularly without giving it a second thought.
But, chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business, employed for everything from water treatment and pulp bleaching in paper mills to disinfecting equipment in food processing plants. Moreover, it is widely employed in producing countless consumer products ranging from laundry cleaners and tires to antifreeze, household cleaners and pharmaceuticals.
In fact, the use of chlorine is so widespread that few people even notice the “death head” warnings on labels anymore despite the fact that, in many industrial applications, chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and even death.
But industrial facilities that produce or use chlorine cannot be sanguine about its handling and storage.
Breathe Easily
When workers breathe even low concentrations of chlorine, it can aggravate the respiratory system and exposure to the gas can irritate the eyes because it reacts with water and cells, changing it into hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid. Neither is pleasant.
So it is incumbent upon businesses to take simple steps to provide adequate protection.
Workers can be protected by being issued gloves, masks and protective clothing. At the same time, work areas in which chlorine is present need portable air sampling devices, complete with exposure level alarms. Finally, fume hoods are a must to enhance localized ventilation.
Chlorine gas is one of those industrial components that carry a significant risk but which too many businesses seem to overlook – until it’s too late. Conducting a risk audit is one way to help ensure that the gas stays in the container and workers won’t suffer if there’s an accidental leak.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business. Its use is so widespread that few people even notice “death head” label warnings anymore yet chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and death.
– by Isaac Rudik
You can’t avoid noticing chlorine in the air: It’s pungent, biting, eye-tearing, odour is unmistakable – and potentially very dangerous. That’s why, when a train carrying chlorine tankers derails or a tanker truck overturns, an entire town or neighbourhood is evacuated quickly by authorities, hospitals are put on stand-by and reporters rush to the scene.
For example, not long ago a chlorine manufacturer in Canada was pumping the gas into an awaiting rail tanker. But the coupling was not properly fastened to the train car from the feed pipe and chlorine leaked into the air. Two employees working at tanker plus one who was nearby and rushed to their aid were overcome by the toxic effects, suffering injuries to their lungs, eyes and exposed skin. People in nearby businesses and a few close-by apartment buildings were hustled onto busses and taken to a school as a precaution until the air was cleared of gas and the leak sealed.
As a toxic gas that irritates and can even destroy the respiratory system, chlorine is a potentially lethal industrial ingrediant. Because it is heavier than air, it can accumulate at the bottom of poorly ventilated spaces. Even more dangerous, chlorine gas is a strong oxidizer which can ignite flammable materials.
Easily Overlooked
The risks of chlorine are easily overlooked and even forgotten about until there is an incident.
When most people think of chlorine, they either think of a laundry product as in chlorine bleach or what gets dumps in a swimming pool to control algae and bacteria. Indeed, many of us use chlorine products regularly without giving it a second thought.
But, chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business, employed for everything from water treatment and pulp bleaching in paper mills to disinfecting equipment in food processing plants. Moreover, it is widely employed in producing countless consumer products ranging from laundry cleaners and tires to antifreeze, household cleaners and pharmaceuticals.
In fact, the use of chlorine is so widespread that few people even notice the “death head” warnings on labels anymore despite the fact that, in many industrial applications, chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and even death.
But industrial facilities that produce or use chlorine cannot be sanguine about its handling and storage.
Breathe Easily
When workers breathe even low concentrations of chlorine, it can aggravate the respiratory system and exposure to the gas can irritate the eyes because it reacts with water and cells, changing it into hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid. Neither is pleasant.
So it is incumbent upon businesses to take simple steps to provide adequate protection.
Workers can be protected by being issued gloves, masks and protective clothing. At the same time, work areas in which chlorine is present need portable air sampling devices, complete with exposure level alarms. Finally, fume hoods are a must to enhance localized ventilation.
Chlorine gas is one of those industrial components that carry a significant risk but which too many businesses seem to overlook – until it’s too late. Conducting a risk audit is one way to help ensure that the gas stays in the container and workers won’t suffer if there’s an accidental leak.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Cancer In The Workplace: Soil Contamination’s Lingering Danger.
Cancer In The Workplace: Soil Contamination’s Lingering Danger.
This is the fourth in our series on how workplace health and safety issues can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on soil pollution.
– by Isaac Rudik
One thing about many cancer-causing toxins used by industry: The risk continues long after they have injured or killed workers. A prime example is the solvent used in paint. A key ingredient is something called “2-nitropropane.” Not only can brief, unprotected exposure to it kill people, once it enters the soil it stays there for hundreds of years.
For example, two construction workers became ill recently after applying an epoxy resin coating containing 2-nitropropane in the confined space of an underground concrete vault. One man died 10 days later and although the second man recovered, he has had persistently elevated levels of a harmful serum in his pancreas. These cases show the importance of both effective industrial education and protective work practices.
Even non-industrial toxins can be deadly.
For example, The New England Journal of Medicine reported 25 years ago that radon, a common radioactive gas emitted by soil, stones and most building materials, may be responsible for as many as 10,000 lung cancer deaths among non-smokers in the United States each year. Follow-up studies reveal nothing to contradict the original findings.
Thus, industry must take special care not to add to the problem – and to ensure that workers are adequately protected as well as minimising the risk of contaminating soil.
Many Potential Sources
A large number of industrial processes use toxic material directly, or employ materials that contain toxins.
These can range from arsenic and PAH’s such as benzoapyrene to garden variety diesel oil products.
Diesel oil can be especially deadly if mishandled. Frequently, soil testing at industrial sites find that the contamination levels from petrocarbons – often diesel products – greatly exceed guidelines mandating clean-up. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that occupational exposure to fuel oils are probably carcinogenic in humans based on animal studies suggesting that repeated contact seems to cause liver and skin cancer.
If diesel products leak into the soil, the cancer-causing by-products take hundreds of years to disappear, spreading their deadly impact into residential areas and farms where they become part of the food chain.
Other heavy metals commonly used by business cause a range of medical problems, both when unprotected workers are exposed as well as if they contaminate the soil around an industrial site. These include heavy metals such as zinc, barium and cadmium – very common in industry – as well as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzoflourantheme.
Studies indicate that soil contaminated by these minerals and compounds can lead to so-called “cancer clusters” both in the workplace and surrounding communities. A cancer cluster is defined by doctors as “(an) aggregation of relatively uncommon events or diseases in space and/or time in amounts that are believed or perceived to be greater than could be expected by chance.” Many instances brought to the attention of health and environmental regulators are “occupational” in that patients in a cluster are identified in terms of their workplace.
