See text links
below.

Safety and health of meat, poultry and fish processing workers

By Shizue Tomoda

Part 13

Available data also show that the number of accidents caused by tripping in meat processing in the United Kingdom was more than three times the general manufacturing average. The frequency of the same types of accident in the other three sectors in table 4.3.3 was also above the general manufacturing average. For accidents caused by machinery, the figure for slaughtering was more than three times the average for manufacturing, while those in other sectors were above average. Accidents by other causes that were more than three times the manufacturing average included exposure to harmful substances in the fish industry, handling and struck by objects in slaughtering, and struck by moving vehicles in meat processing.⁵⁹

In Uruguay, the Ministry of Labour reported that a total of 2,905 accidents were registered in the meat and poultry industries combined, and a total of 1,664 cases were reported in fish processing. Hand tool-related accidents were the most common type among meat and poultry workers, accounting for 25 per cent of all cases. Other common causes included agents of natural origin (e.g. live animals, carcasses, bone splinters) and work environment (e.g. work surface and passageway), which accounted for 16.3 and 12 per cent of the cases, respectively. Accidents were also due to machines, transport, chemical substances, and so on. Among fish processing workers, the work environment was the most prominent cause, accounting for 15.2 per cent of cases, followed by agents of natural origin (9.8 per cent) and hand tools (9.4 per cent).

The information presented above demonstrates that a majority of cases registered as occupational accidents take place in production areas. Many are caused by tools and machines or the condition of the work environment. Many accidents could be prevented if better safety and health measures were applied and if employees became more aware of the issues that concern them. Joint efforts between management and workers is essential in identifying and reducing or eliminating workplace hazards. It is essential that everyone has access to relevant information and training on safety and health matters for the benefit of both management and employees.

4.4 The cost of occupational accidents and diseases

The cost of accidents could involve much more. For example, when serious cases are reported, it could involve legal penalties to the extent that the entire production may be forced to stop for a period of time. Or it could result in civil suits, after which the employer's liability insurance premium would increase. Poor safety records could also adversely affect the consumers' image of the enterprise, which could result in a decline in overall sales. Thus, some suggest that the cost of accidents could represent as much as 37 per cent of the profits, 5 per cent of the operating costs and 36 times the insured cost.⁶⁰

Tables 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 concerning the meat and poultry sectors in Queensland, Australia show the total cost and the cost of claims by nature of injury or disease for 1991-92 to 1994-95. In the meat industry, the total compensation had reached more than A$3.5 million in 1992-93, and then dropped. In the poultry industry, it had increased to over A$1 million, after which it declined. The declines in the number of cases and the cost of claims were the results of a genuine commitment in some states, including Queensland, to address occupational safety and health problems.⁶¹

In Victoria (Australia) a total of 12,709 claims related to accidents and diseases in the meat, poultry and fish processing industries were compensated between January 1988 and May 1995. Of these claims, 9 per cent required payments of over A$20,000 per case. Compensation payments before July 1993 totalled over A$94 million with nearly 630,000 days compensated, while compensation payments after July 1993 totalled almost A$5.5 million with more than 36,000 days compensated. Although the number of claims nearly doubled from 1987-88 to 1988-89 (from 1,280 to 2,250), peaking in 1990-91 (2,498), it dropped sharply to 847 by 1993-94.⁶²

The data for Australia as a whole indicated that the meat industry paid A$60.36 million in 1986-87 alone as workers' compensation. In addition, other indirect costs, including replacement and training of staff, internal management systems for compensation and rehabilitation cases, were required. In effect, the total cost of direct compensation and indirect expenses of accidents and diseases that year was estimated to be over A$300 million.⁶³ The cost of occupational accidents and diseases, which skyrocketed in the late 1980s, must have been responsible for the special efforts made in the early 1990s in Queensland and elsewhere in the country to reduce the number of accidents and diseases and related costs.

Table 4.4.1 presents the consequences of workplace accidents reported in Belgium in 1994. While nearly one-half of the accidents were minor, more than one-half resulted in lost workdays, of which 56 per cent ended in losses of 7 to 29 workdays per case, and 12 per cent required 30 to 90 days or more away from work. Among the cases that resulted in permanent partial incapacity, three-fourths of them resulted in minor incapacities, while 6.5 per cent suffered incapacities of 25 per cent or more. Two employees sustained mortal injuries. The total cost of these injuries, incapacities and deaths was not available, but the total number of workdays lost amounted to 21,284, or an average of 11 days per case.⁶⁴ When these figures and both direct and indirect expenses are considered, these accidents can be costly.

