Identification of Ergonomic-Related Hazards in an Industrial Sample Using the National Occupational Exposure Survey

Prevalence and reporting of occupational illness by company size: Population trends and regulatory implications

“…Despite this partial confirmation of risk factor prevalences, our survey found that MSD rates are only marginally different between size categories, with the lowest rates among the largest and the medium sized firms. Our results contradict the conclusion by Biersner and Winn [1998] that the bimodal distribution of risk factors (lower for smallest and largest companies) for MSD is the reason for the lower reported rates in small companies. In contrast, our findings support the conclusion by Oleinick et al [1995] that lower reporting among small companies is at least a substantial contributor to these patterns.…”

“…This is also in agreement with Silverstein et al [1997] who found that symptom surveys are more sensitive for MSD than BLS logs, and Pransky et al [1999] who found that only 7% of MSD symptoms were recorded on the OSHA log (with reasons for under-reporting including a fear of reprisal, thinking that the condition was an inevitable consequence of job, that the condition was not severe enough, and that reporting might result in a loss of overtime, being labeled as a complainer, or a sign of weakness). However, Biersner and Winn [1998] contend that the difference in rates may be real (rather than reporting differences) as a result of higher exposures to risk factors in larger companies, based on an evaluation of potential physical agent risks (temperature and vibration) and 10 potential ergonomic-related risks (including static and awkward postures, movement and manipulations, machine paced work, and poor lighting) assessed by the National Occupational Exposure Survey (a NIOSH observation evaluation of a sample of 4,500 workplaces completed in 1983). They found that the highest level of biomechanical risk exposure was in medium sized firms (100-249), with lower rates in the smallest and largest companies.…”

“…There has been a debate as to whether this relationship is due to differences in risk factors (and thus differences in actual disease) [Biersner and Winn, 1998] or to better reporting in larger establishments [Oleinick et al, 1995]. Approximately 2/3 of OSHAs occupational disease category is due to Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSD) [termed ''repetitive trauma'' by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)].…”

Examining the completeness of occupational injury and illness data: an update on current research

“…Oleinick et al have argued that the relatively low rates of reported injuries in establishments with fewer than 50 employees reflect lax record keeping rather than safer conditions, 84 a position buttressed by the higher fatality rates in smaller companies, 84,85 although others have found that smaller establishments are generally less hazardous. 86 Of the 790 mostly legally documented low-wage workers surveyed in the Chicago study, 8% reported pay levels below minimum wage, 20% reported not receiving all wages due, 16% reported that taxes were not deducted from their wages, 16% described work in dangerous conditions without protective clothing or training, and 17% said they were required to work overtime but not paid for it. 49 Given such practices, it is reasonable to expect limited adherence to OSHA recordkeeping requirements.…”