Copyright 2000 Star Tribune
Star Tribune
(Minneapolis, MN)
November 20, 2000, Monday, Metro Edition
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 1A
LENGTH: 1098 words
HEADLINE:
Ruling on work injuries embroiled in politics;
New ergonomics
regulations face a legal gantlet.
BYLINE:
Kevin Diaz; Staff Writer
DATELINE: Washington, D.C.
BODY:
John Massetti started handling air cargo,
mail and luggage at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in 1965,
before many of today's workplace health and safety rules took hold.
"When I wake up in the morning, my body is starting to scream," he said.
"Over the years, I had back injuries, bad knees, bad elbows, shoulders, you name
it."
Expansive new "ergonomics standards,"
workplace rules that could help prevent injuries like Massetti's, were supposed
to be part of the budget deal between President Clinton and congressional
Republicans two weeks ago. But the deal collapsed in the countdown to Election
Day, with both sides pointing to differences over the ergonomics rules as the
main deal breaker.
As secretary-treasurer
of the International Association of Machinists, District 143, Massetti, 60, a
former Northwest Airlines worker, now spends a lot of time looking for ways to
prevent repetitive-stress injuries among a new generation of workers.
An estimated 36,000 Minnesota workers are
stricken each year with repetitive-motion injuries and related disorders.
It has long been a contentious workplace issue.
But now, with a lame-duck president facing down an equally lame-duck Congress,
it's become more politically charged than ever before.
The deal between Clinton and Congress
would have postponed the effective date of the regulations until June, giving
the new president a chance to block them.
But with the presidential election still
unsettled, Congress has once again adjourned without reaching an agreement. And
the likelihood of forming a new consensus evaporated last week when the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) _ at Clinton's behest _
issued the new workplace standards anyway.
Now
the government is in court, and more than 100 million workers across the nation
are left to wonder whether the new protections will hold up. In what could shape
up as one of the titanic labor showdowns of modern times, the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers sued in Washington, D.C.,
last week challenging the ergonomics rules, which the groups call
"incomprehensible," "unconstitutional" and based on faulty science.
.
Industry's views
"It's Christmas
in November for the labor unions who contributed massively to the Clinton and
Gore presidential campaigns," said Dan Danner, senior vice president of the
National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB).
Clinton, for his part, accused Republican
congressional leaders of caving in to the business interests that contribute to
their campaigns.
At a minimum, the rules require
companies to give their workers information about repetitive-motion injuries. If
workers report injuries, companies must determine whether they're job-related.
If they are, they're required to offer medical care and paid time off. Repeated
injuries require companies to launch programs to reduce job hazards. The
agriculture, maritime and construction industries are exempt.
OSHA estimates that employers will have to
correct 18 million work stations, from changing keyboards to adjusting
production lines. The government puts the cost to industry at
$4.5 billion a year over the next decade. Industry estimates go
as high as $18 billion a year.
Industry critics contend that the cost
ranges reflect the ambiguities of the regulations. "The words 'feasible' and
'reasonable' are peppered throughout this thing," said James Koskan,
risk-control manager for Supervalu Inc., based in Eden Prairie, which employs
about 9,000 people.
Industry estimates
provided by Koskan indicate that each of the company's 38 food-distribution
centers would need to spend at least $500,000 to comply with
the OSHA rules. But the payoff in improved worker safety, he said, is not
necessarily what the government says it would be.
Northwest Airlines, with the state's
largest private payroll, has long had to address repetitive-motion injuries
among its ground workers, including baggage handlers, reservation sales and
customer service agents. Airline spokesman Jon Austin said that the problem is
"not unique to the company" and that the costs of complying with OSHA's new
rules are still being reviewed.
Tom Votel,
president of St. Paul-based Ergodyne, one of the nation's leading developers of
ergonomically correct workplace products, said that most large employers have
come to understand that protecting the health of their workers makes good
business sense. "A hurt employee can't function fully and produce quality," he
said. "To be honest, most good employers are already doing this."
Many businesses say they fear the new provisions
will make it easier for OSHA to require workplace changes, override workers'
compensation laws and cloud the distinction between injuries workers get on the
job and those they get on their own time. Under the "general duty clause" now in
effect, job-site improvements ordered by OSHA must be economically and
technically feasible and must demonstrably reduce workplace injuries.
"These rules will impose huge burdens on
businesses, and small businesses are the ones that can least afford it," said
Mike Hickey, director of the NFIB Minnesota chapter.
Sen. Rod Grams, R-Minn.,
has sided with business in the dispute. "In the absence of any good scientific
evidence to prove their efficacy, [the rules] will likely prove ineffective and
instead unnecessarily put jobs at risk," said Grams aide Tim Stout.
Those backing the rules, including
Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., argue that reducing ergonomic hazards will pay for
itself. "I refuse to accept this ridiculous tradeoff," Wellstone said during the
Senate debate. "I believe the benefits of ergonomics programs will greatly
exceed the costs."
While repetitive-motion
injuries might seem to be a fact of life in the modern workplace, both sides in
the debate acknowledge that current ergonomic practices have made headway
against the problem in recent years.
"A lot of
times, it's just a matter of putting a pad on the chair, or trying a new
keyboard, or taking a few more rests," said Tim Lovaasen, first president of
Local 7200 of the Communication Workers of America, which represents AT&T
operators in the Twin Cities. "Anything that makes you more comfortable or takes
the strain out of your job helps in the everyday workplace, which is a long way
from Washington."
.
Kevin
Diaz can be contacted at kdiaz@mcclatchydc.com
GRAPHIC: PHOTO
LOAD-DATE: November 21, 2000 