Table 4.4.1. Consequences of workplace accidents in the meat and fish industries in Belgium, 1994

Consequence of accidents	Frequency	Percentage
Minor accidents	996	44.9
Lost workdays: Less than 3 days 3-6 days 7-29 days 30-90 days More than 90 days	1 129 109 250 635 116 19	50.9 4.9 11.3 28.6 5.2 0.9
Permanent partial incapacity: Less than 10% incapacity 10-20% incapacity 25-49% incapacity 50-100% incapacity	92 75 11 5 1	4.1 3.4 0.5 0.2 Negl.
Deaths	2	0.1
Total	2 219	100.0
Source: Fonds voor Arbeidsongevallen (FAO), Belgium.

The direct costs of occupational accidents and diseases in the cooperative sector of the meat and poultry industries in France are shown above in tables 4.1.2 and 4.1.3. The total number of serious accidents declined steadily from 1992 to 1994, while the number of workdays lost rose, particularly from 1992 to 1993. Despite the decline in the number of serious accidents, the total cost of accidents increased steadily between 1992 and 1994, as did the average cost per case that resulted in loss of workdays. Regarding occupational disease, the cost per case declined steadily from 1992 to 1994 in the poultry industry, while that in the meat industry increased by 80 per cent from 1992 to 1993, and then declined by 20 per cent.

These tables show the difference in the cost per accident and disease involving loss of workdays. The cost per case of disease in the meat industry in 1992 was double that of an accident in the meat and poultry industries combined. The cost of a disease in the poultry industry in 1992 was 2.8 times that of an accident in these industries combined. Despite a decline in 1994, the average cost per case of disease in both these industries remained still much higher than that of an accident. The fact that the number of cases of disease that resulted in lost workdays increased in both the meat and poultry industries between 1992 and 1994 is a great concern for all parties involved from the viewpoint of productivity, labour cost and safety and health.

In Hungary, the total number of workdays compensated as sick leave due to accidents and diseases in the meat, poultry and fish processing sectors increased from 120,225 days in 1988 to 161,529 days in 1992, and declined to 122,993 days in 1994. These figures represented losses of 50.7 workdays per case of accidents and diseases combined in 1988. It rose to 76 days per case in 1993, and slightly down to 74 days in 1994. These figures suggest that safety and health problems must have also become costly in recent years.

Tables 4.1.5 and 4.1.8 presenting information on occupational accidents in Italy and Poland, respectively, also indicate the extent of the total cost of injuries in terms of workdays lost. Compensation for these days alone must have been considerable, apart from the other direct and indirect costs involved.

Consequences of occupational accidents and diseases per 1,000 workers in the meat and poultry and fish and shellfish processing industries in Mexico are shown in table 4.4.2. Although these data do not provide the total cost, one can estimate its magnitude based on the number of workdays lost and the number of cases resulting in permanent incapacity as well as in deaths.

Finally, table 4.4.3 presents the total number of workdays lost per 100 full-time workers due to injuries and illnesses in several sectors in the United States. The first five sectors in this list are focused on in this study, while the last four sectors in the food, drink and tobacco industries are presented for comparison. Although no figures on the amount of compensation for the accidents and diseases are provided, the data on lost workdays alone give an idea of the magnitude of the total cost of safety and health problems.

Table 4.4.3 shows that the workers in meat-packing plants face higher safety and health risks in the workplace than any other groups presented. Tobacco workers, on the other hand, enjoy the safest work environment. The workers focused on in this study generally suffer from injuries and illnesses that keep them out of work longer than other groups in the food, drink and tobacco industries.

Table 4.4.2. Consequences of occupational accidents and diseases per 1,000 workers in the meat, poultry, fish and shellfish processing industries in Mexico

Industry		Consequences (Nos.)		1990		1991		1992		1993		1994
Meat/poultry		Workdays lost due to temporary incapacity		2 937		2 822		2 920		2 865		2 546
		Cases of permanent incapacity		2.5		2.8		2.9		3.6		1.7
		Deaths		0.13		0.36		0.18		0.26		0.34
Fish/shellfish		Workdays lost due to temporary incapacity		2 766		3 571		3 114		2 720		3 330
		Cases of permanent incapacity		2.4		3.8		3.8		3.3		2.3
		Deaths		0.10		0.52		0.11		0.13		0.14
Source: These figures have been calculated based on statistics given in IMSS, COORD. S.T., SUI-55/MT-5, 1994.

Table 4.4.3 also shows that the number of workdays lost increased between 1988 and 1990 in most sectors. It increased by 21 per cent in meat-packing plants and by 41 per cent in poultry slaughtering and processing. The increase in the number of workdays lost suggests a considerable rise in the financial burden of the industries, which was associated with both direct and indirect costs of occupational accidents and diseases.

Table 4.4.3. Number of workdays lost, per 100 full-time workers, due to occupational injuries and illnesses in the United States, by industry

Industry		1988		1989		1990
Meat-packing plants		357.0		358.7		431.8
Sausages and other prepared meats		239.5		233.5		265.7
Poultry slaughtering/processing		159.4		173.2		225.2
Canned/cured fish and seafoods		99.1		144.4		122.9
Fresh/frozen prepared fish		164.6		156.5		186.7
Preserved fruits/vegetables		129.1		148.8		161.8
Bakery products		155.2		153.9		168.0
Beverages		163.7		165.1		186.3
Tobacco products		53.9		64.2		62.3
Source: BLS, US Department of Labor: Occupational injuries and illnesses in the United States by industry, Series 1988-90, Washington, DC.

