A Deafening Mix: Noise Plus Chemicals Harm Worker’s Hearing.
When researchers looked at workplaces where there seemed to be a link between hearing loss, noise levels and chemicals, they found risks are wide-spread across industry. Some risks are obvious but many are unexpected.
– By Isaac Rudik
While it’s well-known that work-related hearing loss usually is caused by noise, what isn’t nearly as widely-recognised is that on-going exposure to some widely used chemicals increases the risk of hearing loss, particularly in noisy workplaces. Yet both animal experiments and human studies suggest that workers exposed to some chemicals suffer "ototoxic" effects – a fancy word scientists use to describe damage to both the hearing and balance functions of the ear.
Outside of laboratories, the human impact is being seen with growing frequency among workers at companies where noise and chemicals are part of daily life.
A small Ontario furniture manufacturer noticed three of its factory workers were suffering varying degrees of hearing loss. Working beside loud machinery combined with various chemicals used to produce finished furniture created a growing concern for the company, which became concerned about the potential harm the combination could have on impairing the hearing of its employees.
Although tests could not pinpoint the exact cause, noise and chemical exposure were found to be factors directly responsible for the employee’s hearing loss.
Wide Spread Risks
When researchers looked at workplaces where there seemed to be a link between noise levels and chemicals, they found that the risks are wide-spread across industry. Some are obvious, such as for people who fuel large equipment, trucks and aircraft, those working in construction, manufacturing and metal works, and people who earn a living test firing weapons.
But many are surprisingly unexpected: Painters and printers are at risk as are boat builders, cabinetmakers and firefighters. As studies continue and more is learned about the deafening combination of noise and chemicals, the list of occupations where there is a potential problem keeps expanding.
Both businesses and government institutions are being warned of widely-used chemicals already known to cause possible hearing problems:
• Benzene
• Carbon disulfide
• Carbon monoxide
• Ethylbenzene
• Hydrogen cyanide
• Lead
• Mercury
• n-Hexane
• Solvent mixtures
• Styrene
• Trichloroethylene
• Toluene
• Xylene
All of these are found in fuels and plastics, as thinners for paints, lacquers and dyes, in detergents, medicines, perfumes, fabric and paper coatings, printer’s ink, spray surface coatings and insect repellents.
Cut Risks Easily
A big Homer Simpson “D-Oh!” would be most people’s reaction to someone saying that the best way to reduce hearing loss risk is to cut workplace noise and exposure to “ototoxins.” But the fact is, doing so isn’t always possible or practical.
A more workable and highly cost-effective solution is ensuring that workplaces and employees are adequately protected with the right equipment and gear.
The fastest way to cut down the risk from noise is issuing disposable polyurethane foam earplugs or earmuffs. They’re made from a soft, low-pressure foam that is comfortable to wear because it exerts very little pressure on the ear canal. And they’re easy for compliance supervisors to check that workers are using them because they’re bright purple with yellow cord. The cord’s extended length allows for simple removal and makes the earplug more visible from a distance.
The second step is to have sound meters available throughout a plant. There are at least 10 different models available, many of which are portable so inspectors can move from one area to another, testing sound levels as they walk.
Plants are easily and inexpensively retrofitted with sound baffles as an additional safeguard around areas where noise is especially intense. For example, the SONEX®
Valuline Baffles absorb sound energy from multiple sources, reducing noise and reverberation throughout the environment. Its unique hanging system simplifies installation, reducing labour and cost, and without disrupting work on the floor to accommodate scaffolding.
Finally, any worker exposed to toxic chemicals along with noise needs additional protection. CHEMSPLASH™ combines the economy of micro-porous technology with a surface augmented by micro-membranes. So, its Hybrid Breathable Membrane System is a transformed barrier which retains "breathability" but is highly resistant to penetration to a broad group of dangerous, noxious and poisonous chemicals. It’s the first protective material to incorporate barrier resistance providing continuous outward moisture vapour transmission to minimize the potential for heat stress.
Beyond this, be sure to have a hearing conservation programme even for workers at lower levels of noise exposure than required by OSHA rules. Include workers exposed to chemicals in hearing conservation programs, whether or not they are exposed to noise.
This is our last article of 2009. Everyone at Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. wishes you and yours the best of the season and sends our hopes for a healthy, happy and prosperous New Year. Our next edition will be Jan. 6, 2010.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Touch It Once, Take It Everywhere.
Touch It Once, Take It Everywhere.
Our fingers collect, carry and pass along each microscopic bit of virus, bacteria and lots of other unpleasant things that can make us and everyone we meet sick. The financial cost to companies from illnesses being passed among employees averages more than $3,275 annually for every 50 workers.
By Isaac Rudik
Fingers are so important and useful, every human and primate striding the earth has had 10 of them for more than 3-million years. From making crude tools to doing intricate brain surgery to lovingly stroking the face of a newborn, they are so indispensable few people give them second thought.
But, as with many things in nature, along with the good comes bad. Our fingers – and the hands they’re attached to – also collect, carry and pass along each microscopic bit of virus, bacteria, germs and lots of other nasty things that can make us and everyone we meet sick. And it doesn’t even need to be hand-to-hand contact: We grasp an object such as a door handle that someone else touches later and the bad guys happily move onto a new host.
The H1N1 pandemic is an object lesson in the importance of remembering to do things we were taught as kids: Wash your hands frequently. But the fact is, few people know how to do so properly – if they do it at all; as a result, we don’t kill germs. Along with people working in highly vulnerable sectors such as health care, hospitals, food processing and the corner grocery store, workers in nearly every organisation need to be aware of sanitising their hands regularly.
After all, 90% of contamination comes from hands and fingers.
Spreading Infections
The most blatant problem is in the health care sector, where hospital acquired infections reached epidemic proportions until attention to the problem was put under the spotlight.
The problem became so bad, recently Medicare in the US announced it will stop reimbursing hospitals for treating these infections. Hospitals are barred from billing patients for what Medicare doesn't pay, forcing them to take a loss. This year, Medicare added a long list of other types of infections to its list of "never events" – things that shouldn’t be making patients sick when they’re in hospital recovering from something else.
Courts are paying attention, too. A jury awarded over $2.5-million to a couple in a
medical malpractice lawsuit against a heart surgeon, his group practice and a St. Louis Missouri hospital. The man was rushed to hospital with a heart attack and a pacemaker was surgically implanted. He developed a drug resistant staph infection. It was so severe the man had to undergo 15 additional operations, spent 84 days in hospital and lost his right leg, part of his left foot, a kidney and most of his hearing.
All this happened because the doctors and health care workers as well as the company that made the implanted device were careless about sanitizing their hands and the products those hands made.
Beyond Hospitals
But the problem isn’t limited to careless medical staff, and shrugging off the issue as being unimportant to businesses.
One estimate put the financial cost to every company in every industry as a result of illnesses being passed from one employee to another at an average of more than $3,275 per year for every 50 workers. So a business with 200 employees is losing more than $13,000 annually simply because workers don’t sanitize their hands frequently during the day. The cost is even higher in businesses where employees handle food and, worse, they risk passing germs and infections along to consumers as was seen in recent problems with tomatoes from Mexico, and both peanuts and spinach from the US.
Stationing hand sanitizers in key places around a facility is an important first step. But it’s equally critical to test the effectiveness and strength of the sanitizing fluid on a regular basis.
Titrimetric kits verify the concentration of a sanitizer quickly and easily. They allow a business to validate the power of its liquid sanitizer with colorimetric kits, which contain re-agents for 50 tests. The test saves money by avoiding the sanitizer being too concentrated while at the same time ensuring it’s not too weak to do the job.
Thanks to our eons-old fingers and hands, people take whatever they touch with them. When going from one department to another, hand sanitizers at doors and passageways leave germs where they came from. Testing to ensure that sanitizers are working at the proper strength reduces the likelihood of spreading sickness – and costing the company money.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Our fingers collect, carry and pass along each microscopic bit of virus, bacteria and lots of other unpleasant things that can make us and everyone we meet sick. The financial cost to companies from illnesses being passed among employees averages more than $3,275 annually for every 50 workers.
By Isaac Rudik
Fingers are so important and useful, every human and primate striding the earth has had 10 of them for more than 3-million years. From making crude tools to doing intricate brain surgery to lovingly stroking the face of a newborn, they are so indispensable few people give them second thought.
But, as with many things in nature, along with the good comes bad. Our fingers – and the hands they’re attached to – also collect, carry and pass along each microscopic bit of virus, bacteria, germs and lots of other nasty things that can make us and everyone we meet sick. And it doesn’t even need to be hand-to-hand contact: We grasp an object such as a door handle that someone else touches later and the bad guys happily move onto a new host.
The H1N1 pandemic is an object lesson in the importance of remembering to do things we were taught as kids: Wash your hands frequently. But the fact is, few people know how to do so properly – if they do it at all; as a result, we don’t kill germs. Along with people working in highly vulnerable sectors such as health care, hospitals, food processing and the corner grocery store, workers in nearly every organisation need to be aware of sanitising their hands regularly.
After all, 90% of contamination comes from hands and fingers.
Spreading Infections
The most blatant problem is in the health care sector, where hospital acquired infections reached epidemic proportions until attention to the problem was put under the spotlight.
The problem became so bad, recently Medicare in the US announced it will stop reimbursing hospitals for treating these infections. Hospitals are barred from billing patients for what Medicare doesn't pay, forcing them to take a loss. This year, Medicare added a long list of other types of infections to its list of "never events" – things that shouldn’t be making patients sick when they’re in hospital recovering from something else.
Courts are paying attention, too. A jury awarded over $2.5-million to a couple in a
medical malpractice lawsuit against a heart surgeon, his group practice and a St. Louis Missouri hospital. The man was rushed to hospital with a heart attack and a pacemaker was surgically implanted. He developed a drug resistant staph infection. It was so severe the man had to undergo 15 additional operations, spent 84 days in hospital and lost his right leg, part of his left foot, a kidney and most of his hearing.
All this happened because the doctors and health care workers as well as the company that made the implanted device were careless about sanitizing their hands and the products those hands made.
Beyond Hospitals
But the problem isn’t limited to careless medical staff, and shrugging off the issue as being unimportant to businesses.