Costly Problems, Inexpensive Prevention
Controlling soil contamination from the workplace and in the surrounding community can be a complex problem. When a hazard is discovered, the clean-up cost is enormous to say nothing of potential expenses resulting from worker illnesses, community problems, fines and lawsuits.
Still, there are ways to minimize and even eliminate the risks:
· Worker education is the always first step to ensure that employees understand what they are dealing with and how to prevent potential problems.
· Ensure that toxic material is stored properly in appropriate sealer containers or rooms.
· Install self-contained treatment filters to capture inadvertent spills and run-offs.
Some of this is simply common-sense, some is already required by law and some – such as installing plant site water treatment facilities – is under serious consideration by regulators. A workplace audit where risks are involved will reveal ways to minimize potential problems.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
This is the fourth in our series on how workplace health and safety issues can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on soil pollution.
– by Isaac Rudik
One thing about many cancer-causing toxins used by industry: The risk continues long after they have injured or killed workers. A prime example is the solvent used in paint. A key ingredient is something called “2-nitropropane.” Not only can brief, unprotected exposure to it kill people, once it enters the soil it stays there for hundreds of years.
For example, two construction workers became ill recently after applying an epoxy resin coating containing 2-nitropropane in the confined space of an underground concrete vault. One man died 10 days later and although the second man recovered, he has had persistently elevated levels of a harmful serum in his pancreas. These cases show the importance of both effective industrial education and protective work practices.
Even non-industrial toxins can be deadly.
For example, The New England Journal of Medicine reported 25 years ago that radon, a common radioactive gas emitted by soil, stones and most building materials, may be responsible for as many as 10,000 lung cancer deaths among non-smokers in the United States each year. Follow-up studies reveal nothing to contradict the original findings.
Thus, industry must take special care not to add to the problem – and to ensure that workers are adequately protected as well as minimising the risk of contaminating soil.
Many Potential Sources
A large number of industrial processes use toxic material directly, or employ materials that contain toxins.
These can range from arsenic and PAH’s such as benzoapyrene to garden variety diesel oil products.
Diesel oil can be especially deadly if mishandled. Frequently, soil testing at industrial sites find that the contamination levels from petrocarbons – often diesel products – greatly exceed guidelines mandating clean-up. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that occupational exposure to fuel oils are probably carcinogenic in humans based on animal studies suggesting that repeated contact seems to cause liver and skin cancer.
If diesel products leak into the soil, the cancer-causing by-products take hundreds of years to disappear, spreading their deadly impact into residential areas and farms where they become part of the food chain.
Other heavy metals commonly used by business cause a range of medical problems, both when unprotected workers are exposed as well as if they contaminate the soil around an industrial site. These include heavy metals such as zinc, barium and cadmium – very common in industry – as well as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzoflourantheme.
Studies indicate that soil contaminated by these minerals and compounds can lead to so-called “cancer clusters” both in the workplace and surrounding communities. A cancer cluster is defined by doctors as “(an) aggregation of relatively uncommon events or diseases in space and/or time in amounts that are believed or perceived to be greater than could be expected by chance.” Many instances brought to the attention of health and environmental regulators are “occupational” in that patients in a cluster are identified in terms of their workplace.
Costly Problems, Inexpensive Prevention
Controlling soil contamination from the workplace and in the surrounding community can be a complex problem. When a hazard is discovered, the clean-up cost is enormous to say nothing of potential expenses resulting from worker illnesses, community problems, fines and lawsuits.
Still, there are ways to minimize and even eliminate the risks:
· Worker education is the always first step to ensure that employees understand what they are dealing with and how to prevent potential problems.
· Ensure that toxic material is stored properly in appropriate sealer containers or rooms.
· Install self-contained treatment filters to capture inadvertent spills and run-offs.
Some of this is simply common-sense, some is already required by law and some – such as installing plant site water treatment facilities – is under serious consideration by regulators. A workplace audit where risks are involved will reveal ways to minimize potential problems.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Cancer In The Workplace: “Safe Enough” Can Hide Dangers.
Cancer In The Workplace: “Safe Enough” Can Hide Dangers.
This is the third in our series on how workplace health and safety can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on hidden cancer dangers lurking in occupation safety issues.
– by Isaac Rudik
Only a madman or a fool would work with dimethyl sulphate without wearing a certified safety mask to protect against inhaling its lethal fumes.
Yet even a conscientious employer may not spot hidden dangers in what is otherwise thought of as a “safe” plant.
Not long ago, a company brought us in to conduct a thorough compliance audit in an attempt to hold the line of its insurance premiums, which the insurer was threatening to hike. As we walked through the facility, the chief operating officer pointed proudly to the numerous health and safety measures the company had installed over the past few years. When we came to a sealed part of the plant where dimethyl sulphate was being used, he began telling me about how insistent the supervisors, managers and executives are about workers being masked at all times.
That’s when I grabbed the man’s arm and pulled him hard towards the exit. Shocked and surprised, as I tugged him away he gave me one of those “are you nuts or something?” looks that comes from disbelief and what, to him, was my incomprehensible behaviour. Once we were safely outside the workspace, I removed my mask and told him, “That place is a breeding ground for cancer.”
What caused me to backtrack so rapidly was the stunning sight of a half dozen workers, all wearing proper breathing apparatus, yet some were working in short sleeved shirts and none wore adequate eye protection. I pointed out that regardless of how powerful the ventilating system is in the room, particulate-sized carcinogens from dimethyl sulphate can enter the body through the skin and eyes.
Never Safe Enough
Needless to say, the COO who was so proud of what his company does to protect workers was stunned. He admitted that it never occurred to him or anyone else at the factory, whether shop floor workers or corner office executives, that they were unknowingly creating a risk despite their sincere, best efforts to create and maintain a safe workplace.
The problem is that dimethyl sulfate and many other common chemicals used in a number of manufacturing processes can cause severe external burns when skin contact is made and damages internal organs if it enters the body through the skin. As a result, strong ventilation systems and individual breathing apparatus for workers are not enough to remove the danger.
Consequently, anyone working around such compounds needs more protection including overalls, and goggles. The entire workplace should be fitted with a spill contamination system. In fact, the government lists 60 precautions that companies need to undertake. Some of these include:
· Always keep the material locked inside proper storage containers when not being used.
· Always store according to MSDS.
· Keep the material away from break rooms and cafeterias.