The information reviewed presents a picture of occupational accidents and diseases, which is particularly notable in the meat and poultry industries where the cost of compensation has risen in recent years. This situation is adversely affecting the productivity of these industries. In view of this trend, all parties need to realize the urgent need to cooperate in order to improve their work environment and work practices and their safety and health records.

5. Prevention

Compiling data on accidents and diseases that occur in the workplace is the first step in understanding the types of safety and health problem in these sectors. Once data are analyzed regarding common types and causes of injuries and diseases, safety and health risks can be assessed at enterprise and sectoral levels. This should then lead to measures to eliminate or minimize those risks, which should result in reduced accidents and diseases. The measures must be constantly monitored and revised, as needed, according to changes in the work environment, in machinery and tools and in work methods. For the measures to be effective, every employee needs to be aware of those risks and be trained for safe conduct and use of tools and machinery.

5.1 Preventive measures

5.1.1 Personal protective equipment

For example, boots with non-slip soles can reduce injuries due to slips and falls on wet and greasy floors. The same gear with an adequate upper can also protect feet from cuts from a knife or from burns due to chemicals and hot water used for cleaning and disinfecting the floor. Ear plugs can protect those who are constantly exposed to more than 85 dB(A) of noise. Since hearing impairment normally develops over a long period of time, many are not aware of the need to protect themselves. It is essential that the employees understand the consequences of long hours of exposure to noise without any protection.

Arm guards and mesh gloves and aprons can prevent cuts and stab wounds to the fingers, hands, arms and abdomen. Despite the availability of these items, many cutters and deboners are reported not to use them because such pieces are often considered too heavy and cumbersome and may affect dexterity. Many believe that this hurts their piece-rate income. However, records show that the number of injuries decrease and sick leave is reduced if PPE is worn regularly. A study also indicated that the five-finger protective glove is much more effective than the three-finger glove which can be slippery.⁶⁵ Thus, it is important to make PPE available to employees and to make it a rule for them to use it.

Other items of PPE include protective clothes, gloves, moisture-resistant aprons, safety helmets, goggles, face shields, masks and so on. Protective clothes and insulated boots keep workers in cold rooms warm and their circulatory systems in order. Rubber gloves can prevent workers from contracting infectious disease of animal origin or from dermatitis due to the chemicals they handle. Goggles and face shields can protect workers from intoxication and poisoning when handling chemical substances or from injuries to sensory organs. Surgical masks are useful in preventing the workers from inhaling substances that may lead to respiratory disorders, or from contracting zoonosis.

The essential point of all these PPE items is that employees be able to assess the safety and health risks in their own work environment and to use the most appropriate PPE regularly for their own protection. Maintenance of PPE from a safety and health point of view also needs to be ensured.

5.1.2 Machine guarding and engineering control

To prevent accidents, operators must be well trained in handling machinery and follow all safety guidelines operating the machines. Appropriate machine guards, available from the manufacturer need to be properly installed and maintained. Before starting the machines, operators should ensure that they are wearing the appropriate protective equipment and take care that their clothes, hair or accessories not be caught in the machinery. All machines should also be equipped with control buttons with clear indications of "start" and "stop" to prevent unintended operation.

Guards and control buttons on machinery are some examples of engineering control for preventing accidents. Another example is dealing with the problem of noise, for instance, by isolating the source of noise rather than having workers wear ear plugs or ear muffs. Noise can be isolated by enclosing machines or equipment in a soundproof area or by adding mufflers and silencers to specific machine parts. The noise caused by the movement of metal hooks can be reduced, for example, by using plastic bumpers, coating the rail with nylon or replacing metal hooks with durable plastic ones.

There are many other areas for which engineering control can be used for safety and health purposes. For employees suffering from circulatory problems, an isolation technique is used. A refrigerated area is localized by enclosing chilled hoppers or conveyors. This way the chilled area is kept as small as possible.

Modification of machines, tools and workstations by engineering techniques can be very effective in coping with safety and health risks. While engineers design these techniques with safety in mind, suggestions from workers based on their experience can contribute to their improvement. Since many accidents are also reported during machinery maintenance, engineers could design machines that can be maintained and cleaned safely. Reassembling the machinery after cleaning it should not require a great effort. The input of both management and workers is useful and necessary in making improvements through engineering control.