One estimate put the financial cost to every company in every industry as a result of illnesses being passed from one employee to another at an average of more than $3,275 per year for every 50 workers. So a business with 200 employees is losing more than $13,000 annually simply because workers don’t sanitize their hands frequently during the day. The cost is even higher in businesses where employees handle food and, worse, they risk passing germs and infections along to consumers as was seen in recent problems with tomatoes from Mexico, and both peanuts and spinach from the US.
Stationing hand sanitizers in key places around a facility is an important first step. But it’s equally critical to test the effectiveness and strength of the sanitizing fluid on a regular basis.
Titrimetric kits verify the concentration of a sanitizer quickly and easily. They allow a business to validate the power of its liquid sanitizer with colorimetric kits, which contain re-agents for 50 tests. The test saves money by avoiding the sanitizer being too concentrated while at the same time ensuring it’s not too weak to do the job.
Thanks to our eons-old fingers and hands, people take whatever they touch with them. When going from one department to another, hand sanitizers at doors and passageways leave germs where they came from. Testing to ensure that sanitizers are working at the proper strength reduces the likelihood of spreading sickness – and costing the company money.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Hope Works In Politics But Not For Businesses Facing A Flu Pandemic.
Hope Works In Politics But Not For Businesses Facing A Flu Pandemic.
H1N1 is serious enough that businesses must prepare for a possible outbreak. But a June survey Ottawa did show that 82% of small businesses do not have an emergency flu plan in place. The time to begin preparing is yesterday.
- By Isaac Rudik
It’s not so much a question of “if” but rather “when” the H1N1 flu pandemic will strike Canada in force. The World Health Organisation says the virulent virus is present in more than 50 nations around the globe – right now, mostly in the southern hemisphere – and as the 2009-10 flu season approaches; it is likely to cut a wide swath through businesses.
While this year’s outbreak is unlikely to be as fatal the Spanish flu after World War I that killed tens of thousands of Canadians, it is something serious enough for all businesses to plan for. But a disturbing reality popped up in a June survey that Ottawa conducted among small businesses: An overwhelming 82% of employers do not have an emergency plan for health emergencies, including an outbreak of H1N1 in the workplace.
“It won’t be that bad,” a client told me a few weeks ago when I asked about his company’s plans to handle a pandemic. “Besides, there’ll be flu shots and I’m hoping this is just another overreaction, like SARS was a few years back.”
But “hope,” which helped elect Barack Obama, is not an option for businesses — they must begin planning and preparing now. Those that don’t have a plan already in place need to recognize just how serious the pandemic is expected to be, and start preparing both their staff and the businesses.
Simple Reality
While the H1N1 virus doesn’t appear to be mutating as it races around the globe, evidence suggests that transmission comes from speaking, sneezing or coughing – stuff that’s hard to avoid in everyday life. Any person who is in close contact – as close as about 1 meter – with someone who has flu-like symptoms such as fever, sneezing, coughing, running nose, chills and muscle aches, is at risk.
The SARS Commission led by Mr. Justice Archie Campbell advises that government and employers learn from the SARS outbreak a few years ago. Campbell says the main SARS lesson is that worker safety relies on the “precautionary principle” requiring reasonable action to reduce risk before there is “scientific certainty,” in his words.
Although the federal government is stockpiling vaccine doses, people are being advised to wash their hands frequently, avoid crowded places and to stay home from work if they don’t feel well, the simple reality is that such measures are not likely to be enough.
Businesses of all sizes need to stockpile some simple health tools to help minimise the risk of illness – and distruption to the company that would follow workers getting sick.
Cover Up
We all remember shots of people in Mexico City wearing masks during last year’s major outbreak. And while there are dozens of face mask styles available, it is critical to ensure that masks provided in the workplace or schools will actually contain the H1N1 virus. Many of them won’t.
The Dentec PPE Line N95 Enviroguard mask is NIOSH approved to stop flu viruses from escaping. It offers specific protection but simply putting on a mask for the day isn’t enough.
• Place the mask carefully to cover the entire mouth and nose, tying it securely to reduce gaps between the face and mask.
• Avoid touching the mask, especially when removing it.
• Replace masks with a new clean, dry mask as soon as it becomes damp.
• Clean hands by using with soap and hot water, or use an alcohol-based hand-rub.
• Do not re-use masks, discarding them after each use and disposing immediately after removing the mask.
Especially now as organizations deal with the emerging threat of H1N1, all public and private sector employers must act quickly to err on the side of precaution. A major flu outbreak will be disruptive enough to people; employers must take steps to help minimise the risk they and their employees face.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
H1N1 is serious enough that businesses must prepare for a possible outbreak. But a June survey Ottawa did show that 82% of small businesses do not have an emergency flu plan in place. The time to begin preparing is yesterday.
- By Isaac Rudik
It’s not so much a question of “if” but rather “when” the H1N1 flu pandemic will strike Canada in force. The World Health Organisation says the virulent virus is present in more than 50 nations around the globe – right now, mostly in the southern hemisphere – and as the 2009-10 flu season approaches; it is likely to cut a wide swath through businesses.
While this year’s outbreak is unlikely to be as fatal the Spanish flu after World War I that killed tens of thousands of Canadians, it is something serious enough for all businesses to plan for. But a disturbing reality popped up in a June survey that Ottawa conducted among small businesses: An overwhelming 82% of employers do not have an emergency plan for health emergencies, including an outbreak of H1N1 in the workplace.
“It won’t be that bad,” a client told me a few weeks ago when I asked about his company’s plans to handle a pandemic. “Besides, there’ll be flu shots and I’m hoping this is just another overreaction, like SARS was a few years back.”
But “hope,” which helped elect Barack Obama, is not an option for businesses — they must begin planning and preparing now. Those that don’t have a plan already in place need to recognize just how serious the pandemic is expected to be, and start preparing both their staff and the businesses.
Simple Reality
While the H1N1 virus doesn’t appear to be mutating as it races around the globe, evidence suggests that transmission comes from speaking, sneezing or coughing – stuff that’s hard to avoid in everyday life. Any person who is in close contact – as close as about 1 meter – with someone who has flu-like symptoms such as fever, sneezing, coughing, running nose, chills and muscle aches, is at risk.
The SARS Commission led by Mr. Justice Archie Campbell advises that government and employers learn from the SARS outbreak a few years ago. Campbell says the main SARS lesson is that worker safety relies on the “precautionary principle” requiring reasonable action to reduce risk before there is “scientific certainty,” in his words.
Although the federal government is stockpiling vaccine doses, people are being advised to wash their hands frequently, avoid crowded places and to stay home from work if they don’t feel well, the simple reality is that such measures are not likely to be enough.
Businesses of all sizes need to stockpile some simple health tools to help minimise the risk of illness – and distruption to the company that would follow workers getting sick.
Cover Up
We all remember shots of people in Mexico City wearing masks during last year’s major outbreak. And while there are dozens of face mask styles available, it is critical to ensure that masks provided in the workplace or schools will actually contain the H1N1 virus. Many of them won’t.
The Dentec PPE Line N95 Enviroguard mask is NIOSH approved to stop flu viruses from escaping. It offers specific protection but simply putting on a mask for the day isn’t enough.
• Place the mask carefully to cover the entire mouth and nose, tying it securely to reduce gaps between the face and mask.
• Avoid touching the mask, especially when removing it.
• Replace masks with a new clean, dry mask as soon as it becomes damp.
• Clean hands by using with soap and hot water, or use an alcohol-based hand-rub.
• Do not re-use masks, discarding them after each use and disposing immediately after removing the mask.
Especially now as organizations deal with the emerging threat of H1N1, all public and private sector employers must act quickly to err on the side of precaution. A major flu outbreak will be disruptive enough to people; employers must take steps to help minimise the risk they and their employees face.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Pump Down The Volume: Noise Pollution Is Serious Stuff.
Pump Down The Volume: Noise Pollution Is Serious Stuff.
While it’s impossible to make a factory blasting at full output TV studio quiet, steps can be taken to reduce noise as much as possible – which translates into high productivity and fewer worker’s comp claims for hearing loss.
– By Isaac Rudik
In a world where workplace and outside noise can seem like an unyielding din, it is easy to take hearing for granted. Moreover, symptoms of hearing loss can be overlooked since they appear gradually and are seldom associated with pain. As a result, increasing deafness remains unnoticed often for years until it’s too late.
In fact, among all occupational hazards, noise is the biggest cause of permanent disability claims settled by Ontario’s Worker’s Compensation Board. According to WSIB, hearing loss due to high workplace noise levels resulted in roughly $100-million in claims paid out over a recent 10 year period.
As a result, Ontario’s Ministry of Labour introduced strict limits for workplace noise exposure. Among other things, the government reduced the allowable exposure time to noise by workers in half. The Environment Ministry deals with preventing excessive noise in Ontario, and sounds produced by human activity is controlled by the laws in the Ontario Environmental Protection Act (EPA), which holds that noise is a contaminant with adverse effects on workers.
Why? Because researchers proved that an individual exposed to 85dba for eight hours a day, week after week, will suffer hearing loss. The louder the sound, the less time it takes. Thus, the noisier the workplace, the fewer exposures and time it takes to produce significant – and, for employers, costly – hearing loss.
Achieving Results
While it’s impossible to make a factory blasting at full output TV studio quiet, steps can be taken to reduce noise as much as possible.
Executives at an Ontario tool-and-die maker knew they were in a noisy business; it’s in the nature of what the company does. But they were intent on reducing noise levels as much as possible. For one thing, they didn’t want to be socked with expensive worker’s comp claims if employees started suffering hearing problems; for another, they recognised that high noise levels meant lower productivity.
The company developed a three-prong strategy: Remove, Reduce, and Rest.
The company removed as much noise as possible from its plant and then reduced the amount of noise entering the workplace. Following exposure to loud noise, auditory rest is crucial to allow recovery time for the hearing system.
The plant formed a management-worker committee and following guidelines created by the Canadian Hearing Society.
First, noise was reduced at the machinery sound source, either by isolating machines or installing insulating materials to muffle sound and vibration.
Next, within the plant sound barriers made of acoustic materials were installed along with adding machine enclosures, equipment mounts, exhaust silencers and mufflers. Where possible, sound-absorbing coatings were applied to machines and plastic gears substituted for metal ones. Each helped reduce noise.