· Store containers in a well-ventilated place.
· Be sure that ignition sources are kept far from the material.
· Never eat or drink when using the compound.
· Whenever leaving the work area, remove clothing that may be contaminated.
· If a worker begins to feel ill, seek medical advice immediately.
· Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on recycling.
Real Risks
The risks from dimethyl sulphate and other cancer-causing chemicals are very real yet the dangers can be totally hidden – even from companies that believe they are taking care to protect vulnerable workers.
When so many types of protection are relatively inexpensive and easy to use, there is no excuse for a business of any size not to ensure that workplace health and safety issues are thoroughly addressed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
This is the third in our series on how workplace health and safety can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on hidden cancer dangers lurking in occupation safety issues.
– by Isaac Rudik
Only a madman or a fool would work with dimethyl sulphate without wearing a certified safety mask to protect against inhaling its lethal fumes.
Yet even a conscientious employer may not spot hidden dangers in what is otherwise thought of as a “safe” plant.
Not long ago, a company brought us in to conduct a thorough compliance audit in an attempt to hold the line of its insurance premiums, which the insurer was threatening to hike. As we walked through the facility, the chief operating officer pointed proudly to the numerous health and safety measures the company had installed over the past few years. When we came to a sealed part of the plant where dimethyl sulphate was being used, he began telling me about how insistent the supervisors, managers and executives are about workers being masked at all times.
That’s when I grabbed the man’s arm and pulled him hard towards the exit. Shocked and surprised, as I tugged him away he gave me one of those “are you nuts or something?” looks that comes from disbelief and what, to him, was my incomprehensible behaviour. Once we were safely outside the workspace, I removed my mask and told him, “That place is a breeding ground for cancer.”
What caused me to backtrack so rapidly was the stunning sight of a half dozen workers, all wearing proper breathing apparatus, yet some were working in short sleeved shirts and none wore adequate eye protection. I pointed out that regardless of how powerful the ventilating system is in the room, particulate-sized carcinogens from dimethyl sulphate can enter the body through the skin and eyes.
Never Safe Enough
Needless to say, the COO who was so proud of what his company does to protect workers was stunned. He admitted that it never occurred to him or anyone else at the factory, whether shop floor workers or corner office executives, that they were unknowingly creating a risk despite their sincere, best efforts to create and maintain a safe workplace.
The problem is that dimethyl sulfate and many other common chemicals used in a number of manufacturing processes can cause severe external burns when skin contact is made and damages internal organs if it enters the body through the skin. As a result, strong ventilation systems and individual breathing apparatus for workers are not enough to remove the danger.
Consequently, anyone working around such compounds needs more protection including overalls, and goggles. The entire workplace should be fitted with a spill contamination system. In fact, the government lists 60 precautions that companies need to undertake. Some of these include:
· Always keep the material locked inside proper storage containers when not being used.
· Always store according to MSDS.
· Keep the material away from break rooms and cafeterias.
· Store containers in a well-ventilated place.
· Be sure that ignition sources are kept far from the material.
· Never eat or drink when using the compound.
· Whenever leaving the work area, remove clothing that may be contaminated.
· If a worker begins to feel ill, seek medical advice immediately.
· Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on recycling.
Real Risks
The risks from dimethyl sulphate and other cancer-causing chemicals are very real yet the dangers can be totally hidden – even from companies that believe they are taking care to protect vulnerable workers.
When so many types of protection are relatively inexpensive and easy to use, there is no excuse for a business of any size not to ensure that workplace health and safety issues are thoroughly addressed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Cancer In The Workplace: Airborne Workplace Pollution Can Be Hazardous To Living.
Cancer In The Workplace: Airborne Workplace Pollution Can Be Hazardous To Living.
The first in our series on how workplace health and safety can cause hazards, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on air pollution.
– by Isaac Rudik
Even though the number of previously-fatal cancers is diminishing as medicine finds effective ways of treating them, they are still a serious enough problem for businesses to consider ways of minimizing them in the workplace.
Admittedly, some exposure from sources such as UV radiation and smoke may occur in both work and non-work contexts. Moreover, there is no way to reliably differentiate between cancers in the same organ caused by different factors. Estimating the extent of occupational cancer is complex and estimates vary according to the method used. Still, it is probable that up to an estimated 11% of cancers are attributable to occupational exposure.
Still, as data collection widens and more is learned about the long-term impact of exposure to carcinogens, it is likely that within the next three-to-five years Ontario businesses will come under increasing pressure to minimize risks.
Proactive Steps
Already, businesses have a legal, pro-active requirement to eliminate workplace hazards so the regulatory framework for broadening the scope to include carcinogens is in place. Indeed, some businesses already work with stiff, cancer-related regulations: For example, printing companies using UV inks, which can cause cancer upon contact, must take steps to ensure workers are protected adequately and report incidents if they occur.
At the same time, chemicals in the workplace whether for personal hygiene or used in the workplace saturate the air. In a recent case, a worker complained about strong scents coming from co-workers. A supervisor requested a supplier provide information about a space deodorant used in lavatories, discovering a possible link between adverse negative health effects and chemicals commonly found in the space deodorants. A simple search for alternatives with fewer harmful chemicals produced substitute options to replace the more harmful space deodorant being used.
As with other hazards, ensuring that workplace exposure to carcinogenic agents does not occur is the best way to reduce occupational cancer. Options range from replacing known carcinogens to the use of enclosed systems and protective clothing.
What researchers are looking for are so-called “cancer clusters.” These happen when reporting of an unexpectedly high incidence of cancer shows up in a defined population or geographical area – such as a manufacturing plan. Some cancer clusters are suspected of resulting from occupational exposure because they are identified with workers in a particular location. Cancer cluster investigations seek to identify unrecognised exposure to known carcinogens and the adequacy of protective measures.
Avoiding Problems
With or without regulations, there are a number of practical, low-cost ways for businesses that deal with potential, cancer causing material can take:
· Ensure workers use eye and face protection if aerosols or splashes are anticipated.
· Use mechanical devices for all pipefitting procedures to prevent contaminated air from seeping into the workplace.
· Make sure that materials that may generate an aerosol is kept in suitable containment devices such as a fume hood, biological safety cabinet, or glove box.
· Capture vapors or aerosols through exhaust ventilation at the worksite, using a fume hood or biological safety cabinet.
· When moving carcinogens in hallways or corridors, make sure they are stores inside a secondary container that seals closed and is leak-proof.
· Place a door card warning at entrances to work areas.
