Rank: Guest
|
Posted By shaun allport
Is there any one who can give guidance on the above subject?
I am presently assessing tasks carried out of a light assembly nature for the automotive industry
Predominantly it is all seated assembly work, stations laid out as ergonomically as they can be, tasks all within comfort zone and a rotation policy is in place.........what’s the issue I hear you say?
The rotation policy.... as all the tasks are of a similar nature operators go from one task to
a likewise task, thus not allowing relaxation of used muscles which i believe is a key defense to this problem
any ideas?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By pnm999
Shaun,
I cant help you with your issue about your rotation but you may want to try using the RULA method for assessing Ergonomic issues, search on google, whilst carrying out their tasks, this will give each task a score allowing you to prioritise each one.
Hope this helps
Paul
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By shaun allport
Many thanks Paul
will look at it later
regards
Shaun
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kieran J Duignan
Shaun
From the information you have outlined, it is not clear what exactly you mean when you write: 'stations laid out as ergonomically as they can be, tasks all within comfort zone ... not allowing relaxation of used muscles'
As a registered ergonomist (M Erg S), I interpret what you write to mean an out-of-date meaning of 'ergonomics', since current research very strongly emphasises the holistic character of ergonomics whereas your version is simply 'biomechanical'. (Admittedly, some insurers who should know better adopt this restricted meaning when it suits them - and they get a punch on the nose from an expert ergonomist advising a solicitor in negotiatons with them) This is 15 years out of date in relation to current research which is the legal benchmark.
In terms of a risk assessment conducted in accordance with the HSC Management of Health and Safety Regs 1999, what you are saying is that you assess the risks to which the workers remain exposed as medium or higher. When (NOT if) employee suffer musculo-skeletal injuries, you will face the added responsibility of 'reasonable adjustment' for the disability caused by their work situation; as there is in principle no upper limit for a successful award under discrimination law. act now to avoid getting into this costly and troublesome quagmire.
A bona fide ergonomic prescription for controlling the risks includes at the least these elements of good practice:
a. pauses for the operators to do postural exercises for their backs and upper limbs, including wrists and hands
b. clearly displayed reminders to take these breaks
c. an adjustable foot rest available to any employee whose feet don't comfortabley rest on the ground when s/he is seated at work
d monthly written checks, completed by each employee, about any symptoms of musculo-skeletal disorder
e. independent assessment by a professional safety ergonomist of the work setting of any employee who reports MSD symptoms.
As MSDs can be intensely painful, 24/7, even the most placid employee is apt to behave defensively and apparently aggressively if he or she suffers such injuries because of employer neglect.
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.