5.1.3 Ergonomics

One of the causes of musculoskeletal disorders is that cutters and deboners handle greasy and slippery chunks of meat with repetitive motions. The nature of their tasks requires force, which leads to overuse of certain muscles and joints, and can result in temporary or permanent disability of specific parts of the body. Standing for long hours and working in a fixed posture is another cause of this problem. In addition, work in cold temperatures aggravates blood circulation, which creates the condition for this problem to develop. As musculoskeletal injuries and diseases draw increasing attention in many countries, various attempts are being made to reduce the risks through ergonomics.

The ergonomic approach focuses on making work and the work environment fit the workers, rather than making the worker fit them, to achieve maximum efficiency in a comfortable position. For example, workstations should be designed to meet the needs of the worker who performs certain tasks through repeated motions in the same position. This requires that the height, shape or space of the workstation fit the needs of the worker in order for him/her to work with the least amount of strain.

Since different workers may perform different tasks at the same workstation at different times, and since workers' heights vary, the station must be adjustable to accommodate their needs. The optimum height of the workstation varies depending on the task performed, but having the workstation about 8 cm below the elbow is considered the best height for simple, light manual tasks.

Ergonomics could also be applied to tools such as knives and power saws. For example, the handle of a knife should be designed to accommodate the shape of the hand and fingers so that the worker can grip it better, resulting in an efficient performance and with the least strain in any of his/her body parts. A heavy powered tool should be suspended with an adjustable cord so that the user does not have to support its weight while performing a task.

Lifting and carrying heavy loads also results in many musculoskeletal injuries. Such tasks should be done with a forklift or a mechanical aid to minimize risks. If this is not feasible, workers should at least be trained in the safer handling of heavy objects. The correct posture when loading and unloading heavy objects would be helpful. Such loads can also be handled by two persons. A better storing arrangement, such as installed racks and shelves, from which workers lift or put down heavy objects, would also reduce hazards.

Ergonomic improvement does not have to be costly. Even simple suggestions based on workers' daily experiences can protect them while improving their work efficiency. It is therefore advisable for employees to be trained in assessing various ergonomic risks and hazards around them, and in dealing with them with other co-workers by sharing ideas and better work methods.

5.1.4 Work environment and good housekeeping

There are many accidents related to vehicles, such as forklifts, inside the plant that can be reduced if pedestrians' and vehicles' passageways are clearly marked on the floor and if internal traffic rules are strictly observed. Some workers also strike their heads or other body parts against protruding parts of the building or facilities. Such areas can be cordoned off or clearly marked with a large hanging sign. A swinging door presents a high risk of accidents when the other side is not visible. A window could be installed on the upper part of the door or the whole door could be made of translucent material.

A freezer door must be kept closed in order for frozen materials to remain at a certain temperature, but there is a danger of being trapped in a sub-zero room. Most freezers are equipped with an inside lever. If the lever breaks however, there is still the risk of being trapped. An alarm system that can be triggered from the inside should be installed.

In the layout of workstations where workers using knives or other dangerous tools, there should be enough space for each employee to work safely. For example, according to the safety rules of Poland provided by its Labour Ministry, each fish processing worker should have 5 m² of working space and that the distance between workers should not be less than 1 meter. In its poultry processing plants also, space of at least 1.2 metres on both sides of the conveyor belt is provided.

Keeping the storage well organized is fundamental to good housekeeping. Tools and supplies should be placed so that anyone can find easily whatever he/she is looking for. Dangerous substances need to be clearly labelled and safely positioned to prevent poisoning accidents, while heavy materials should be stored on middle shelves to minimize back strains. Knives need to be sharpened regularly by trained individuals so that cutters will not have to exert unnecessary force, which would help prevent musculoskeletal injuries and diseases.

Adequate lighting throughout the workplace is essential. Poor lighting and glare can lead to eye strain and reduced productivity and is also likely to cause accidents. Though regulations vary among countries, lighting of 300 lux or more is generally recommended for precision work, 150 lux or more for normal work and 70 lux or more for rough work. Storage rooms and traffic routes need to be well lit to prevent traffic accidents and also errors in identifying materials. Electrical wirings and outlets must be regularly checked and maintained in a safe condition to reduce risks of electrocution and short circuiting.

5.1.5 Administrative control

Difficulties in job rotation is that certain tasks require different qualifications. Different pay rates for different tasks make it difficult to apply this system as many workers prefer to keep their higher-paying jobs even if it means repetitive work. Some might fear an overall decline in productivity as work speed is bound to drop with rotations. Thus, management must consider both positive and negative points and difficulties when introducing job rotation.

Providing short and frequent pauses to those who perform repetitive tasks, rather than one long break in the morning and afternoon, may be effective in preventing musculoskeletal strains. Engaging workers in stretching and light exercise during these pauses is even more advisable. There must be enough space for movement, and advice is needed as to what kind of stretching would be useful for those who perform physically stressful tasks or for those who use the same body parts excessively.