Much of this is simply common-sense and some is already required by law. An audit of a workplace where there might be a cancer risk will reveal whether additional protection is needed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
The first in our series on how workplace health and safety can cause hazards, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on air pollution.
– by Isaac Rudik
Even though the number of previously-fatal cancers is diminishing as medicine finds effective ways of treating them, they are still a serious enough problem for businesses to consider ways of minimizing them in the workplace.
Admittedly, some exposure from sources such as UV radiation and smoke may occur in both work and non-work contexts. Moreover, there is no way to reliably differentiate between cancers in the same organ caused by different factors. Estimating the extent of occupational cancer is complex and estimates vary according to the method used. Still, it is probable that up to an estimated 11% of cancers are attributable to occupational exposure.
Still, as data collection widens and more is learned about the long-term impact of exposure to carcinogens, it is likely that within the next three-to-five years Ontario businesses will come under increasing pressure to minimize risks.
Proactive Steps
Already, businesses have a legal, pro-active requirement to eliminate workplace hazards so the regulatory framework for broadening the scope to include carcinogens is in place. Indeed, some businesses already work with stiff, cancer-related regulations: For example, printing companies using UV inks, which can cause cancer upon contact, must take steps to ensure workers are protected adequately and report incidents if they occur.
At the same time, chemicals in the workplace whether for personal hygiene or used in the workplace saturate the air. In a recent case, a worker complained about strong scents coming from co-workers. A supervisor requested a supplier provide information about a space deodorant used in lavatories, discovering a possible link between adverse negative health effects and chemicals commonly found in the space deodorants. A simple search for alternatives with fewer harmful chemicals produced substitute options to replace the more harmful space deodorant being used.
As with other hazards, ensuring that workplace exposure to carcinogenic agents does not occur is the best way to reduce occupational cancer. Options range from replacing known carcinogens to the use of enclosed systems and protective clothing.
What researchers are looking for are so-called “cancer clusters.” These happen when reporting of an unexpectedly high incidence of cancer shows up in a defined population or geographical area – such as a manufacturing plan. Some cancer clusters are suspected of resulting from occupational exposure because they are identified with workers in a particular location. Cancer cluster investigations seek to identify unrecognised exposure to known carcinogens and the adequacy of protective measures.
Avoiding Problems
With or without regulations, there are a number of practical, low-cost ways for businesses that deal with potential, cancer causing material can take:
· Ensure workers use eye and face protection if aerosols or splashes are anticipated.
· Use mechanical devices for all pipefitting procedures to prevent contaminated air from seeping into the workplace.
· Make sure that materials that may generate an aerosol is kept in suitable containment devices such as a fume hood, biological safety cabinet, or glove box.
· Capture vapors or aerosols through exhaust ventilation at the worksite, using a fume hood or biological safety cabinet.
· When moving carcinogens in hallways or corridors, make sure they are stores inside a secondary container that seals closed and is leak-proof.
· Place a door card warning at entrances to work areas.
Much of this is simply common-sense and some is already required by law. An audit of a workplace where there might be a cancer risk will reveal whether additional protection is needed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
When Looking For Small Risks, Don’t Ignore The Big Ones.
When Looking For Small Risks, Don’t Ignore The Big Ones.
While work-related accidents sidelining employees for fewer than 20 days are down sharply, there is a dramatic rise in more serious injuries. Is the provincial ministry partially to blame?
– By Isaac Rudik
Here’s a bit of good news for companies and their workers: Non-fatal accidents and injuries in Ontario that result in fewer than 20 days away from work are declining rather dramatically. But there is also some bad news: Incidents serious enough to keep an employee off work for 21 or more days are up sharply – as much as 23% for injuries where someone is on accident leave for more than one month.
The question is to what extent is the Ministry of Labour responsible for the numbers? In its zeal to compel businesses to suss out big risks that cause relatively minor injuries, it has created the unintended consequence of enabling companies to overlook more serious but less frequent potential accident and injury risks that happen less frequently but cause more damage.
But regardless of the ministry’s emphasis, businesses must continue to reduce the risk from potential accidents that create long-term recovery and may cause environmental damage.
Ergo, Ergonomics
It turns out that one of the biggest causes of serious accidents and injuries comes when handling high risk material. Too many businesses use a standard dolly – pretty much the same style your neighbour rents when he asks you to help him move a few boxes to the cottage – even when hauling gas cylinders, drums and other hazardous material around a factory or warehouse. But there’s a relatively simple and inexpensive way to prevent more serious injuries and accidents: Use ergonomically correct equipment, especially when handling hazardous materials.
The harsh fact is that one size does not fit every handling situation.
Take a typical, 55 gallon storage drum as an example. Depending on what is being done with it, there are at least four different ergonomically correct devices to move the drum without risking an injury to a worker – or a potential environmental hazard because the wrong equipment was used to transport the drum from one place to another and the drum tips, rolls and opens. The list of correct equipment includes a truck, a dolly, a cradle and a stacker.
Yet when we are asked to do a safety compliance audit, more often than not one of the things we find is the wrong equipment being employed improperly. In one instance, we found a pallet stacker being used to stack drums despite the fact that there is no way to secure a drum to a pallet lifting device. As a result, workers are at risk of injury, the company is at risk of hefty fines if there is an accident and the environment may be at risk from an avoidable spill.
Smart Moves
It’s just a smart business move to ensure that a material handling solution fits the specific situation.
The smart way to protect both the company and its employees is to always use ergonomically proven material handling solutions. Normal dollies should only move non-gas, non-hazardous and not-liquid materials. Everything else requires a specialised piece of equipment.
Using the correct handling cart for different applications does require a small investment in material handling and during a recession holding down costs is especially important. But the price for the correct material handling equipment is peanuts compared with the huge cost of a worker suffering a debilitating, long term disability, the price of cleaning up the environment after a spill and paying out cold cash to the government for the fines it levies.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
While work-related accidents sidelining employees for fewer than 20 days are down sharply, there is a dramatic rise in more serious injuries. Is the provincial ministry partially to blame?
– By Isaac Rudik
Here’s a bit of good news for companies and their workers: Non-fatal accidents and injuries in Ontario that result in fewer than 20 days away from work are declining rather dramatically. But there is also some bad news: Incidents serious enough to keep an employee off work for 21 or more days are up sharply – as much as 23% for injuries where someone is on accident leave for more than one month.
