The Challenges to Implementing Ergonomic Change

1. The Challenges to Implementing Ergonomic Change From a Manufacturer’s Perspective Dan Dubblestyne CRSP HS&E Director The Woodbridge Group

2. The Challenges to Implementing Ergonomic Change • Challenges/Barriers to Implementing Change • Examples/Experiences • Suggestions and Solutions • Questions March 4th, 2008

3. Challenges and Barriers to Implementing Change Need to avoid adopting an on-the-fly approach to addressing ergonomic issues March 4th, 2008

4. March 4th, 2008

5. Challenges and Barriers to Implementing Change • Employees not involved in the change process • Communication disconnects • Many employers simply do not comprehend the term “ergonomics” • Ergonomics still considered by some as “voodoo science” • “Time Study” approach still favoured • Ergonomics not considered during the design phase March 4th, 2008

6. Challenges and Barriers to Implementing Change • Costs can be prohibitive • Technology change can result in loss of jobs • Ergonomic assessment reports often do not specify practical recommendations • Lack of resources/funding/training • Maintenance • Psychosocial aspects are not addressed March 4th, 2008

7. Employees Not Involved in the Change Process • Not considered a stakeholder by some employers • Not engaged • No formal “Change Process” in place (seat-of-the-pants approach) • Examples: • Re-design of Off-Line area • Introduction of new Fork Lift Trucks March 4th, 2008

8. Communication Disconnects • No consultation with employees affected by change • No formal communication mechanism • Reports of pain and/or injury not adequately analyzed to identify ergonomic flags • Examples: • Installation of trim tool balancers March 4th, 2008

9. Comprehension of the term “Ergonomics” • Surprisingly, or not, there are many people out there who are not familiar with the term • Many who have heard it, do not understand the meaning • Example: An acquaintance, a Plant Manager at a small manufacturing facility, who heard the term thought it had a different meaning March 4th, 2008

10. Ergonomics as “Voodoo Science” • Still an “elective” subject in most, if not all, Engineering curriculums • Ergonomists and Engineers do not speak the same language • The science behind Ergonomics has been coined by some as “Voodoo Science” March 4th, 2008

11. Time Study Approach Still Favoured • An engineering staple, it is often utilized to verify a process design • Mostly considers non-human factors • Rarely includes ergonomic factors such as repetition, force, posture, etc. • Example: Line Speed Adjustment on a Production Assembly Line March 4th, 2008

12. Ergonomics Not Considered During Design Phase • If it was, we would likely not even need to have this workshop • Design-level Risk Assessments not a formal requirement in many organizations • Usually considered after the fact – retrofit costs often much higher than design costs March 4th, 2008

13. Costs Can Be Prohibitive • Re-engineering is often the recommended/needed solution and may require significant capital expenditure • The cost of a baseline ergonomic assessment can reach a five figure amount very quickly • Example: • Production Line redesign costs in excess of $600K • A baseline assessment at one of our new facilities was in excess of $25K March 4th, 2008

14. Technology Change Can Result in Loss of Jobs • Often, the only truly effective ergonomic solution is automation • All parties aware of this risk • In the lean manufacturing environment of today’s world, not a simple matter of finding another job for the displaced individual • Example: Installation of a robot to replace the human performing the job March 4th, 2008

15. Ergo. Assessment Reports Often Do Not Include Practical Recommendations • Assessment reports identify the ergonomic stressors and potential problems • If recommendations are made, they are often generic, and not entirely practical • Recipient of the report is often left to deal with the issue of what is to be done with the content of the report. • Example: Re-design entire production line and all jobs/tasks within this work space March 4th, 2008

16. Lack of Resources/Funding/Training • No Health and Safety professional (advocate role) • No on-site engineering expertise • No budget for health and safety projects • Reduced level of Ministry of Labour resources • JHSC members do not have adequate level of training or knowledge • Training – Turnover/Expectations are often too high • Ergonomics added to the list of responsibilities with no time allotted to use the acquired training • Trainees may not have the necessary technical capabilities March 4th, 2008

17. Maintenance • Established ergonomic assessments once developed, require ongoing maintenance (reviewed as changes occur) • JTA’s/JSA’s/PDA’s also require ongoing maintenance • Maintenance costs may be high as, depending on available resources, this work is farmed out to ergonomists • Example: Out-of-date JSA may result in MOL order on a work refusal March 4th, 2008

18. Psychosocial Aspects Not Addressed • How will the plant/organizational culture affect the implementation of change? • How is employee morale ? • Are the existing jobs/tasks dysfunctional in nature (e.g. promotes mental atrophy through non-stimulating work)? March 4th, 2008

19. What Can/Should We Do About It? • No easy solution or magic bullet • Swallow in small bites or one big gulp? March 4th, 2008

20. What Can/Should We Do About It? • Involve employees at all levels • Implement sustainable communication mechanisms (weekly safety talks, ergonomics newsletters or bulletin boards) • Include ergonomics in the mandate of the JHSC, or implement a separate committee • Include employees who perform the jobs/tasks in related design-level risk assessments, and development of JTA’s/JSA’s/PDA’s March 4th, 2008

21. What Can/Should We Do About It? • Ergonomic Sciences made a mandatory component of the Engineering and Industrial Technology curriculums • Need more Industrial Engineers/Technicians w/Ergonomic specialization • Existing ergonomic staff part of Engineering – not H&S function March 4th, 2008

22. What Can/Should We Do About It? • Increase training (awareness and specific) in a workshop format, where effectiveness is gauged to measure transfer of knowledge • Develop more user-friendly assessment tools – users need to understand the limitations of these tools and what can/should be done with the assessment results March 4th, 2008

23. What Can/Should We Do About It? • Key – implement design-level risk assessments on new or significantly modified equipment, machinery or process installations • Pre-Start Review (PSR) may not adequately cover ergonomic design • Risk Assessments are a component of a quality H&S Management System March 4th, 2008

24. What Can/Should We Do About It? • Project Review Checklist March 4th, 2008

25. What Can/Should We Do About It? • Create a culture of change in the facility (understand current culture, determine mission/vision/values of desired culture, change employee behaviour) • Improve employee morale - design, promote, and implement positive interaction activities throughout the entire employee population • Apply job rotation as a method of stimulation (ensure that it is ergonomically appropriate) • Provide training to complement and increase job knowledge March 4th, 2008

26. Summary • Design-Level Risk Assessments • Ergo-educated Engineers/Technologists • Involve employees • Training and education • Communication • Create a culture of Change March 4th, 2008

27. QUESTIONS? March 4th, 2008