Several recent articles and news reports have focused on Maine’s workplace safety record and the resulting Workers’ Compensation costs. By any standard of measurement, Maine’s rate of occupational injuries and illnesses is too high. Each year, statistics are collected and published on occupational injuries, illnesses and deaths in Maine, other states and the nation as a whole. These figures provide an important perspective on these grim realities.

However, the other side of these numbers is not portrayed – the human costs resulting from the pain and suffering of those injured, the loss of life from fatal injuries, the consequential anguish experienced by family members and friends of those killed or injured and the economic loss in earnings and productivity.

Maine employers, workers and unions can work with officials to reduce these harsh realities through the implementation of occupational health and safety programs containing three critically important approaches: education, engineering and enforcement. Incidences of work-related accidents, injuries and occupational disease can be reduced significantly through a Three E approach involving education on hazard recognition and abatement, reduction and elimination of unsafe and unhealthy work environments through proper engineering and ergonomic design, and the full enforcement of existing federal and state laws dealing with occupational health and safety.

Education

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that, “annually, on average, one-fourth (26 percent) of the American work force has less than one year’s experience in their current position. Sadly, new workers during their first year of employment experience one-third (30.8 percent) of all occupational injuries; and two-thirds (62.5 percent) of all injuries during the first five years on the job.” Occupational health and safety education for both workers and supervisors can play a vital role in helping to reduce these injuries. Examples of important topics to be covered in this education include the following: approaches for identifying and abating hazards relating to the job, legal provisions and standards of all applicable occupational health and safety laws, emergency procedures in the case of accidents and new developments in the field of occupational health and safety relating to the type of work involved.

Engineering

Based on the most recently reported data compiled by the Maine Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Standards, “disorders associated with repeated trauma are the most frequently occurring occupational illness in private-sector workplaces such as Maine. This category, which includes cumulative trauma disorders such as tendinitis, overuse syndrome, carpal tunnel syndrome and hearing loss accounted for 82.5 percent of all occupational illness cases recorded in 1999.” The Maine BLS report also pointed out that these repeated trauma disorders “accounted for the majority” of occupational illnesses in Maine’s public-sector workplaces for 1999.

The hazards which cause these injuries can be abated by making workplaces or sites safe and healthful through proper engineering and design. For example, proper work design can play a vital role in reducing musculoskeletal-related disorders or injuries (MSDs) such as carpal tunnel syndrome. By applying ergonomics, work stations involving computers, as well as other machines, tools and equipment can be designed to fit the occupational health and safety needs of workers. The costs of MSDs are both high and dramatic. On a national level, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reports that annually, MSDs “account for more than 15 to 20 billion dollars in Workers’ Compensation costs,” and are responsible for one-third of all lost workday injuries and illnesses in the United States.

MSDs should not and need not occur as a result of an employee’s job. A number of possible actions can be taken to abate the hazards that cause these injuries. One strategy involves labor and management participation in a joint health and safety committee that can function to identify, reduce and/or eliminate ergonomic hazards and other hazards as well. Based on this hazard identification and analysis, appropriate engineering actions can be taken involving the design or redesign of work stations, tools, equipment and machines; employee training and education; and, where feasible, the adoption of administrative controls including job rotation, break time, diversification of job tasks and the use of personal protective equipment. However, such equipment should only have to be used when necessary, and as a last resort.

The congressional intent behind the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act was that the solution to eliminating and controlling work hazards was not imposing layer upon layer of personal protective equipment on employees, but rather, making basic changes in the design, setup and functioning of work environments.

Enforcement

The previously cited Maine Bureau of Labor Standards (BLS) study also documented how Maine had the highest incidence rate of occupational injuries and illnesses of all states and territories of the United States in 1999. (Incidence rate is the number of OSHA recordable injuries, illnesses or both per 100 full-time workers.) The BLS emphasized that these “incidence rates … are not adjusted for the industry mix of the states and the nation, as a whole, [and that] incidence rates vary greatly between industries. Therefore, caution is necessary when making comparisons between incidence rates produced for different jurisdictions. For instance, a state with a higher concentration of employment in high-risk industries will likely have a higher total case incidence rate than a state with a lower concentration of high-risk industries.” However, even allowing for this lack of statistical adjustment, using the same data reported by the Maine BLS, Maine’s incidence rate of occupational injuries and illnesses is higher than all other states, even those with comparable or even greater proportions of high-risk industries.

There can be no doubt about the clear and continued need for strong enforcement of existing occupational health and safety laws on the federal and state levels. These laws should enable Maine’s workers to attain healthful and safe workplaces or sites. Yet, as the data shows, Maine has the dubious distinction of being the national leader in the incidence of occupational injuries and illnesses. Through the “Three E” approach involving Education, Engineering and Enforcement, Maine’s employers, workers and unions need to continue working with appropriate officials to attain and maintain workplaces or sites that are healthful, safe and productive.

Bill Murphy and John Hanson are on the staff of the Bureau of Labor Education at the University of Maine.