The question is to what extent is the Ministry of Labour responsible for the numbers? In its zeal to compel businesses to suss out big risks that cause relatively minor injuries, it has created the unintended consequence of enabling companies to overlook more serious but less frequent potential accident and injury risks that happen less frequently but cause more damage.
But regardless of the ministry’s emphasis, businesses must continue to reduce the risk from potential accidents that create long-term recovery and may cause environmental damage.
Ergo, Ergonomics
It turns out that one of the biggest causes of serious accidents and injuries comes when handling high risk material. Too many businesses use a standard dolly – pretty much the same style your neighbour rents when he asks you to help him move a few boxes to the cottage – even when hauling gas cylinders, drums and other hazardous material around a factory or warehouse. But there’s a relatively simple and inexpensive way to prevent more serious injuries and accidents: Use ergonomically correct equipment, especially when handling hazardous materials.
The harsh fact is that one size does not fit every handling situation.
Take a typical, 55 gallon storage drum as an example. Depending on what is being done with it, there are at least four different ergonomically correct devices to move the drum without risking an injury to a worker – or a potential environmental hazard because the wrong equipment was used to transport the drum from one place to another and the drum tips, rolls and opens. The list of correct equipment includes a truck, a dolly, a cradle and a stacker.
Yet when we are asked to do a safety compliance audit, more often than not one of the things we find is the wrong equipment being employed improperly. In one instance, we found a pallet stacker being used to stack drums despite the fact that there is no way to secure a drum to a pallet lifting device. As a result, workers are at risk of injury, the company is at risk of hefty fines if there is an accident and the environment may be at risk from an avoidable spill.
Smart Moves
It’s just a smart business move to ensure that a material handling solution fits the specific situation.
The smart way to protect both the company and its employees is to always use ergonomically proven material handling solutions. Normal dollies should only move non-gas, non-hazardous and not-liquid materials. Everything else requires a specialised piece of equipment.
Using the correct handling cart for different applications does require a small investment in material handling and during a recession holding down costs is especially important. But the price for the correct material handling equipment is peanuts compared with the huge cost of a worker suffering a debilitating, long term disability, the price of cleaning up the environment after a spill and paying out cold cash to the government for the fines it levies.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Don’t Let A Fork Lift Truck Skewer Your Company.
Don’t Let A Fork Lift Truck Skewer Your Company.
Like so many things, pedestrian and lift truck lane markings become part of the background scenery in most plants: They’re visible but no one really notices them any more. Now, there’s a better way to avoid costly accidents.
– By Isaac Rudik
It doesn’t take much of an accident for a fork lift truck to cause serious injury.
Not long ago, an Ontario woman was severely injured at work when the company’s fork lift swung around suddenly and hit her in the middle of her chest. She was spun around by the impact of the truck and sent flying several feet across the plant. The woman was rushed to hospital for emergency, life saving, surgery. Fortunately, she recovered fully from the accident and was able to return to work within six months.
Also fortunate is that the fork lift was carrying only an empty plastic container. Had the load been any larger or heavier, doctors say that most likely the woman would have been killed instantly.
The accident happened even though the area where she was working had been marked with designated forklift and pedestrian lanes. But like so many things in life, the markings became part of the background scenery in the plant: Yes, they were there but no one really noticed them any more.
Visible – But Invisible
The accident was costly to the company. Not only was the injured employee on Worker Compensation for a half-year, the poor operator was so distraught by causing the accident he was unable to work for two months. But the combined eight months of Worker Comp claims was only a small part of the financial cost to the company. A steep fine was levied by the province and a court awarded hefty damages to both the woman and the fork lift driver.
The accident highlights a major shortcoming of using hanging signs and floor lane markings to create safety zones: They rely almost entirely on a fork lift driver being able to see not only the signage but whether someone has wandered in front of the vehicle. Too often, accidents happen because a large load is being moved and the driver’s view is at least partially blocked. Thus, it’s frequently impossible for the operator to know whether a worker has wandered out of the pedestrian lane – or whether the truck has strayed into the lane.
In effect, the very tools used to ensure safety become their own hazard. Even though they’re visible, they can become invisible for a split second, more than enough time for a serious accident to occur.
Moreover, the layout of far too many factories does not take driver visibility into account. Blind corners, a flash of blinding sunlight from a window, a burned out lighting fixture all can make it difficult, if not impossible, for the operator to spot pedestrians crossing the plant floor. Even worse, the recession means most businesses are pushing all-out for productivity, efficiency and speed but these very factors can result in carelessness and not paying attention.
Government regulations mandate that companies take adequate precautions to ensure worker safety. When first introduced decades ago, rules requiring lane markings on a plant floor and posting signs were more than adequate: They were a significant improvement over the era of having no markings and they were the best warning available.
Intelligent Signage
But, thanks to inexpensive new technology, there is a better way to protect workers and help ensure that a fork lift truck out in the plant doesn’t end up skewering an employee or the company.
Now there are traffic signs which sense approaching vehicles and whether people are walking into the path of the fork lift. Once a person is detected, an audio as well as a visual alert is sent out so both know the other is approaching well before they are seen. This greatly increases the ability to avoid an accident. Moreover, unlike signs, the 95db audible alert coupled with a flashing light will never become “just part of the scenery” on a factory floor.
Low cost technology removes the excuse companies have used for some time to prevent accidents. And prevention is always the least costly way of avoiding a lot of needless expense and hassle. Implementing the new generation of warnings now will help ensure that no uncontrollable incident will happen.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Like so many things, pedestrian and lift truck lane markings become part of the background scenery in most plants: They’re visible but no one really notices them any more. Now, there’s a better way to avoid costly accidents.
– By Isaac Rudik
It doesn’t take much of an accident for a fork lift truck to cause serious injury.
Not long ago, an Ontario woman was severely injured at work when the company’s fork lift swung around suddenly and hit her in the middle of her chest. She was spun around by the impact of the truck and sent flying several feet across the plant. The woman was rushed to hospital for emergency, life saving, surgery. Fortunately, she recovered fully from the accident and was able to return to work within six months.
Also fortunate is that the fork lift was carrying only an empty plastic container. Had the load been any larger or heavier, doctors say that most likely the woman would have been killed instantly.
The accident happened even though the area where she was working had been marked with designated forklift and pedestrian lanes. But like so many things in life, the markings became part of the background scenery in the plant: Yes, they were there but no one really noticed them any more.
