70 likes | 215 Views
IE 419 Work Design: Productivity and Safety Dr. Andris Freivalds Class #40. Case Study - Pneumatic Nailers. Advantages Operation: Trigger trip vs. Yoke-trip (bump mode) Weight/size Standards: ANSI/ISANTA SNT-101-1983 OSHA 1910.243, 29 CFR 1926.300. Litigation Process.
E N D
IE 419 Work Design:Productivity and Safety Dr. Andris Freivalds Class #40 IE 419
Case Study - Pneumatic Nailers • Advantages • Operation: • Trigger trip vs. • Yoke-trip (bump mode) • Weight/size • Standards: • ANSI/ISANTA SNT-101-1983 • OSHA 1910.243, 29 CFR 1926.300 IE 419
Litigation Process • Accident/injury • Plaintiff hires lawyer, files suit • Defense hires lawyer • Cross evaluations of evidence (discovery) • Pre-trial depositions • Out-of-court settlement? IE 419
Goes to Court - Trial • Qualification of experts • Direct examination • Cross examination • Re-direct, re-cross • Expert witnesses - ethical considerations ✓ ‘hired gun’ ✓ sterile vs. interested ✓ take cases you don’t believe in? ✓ negative comments on opposing colleagues ✓ opinion vs. fact IE 419
Specific Cases • Duo-Fast vs. Condella - setting windows, head injury, no hard hats/safety glasses • Atro vs. Edwards - framing, back injury, no hard hats/safety glasses • Duo-Fast vs. Schmidt - deck joists, self-inflicted leg injury IE 419
Plaintiff Allegations • Tool weight depresses yoke/trigger • Trigger/handle design invites activation • Mechanical lockout necessary • Eliminate bump mode • Warnings deficient • Increase trigger/yoke force IE 419
Defense Answers • Tool weight < than yoke/trigger force • Tool to be disconnected during transport • Increasing trigger force causes other dangers (CTD injuries) • Elimination of bump mode decreases productivity (need for tool) • Risk vs. productivity • Warnings vs. good practice/training IE 419