Closely related to administrative control of pauses and rest periods is the control of work speed. Many meat and poultry processing workers perform repetitive tasks on the conveyor belt, where they are required to work at the same speed as the conveyor belt, which places excessive pressure on those who are unable to maintain the pace. The speed in these industries has been increased considerably over the years to achieve higher productivity. However, excessive work speed often results in repetitive strains of arms and joints. Management in consultation with workers and supported by evidence needs to establish the speed beyond which the quality of products tends to decline and injuries occur.

Administrative control is also needed at recruitment. Pre-employment medical examinations are conducted in the meat and poultry industries of many countries to comply with the requirements of the meat-importing countries. Some plants also conduct more sophisticated check-ups, involving audiometric and musculoskeletal screening assessments to avoid recruiting or assigning certain tasks to those who are prone to disorders related to work and the work environment.

Accidents often increase with age. The data provided by the Ministry of Japan show that the accident rate for every 1,000 workers of 50 or older in 1989 was 7.7, as compared with 3.4 for the 20 to 29 age bracket.⁶⁶ Management can arrange work so that older workers are assigned to tasks involving less risk. In this way overall safety records can be improved. Administrative control can be combined with other measures to aim at ever higher safety standards.

5.1.6 Measures against zoonosis

There have also been cases of a new disease called bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly referred to as "mad-cow disease". The cases of BSE which have been reported mainly in Europe, pushed the beef industry and meat consumers into a state of panic. This was due mainly to the fact that there is little scientifically reliable information available as to how this disease is contracted and what can be done to avoid it.

As regards the known diseases, there are some established measures which need to be followed. Immunization is recommended against Q fever and medical screening of both employees and livestock is essential. Employees must maintain high standards of personal hygiene, ranging from clean clothes and hands to proper and immediate treatment of cuts, wounds and skin lesions. In order for employees to maintain high standards of personal hygiene, they must be provided with adequate facilities that include basins for hand washing and shower rooms.

Another important factor to prevent zoonosis is that plants must be designed so that yards, slaughtering areas and skin sheds can be cleaned and drained to maintain hygiene. The use of high-pressure water should be minimized to reduce the generation of aerosols which could contain harmful micro-organisms.

Finally, appropriate personal protective equipment over the mouth, eyes and hands can guard against inhalation and contamination of disease-carrying micro-organisms. If these measures are strictly observed at all times, zoonotic diseases will be reduced.

5.2 Safety and health committees

The minimum number of workers for which this law is applicable varies between countries and states. In Australia, the Industrial Health, Safety and Welfare Act, 1977 of Tasmania elects workers' safety representatives where more than ten people are employed. The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1983 of New South Wales, on the other hand, makes it obligatory for a workplace with more than 20 persons to form an SH committee.⁶⁷

Among the members of the European Union, the minimum number of employees in a workplace in order for a SH committee to be established ranges from 20 in Denmark to 100 in Spain.⁶⁸

For any SH committee to be effective, it has to have a serious commitment from management at all levels, particularly from senior management. It should also have the enthusiastic participation of employees through their representatives. Workers' representatives, who should make up half of the committee members, can be self-elected or appointed by management. They should be trained in the concept and practice of integrated OSH management approaches and have broad support from their fellow workers.

Responsibilities generally include the following tasks: (1) to inspect the workplace in a manner determined by the committee at agreed intervals, after giving reasonable notice to the employer or immediately in the event of an accident; (2) to accompany a government inspector during an inspection; (3) to be present at an interview between an employee and an inspector or employer; (4) to have access to the employer's information relating to actual and potential hazards and the health and safety of employees; (5) to be consulted on or provided with details of proposed changes to the workplace that may affect the safety, health and welfare of the workers; (6) to receive information from an inspector about his/her observations and any action proposed by the inspector; (7) to recommend training to overcome OSH hazards; and (8) to cease work when there is an immediate threat to safety and health, after consultation with the employer.⁶⁹

It is important that workers' representatives are trusted by their fellow workers and are knowledgeable about OSH issues. They should also have communication skills, with which they can convey relevant information and train the workers in best practices. The skills are also useful in channelling their colleagues' contribution regarding risk assessment and identification into proposals of corrective measures.

On the other hand, a plant-level SH committee generally has the following functions: (1) to create and maintain awareness and interest in safety and health in the workplace; (2) to facilitate cooperation between employer and employee; (3) to develop and distribute standards, rules and procedures on safety and health; (4) review the circumstances surrounding work injuries, illnesses and occurrences; and (5) to make recommendations to the employer on safety and health matters.