Visible – But Invisible
The accident was costly to the company. Not only was the injured employee on Worker Compensation for a half-year, the poor operator was so distraught by causing the accident he was unable to work for two months. But the combined eight months of Worker Comp claims was only a small part of the financial cost to the company. A steep fine was levied by the province and a court awarded hefty damages to both the woman and the fork lift driver.
The accident highlights a major shortcoming of using hanging signs and floor lane markings to create safety zones: They rely almost entirely on a fork lift driver being able to see not only the signage but whether someone has wandered in front of the vehicle. Too often, accidents happen because a large load is being moved and the driver’s view is at least partially blocked. Thus, it’s frequently impossible for the operator to know whether a worker has wandered out of the pedestrian lane – or whether the truck has strayed into the lane.
In effect, the very tools used to ensure safety become their own hazard. Even though they’re visible, they can become invisible for a split second, more than enough time for a serious accident to occur.
Moreover, the layout of far too many factories does not take driver visibility into account. Blind corners, a flash of blinding sunlight from a window, a burned out lighting fixture all can make it difficult, if not impossible, for the operator to spot pedestrians crossing the plant floor. Even worse, the recession means most businesses are pushing all-out for productivity, efficiency and speed but these very factors can result in carelessness and not paying attention.
Government regulations mandate that companies take adequate precautions to ensure worker safety. When first introduced decades ago, rules requiring lane markings on a plant floor and posting signs were more than adequate: They were a significant improvement over the era of having no markings and they were the best warning available.
Intelligent Signage
But, thanks to inexpensive new technology, there is a better way to protect workers and help ensure that a fork lift truck out in the plant doesn’t end up skewering an employee or the company.
Now there are traffic signs which sense approaching vehicles and whether people are walking into the path of the fork lift. Once a person is detected, an audio as well as a visual alert is sent out so both know the other is approaching well before they are seen. This greatly increases the ability to avoid an accident. Moreover, unlike signs, the 95db audible alert coupled with a flashing light will never become “just part of the scenery” on a factory floor.
Low cost technology removes the excuse companies have used for some time to prevent accidents. And prevention is always the least costly way of avoiding a lot of needless expense and hassle. Implementing the new generation of warnings now will help ensure that no uncontrollable incident will happen.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A New Meaning To “Silent But Deadly”
A New Meaning To “Silent But Deadly”
Working in confined spaces increases the danger to workers of breathing contaminated air. But there’s no longer an excuse not to see a hidden, silent danger.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, Javier del Rio was cleaning an empty tank used to store flaxseed oil. When he lost consciousness, a co-worker jumped in to save him. He also lost consciousness and both men were asphyxiated.
According to investigators, argon gas was pumped into the tank to drive out oxygen when it was filled with oil. Once the tank was empty for cleaning, oxygen was pumped back into it and vents were opened to remove the argon. But some of the argon gas – which is heavier than oxygen – lurked at the bottom of the tank, displacing fresh air del Rio and his colleague needed to breathe.
Government regulations mandate that employees be protected properly against numerous hazards, including breathing noxious gas. And monitoring the workplace for air quality has never been easier. New and emerging technology makes doing so not only more effective but far less costly than even a few years ago, removing an excuse companies hid behind for decades when caught.
With courts imposing hefty fines on companies, and awarding record sums to employees injured after breathing contaminated air, there is new meaning to the old warning “silent but deadly” when referring to bad air.
Don’t Assume
Most people put their faith in knowing they will breathe good air, whether indoors or in a confined space such as the workplace. Not unreasonably, they assume someone is checking for the safety of the air they are breathing.
When someone doesn’t do their job, or there is an undetected leak, the results are disastrous.
Air – whether life sustaining or deadly – is usually colourless, odourless and tasteless. As a result, many gases are infused with an additive to create an aroma. That’s why when someone calls 911 to report smelling gas in their home, what they smell isn’t the gas but the additive designed to alert to a leak or contamination.
The atmosphere in a confined work space may seem like any other. But because many industrial gases have no odour additive, companies can never assume that all is safe.
Confined spaces on a shop floor have fooled scores of injured or killed workers every year after they assumed somebody checked for air quality. But the worst thing for a worker to do is to or “follow their nose,” guessing that since the air smelled alright it was safe to enter. But air may look and smell safe but be filled with enough toxic contaminants to kill anyone breathing it in, especially in an enclosed area.
Smart Prevention
As with every other workplace safety issue, prevention is easier – and far less costly – than fixing a problem.
The best approach is to issue workers who might be at risk with personal multi-gas monitors which monitor air quality continuously as an employee goes about their job, whether at their work station or if moving around the plant. A second option is a “confined space monitor” designed to be used only in small, high risk areas of the factory.
Typically, these devices offer multiple warnings to the worker wearing one: A loud sound warning such as a 95db beeping or horn, a warning light and a vibrating pulse in case the wearer misses either of the other two alerts. At least one of the three should grab a worker’s attention, following the old saw about “if at first you don’t get noticed, keep trying ‘til you do.”
It’s always best to find smart ways to prevent fumes from causing an injury. But, in many cases, fumes are part of the process. Ensuring that workers are alerted now to noxious air before they’re injured helps make certain that your plant won’t be victimised by an incident that could have been prevented.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Working in confined spaces increases the danger to workers of breathing contaminated air. But there’s no longer an excuse not to see a hidden, silent danger.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, Javier del Rio was cleaning an empty tank used to store flaxseed oil. When he lost consciousness, a co-worker jumped in to save him. He also lost consciousness and both men were asphyxiated.
According to investigators, argon gas was pumped into the tank to drive out oxygen when it was filled with oil. Once the tank was empty for cleaning, oxygen was pumped back into it and vents were opened to remove the argon. But some of the argon gas – which is heavier than oxygen – lurked at the bottom of the tank, displacing fresh air del Rio and his colleague needed to breathe.
Government regulations mandate that employees be protected properly against numerous hazards, including breathing noxious gas. And monitoring the workplace for air quality has never been easier. New and emerging technology makes doing so not only more effective but far less costly than even a few years ago, removing an excuse companies hid behind for decades when caught.
With courts imposing hefty fines on companies, and awarding record sums to employees injured after breathing contaminated air, there is new meaning to the old warning “silent but deadly” when referring to bad air.
Don’t Assume
Most people put their faith in knowing they will breathe good air, whether indoors or in a confined space such as the workplace. Not unreasonably, they assume someone is checking for the safety of the air they are breathing.
When someone doesn’t do their job, or there is an undetected leak, the results are disastrous.