Finally, schedules were re-configured to allow workers to rotate to less noisy areas during their shift. They were also provided personal hearing protection and instructed on its proper use.
Primary Solution
The company used a variety of SONEX Panels which provided it with a range of acoustic solutions that met both functional and aesthetic requirements. The panels are used in everything from industrial facilities to manufacturing plants, warehouses, schools and universities, churches, multi-purpose rooms, cafeterias, offices, retail stores, recording studios and many other locations requiring acoustical control.
SONEX panels were chosen for their adhesive-applied installation and are all made with Willtec® foam, which is fire rated Class 1. At the same time, SONEX Valueline Baffles helped improve communication, reducing echo and reverberation in large open areas such as the production plant and warehouse.
Although the company absorbed an up-front investment, it noticed improved productivity on the plant floor almost immediately. Moreover, it received a number of points towards its LEED certification as an all-around healthy and green workplace – which is paying off in employee retention.
Coupled with reducing the likelihood of joining a long line of companies facing worker comp claims for hearing loss, the company is delighted it pumped down the volume.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
While it’s impossible to make a factory blasting at full output TV studio quiet, steps can be taken to reduce noise as much as possible – which translates into high productivity and fewer worker’s comp claims for hearing loss.
– By Isaac Rudik
In a world where workplace and outside noise can seem like an unyielding din, it is easy to take hearing for granted. Moreover, symptoms of hearing loss can be overlooked since they appear gradually and are seldom associated with pain. As a result, increasing deafness remains unnoticed often for years until it’s too late.
In fact, among all occupational hazards, noise is the biggest cause of permanent disability claims settled by Ontario’s Worker’s Compensation Board. According to WSIB, hearing loss due to high workplace noise levels resulted in roughly $100-million in claims paid out over a recent 10 year period.
As a result, Ontario’s Ministry of Labour introduced strict limits for workplace noise exposure. Among other things, the government reduced the allowable exposure time to noise by workers in half. The Environment Ministry deals with preventing excessive noise in Ontario, and sounds produced by human activity is controlled by the laws in the Ontario Environmental Protection Act (EPA), which holds that noise is a contaminant with adverse effects on workers.
Why? Because researchers proved that an individual exposed to 85dba for eight hours a day, week after week, will suffer hearing loss. The louder the sound, the less time it takes. Thus, the noisier the workplace, the fewer exposures and time it takes to produce significant – and, for employers, costly – hearing loss.
Achieving Results
While it’s impossible to make a factory blasting at full output TV studio quiet, steps can be taken to reduce noise as much as possible.
Executives at an Ontario tool-and-die maker knew they were in a noisy business; it’s in the nature of what the company does. But they were intent on reducing noise levels as much as possible. For one thing, they didn’t want to be socked with expensive worker’s comp claims if employees started suffering hearing problems; for another, they recognised that high noise levels meant lower productivity.
The company developed a three-prong strategy: Remove, Reduce, and Rest.
The company removed as much noise as possible from its plant and then reduced the amount of noise entering the workplace. Following exposure to loud noise, auditory rest is crucial to allow recovery time for the hearing system.
The plant formed a management-worker committee and following guidelines created by the Canadian Hearing Society.
First, noise was reduced at the machinery sound source, either by isolating machines or installing insulating materials to muffle sound and vibration.
Next, within the plant sound barriers made of acoustic materials were installed along with adding machine enclosures, equipment mounts, exhaust silencers and mufflers. Where possible, sound-absorbing coatings were applied to machines and plastic gears substituted for metal ones. Each helped reduce noise.
Finally, schedules were re-configured to allow workers to rotate to less noisy areas during their shift. They were also provided personal hearing protection and instructed on its proper use.
Primary Solution
The company used a variety of SONEX Panels which provided it with a range of acoustic solutions that met both functional and aesthetic requirements. The panels are used in everything from industrial facilities to manufacturing plants, warehouses, schools and universities, churches, multi-purpose rooms, cafeterias, offices, retail stores, recording studios and many other locations requiring acoustical control.
SONEX panels were chosen for their adhesive-applied installation and are all made with Willtec® foam, which is fire rated Class 1. At the same time, SONEX Valueline Baffles helped improve communication, reducing echo and reverberation in large open areas such as the production plant and warehouse.
Although the company absorbed an up-front investment, it noticed improved productivity on the plant floor almost immediately. Moreover, it received a number of points towards its LEED certification as an all-around healthy and green workplace – which is paying off in employee retention.
Coupled with reducing the likelihood of joining a long line of companies facing worker comp claims for hearing loss, the company is delighted it pumped down the volume.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
What Cheating Fisherman And Improper Hazardous Waste Storage Have In Common
What Cheating Fisherman And Improper Hazardous Waste Storage Have In Common
Manufacturers storing raw material from paint to corrosives will face much heftier fines and stiffer “we got you” sanctions – all the way up to temporary plant closures – if storage cabinets don’t meet regulations.
– By Isaac Rudik
As anyone who fishes can attest, getting caught over the limit – whether it’s one too many trout on a line in an isolated, northern lake or a huge trawler netting too many tons of albacore in the middle of the open ocean – can result in a hefty fine and other stiff sanctions.
The idea is to levy a penalty large enough so that fishers loose the value of their catch plus fork over a painful, don’t ever do that again, fine.
Now, improperly storing hazardous materials will trigger even higher fines, and for the same reason
The Ministry of Environment is adopting the same approach as fish and game wardens to penalise companies improperly handling and storing hazardous material. When fully implemented, manufacturers who store raw material from paint to corrosives and other contaminants will face much heftier fines and stiffer, “we caught you red handed,” sanctions – all the way up to temporary plant closures – if storage cabinets do not comply with regulations.
The reason behind the tough, new and potentially very costly tactic is because a leading cause of industrial fires is improperly stored and handled flammable liquids. To minimize the hazard, the government wants businesses to identify and inventory any chemicals in the workplace, storing them in code-compliant safety cabinets. If an inspector finds non-compliance, the days of a slap on the wrist are gone.
Poor Housekeeping Award
There are countless examples of poor housekeeping resulting in spontaneous fires and explosions.
In schools, for example, it is common to find chemicals stored alphabetically – easy for students to find what they’re looking for when doing experiments but also for disaster to strike. In one recent case at a university, diluted solutions of Hydrochloric and Nitric acids were discarded in a waste container. Sometime during the night, the acids reacted with each other, creating pressure from the gases generated.
The pressure was strong enough to destroy the 1-litre waste container kept in a storage cabinet under a fume hood. It also blew the doors off the cabinet, upseting equipment on a counter. Fortunately, nobody was standing nearby when the explosion occurred.
Many businesses commit the same error, failing to properly isolate hazardous materials that can interact and ignite a fire or worse.
Easy Prevention
Storing hazardous material must be done according to Canadian laws and regulations, all of which are Underwriter Laboratory of Canada (ULC) approved, Factory Mutual Canada (FMC) Approved, and National Fire Code of Canada (NFCC) approved.
Proper safety cabinets meet nine other, key criteria.
• Insulated, 18-gauge steel construction, double-walled, with 1½" air space.
• Chemical-resistant finish, inside and out.
• Dual vents with built-in flash arresters.
• Liquid-tight containment sump at least 2" deep, to hold leaks.
• Highly visible warning label "Flammable — Keep Fire Away."
• Easy close or self-latching doors with three-point latches for added fire protection.
• Doors with fusible link mechanism that holds doors open but melts at 165°F for automatic closure.
• Built-in grounding connector.
• Adjustable leveling feet for balancing on uneven surfaces.
There are numerous, UL Canada Aapproved safety cabinets available, each designed to store specific types of hazardous or flammable material. They offer protection against not only potential explosions or fires but also the wrath of a ministry inspector armed with a citation book.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Manufacturers storing raw material from paint to corrosives will face much heftier fines and stiffer “we got you” sanctions – all the way up to temporary plant closures – if storage cabinets don’t meet regulations.
– By Isaac Rudik
As anyone who fishes can attest, getting caught over the limit – whether it’s one too many trout on a line in an isolated, northern lake or a huge trawler netting too many tons of albacore in the middle of the open ocean – can result in a hefty fine and other stiff sanctions.
The idea is to levy a penalty large enough so that fishers loose the value of their catch plus fork over a painful, don’t ever do that again, fine.
Now, improperly storing hazardous materials will trigger even higher fines, and for the same reason
The Ministry of Environment is adopting the same approach as fish and game wardens to penalise companies improperly handling and storing hazardous material. When fully implemented, manufacturers who store raw material from paint to corrosives and other contaminants will face much heftier fines and stiffer, “we caught you red handed,” sanctions – all the way up to temporary plant closures – if storage cabinets do not comply with regulations.
The reason behind the tough, new and potentially very costly tactic is because a leading cause of industrial fires is improperly stored and handled flammable liquids. To minimize the hazard, the government wants businesses to identify and inventory any chemicals in the workplace, storing them in code-compliant safety cabinets. If an inspector finds non-compliance, the days of a slap on the wrist are gone.
Poor Housekeeping Award
There are countless examples of poor housekeeping resulting in spontaneous fires and explosions.
In schools, for example, it is common to find chemicals stored alphabetically – easy for students to find what they’re looking for when doing experiments but also for disaster to strike. In one recent case at a university, diluted solutions of Hydrochloric and Nitric acids were discarded in a waste container. Sometime during the night, the acids reacted with each other, creating pressure from the gases generated.
The pressure was strong enough to destroy the 1-litre waste container kept in a storage cabinet under a fume hood. It also blew the doors off the cabinet, upseting equipment on a counter. Fortunately, nobody was standing nearby when the explosion occurred.
Many businesses commit the same error, failing to properly isolate hazardous materials that can interact and ignite a fire or worse.
Easy Prevention
Storing hazardous material must be done according to Canadian laws and regulations, all of which are Underwriter Laboratory of Canada (ULC) approved, Factory Mutual Canada (FMC) Approved, and National Fire Code of Canada (NFCC) approved.
Proper safety cabinets meet nine other, key criteria.
• Insulated, 18-gauge steel construction, double-walled, with 1½" air space.