In addition to a plant-level safety and health committee, many countries also require by law a safety and health (SH) officer. In Queensland, Australia, for example, the law provides that a workplace with more than 30 employees should appoint a qualified person for this task. The duties of an SH officer usually include, in addition to being on the safety and health committee, inspecting the workplace and advising the employer on the overall condition of safety and health, recording and investigating all occupational injuries and diseases and assisting government inspectors in their duties. An SH officer should therefore have a thorough knowledge of law and regulations related to safety and health in the particular industry, safety and health practices in the workplace and in accident investigation procedures.⁷⁰

Employers in Japan are required by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, revised in 1990, to appoint safety officers in workplaces under certain conditions. The conditions vary by sector and according to other factors. In construction sites and organic chemical and petroleum products manufacturing plants, at least one full-time safety officer is appointed if the number of employees exceeds 300. In the meat, poultry and fish processing sectors, the requirement is imposed on plants employing 1,000 or more staff, as in the case of most manufacturing industries. A safety officer must have a university degree in science and a minimum of five years of practical experience in occupational safety.

Employers in Japan are also obligated to appoint health and medical officers. The number of health officers required depends on the size of the workforce. In the food and drink industries, at least one health officer must be appointed in a plant employing 50 to 199 workers, two officers in a plant with 200 to 499 workers and six officers for more than 3,000 workers. At least one medical officer must be regularly assigned in a plant where 500 regular workers are employed and where they work in extremely cold temperatures, handle cold objects and are at risk of infection from micro-organisms. (This includes meat, poultry and fish processing industries.)⁷¹

In order to assist the plant-level SH structures to perform their functions, a bipartite mechanism at the industry level in some countries has produced, or is in the process of producing, a self-audit checklist for the workplace safety and health assessment. The checklist contains columns that list issues of concern (e.g. "The safety policy has been communicated to workers".), their statuses (e.g. "yes" or "no"), corrective actions and/or comments specified and the date when corrective actions were completed.

This type of checklist should help everyone to perform their duties in steps and follow-up until satisfactory results are obtained. The surest way to make the workplace safe is to have every employee raise his/her SH awareness through information dissemination and appropriate training.

5.3 Information dissemination and training regarding workplace hazards

Types of information that employees should have access to are about their plant, the equipment and machinery, the hazardous substances they handle and the work processes they must comply with. They should also be informed of hazards associated with new equipment, techniques and work processes. Information on, and causes of, workplace accidents is always useful in order for them to develop measures to minimize risks.

Information can be provided in various forms. It can be distributed to individual workers as memos and reports, or can be posted on the bulletin board. The board must be accessible to everyone. Information on OSH must also be an important part of the initial training at an employee's induction, since new staff are at a higher risk of accidents. Special emphasis must be placed on safety and health codes and practices during their job training. If employees are illiterate or from multilingual groups, employers must ensure that proper languages or visual aids be used.

The purposes of training are multifold. Employers aim at increasing safety and health awareness among managerial staff and employees at all levels. They try to ensure that the staff can demonstrate safe work practices, understand guidelines and legislation relevant to their work circumstances and put into practice what they have learned. Training needs depend on his/her place of work, tasks and responsibilities. It is therefore necessary to identify which groups require what kind of training in order to make the content relevant.

Training in OSH concepts and practices of newly recruited employees is absolutely essential. Anyone whose job has changed and who is required to work with new equipment/machines or environment should be trained at each change. In view of the fact that many accidents occur during maintenance, employers must make sure that the staff receive tailor-made training. All workers require training in the proper use and maintenance of their respective PPE, without which PPE can be useless. Finally, managers, supervisors and workers' SH representatives must be thoroughly knowledgeable on SH issues, practices and regulations relevant to their plants or to the employees they deal with.⁷²

It is important that the content of training and training methods be reviewed and evaluated fairly often because work processes, techniques and machinery are constantly changing. Industry-specific guidelines, regulations and codes of practice should be revised and amended accordingly. Industry-specific new information related to OSH made available by various institutes should also be incorporated into training materials. Reviews and evaluations of any training programme is to ensure that the content remains relevant and appropriate to trainees.

6. National safety and health inspection

Various pieces of legislation and regulations concerning the safety and health of workers and the workplace are usually enforced by the directorate of occupational safety and health set up within the ministry of labour. While a complete system of safety and health inspection is still in the process of being developed in many developing countries, the existing system has never been fully satisfactory in most countries due mainly to insufficient manpower for adequate inspection. The task imposed on government authorities is to design the most effective system with limited resources to ensure safety and health in the workplace.

6.1 Safety and health inspection systems

Inspectors in India, whose fundamental powers and authority are provided mainly in the Factories Act of 1948, enforce safety and health standards in the workplace in 31 States and Union Territories. Since 1987, their power has been enhanced to increase their effectiveness.⁷⁴ Australian meat, poultry and fish processing workers and their workplaces are covered by the inspectors empowered by the relevant state and territory authorities since there are no Commonwealth employers in these specific sectors.⁷⁵

In general, SH inspectors are those who make technical inspections and others who make medical inspections. The former's tasks include anything related to safety issues, such as checking the observance of safety regulations, investigating complaints with regard to safety at work and setting up inquiries into occupational accidents. The latter's responsibilities cover issues related to the hygiene and health of workers and occupational diseases in the workplace.