Air – whether life sustaining or deadly – is usually colourless, odourless and tasteless. As a result, many gases are infused with an additive to create an aroma. That’s why when someone calls 911 to report smelling gas in their home, what they smell isn’t the gas but the additive designed to alert to a leak or contamination.
The atmosphere in a confined work space may seem like any other. But because many industrial gases have no odour additive, companies can never assume that all is safe.
Confined spaces on a shop floor have fooled scores of injured or killed workers every year after they assumed somebody checked for air quality. But the worst thing for a worker to do is to or “follow their nose,” guessing that since the air smelled alright it was safe to enter. But air may look and smell safe but be filled with enough toxic contaminants to kill anyone breathing it in, especially in an enclosed area.
Smart Prevention
As with every other workplace safety issue, prevention is easier – and far less costly – than fixing a problem.
The best approach is to issue workers who might be at risk with personal multi-gas monitors which monitor air quality continuously as an employee goes about their job, whether at their work station or if moving around the plant. A second option is a “confined space monitor” designed to be used only in small, high risk areas of the factory.
Typically, these devices offer multiple warnings to the worker wearing one: A loud sound warning such as a 95db beeping or horn, a warning light and a vibrating pulse in case the wearer misses either of the other two alerts. At least one of the three should grab a worker’s attention, following the old saw about “if at first you don’t get noticed, keep trying ‘til you do.”
It’s always best to find smart ways to prevent fumes from causing an injury. But, in many cases, fumes are part of the process. Ensuring that workers are alerted now to noxious air before they’re injured helps make certain that your plant won’t be victimised by an incident that could have been prevented.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Contaminated Water Is More Than Just A Third World Problem
Contaminated Water Is More Than Just A Third World Problem
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, good water can turn bad and contaminate the processing line if proper precautions aren’t taken. Preventing a problem before a contaminant finds its way into food is a fraction of the cost of fixing it.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, a major food processor had to recall tens of thousands of contaminated packaged products. Not only did the recall, and finding and fixing the problem, cost millions of dollars, it did untold damage to the company’s reputation with consumers.
While the source of the problem in the processing line was eventually located and fixed, the issue highlights a major issue every business dealing with food for human consumption faces: Ensuring that contamination from one of dozens of potential trouble spots doesn’t creep into products that people eat.
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, it’s possible that what starts out as potable can become contaminated, affecting everything from fruits and vegetables to meat processing and harvested grains – and companies that process the products through to the people who consume them.
No Wiggle Room
Ensuring clean water and safe products that use water in processing is a fundamental obligation of government in Canada and other developed nations. Thus, the law leaves no wiggle room for businesses that allow water to become tainted and contaminate food, whether through sloppy procedures at a plant or just by accident.
At its most basic, the Canadian Food Inspection System requires that raw materials and ingredients are cleaned, sorted and prepared in a way that prevents contamination. In handling food, water – used for everything from washing fruit to cleaning machinery – can become tainted easily as microbes, bacteria and other pollutants are transmitted in one of countless ways. And when a food processor runs afoul of the law, penalties are fast, stiff and public.
At a minimum, fines for violations can begin as high as $60,000 per incident – and rise from there. If the government finds the cause is negligence, criminal charges may be brought against the business, its executives and key employees. Generally, expensive consultants and expensive lab work are needed to locate and remedy the cause of the contamination, and product recalls extract a high dollar cost.
Meanwhile, the company suffers enormous damage to its reputation.
Any time a food product is recalled, it attracts big headlines and extensive coverage on television and radio newscasts. The company must launch a far-reaching advertising and public relations campaign, first to alert distributors, retailers and consumers and then to reassure its customers that not only is every effort being made to ensure the problem doesn’t happen again but the steps it is taking to win back consumer confidence.
Indeed, one Harvard Business School study shows that even for a food processing company with an unblemished record of more than a century of providing safe food, it can up to two years to win back customers after a recall. Along the way, sales, margins and profits are adversely affected.
Easy Prevention
Yet it is relatively easy to prevent water used in food processing from becoming contaminated.
Preventing exposure to contaminated water reduces day-to-day operating costs, and can improve profitability along the way. So-called Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) in the form of full body suits that include a hood, a full face shield, goggles or a mask that forms a tight bond around the mouth and nose plus shoe covers sounds complicated but is easy to wear and inexpensive to purchase.
For example, a supplier such as CSC carries such safety wear starting as inexpensively as $180 per suit. Moreover, the cost of PPE is more than offset by its positive effect on production time and the quality of work as well as keeping not just the processing line safe from contaminants but also workers. In fact, often overlooked in a contamination-caused recall are work related injuries or sickness that arises when a worker becomes exposed to a contaminant.
The problems of contaminated water are not just an issue in third world countries. Even in Canada, it’s easy for H20 to become tainted, affecting food production, consumer confidence, and sales and profits. But it’s easier – and far less costly – to prevent a problem from arising in the first place.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, good water can turn bad and contaminate the processing line if proper precautions aren’t taken. Preventing a problem before a contaminant finds its way into food is a fraction of the cost of fixing it.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, a major food processor had to recall tens of thousands of contaminated packaged products. Not only did the recall, and finding and fixing the problem, cost millions of dollars, it did untold damage to the company’s reputation with consumers.
While the source of the problem in the processing line was eventually located and fixed, the issue highlights a major issue every business dealing with food for human consumption faces: Ensuring that contamination from one of dozens of potential trouble spots doesn’t creep into products that people eat.
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, it’s possible that what starts out as potable can become contaminated, affecting everything from fruits and vegetables to meat processing and harvested grains – and companies that process the products through to the people who consume them.
No Wiggle Room
Ensuring clean water and safe products that use water in processing is a fundamental obligation of government in Canada and other developed nations. Thus, the law leaves no wiggle room for businesses that allow water to become tainted and contaminate food, whether through sloppy procedures at a plant or just by accident.
At its most basic, the Canadian Food Inspection System requires that raw materials and ingredients are cleaned, sorted and prepared in a way that prevents contamination. In handling food, water – used for everything from washing fruit to cleaning machinery – can become tainted easily as microbes, bacteria and other pollutants are transmitted in one of countless ways. And when a food processor runs afoul of the law, penalties are fast, stiff and public.
At a minimum, fines for violations can begin as high as $60,000 per incident – and rise from there. If the government finds the cause is negligence, criminal charges may be brought against the business, its executives and key employees. Generally, expensive consultants and expensive lab work are needed to locate and remedy the cause of the contamination, and product recalls extract a high dollar cost.
