Search News
For the Media
For media inquiries, call CWA Communications at 202-434-1168 or email comms@cwa-union.org. To read about CWA Members, Leadership or Industries, visit our About page.
Ergonomics Proposal Good But Could Be Better, CWAers Testify
A federal proposal to protect workers from injuries caused by poor ergonomics is a solid step in the right direction, but it doesn’t go far enough, CWA members and staff testified at hearings recently in Washington, D.C., Chicago and Portland, Ore.
“CWA strongly supports the establishment of OSHA’s ergonomic standard,” Executive Vice President Larry Cohen said, opening CWA’s testimony in Washington. “But we believe several areas of the standard ought to be strengthened.”
The proposal, put forth by the Occu-pational Safety and Health Administration, needs to do more to prevent injuries among office-based and telecommunications employees who spend hours a day at computer terminals, speakers said.
“The OSHA standard must require employers of computer users to have a proactive, preventive ergonomics program, just as is required in general industry,” Carla Katz, president of Local 1034, testified. “Computer users should not be the guinea pigs of the technological age.”
The proposal calls for immediate changes in manufacturing and “manual handling” or lifting jobs, such as work in hospitals or for delivery companies. Computer users — public employees, journalists, telephone operators and service representatives and others — aren’t covered automatically. Improvements wouldn’t be required at a given work site until at least one employee reports a diagnosed work-related musculoskeletal disorder (MSD).
“To wait until a worker is actually injured, perhaps permanently, is inhumane and barbaric,” Amy Bahruth, a computer health and safety trainer in District 1, told OSHA representatives in Washington. “Haven’t we learned enough yet from coal miners, asbestos workers, chemical workers and garment workers about the human costs of inaction?”
Even in its present form, however, the proposal is under heavy fire from business and industry — and their backers in Congress — who dispute the wealth of medical studies showing a direct link between poor ergonomics and worker injuries. Opponents claim the rule would cost businesses too much money.
OSHA, which hopes to have a standard in place by the end of the year, says the rule would save employers twice what it would cost. The agency estimates that workplace improvements would cost $4.2 billion a year, but would save $9 billion annually in workers’ compensation and related expenses.
Nearly 2 million workers every year suffer injuries because of ergonomic problems and a third of those require time off work to heal. OSHA researchers say the risk of MSDs is higher than the risk from asbestos or any other workplace hazard the agency has sought to regulate.
Still, giant corporations and industry groups have hired high-powered attorneys to testify against the standard and cross-examine workers, labor activists, medical doctors and researchers who are speaking in support of it.
Only one business — SBC, which employs thousands of CWA workers in its telecommunications companies — has come out in favor of an ergonomics standard. However, the company doesn’t support the proposal as written.
CWA’s panelists presented hard medical evidence as well as anecdotes, describing their own or a colleague’s chronic pain and disabilities caused by bad ergonomics.
Jesse Davis, a longtime volunteer health and safety coordinator in Local 2222, told of a Bell Atlantic service representative with carpal tunnel syndrome in both hands who still suffers constant pain in spite of two surgeries. “The nerve damage is so severe, she must use both hands to hold a glass so as not to drop it,” Davis testified.
Davis also described medical problems suffered by a technician who spent years on ladders and telephone poles, wearing a body belt to keep him from falling. He developed a degenerative nerve and muscle disorder. “This standard could help people from becoming debilitated,” Davis said.
Dave LeGrande, CWA’s occupational health and safety director, said the proposed standard should cover telecommunications craft workers automatically. Whether the phone companies interpret the standard the same way isn’t clear, however.
“We maintain that they are included, and we will fight to make sure they are,” LeGrande said. “Their jobs demand a significant amount of handling, lifting and climbing — often with 25 pounds of tools on their belts.”
“CWA strongly supports the establishment of OSHA’s ergonomic standard,” Executive Vice President Larry Cohen said, opening CWA’s testimony in Washington. “But we believe several areas of the standard ought to be strengthened.”
The proposal, put forth by the Occu-pational Safety and Health Administration, needs to do more to prevent injuries among office-based and telecommunications employees who spend hours a day at computer terminals, speakers said.
“The OSHA standard must require employers of computer users to have a proactive, preventive ergonomics program, just as is required in general industry,” Carla Katz, president of Local 1034, testified. “Computer users should not be the guinea pigs of the technological age.”
The proposal calls for immediate changes in manufacturing and “manual handling” or lifting jobs, such as work in hospitals or for delivery companies. Computer users — public employees, journalists, telephone operators and service representatives and others — aren’t covered automatically. Improvements wouldn’t be required at a given work site until at least one employee reports a diagnosed work-related musculoskeletal disorder (MSD).
“To wait until a worker is actually injured, perhaps permanently, is inhumane and barbaric,” Amy Bahruth, a computer health and safety trainer in District 1, told OSHA representatives in Washington. “Haven’t we learned enough yet from coal miners, asbestos workers, chemical workers and garment workers about the human costs of inaction?”
Even in its present form, however, the proposal is under heavy fire from business and industry — and their backers in Congress — who dispute the wealth of medical studies showing a direct link between poor ergonomics and worker injuries. Opponents claim the rule would cost businesses too much money.
OSHA, which hopes to have a standard in place by the end of the year, says the rule would save employers twice what it would cost. The agency estimates that workplace improvements would cost $4.2 billion a year, but would save $9 billion annually in workers’ compensation and related expenses.
Nearly 2 million workers every year suffer injuries because of ergonomic problems and a third of those require time off work to heal. OSHA researchers say the risk of MSDs is higher than the risk from asbestos or any other workplace hazard the agency has sought to regulate.
Still, giant corporations and industry groups have hired high-powered attorneys to testify against the standard and cross-examine workers, labor activists, medical doctors and researchers who are speaking in support of it.
Only one business — SBC, which employs thousands of CWA workers in its telecommunications companies — has come out in favor of an ergonomics standard. However, the company doesn’t support the proposal as written.
CWA’s panelists presented hard medical evidence as well as anecdotes, describing their own or a colleague’s chronic pain and disabilities caused by bad ergonomics.
Jesse Davis, a longtime volunteer health and safety coordinator in Local 2222, told of a Bell Atlantic service representative with carpal tunnel syndrome in both hands who still suffers constant pain in spite of two surgeries. “The nerve damage is so severe, she must use both hands to hold a glass so as not to drop it,” Davis testified.
Davis also described medical problems suffered by a technician who spent years on ladders and telephone poles, wearing a body belt to keep him from falling. He developed a degenerative nerve and muscle disorder. “This standard could help people from becoming debilitated,” Davis said.
Dave LeGrande, CWA’s occupational health and safety director, said the proposed standard should cover telecommunications craft workers automatically. Whether the phone companies interpret the standard the same way isn’t clear, however.
“We maintain that they are included, and we will fight to make sure they are,” LeGrande said. “Their jobs demand a significant amount of handling, lifting and climbing — often with 25 pounds of tools on their belts.”