• Chemical-resistant finish, inside and out.
• Dual vents with built-in flash arresters.
• Liquid-tight containment sump at least 2" deep, to hold leaks.
• Highly visible warning label "Flammable — Keep Fire Away."
• Easy close or self-latching doors with three-point latches for added fire protection.
• Doors with fusible link mechanism that holds doors open but melts at 165°F for automatic closure.
• Built-in grounding connector.
• Adjustable leveling feet for balancing on uneven surfaces.
There are numerous, UL Canada Aapproved safety cabinets available, each designed to store specific types of hazardous or flammable material. They offer protection against not only potential explosions or fires but also the wrath of a ministry inspector armed with a citation book.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (www.compliancesolutionscanada.com), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
When Thinking You’re Doing Everything Right - Isn’t Enough
When Thinking You’re Doing Everything Right - Isn’t Enough
Following regulations when something is first installed may no longer be adequate because a company grows, employing more people, or the regulations are tougher yet the business doesn’t keep up-to-date. The result can be a shockingly expensive work order – and an even more expensive fine.
– By Isaac Rudik
While the news media likes to portray companies who get fined for violating health and safety rules as cold-hearted, money grubbing, villains, the truth often is very different. In fact, each year many businesses believe they are doing everything correctly, working hard and spending money to protect workers and the environment, yet still get cited and fined.
The reason? What they thought was properly following regulatory procedures and requirements when something was first installed – say, an eyewash basin – or protective regimens are no longer adequate because the company grew and employs more people, or the regulations themselves became tougher and the business didn’t keep up-to-date.
In fact, there are plenty of occasions when thinking you’re doing the right thing simply is not enough – and it could end up costing even the most diligent business serious money.
Playing Safe
The process at an Ontario manufacturer required that parts be put through an acid bath during assembly. The businesses was painstakingly thorough in ensuring that exposed employees wore goggles and face shields, and insisted that a supervisor check several times each shift that they were being used – and used correctly. As a result, the company never suffered an injury or an incident.
During a routine visit, a Ministry of Labour inspector toured the plant. Much to the surprise of everyone, before leaving the inspector wrote out a work order and cited the plant, making it subject to a hefty fine. The reason? Even though the facility had two eyewash stations – neither of which had ever been used – the water flowed slowly and some of the treatment supplies on hand were well beyond their “use by” date.
Moreover, the work order noted that the company needed to have as many operable eyewash facilities as necessary to enable a worker to reach it within 10 seconds from wherever they’re stationed. Because the plant grew in size over the years, one of the eyewash stations was now 30-to-60 seconds from hazardous work areas, and on the other side of a partitioning wall.
In fact, one of the most-common ways an organisation can find itself in trouble is over something very simple such as it emergency eyewash and shower facilities.
Easy Steps
The most-obvious rule of thumb is ensuring that each emergency shower or eyewash station is easily identified. A sign should use a symbol that does not require workers to have specific language skills to understand it, and the location should be well lit.
Other recommendations include emergency showers or eyewash stations should:
• Be located as close to the hazard as possible
• Not be partitioned off from hazardous work areas.
• Have an unobstructed path between the hazard and aid.
• Be located where workers can easily see stations.
• Be on the same floor as the hazard, as near an exit as possible so that emergency response teams can reach the victim easily.
• Provide a drainage system for excess water because, once used, the water itself may be a hazardous waste and special regulations apply.
• Not come in contact with electrical equipment.
• Be protected from freezing when installing emergency equipment outdoors.
It’s not just factories that are at risk.
For instance, a London ON nursing home was fine $55,000 recently for exposing workers to eye injury because of a disinfectant used in cleaning the facility. And a Markham food processor was hit with a $75,000 fine after a worker cleaning a food preparation tank was injured when a disinfecting line broke, injuring the employee’s eyes. In both cases, the company was committed to providing a safe workplace and found out, too late, that more needed to be done.
The fact is that any business may find itself at risk – even when it is striving to do the right thing.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Following regulations when something is first installed may no longer be adequate because a company grows, employing more people, or the regulations are tougher yet the business doesn’t keep up-to-date. The result can be a shockingly expensive work order – and an even more expensive fine.
– By Isaac Rudik
While the news media likes to portray companies who get fined for violating health and safety rules as cold-hearted, money grubbing, villains, the truth often is very different. In fact, each year many businesses believe they are doing everything correctly, working hard and spending money to protect workers and the environment, yet still get cited and fined.
The reason? What they thought was properly following regulatory procedures and requirements when something was first installed – say, an eyewash basin – or protective regimens are no longer adequate because the company grew and employs more people, or the regulations themselves became tougher and the business didn’t keep up-to-date.
In fact, there are plenty of occasions when thinking you’re doing the right thing simply is not enough – and it could end up costing even the most diligent business serious money.
Playing Safe
The process at an Ontario manufacturer required that parts be put through an acid bath during assembly. The businesses was painstakingly thorough in ensuring that exposed employees wore goggles and face shields, and insisted that a supervisor check several times each shift that they were being used – and used correctly. As a result, the company never suffered an injury or an incident.
During a routine visit, a Ministry of Labour inspector toured the plant. Much to the surprise of everyone, before leaving the inspector wrote out a work order and cited the plant, making it subject to a hefty fine. The reason? Even though the facility had two eyewash stations – neither of which had ever been used – the water flowed slowly and some of the treatment supplies on hand were well beyond their “use by” date.
Moreover, the work order noted that the company needed to have as many operable eyewash facilities as necessary to enable a worker to reach it within 10 seconds from wherever they’re stationed. Because the plant grew in size over the years, one of the eyewash stations was now 30-to-60 seconds from hazardous work areas, and on the other side of a partitioning wall.
In fact, one of the most-common ways an organisation can find itself in trouble is over something very simple such as it emergency eyewash and shower facilities.
Easy Steps
The most-obvious rule of thumb is ensuring that each emergency shower or eyewash station is easily identified. A sign should use a symbol that does not require workers to have specific language skills to understand it, and the location should be well lit.
Other recommendations include emergency showers or eyewash stations should:
• Be located as close to the hazard as possible
• Not be partitioned off from hazardous work areas.
• Have an unobstructed path between the hazard and aid.
• Be located where workers can easily see stations.
• Be on the same floor as the hazard, as near an exit as possible so that emergency response teams can reach the victim easily.
• Provide a drainage system for excess water because, once used, the water itself may be a hazardous waste and special regulations apply.
• Not come in contact with electrical equipment.
• Be protected from freezing when installing emergency equipment outdoors.
It’s not just factories that are at risk.
For instance, a London ON nursing home was fine $55,000 recently for exposing workers to eye injury because of a disinfectant used in cleaning the facility. And a Markham food processor was hit with a $75,000 fine after a worker cleaning a food preparation tank was injured when a disinfecting line broke, injuring the employee’s eyes. In both cases, the company was committed to providing a safe workplace and found out, too late, that more needed to be done.
The fact is that any business may find itself at risk – even when it is striving to do the right thing.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Something In The Air Smells Funny.
Something In The Air Smells Funny.
Chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business. Its use is so widespread that few people even notice “death head” label warnings anymore yet chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and death.
– by Isaac Rudik
You can’t avoid noticing chlorine in the air: It’s pungent, biting, eye-tearing, odour is unmistakable – and potentially very dangerous. That’s why, when a train carrying chlorine tankers derails or a tanker truck overturns, an entire town or neighbourhood is evacuated quickly by authorities, hospitals are put on stand-by and reporters rush to the scene.
For example, not long ago a chlorine manufacturer in Canada was pumping the gas into an awaiting rail tanker. But the coupling was not properly fastened to the train car from the feed pipe and chlorine leaked into the air. Two employees working at the tanker plus one who was nearby and rushed to their aid were overcome by the toxic effects, suffering injuries to their lungs, eyes and exposed skin. People in nearby businesses and a few close-by apartment buildings were hustled onto busses and taken to a school as a precaution until the air was cleared of gas and the leak sealed.
As a toxic gas that irritates and can even destroy the respiratory system, chlorine is a potentially lethal industrial ingrediant. Because it is heavier than air, it can accumulate at the bottom of poorly ventilated spaces. Even more dangerous, chlorine gas is a strong oxidizer which can ignite flammable materials.
Easily Overlooked
The risks of chlorine are easily overlooked and even forgotten about until there is an incident.
When most people think of chlorine, they either think of a laundry product as in chlorine bleach or what gets dumps in a swimming pool to control algae and bacteria. Indeed, many of us use chlorine products regularly without giving it a second thought.
But, chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business, employed for everything from water treatment and pulp bleaching in paper mills to disinfecting equipment in food processing plants. Moreover, it is widely employed in producing countless consumer products ranging from laundry cleaners and tires to antifreeze, household cleaners and pharmaceuticals.
In fact, the use of chlorine is so widespread that few people even notice the “death head” warnings on labels anymore despite the fact that, in many industrial applications, chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and even death.
But industrial facilities that produce or use chlorine cannot be sanguine about its handling and storage.
Breathe Easily
When workers breathe even low concentrations of chlorine, it can aggravate the respiratory system and exposure to the gas can irritate the eyes because it reacts with water and cells, changing it into hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid. Neither is pleasant.
So it is incumbent upon businesses to take simple steps to provide adequate protection.
Workers can be protected by being issued gloves, masks and protective clothing. At the same time, work areas in which chlorine is present need portable air sampling devices, complete with exposure level alarms. Finally, fume hoods are a must to enhance localized ventilation.
Chlorine gas is one of those industrial components that carry a significant risk but which too many businesses seem to overlook – until it’s too late. Conducting a risk audit is one way to help ensure that the gas stays in the container and workers won’t suffer if there’s an accidental leak.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business. Its use is so widespread that few people even notice “death head” label warnings anymore yet chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and death.
– by Isaac Rudik
You can’t avoid noticing chlorine in the air: It’s pungent, biting, eye-tearing, odour is unmistakable – and potentially very dangerous. That’s why, when a train carrying chlorine tankers derails or a tanker truck overturns, an entire town or neighbourhood is evacuated quickly by authorities, hospitals are put on stand-by and reporters rush to the scene.