Inspectors' visits to workplaces can be classified largely into five types: general visits, special visits, visits after complaints, follow-up visits and informative visits. General visits are those carried out as routine work of inspectors to enforce safety and health standards in general. Special visits are motivated by the necessity of checking the application of specific regulations being targeted. Visits following complaints are conducted after alleged violations of standards or when unsafe or unhealthy working conditions are reported, usually by employees. Follow-up visits determine if previous violations have been corrected. Finally, inspectors cooperate with safety and health committees by providing them with information and training on prevention of occupational safety and health in the workplace.⁷⁶

The inspectors' authority and power in enforcing safety and health standards may vary among countries. In general, they are authorized to enter without delay and at reasonable times any workplace without any notice for the purpose of inspection and investigation. They can also examine any records and documents relevant to the safety and health of workers and the premises. Furthermore, they may question any employer or employee, privately or with witnesses, to obtain necessary information. When they find any violation of safety or health codes, they are authorized to issue citations as well as to impose fines and penalties.

There is little information as regards the extent and frequency of inspections that meat, poultry and fish processing plants are subject to. The records of inspection in most countries do not have breakdowns by sector. The Inspection Activity Report of 1993 of the Ministry of Employment and Labour, Belgium shows that there was a total of 8,758 general inspections conducted by safety and health inspectors, including 876 follow-up visits, covering all industries. In the same year, a total of 3,778 special inspections, including 1,086 follow-up visits, was also conducted. In addition, a total of 1,264 inspections following complaints, including 470 follow-up visits, and 1,740 informative visits were carried out. However, no indication was given as to how many of these inspections were related to the meat, poultry and fish processing industries.

According to the information provided by the Government of Poland, a total of 222 inspections was conducted in 1994 in 217 meat processing enterprises where a total of 20,120 workers were employed. Included among them were ten state-owned and six cooperative enterprises. The following establishments became the target of these inspections: those that had poor records from the previous inspection; those that were newly established and those that were selected as representative enterprises from the ownership point of view.

During the course of these inspections in Poland, there were several types of safety and health violation reported. They most often involved electro-energetic, heat and gas installations, and consisted of 21.3 per cent of the total number of violations. The next most frequent problem was inappropriate state of buildings and work premises (15.4 per cent), followed by insufficient guards for dangerous machinery (14.3 per cent), lack of ventilation at work posts (8.2 per cent), inappropriate organization of work posts (88.1 per cent), unsatisfactory hygiene and sanitation of work premises (7.5 per cent), inadequate personal protection measures (7.3 per cent) and lack of or inappropriate medical examination of employees (6.8 per cent). The problems related to PPE involved mainly the equipment to protect the hands and body against cuts, head protection in slaughtering and ear protection against noisy machines.

After these inspections, 3,930 decisions were taken by the inspectors. These included the issuance of letters of various natures (e.g. warnings, reminders, persuasion) to the management of enterprises in relation to 743 matters of violations and non-observance of safety and health codes. There were also 215 orders of temporary work stoppage issued because of hazardous work conditions and 159 cases of fines imposed on the employers who had violated certain provisions. Finally, there were 77 cases involving 161 workers where they were referred to other jobs because their skills were inadequate for the tasks they had been performing.

Compared with similar inspections conducted in the Polish meat industry in 1990, the results of 1994 were largely encouraging. Concerning noise in the workplace, for example, the number of violations of the highest admissible level dropped from 32 per cent of the total violations in 1990 to 1.5 per cent in 1994. The violations involving harmful substances fell sharply from 10 to 0.6 per cent, while those concerning machine guards increased slightly from 12 to 14.3 per cent. Those related to transport also declined from 6 to 3.4 per cent. The ones involving installations of various sources of energy increased from 13 to 21.3 per cent.

The results of these inspections indicate that the occupational hazards in the Polish meat industry occur mostly in certain areas. They include inadequate state of work premises, inappropriate organization or design of workstations, lack of adequate PPE and inadequate guarding of dangerous machines. Inappropriate state of work premises include inadequate ventilation and inappropriate installations of energy sources and equipment.

The results also revealed that the safety and health records in smaller and newly established enterprises were relatively worse. This might have been due to inadequate knowledge of safety and health issues of the employers. It could also mean that when new or small establishments aim at higher profits, they may neglect adequate investment in safety and health measures. In any case, these findings point out the areas on which future inspections should focus when resources for the inspection system are limited.