Meanwhile, the company suffers enormous damage to its reputation.
Any time a food product is recalled, it attracts big headlines and extensive coverage on television and radio newscasts. The company must launch a far-reaching advertising and public relations campaign, first to alert distributors, retailers and consumers and then to reassure its customers that not only is every effort being made to ensure the problem doesn’t happen again but the steps it is taking to win back consumer confidence.
Indeed, one Harvard Business School study shows that even for a food processing company with an unblemished record of more than a century of providing safe food, it can up to two years to win back customers after a recall. Along the way, sales, margins and profits are adversely affected.
Easy Prevention
Yet it is relatively easy to prevent water used in food processing from becoming contaminated.
Preventing exposure to contaminated water reduces day-to-day operating costs, and can improve profitability along the way. So-called Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) in the form of full body suits that include a hood, a full face shield, goggles or a mask that forms a tight bond around the mouth and nose plus shoe covers sounds complicated but is easy to wear and inexpensive to purchase.
For example, a supplier such as CSC carries such safety wear starting as inexpensively as $180 per suit. Moreover, the cost of PPE is more than offset by its positive effect on production time and the quality of work as well as keeping not just the processing line safe from contaminants but also workers. In fact, often overlooked in a contamination-caused recall are work related injuries or sickness that arises when a worker becomes exposed to a contaminant.
The problems of contaminated water are not just an issue in third world countries. Even in Canada, it’s easy for H20 to become tainted, affecting food production, consumer confidence, and sales and profits. But it’s easier – and far less costly – to prevent a problem from arising in the first place.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Sound The Alarm – But Not Too Loudly. Excessive noise contributes to workplace hearing loss and other health issues.
Sound The Alarm – But Not Too Loudly. Excessive noise contributes to workplace hearing loss and other health issues.
- By Isaac Rudik
Noise is aggravating, whether at home, in a restaurant or on a loud street. But in the workplace, excessive noise is more than aggravating: It cuts productivity while creating serious health hazards for workers which might lead to costly fines and worker’s compensation claims. Besides making it hard for workers to hear each other, excess workplace noise increases blood pressure, speeds breathing rates, disturbs digestion and, in people prone to heart disease, affects heart rates. And noise effects don’t stop: Studies show that exposure to ongoing noise makes sleep difficult.
For pregnant workers, excessive noise also can affect a developing fetus.
Little wonder noise is a serious problem that must be addressed seriously by business.
Noise Is Costly
- By Isaac Rudik
Noise is aggravating, whether at home, in a restaurant or on a loud street. But in the workplace, excessive noise is more than aggravating: It cuts productivity while creating serious health hazards for workers which might lead to costly fines and worker’s compensation claims. Besides making it hard for workers to hear each other, excess workplace noise increases blood pressure, speeds breathing rates, disturbs digestion and, in people prone to heart disease, affects heart rates. And noise effects don’t stop: Studies show that exposure to ongoing noise makes sleep difficult.
For pregnant workers, excessive noise also can affect a developing fetus.
Little wonder noise is a serious problem that must be addressed seriously by business.
Noise Is Costly
Companies must protect workers from noise. Government inspectors apply four common-sense tests when checking noise levels before using meters to measure precise levels. But these same checks can be performed by supervisors long before the Ministry of Labour (MoL) arrives.
- In a noisy area, do people raise their voice to be heard?
- Do workers have difficulty hearing someone speaking from two feet away?
- After leaving a noisy area, does speech sound muffled or dull?
- Is there a pain or ringing of the ears after noise exposure?
Companies that aren’t proactive can face major problems if MoL finds excessive noise:
- Employers must conduct a costly audit.
- The company can be fined up to $75,000.
- Fixing the problem means retaining costly noise abatement consultants.
- The problem must be fixed quickly.
- If there are noise-related injuries, the company must pay for treatment.
- Worker Compensation premiums rise by about 0.5%.
For years, workplace noise was overlooked because of numerous problems. But today, new technology makes monitoring easier and in-house testing is relatively inexpensive. Moreover, installing sound absorbing material is much easier than in the past.
As a result, excuses companies hid behind for years are gone. So courts are awarding large sums to employees and levying hefty fines on companies violating noise rules.
Quiet Down
Utilizing sound absorbing material as a barrier between machinery and employees helps reduce levels to allowable levels. Even better, sound absorbing material placed on walls and ceilings helps reduce the chance of reflected noise injuring employees.
For example, grinding produces a shrieking sound, disturbing everyone nearby. One CSC customer’s grinding unit never caused a problem when it was in a separate building, away from other workers. But when a new, more efficient plant was built, the grinding room was in the main factory along with all manufacturing. Other work areas were noise-protected by installing shields on both sides of the operation and suspending sound absorbing baffles above the area.
Melamine Acoustic Foam on walls and ceilings offers good sound absorption in this kind of situation. It also enjoys Class 0 fire specification, meaning when exposed to naked flames it does not release toxic bi-products associated with other conventional polyurethane based acoustic foams.
Safe Solutions
A misconception many companies have about noise is “We’ve never had a problem.” But this head-in-the-sand approach is foolish; even the savviest Vegas gambler knows luck runs out eventually.
Reducing noise involves four, interrelated pieces:
- Barriers or screens offer a simple, effective way to reduce noise, placing it as close to the source as possible.
- The higher and wider the barrier, the greater the reduction.
- Barriers and screens work well against direct noise and poorly against reflective noise, not offering full protection against low frequency noise.
- Barriers should be made of dense, sound absorbing material and face the noise.
In dealing with noise abatement, too often companies commit one of two serious mistakes.
Either they invest in compliance but don’t become compliant because they do the wrong thing, or the solution is insufficient. The other major error is failing to invest in a solution because, too often, a business doesn’t have a budget line item or they don’t believe it’s a major issue.
When dealing with these concerns, look for product suppliers such as CSC that provide in-house expertise and work with third party consultants to create a cost-effective and compliant solution. Find a supplier who works extensively with both industry and government, enhancing the ability to create a fix that meets budget restraints yet also meets government rules.
As the economy grows tougher, companies must save money. Often safety is compromised by small budgets and this can be a company’s single most dangerous, costly mistake. While eliminating noise entirely is impossible, it can be brought within manageable – and legal – levels with limited budgets.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. .
He may be reached by e-mail at irudik@csc-inc.ca or by calling 905-761-5354
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)