For example, not long ago a chlorine manufacturer in Canada was pumping the gas into an awaiting rail tanker. But the coupling was not properly fastened to the train car from the feed pipe and chlorine leaked into the air. Two employees working at the tanker plus one who was nearby and rushed to their aid were overcome by the toxic effects, suffering injuries to their lungs, eyes and exposed skin. People in nearby businesses and a few close-by apartment buildings were hustled onto busses and taken to a school as a precaution until the air was cleared of gas and the leak sealed.
As a toxic gas that irritates and can even destroy the respiratory system, chlorine is a potentially lethal industrial ingrediant. Because it is heavier than air, it can accumulate at the bottom of poorly ventilated spaces. Even more dangerous, chlorine gas is a strong oxidizer which can ignite flammable materials.
Easily Overlooked
The risks of chlorine are easily overlooked and even forgotten about until there is an incident.
When most people think of chlorine, they either think of a laundry product as in chlorine bleach or what gets dumps in a swimming pool to control algae and bacteria. Indeed, many of us use chlorine products regularly without giving it a second thought.
But, chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business, employed for everything from water treatment and pulp bleaching in paper mills to disinfecting equipment in food processing plants. Moreover, it is widely employed in producing countless consumer products ranging from laundry cleaners and tires to antifreeze, household cleaners and pharmaceuticals.
In fact, the use of chlorine is so widespread that few people even notice the “death head” warnings on labels anymore despite the fact that, in many industrial applications, chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and even death.
But industrial facilities that produce or use chlorine cannot be sanguine about its handling and storage.
Breathe Easily
When workers breathe even low concentrations of chlorine, it can aggravate the respiratory system and exposure to the gas can irritate the eyes because it reacts with water and cells, changing it into hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid. Neither is pleasant.
So it is incumbent upon businesses to take simple steps to provide adequate protection.
Workers can be protected by being issued gloves, masks and protective clothing. At the same time, work areas in which chlorine is present need portable air sampling devices, complete with exposure level alarms. Finally, fume hoods are a must to enhance localized ventilation.
Chlorine gas is one of those industrial components that carry a significant risk but which too many businesses seem to overlook – until it’s too late. Conducting a risk audit is one way to help ensure that the gas stays in the container and workers won’t suffer if there’s an accidental leak.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Splish Splash, It’s A Chemical Bath
Splish Splash, It’s A Chemical Bath
Nothing can be as traumatic as a debilitating chemical accident at work. Safety regulators and courts are tough on employers and sympathetic to workers who suffer eye injuries as a result of an accident at work. But preventing serious accidents is relatively easy and often inexpensive.
– By Isaac Rudik
Too often, too little attention is paid to risks posed by potential workplace eye injuries. Yet nothing can be as traumatic as losing even partial eyesight – and both provincial safety regulators and the courts are tough on employers and very sympathetic to workers who suffer eye injuries as a result of an accident at work.
Even when a company thinks it’s doing the right thing for workers, it may not be doing enough.
For example, not long ago a lab technician who was wearing safety glasses suffered permanent eye injury when a chemical splash got under the goggles. His eyes were not completely protected because goggles provided by the lab were not designed to be worn on top of glasses. Yet no warning signs or labels were posted. A co-worker rushing to the employee’s aid took him to the eyewash station but the natural reflex to shut the eyes prevented the worker from flushing both eyes for 15 minutes.
Numerous Risks
While perhaps the most debilitating, it’s not just eyes that are at risk to injury from chemical splashes. Skin burns and damage to internal organs from inhaling chemical fumes are serious risks that must be addressed seriously. Moreover, hazardous substances are found in countless workplaces. Indeed, they are in most work areas including shops, factories, farms and even offices.
Countless substances such as sulfuric, nitric and hydrofluoric acids are common in many industrial processes, and along with alkali’s including ammonia, magnesium, and potassium, are all hazardous. If not handled with caution, any one of them will cause serious burns and injuries.
In fact, there is a wide range of gas, solid and liquid hazardous materials that workers need to be protected from so exposure cannot cause a life-altering accident.
Identifying and controlling risks faced by workers is not difficult, nor is it necessarily expensive – if a business knows where to look and how to adjust the way the shop floor works. There are steps any company can take immediately:
1. Isolate dangerous processes with barriers or separate the work area.
2. Provide adequate training and supervision.
3. Familiarize workers with hazards, educating them on workplace safety and emergency procedures.
4. Establish safe work practices such as restricting area access, reducing clutter, replacing container lids, providing for safe storage and being prepared for an emergency.
5. Use local exhaust ventilation or automate the workplace process.
Beyond these, it is vitally important to install back splash guards to protect workers from splattering water, flying debris and other mishaps. And a lab safety shield can protect against UV radiation, splattering liquids, flying glass and other hazards while allowing a clear, undistorted view of work area.
While companies often point to lockers full of personal protective equipment such as gloves, lab coats, safety glasses and dust masks, generally these are only supplements to more direct and effective controls.
Prevent, Don’t Prevaricate
The worker who suffered the serious eye injury never returned to work. The company paid a hefty fine for not alerting workers to the proper use and limitations of safety goggles, and a court awarded the man substantial damages because it ruled the employer was careless. But his life will never be the same again.
For example, had the worker been provided with either goggles that fit securely over glasses or a face shield, the injury might have been prevented altogether. Indeed, proper protective clothing should be a “must have” in any workplace where there is exposure to acid or alkaline solutions. These include protective clothing, masks and barriers.
The proper fume hood for a given exposure will help ensure that fume “seepage” doesn’t endanger employees – either those working directly with the hazardous material and those in the rest of the plant.
Like so many workplace accidents, if a company is willing to take positive, often inexpensive, steps to minimise the risks facing employees and the potential exposure facing the business, problems can be avoided easily.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Nothing can be as traumatic as a debilitating chemical accident at work. Safety regulators and courts are tough on employers and sympathetic to workers who suffer eye injuries as a result of an accident at work. But preventing serious accidents is relatively easy and often inexpensive.
– By Isaac Rudik
Too often, too little attention is paid to risks posed by potential workplace eye injuries. Yet nothing can be as traumatic as losing even partial eyesight – and both provincial safety regulators and the courts are tough on employers and very sympathetic to workers who suffer eye injuries as a result of an accident at work.
Even when a company thinks it’s doing the right thing for workers, it may not be doing enough.
For example, not long ago a lab technician who was wearing safety glasses suffered permanent eye injury when a chemical splash got under the goggles. His eyes were not completely protected because goggles provided by the lab were not designed to be worn on top of glasses. Yet no warning signs or labels were posted. A co-worker rushing to the employee’s aid took him to the eyewash station but the natural reflex to shut the eyes prevented the worker from flushing both eyes for 15 minutes.
Numerous Risks
While perhaps the most debilitating, it’s not just eyes that are at risk to injury from chemical splashes. Skin burns and damage to internal organs from inhaling chemical fumes are serious risks that must be addressed seriously. Moreover, hazardous substances are found in countless workplaces. Indeed, they are in most work areas including shops, factories, farms and even offices.
Countless substances such as sulfuric, nitric and hydrofluoric acids are common in many industrial processes, and along with alkali’s including ammonia, magnesium, and potassium, are all hazardous. If not handled with caution, any one of them will cause serious burns and injuries.
In fact, there is a wide range of gas, solid and liquid hazardous materials that workers need to be protected from so exposure cannot cause a life-altering accident.
Identifying and controlling risks faced by workers is not difficult, nor is it necessarily expensive – if a business knows where to look and how to adjust the way the shop floor works. There are steps any company can take immediately:
1. Isolate dangerous processes with barriers or separate the work area.
2. Provide adequate training and supervision.
3. Familiarize workers with hazards, educating them on workplace safety and emergency procedures.
4. Establish safe work practices such as restricting area access, reducing clutter, replacing container lids, providing for safe storage and being prepared for an emergency.
5. Use local exhaust ventilation or automate the workplace process.
Beyond these, it is vitally important to install back splash guards to protect workers from splattering water, flying debris and other mishaps. And a lab safety shield can protect against UV radiation, splattering liquids, flying glass and other hazards while allowing a clear, undistorted view of work area.
While companies often point to lockers full of personal protective equipment such as gloves, lab coats, safety glasses and dust masks, generally these are only supplements to more direct and effective controls.
Prevent, Don’t Prevaricate
The worker who suffered the serious eye injury never returned to work. The company paid a hefty fine for not alerting workers to the proper use and limitations of safety goggles, and a court awarded the man substantial damages because it ruled the employer was careless. But his life will never be the same again.
For example, had the worker been provided with either goggles that fit securely over glasses or a face shield, the injury might have been prevented altogether. Indeed, proper protective clothing should be a “must have” in any workplace where there is exposure to acid or alkaline solutions. These include protective clothing, masks and barriers.
The proper fume hood for a given exposure will help ensure that fume “seepage” doesn’t endanger employees – either those working directly with the hazardous material and those in the rest of the plant.
Like so many workplace accidents, if a company is willing to take positive, often inexpensive, steps to minimise the risks facing employees and the potential exposure facing the business, problems can be avoided easily.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Something In The Air Smells Funny.
Something In The Air Smells Funny.
Chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business. Its use is so widespread that few people even notice “death head” label warnings anymore yet chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and death.
– by Isaac Rudik
You can’t avoid noticing chlorine in the air: It’s pungent, biting, eye-tearing, odour is unmistakable – and potentially very dangerous. That’s why, when a train carrying chlorine tankers derails or a tanker truck overturns, an entire town or neighbourhood is evacuated quickly by authorities, hospitals are put on stand-by and reporters rush to the scene.
For example, not long ago a chlorine manufacturer in Canada was pumping the gas into an awaiting rail tanker. But the coupling was not properly fastened to the train car from the feed pipe and chlorine leaked into the air. Two employees working at tanker plus one who was nearby and rushed to their aid were overcome by the toxic effects, suffering injuries to their lungs, eyes and exposed skin. People in nearby businesses and a few close-by apartment buildings were hustled onto busses and taken to a school as a precaution until the air was cleared of gas and the leak sealed.
As a toxic gas that irritates and can even destroy the respiratory system, chlorine is a potentially lethal industrial ingrediant. Because it is heavier than air, it can accumulate at the bottom of poorly ventilated spaces. Even more dangerous, chlorine gas is a strong oxidizer which can ignite flammable materials.
