|
Fast Talk
These very short public forums to re-address
the issue of ergonomic hazards in the workplace are limited to
1 1/2 days in Washington, DC, one day in Chicago and one day
in California.
It appears Secretary Chao is hoping for
a small number of very fast talkers. Last year's ergonomics hearings
lasted 39 days and resulted in 17,979 pages of hearings testimony
alone (this does not include the hundreds of thousands of pages
of written evidence submitted).
We spoke with an employee in OSHA's Docket
Office, who told us that the call for comments on the now defunct
2000 Ergonomic Standard resulted in a stack of papers "over
90 feet high, and I'm not kidding."
Apparently in an attempt to avoid another
huge flood of paperwork, the Department of Labor is allowing
the resubmission of documentry evidence which was previously
submitted in the OSHA ergonomics rulemaking Docket S-777, last
year's ergonomic effort.
Those wishing to resubmit evidence need
only reference the Exhibit Number of their previous submission.
The OSHA Docket elves will re-enter this evidence into the new
docket (S-777A). Whether or not anyone will actually read
these resubmissions is an open question.
Three Questions
This time around, written comment submissions
and forum speakers have been asked to address three very specific
questions:
Question 1:
What is an ergonomics injury? The Department of Labor is interested
in establishing an accepted definition that the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, employers and their employees
can understand and apply.
Question 2:
How can the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, employers
and employees determine whether an ergonomics injury was caused
by work-related activities or non-work-related activities; and,
if the ergonomics injury was caused by a combination of the two,
what is the appropriate response?
Question 3:
What are the most useful and cost-effective types of government
involvement to address workplace ergonomics injuries (e.g., rulemaking,
guidelines, "best practices," publications/conferences,
technical assistance, consultations, partnerships or combinations
of such approaches)? The agency particularly invites comment
on the advantages and disadvantages of each approach or combination
of approaches.
|