Easily Overlooked
The risks of chlorine are easily overlooked and even forgotten about until there is an incident.
When most people think of chlorine, they either think of a laundry product as in chlorine bleach or what gets dumps in a swimming pool to control algae and bacteria. Indeed, many of us use chlorine products regularly without giving it a second thought.
But, chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business, employed for everything from water treatment and pulp bleaching in paper mills to disinfecting equipment in food processing plants. Moreover, it is widely employed in producing countless consumer products ranging from laundry cleaners and tires to antifreeze, household cleaners and pharmaceuticals.
In fact, the use of chlorine is so widespread that few people even notice the “death head” warnings on labels anymore despite the fact that, in many industrial applications, chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and even death.
But industrial facilities that produce or use chlorine cannot be sanguine about its handling and storage.
Breathe Easily
When workers breathe even low concentrations of chlorine, it can aggravate the respiratory system and exposure to the gas can irritate the eyes because it reacts with water and cells, changing it into hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid. Neither is pleasant.
So it is incumbent upon businesses to take simple steps to provide adequate protection.
Workers can be protected by being issued gloves, masks and protective clothing. At the same time, work areas in which chlorine is present need portable air sampling devices, complete with exposure level alarms. Finally, fume hoods are a must to enhance localized ventilation.
Chlorine gas is one of those industrial components that carry a significant risk but which too many businesses seem to overlook – until it’s too late. Conducting a risk audit is one way to help ensure that the gas stays in the container and workers won’t suffer if there’s an accidental leak.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business. Its use is so widespread that few people even notice “death head” label warnings anymore yet chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and death.
– by Isaac Rudik
You can’t avoid noticing chlorine in the air: It’s pungent, biting, eye-tearing, odour is unmistakable – and potentially very dangerous. That’s why, when a train carrying chlorine tankers derails or a tanker truck overturns, an entire town or neighbourhood is evacuated quickly by authorities, hospitals are put on stand-by and reporters rush to the scene.
For example, not long ago a chlorine manufacturer in Canada was pumping the gas into an awaiting rail tanker. But the coupling was not properly fastened to the train car from the feed pipe and chlorine leaked into the air. Two employees working at tanker plus one who was nearby and rushed to their aid were overcome by the toxic effects, suffering injuries to their lungs, eyes and exposed skin. People in nearby businesses and a few close-by apartment buildings were hustled onto busses and taken to a school as a precaution until the air was cleared of gas and the leak sealed.
As a toxic gas that irritates and can even destroy the respiratory system, chlorine is a potentially lethal industrial ingrediant. Because it is heavier than air, it can accumulate at the bottom of poorly ventilated spaces. Even more dangerous, chlorine gas is a strong oxidizer which can ignite flammable materials.
Easily Overlooked
The risks of chlorine are easily overlooked and even forgotten about until there is an incident.
When most people think of chlorine, they either think of a laundry product as in chlorine bleach or what gets dumps in a swimming pool to control algae and bacteria. Indeed, many of us use chlorine products regularly without giving it a second thought.
But, chlorine may be the most-commonly used toxin in business, employed for everything from water treatment and pulp bleaching in paper mills to disinfecting equipment in food processing plants. Moreover, it is widely employed in producing countless consumer products ranging from laundry cleaners and tires to antifreeze, household cleaners and pharmaceuticals.
In fact, the use of chlorine is so widespread that few people even notice the “death head” warnings on labels anymore despite the fact that, in many industrial applications, chlorine can cause worker illness, injury and even death.
But industrial facilities that produce or use chlorine cannot be sanguine about its handling and storage.
Breathe Easily
When workers breathe even low concentrations of chlorine, it can aggravate the respiratory system and exposure to the gas can irritate the eyes because it reacts with water and cells, changing it into hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid. Neither is pleasant.
So it is incumbent upon businesses to take simple steps to provide adequate protection.
Workers can be protected by being issued gloves, masks and protective clothing. At the same time, work areas in which chlorine is present need portable air sampling devices, complete with exposure level alarms. Finally, fume hoods are a must to enhance localized ventilation.
Chlorine gas is one of those industrial components that carry a significant risk but which too many businesses seem to overlook – until it’s too late. Conducting a risk audit is one way to help ensure that the gas stays in the container and workers won’t suffer if there’s an accidental leak.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Cancer In The Workplace: “Safe Enough” Can Hide Dangers.
Cancer In The Workplace: “Safe Enough” Can Hide Dangers.
This is the third in our series on how workplace health and safety can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on hidden cancer dangers lurking in occupation safety issues.
– by Isaac Rudik
Only a madman or a fool would work with dimethyl sulphate without wearing a certified safety mask to protect against inhaling its lethal fumes.
Yet even a conscientious employer may not spot hidden dangers in what is otherwise thought of as a “safe” plant.
Not long ago, a company brought us in to conduct a thorough compliance audit in an attempt to hold the line of its insurance premiums, which the insurer was threatening to hike. As we walked through the facility, the chief operating officer pointed proudly to the numerous health and safety measures the company had installed over the past few years. When we came to a sealed part of the plant where dimethyl sulphate was being used, he began telling me about how insistent the supervisors, managers and executives are about workers being masked at all times.
That’s when I grabbed the man’s arm and pulled him hard towards the exit. Shocked and surprised, as I tugged him away he gave me one of those “are you nuts or something?” looks that comes from disbelief and what, to him, was my incomprehensible behaviour. Once we were safely outside the workspace, I removed my mask and told him, “That place is a breeding ground for cancer.”
What caused me to backtrack so rapidly was the stunning sight of a half dozen workers, all wearing proper breathing apparatus, yet some were working in short sleeved shirts and none wore adequate eye protection. I pointed out that regardless of how powerful the ventilating system is in the room, particulate-sized carcinogens from dimethyl sulphate can enter the body through the skin and eyes.
Never Safe Enough
Needless to say, the COO who was so proud of what his company does to protect workers was stunned. He admitted that it never occurred to him or anyone else at the factory, whether shop floor workers or corner office executives, that they were unknowingly creating a risk despite their sincere, best efforts to create and maintain a safe workplace.
The problem is that dimethyl sulfate and many other common chemicals used in a number of manufacturing processes can cause severe external burns when skin contact is made and damages internal organs if it enters the body through the skin. As a result, strong ventilation systems and individual breathing apparatus for workers are not enough to remove the danger.
Consequently, anyone working around such compounds needs more protection including overalls, and goggles. The entire workplace should be fitted with a spill contamination system. In fact, the government lists 60 precautions that companies need to undertake. Some of these include:
· Always keep the material locked inside proper storage containers when not being used.
· Always store according to MSDS.
· Keep the material away from break rooms and cafeterias.
· Store containers in a well-ventilated place.
· Be sure that ignition sources are kept far from the material.
· Never eat or drink when using the compound.
· Whenever leaving the work area, remove clothing that may be contaminated.
· If a worker begins to feel ill, seek medical advice immediately.
· Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on recycling.
Real Risks
The risks from dimethyl sulphate and other cancer-causing chemicals are very real yet the dangers can be totally hidden – even from companies that believe they are taking care to protect vulnerable workers.
When so many types of protection are relatively inexpensive and easy to use, there is no excuse for a business of any size not to ensure that workplace health and safety issues are thoroughly addressed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
This is the third in our series on how workplace health and safety can elevate cancer risks, and how to control potential problems. This article focuses on hidden cancer dangers lurking in occupation safety issues.
– by Isaac Rudik
Only a madman or a fool would work with dimethyl sulphate without wearing a certified safety mask to protect against inhaling its lethal fumes.
Yet even a conscientious employer may not spot hidden dangers in what is otherwise thought of as a “safe” plant.
Not long ago, a company brought us in to conduct a thorough compliance audit in an attempt to hold the line of its insurance premiums, which the insurer was threatening to hike. As we walked through the facility, the chief operating officer pointed proudly to the numerous health and safety measures the company had installed over the past few years. When we came to a sealed part of the plant where dimethyl sulphate was being used, he began telling me about how insistent the supervisors, managers and executives are about workers being masked at all times.
That’s when I grabbed the man’s arm and pulled him hard towards the exit. Shocked and surprised, as I tugged him away he gave me one of those “are you nuts or something?” looks that comes from disbelief and what, to him, was my incomprehensible behaviour. Once we were safely outside the workspace, I removed my mask and told him, “That place is a breeding ground for cancer.”
What caused me to backtrack so rapidly was the stunning sight of a half dozen workers, all wearing proper breathing apparatus, yet some were working in short sleeved shirts and none wore adequate eye protection. I pointed out that regardless of how powerful the ventilating system is in the room, particulate-sized carcinogens from dimethyl sulphate can enter the body through the skin and eyes.
Never Safe Enough
Needless to say, the COO who was so proud of what his company does to protect workers was stunned. He admitted that it never occurred to him or anyone else at the factory, whether shop floor workers or corner office executives, that they were unknowingly creating a risk despite their sincere, best efforts to create and maintain a safe workplace.
The problem is that dimethyl sulfate and many other common chemicals used in a number of manufacturing processes can cause severe external burns when skin contact is made and damages internal organs if it enters the body through the skin. As a result, strong ventilation systems and individual breathing apparatus for workers are not enough to remove the danger.
Consequently, anyone working around such compounds needs more protection including overalls, and goggles. The entire workplace should be fitted with a spill contamination system. In fact, the government lists 60 precautions that companies need to undertake. Some of these include:
· Always keep the material locked inside proper storage containers when not being used.
· Always store according to MSDS.
· Keep the material away from break rooms and cafeterias.
· Store containers in a well-ventilated place.
· Be sure that ignition sources are kept far from the material.
· Never eat or drink when using the compound.
· Whenever leaving the work area, remove clothing that may be contaminated.
· If a worker begins to feel ill, seek medical advice immediately.
· Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on recycling.
Real Risks
The risks from dimethyl sulphate and other cancer-causing chemicals are very real yet the dangers can be totally hidden – even from companies that believe they are taking care to protect vulnerable workers.
When so many types of protection are relatively inexpensive and easy to use, there is no excuse for a business of any size not to ensure that workplace health and safety issues are thoroughly addressed.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. , Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A New Meaning To “Silent But Deadly”
A New Meaning To “Silent But Deadly”
Working in confined spaces increases the danger to workers of breathing contaminated air. But there’s no longer an excuse not to see a hidden, silent danger.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, Javier del Rio was cleaning an empty tank used to store flaxseed oil. When he lost consciousness, a co-worker jumped in to save him. He also lost consciousness and both men were asphyxiated.
According to investigators, argon gas was pumped into the tank to drive out oxygen when it was filled with oil. Once the tank was empty for cleaning, oxygen was pumped back into it and vents were opened to remove the argon. But some of the argon gas – which is heavier than oxygen – lurked at the bottom of the tank, displacing fresh air del Rio and his colleague needed to breathe.
Government regulations mandate that employees be protected properly against numerous hazards, including breathing noxious gas. And monitoring the workplace for air quality has never been easier. New and emerging technology makes doing so not only more effective but far less costly than even a few years ago, removing an excuse companies hid behind for decades when caught.
With courts imposing hefty fines on companies, and awarding record sums to employees injured after breathing contaminated air, there is new meaning to the old warning “silent but deadly” when referring to bad air.
Don’t Assume
Most people put their faith in knowing they will breathe good air, whether indoors or in a confined space such as the workplace. Not unreasonably, they assume someone is checking for the safety of the air they are breathing.
When someone doesn’t do their job, or there is an undetected leak, the results are disastrous.
Air – whether life sustaining or deadly – is usually colourless, odourless and tasteless. As a result, many gases are infused with an additive to create an aroma. That’s why when someone calls 911 to report smelling gas in their home, what they smell isn’t the gas but the additive designed to alert to a leak or contamination.
The atmosphere in a confined work space may seem like any other. But because many industrial gases have no odour additive, companies can never assume that all is safe.
Confined spaces on a shop floor have fooled scores of injured or killed workers every year after they assumed somebody checked for air quality. But the worst thing for a worker to do is to or “follow their nose,” guessing that since the air smelled alright it was safe to enter. But air may look and smell safe but be filled with enough toxic contaminants to kill anyone breathing it in, especially in an enclosed area.
Smart Prevention
As with every other workplace safety issue, prevention is easier – and far less costly – than fixing a problem.
The best approach is to issue workers who might be at risk with personal multi-gas monitors which monitor air quality continuously as an employee goes about their job, whether at their work station or if moving around the plant. A second option is a “confined space monitor” designed to be used only in small, high risk areas of the factory.
Typically, these devices offer multiple warnings to the worker wearing one: A loud sound warning such as a 95db beeping or horn, a warning light and a vibrating pulse in case the wearer misses either of the other two alerts. At least one of the three should grab a worker’s attention, following the old saw about “if at first you don’t get noticed, keep trying ‘til you do.”
It’s always best to find smart ways to prevent fumes from causing an injury. But, in many cases, fumes are part of the process. Ensuring that workers are alerted now to noxious air before they’re injured helps make certain that your plant won’t be victimised by an incident that could have been prevented.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Working in confined spaces increases the danger to workers of breathing contaminated air. But there’s no longer an excuse not to see a hidden, silent danger.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, Javier del Rio was cleaning an empty tank used to store flaxseed oil. When he lost consciousness, a co-worker jumped in to save him. He also lost consciousness and both men were asphyxiated.
According to investigators, argon gas was pumped into the tank to drive out oxygen when it was filled with oil. Once the tank was empty for cleaning, oxygen was pumped back into it and vents were opened to remove the argon. But some of the argon gas – which is heavier than oxygen – lurked at the bottom of the tank, displacing fresh air del Rio and his colleague needed to breathe.
Government regulations mandate that employees be protected properly against numerous hazards, including breathing noxious gas. And monitoring the workplace for air quality has never been easier. New and emerging technology makes doing so not only more effective but far less costly than even a few years ago, removing an excuse companies hid behind for decades when caught.
With courts imposing hefty fines on companies, and awarding record sums to employees injured after breathing contaminated air, there is new meaning to the old warning “silent but deadly” when referring to bad air.
Don’t Assume
Most people put their faith in knowing they will breathe good air, whether indoors or in a confined space such as the workplace. Not unreasonably, they assume someone is checking for the safety of the air they are breathing.
When someone doesn’t do their job, or there is an undetected leak, the results are disastrous.
Air – whether life sustaining or deadly – is usually colourless, odourless and tasteless. As a result, many gases are infused with an additive to create an aroma. That’s why when someone calls 911 to report smelling gas in their home, what they smell isn’t the gas but the additive designed to alert to a leak or contamination.
The atmosphere in a confined work space may seem like any other. But because many industrial gases have no odour additive, companies can never assume that all is safe.
Confined spaces on a shop floor have fooled scores of injured or killed workers every year after they assumed somebody checked for air quality. But the worst thing for a worker to do is to or “follow their nose,” guessing that since the air smelled alright it was safe to enter. But air may look and smell safe but be filled with enough toxic contaminants to kill anyone breathing it in, especially in an enclosed area.
Smart Prevention
As with every other workplace safety issue, prevention is easier – and far less costly – than fixing a problem.
The best approach is to issue workers who might be at risk with personal multi-gas monitors which monitor air quality continuously as an employee goes about their job, whether at their work station or if moving around the plant. A second option is a “confined space monitor” designed to be used only in small, high risk areas of the factory.
Typically, these devices offer multiple warnings to the worker wearing one: A loud sound warning such as a 95db beeping or horn, a warning light and a vibrating pulse in case the wearer misses either of the other two alerts. At least one of the three should grab a worker’s attention, following the old saw about “if at first you don’t get noticed, keep trying ‘til you do.”
It’s always best to find smart ways to prevent fumes from causing an injury. But, in many cases, fumes are part of the process. Ensuring that workers are alerted now to noxious air before they’re injured helps make certain that your plant won’t be victimised by an incident that could have been prevented.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc., Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Contaminated Water Is More Than Just A Third World Problem
Contaminated Water Is More Than Just A Third World Problem
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, good water can turn bad and contaminate the processing line if proper precautions aren’t taken. Preventing a problem before a contaminant finds its way into food is a fraction of the cost of fixing it.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, a major food processor had to recall tens of thousands of contaminated packaged products. Not only did the recall, and finding and fixing the problem, cost millions of dollars, it did untold damage to the company’s reputation with consumers.
While the source of the problem in the processing line was eventually located and fixed, the issue highlights a major issue every business dealing with food for human consumption faces: Ensuring that contamination from one of dozens of potential trouble spots doesn’t creep into products that people eat.
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, it’s possible that what starts out as potable can become contaminated, affecting everything from fruits and vegetables to meat processing and harvested grains – and companies that process the products through to the people who consume them.
No Wiggle Room
Ensuring clean water and safe products that use water in processing is a fundamental obligation of government in Canada and other developed nations. Thus, the law leaves no wiggle room for businesses that allow water to become tainted and contaminate food, whether through sloppy procedures at a plant or just by accident.
At its most basic, the Canadian Food Inspection System requires that raw materials and ingredients are cleaned, sorted and prepared in a way that prevents contamination. In handling food, water – used for everything from washing fruit to cleaning machinery – can become tainted easily as microbes, bacteria and other pollutants are transmitted in one of countless ways. And when a food processor runs afoul of the law, penalties are fast, stiff and public.
At a minimum, fines for violations can begin as high as $60,000 per incident – and rise from there. If the government finds the cause is negligence, criminal charges may be brought against the business, its executives and key employees. Generally, expensive consultants and expensive lab work are needed to locate and remedy the cause of the contamination, and product recalls extract a high dollar cost.
Meanwhile, the company suffers enormous damage to its reputation.
Any time a food product is recalled, it attracts big headlines and extensive coverage on television and radio newscasts. The company must launch a far-reaching advertising and public relations campaign, first to alert distributors, retailers and consumers and then to reassure its customers that not only is every effort being made to ensure the problem doesn’t happen again but the steps it is taking to win back consumer confidence.
Indeed, one Harvard Business School study shows that even for a food processing company with an unblemished record of more than a century of providing safe food, it can up to two years to win back customers after a recall. Along the way, sales, margins and profits are adversely affected.
Easy Prevention
Yet it is relatively easy to prevent water used in food processing from becoming contaminated.
Preventing exposure to contaminated water reduces day-to-day operating costs, and can improve profitability along the way. So-called Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) in the form of full body suits that include a hood, a full face shield, goggles or a mask that forms a tight bond around the mouth and nose plus shoe covers sounds complicated but is easy to wear and inexpensive to purchase.
For example, a supplier such as CSC carries such safety wear starting as inexpensively as $180 per suit. Moreover, the cost of PPE is more than offset by its positive effect on production time and the quality of work as well as keeping not just the processing line safe from contaminants but also workers. In fact, often overlooked in a contamination-caused recall are work related injuries or sickness that arises when a worker becomes exposed to a contaminant.
The problems of contaminated water are not just an issue in third world countries. Even in Canada, it’s easy for H20 to become tainted, affecting food production, consumer confidence, and sales and profits. But it’s easier – and far less costly – to prevent a problem from arising in the first place.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc.), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, good water can turn bad and contaminate the processing line if proper precautions aren’t taken. Preventing a problem before a contaminant finds its way into food is a fraction of the cost of fixing it.
– by Isaac Rudik
Recently, a major food processor had to recall tens of thousands of contaminated packaged products. Not only did the recall, and finding and fixing the problem, cost millions of dollars, it did untold damage to the company’s reputation with consumers.
While the source of the problem in the processing line was eventually located and fixed, the issue highlights a major issue every business dealing with food for human consumption faces: Ensuring that contamination from one of dozens of potential trouble spots doesn’t creep into products that people eat.
Even in Canada, where clean water is taken for granted, it’s possible that what starts out as potable can become contaminated, affecting everything from fruits and vegetables to meat processing and harvested grains – and companies that process the products through to the people who consume them.
No Wiggle Room
Ensuring clean water and safe products that use water in processing is a fundamental obligation of government in Canada and other developed nations. Thus, the law leaves no wiggle room for businesses that allow water to become tainted and contaminate food, whether through sloppy procedures at a plant or just by accident.
At its most basic, the Canadian Food Inspection System requires that raw materials and ingredients are cleaned, sorted and prepared in a way that prevents contamination. In handling food, water – used for everything from washing fruit to cleaning machinery – can become tainted easily as microbes, bacteria and other pollutants are transmitted in one of countless ways. And when a food processor runs afoul of the law, penalties are fast, stiff and public.
At a minimum, fines for violations can begin as high as $60,000 per incident – and rise from there. If the government finds the cause is negligence, criminal charges may be brought against the business, its executives and key employees. Generally, expensive consultants and expensive lab work are needed to locate and remedy the cause of the contamination, and product recalls extract a high dollar cost.
Meanwhile, the company suffers enormous damage to its reputation.
Any time a food product is recalled, it attracts big headlines and extensive coverage on television and radio newscasts. The company must launch a far-reaching advertising and public relations campaign, first to alert distributors, retailers and consumers and then to reassure its customers that not only is every effort being made to ensure the problem doesn’t happen again but the steps it is taking to win back consumer confidence.
Indeed, one Harvard Business School study shows that even for a food processing company with an unblemished record of more than a century of providing safe food, it can up to two years to win back customers after a recall. Along the way, sales, margins and profits are adversely affected.
Easy Prevention
Yet it is relatively easy to prevent water used in food processing from becoming contaminated.
Preventing exposure to contaminated water reduces day-to-day operating costs, and can improve profitability along the way. So-called Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) in the form of full body suits that include a hood, a full face shield, goggles or a mask that forms a tight bond around the mouth and nose plus shoe covers sounds complicated but is easy to wear and inexpensive to purchase.
For example, a supplier such as CSC carries such safety wear starting as inexpensively as $180 per suit. Moreover, the cost of PPE is more than offset by its positive effect on production time and the quality of work as well as keeping not just the processing line safe from contaminants but also workers. In fact, often overlooked in a contamination-caused recall are work related injuries or sickness that arises when a worker becomes exposed to a contaminant.
The problems of contaminated water are not just an issue in third world countries. Even in Canada, it’s easy for H20 to become tainted, affecting food production, consumer confidence, and sales and profits. But it’s easier – and far less costly – to prevent a problem from arising in the first place.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc.), Canada’s largest provider of health, safety and environmental compliance solutions to industrial, institutional and government facilities.
E-mail Isaac at irudik@csc-inc.ca or phone him at 905-761-5354.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Sound The Alarm – But Not Too Loudly. Excessive noise contributes to workplace hearing loss and other health issues.
Noise is aggravating, whether at home, in a restaurant or on a loud street. But in the workplace, excessive noise is more than aggravating: It cuts productivity while creating serious health hazards for workers which might lead to costly fines and worker’s compensation claims.
Besides making it hard for workers to hear each other, excess workplace noise increases blood pressure, speeds breathing rates, disturbs digestion and, in people prone to heart disease, affects heart rates. And noise effects don’t stop: Studies show that exposure to ongoing noise makes sleep difficult.
For pregnant workers, excessive noise also can affect a developing fetus.
Little wonder noise is a serious problem that must be addressed seriously by business.
Noise Is Costly
Companies must protect workers from noise. Government inspectors apply four common-sense tests when checking noise levels before using meters to measure precise levels. But these same checks can be performed by supervisors long before the Ministry of Labour (MoL) arrives.
• In a noisy area, do people raise their voice to be heard?
• Do workers have difficulty hearing someone speaking from two feet away?
• After leaving a noisy area, does speech sound muffled or dull?
• Is there a pain or ringing of the ears after noise exposure?
Companies that aren’t proactive can face major problems if MoL finds excessive noise:
• Employers must conduct a costly audit.
• The company can be fined up to $75,000.
• Fixing the problem means retaining costly noise abatement consultants.
• The problem must be fixed quickly.
• If there are noise-related injuries, the company must pay for treatment.
• Worker Compensation premiums rise by about 0.5%.
For years, workplace noise was overlooked because of numerous problems. But today, new technology makes monitoring easier and in-house testing is relatively inexpensive. Moreover, installing sound absorbing material is much easier than in the past.
As a result, excuses companies hid behind for years are gone. So courts are awarding large sums to employees and levying hefty fines on companies violating noise rules.
Quiet Down
Utilizing sound absorbing material as a barrier between machinery and employees helps reduce levels to allowable levels. Even better, sound absorbing material placed on walls and ceilings helps reduce the chance of reflected noise injuring employees.
For example, grinding produces a shrieking sound, disturbing everyone nearby. One CSC customer’s grinding unit never caused a problem when it was in a separate building, away from other workers. But when a new, more efficient plant was built, the grinding room was in the main factory along with all manufacturing. Other work areas were noise-protected by installing shields on both sides of the operation and suspending sound absorbing baffles above the area.
Melamine Acoustic Foam on walls and ceilings offers good sound absorption in this kind of situation. It also enjoys Class 0 fire specification, meaning when exposed to naked flames it does not release toxic bi-products associated with other conventional polyurethane based acoustic foams.
Safe Solutions
A misconception many companies have about noise is “We’ve never had a problem.” But this head-in-the-sand approach is foolish; even the savviest Vegas gambler knows luck runs out eventually.
Reducing noise involves four, interrelated pieces:
• Barriers or screens offer a simple, effective way to reduce noise, placing it as close to the source as possible.
• The higher and wider the barrier, the greater the reduction.
• Barriers and screens work well against direct noise and poorly against reflective noise, not offering full protection against low frequency noise.
• Barriers should be made of dense, sound absorbing material and face the noise.
In dealing with noise abatement, too often companies commit one of two serious mistakes. Either they invest in compliance but don’t become compliant because they do the wrong thing, or the solution is insufficient. The other major error is failing to invest in a solution because, too often, a business doesn’t have a budget line item or they don’t believe it’s a major issue.
When dealing with these concerns, look for product suppliers such as CSC that provide in-house expertise and work with third party consultants to create a cost-effective and compliant solution. Find a supplier who works extensively with both industry and government, enhancing the ability to create a fix that meets budget restraints yet also meets government rules.
As the economy grows tougher, companies must save money. Often safety is compromised by small budgets and this can be a company’s single most dangerous, costly mistake. While eliminating noise entirely is impossible, it can be brought within manageable – and legal – levels with limited budgets.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (http://www.compliancesolutionscanada.com/).
He may be reached by e-mail at irudik@csc-inc.ca or
by calling 905-761-5354
Besides making it hard for workers to hear each other, excess workplace noise increases blood pressure, speeds breathing rates, disturbs digestion and, in people prone to heart disease, affects heart rates. And noise effects don’t stop: Studies show that exposure to ongoing noise makes sleep difficult.
For pregnant workers, excessive noise also can affect a developing fetus.
Little wonder noise is a serious problem that must be addressed seriously by business.
Noise Is Costly
Companies must protect workers from noise. Government inspectors apply four common-sense tests when checking noise levels before using meters to measure precise levels. But these same checks can be performed by supervisors long before the Ministry of Labour (MoL) arrives.
• In a noisy area, do people raise their voice to be heard?
• Do workers have difficulty hearing someone speaking from two feet away?
• After leaving a noisy area, does speech sound muffled or dull?
• Is there a pain or ringing of the ears after noise exposure?
Companies that aren’t proactive can face major problems if MoL finds excessive noise:
• Employers must conduct a costly audit.
• The company can be fined up to $75,000.
• Fixing the problem means retaining costly noise abatement consultants.
• The problem must be fixed quickly.
• If there are noise-related injuries, the company must pay for treatment.
• Worker Compensation premiums rise by about 0.5%.
For years, workplace noise was overlooked because of numerous problems. But today, new technology makes monitoring easier and in-house testing is relatively inexpensive. Moreover, installing sound absorbing material is much easier than in the past.
As a result, excuses companies hid behind for years are gone. So courts are awarding large sums to employees and levying hefty fines on companies violating noise rules.
Quiet Down
Utilizing sound absorbing material as a barrier between machinery and employees helps reduce levels to allowable levels. Even better, sound absorbing material placed on walls and ceilings helps reduce the chance of reflected noise injuring employees.
For example, grinding produces a shrieking sound, disturbing everyone nearby. One CSC customer’s grinding unit never caused a problem when it was in a separate building, away from other workers. But when a new, more efficient plant was built, the grinding room was in the main factory along with all manufacturing. Other work areas were noise-protected by installing shields on both sides of the operation and suspending sound absorbing baffles above the area.
Melamine Acoustic Foam on walls and ceilings offers good sound absorption in this kind of situation. It also enjoys Class 0 fire specification, meaning when exposed to naked flames it does not release toxic bi-products associated with other conventional polyurethane based acoustic foams.
Safe Solutions
A misconception many companies have about noise is “We’ve never had a problem.” But this head-in-the-sand approach is foolish; even the savviest Vegas gambler knows luck runs out eventually.
Reducing noise involves four, interrelated pieces:
• Barriers or screens offer a simple, effective way to reduce noise, placing it as close to the source as possible.
• The higher and wider the barrier, the greater the reduction.
• Barriers and screens work well against direct noise and poorly against reflective noise, not offering full protection against low frequency noise.
• Barriers should be made of dense, sound absorbing material and face the noise.
In dealing with noise abatement, too often companies commit one of two serious mistakes. Either they invest in compliance but don’t become compliant because they do the wrong thing, or the solution is insufficient. The other major error is failing to invest in a solution because, too often, a business doesn’t have a budget line item or they don’t believe it’s a major issue.
When dealing with these concerns, look for product suppliers such as CSC that provide in-house expertise and work with third party consultants to create a cost-effective and compliant solution. Find a supplier who works extensively with both industry and government, enhancing the ability to create a fix that meets budget restraints yet also meets government rules.
As the economy grows tougher, companies must save money. Often safety is compromised by small budgets and this can be a company’s single most dangerous, costly mistake. While eliminating noise entirely is impossible, it can be brought within manageable – and legal – levels with limited budgets.
Isaac Rudik is a compliance consultant with Compliance Solutions Canada Inc. (http://www.compliancesolutionscanada.com/).
He may be reached by e-mail at irudik@csc-inc.ca or
by calling 905-761-5354
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)