Resources and manpower for safety and health inspections in the workplace vary among countries, but they are generally inadequate in most countries. In the United States, for example, there are about 2,000 inspectors nationwide employed by the OSHA who are responsible for inspecting 6 million workplaces with 93 million employees. This means that on average a company can expect to see an OSHA inspector once every ten years.⁷⁷

In order to carry out more effective activities with limited resources and manpower, OSHA has focused on certain types of inspection as priorities. Its top priority has been inspections involving imminent danger in workplaces. This concerns any condition where a danger exists that can be expected to cause death or serious injuries immediately. Other priority inspections have been investigations of catastrophes and fatal accidents, those which follow employee complaints, and those which are of a special nature focused on highly hazardous situations or substances. Should any of the above inspectional visits uncover any violations of safety and health rules and regulations, follow-up visits are normally conducted to see if appropriate corrective measures have been taken.⁷⁸ These focused and prioritized inspection systems should have helped the OSHA achieve a higher efficiency in its role and function.

However, the latest approach to workplace inspections in the United States focuses on the worst offenders while relying primarily on voluntary compliance with federal safety and health regulations on the part of employers. This was a result of the Government's downsizing efforts which aim at increasing the protection of workers' safety and health, while decreasing red tape. This new inspection system is based on the test programme the United States Government has operated in the state of Maine.

In Maine, OSHA identified, through workers' compensation insurance claims, 200 companies with the worst safety and health records. These 200 companies represented 1 per cent of the State's employers and 30 per cent of the workforce, but accounted for 45 per cent of Maine's compensations for occupational injuries and diseases. These employers were visited by OSHA representatives and given two choices. One was to participate in a new programme in which the enterprise would set up management-employee teams to develop a comprehensive safety and health plan to remedy the problems. The other was to risk OSHA's traditional inspection approach, which could result in heavy penalties. Out of the 200, 98 per cent of the employers chose the first option. The results of this new approach are reportedly impressive.⁷⁹

The inspectors' informative role in raising the awareness of employers and workers of occupational safety and health problems has been important. This role has become one of the essential parts of their responsibilities under the new approach in the United States. When management and employees become more aware of the fact that safe and healthy workplaces are beneficial to everyone concerned, they will learn to take their own initiatives without having to be coerced or reminded by inspectors. Until then, the latter will have to continue their campaign for voluntary measures for improvement, as well as to enforce regulations and impose fines and penalties. Again, good management employee cooperation seems to be the best solution in ensuring safety and health in the workplace where inspectional resources are limited.

6.2 Training inspectors

The employment characteristics of Australian inspectors were studied in 1993-94. The results show that 80 per cent of them held a degree or diploma (including those in progress), while 70 per cent had specific qualifications in the area of OSH. In addition, 60 per cent had qualifications in specific areas, such as electrical trades. All of them had received in-house training and their average length of service as inspectors was eight years.

The nature and duration of their training varies among states. In New South Wales, newly recruited inspectors undergo intensive training for six months, while in South Australia, the training is for 17 weeks. These training courses, administered by experienced inspectors, consist usually of familiarizing the inspectors with various legislation concerning OSH and the resources for technical services available in the inspectors' office. Practical training in different divisions (e.g. engineering, dangerous substances, pressure vessels, etc.), field visits and techniques for OSH audits, inspections and accident investigations are also included. The last few weeks of their training are spent in reviewing or catching up on subjects in which they feel deficient.⁸⁰

In the United States, the OSHA Training Institute in Des Plaines, Illinois, provides basic and advanced OSH training and education for federal and state personnel and consultants. It also trains employers and worker representatives from the private sector. It is equipped with various demonstration laboratories, audiovisual units, equipment, machinery, woodworking and welding shops and a complete industrial ventilation unit. Courses are given on electrical hazards, machine guarding, ventilation and ergonomics. There are also tailor-made courses for personnel in the private sector dealing with OSH in certain industries such as construction.

In addition, OSHA financially assists non-profit organizations to develop programmes and materials for educating employers and employees about their workplace hazards. Such grants are provided to help recipient organizations to develop their capabilities in providing training and related services in OSH to firms in the private sector.⁸¹

Newly recruited inspectors in most countries are trained in safety and health issues, such as machine guarding and ventilation, that are applicable to all industries. However, there are certain conditions or situations in the workplace that are characteristic to specific industries. PPE and machinery used in the meat, poultry and fish processing industries are different from those in other sectors. Safety and health issues in a cold, wet and often greasy workplace are entirely different from the work environment of, for example, electronics assembly-workers or textile workers. For this reason, it is desirable that inspectors receive more sector-specific training, in addition to general subjects. This would be useful when they train employers and employees in specific sectors during their informative visits.

⁵⁹ Health and Safety Executive: A recipe for safety: Health and safety in the food industry, 3/94, United Kingdom.

⁶⁰ Health and Safety Executive: A recipe for safety: Health and safety in the food industry, 3/94, United Kingdom.

⁶¹ David Caple and associates, Robert Barrow Risk Management and Australian Meat and Livestock Research and Development Corporation: Occupational Health and Safety in the Australian Meat Processing Industry, Final Report, Apr., 1990.

⁶² Information was provided by the Government of Australia.

⁶³ David Caple, et al., op. cit.

⁶⁴ Data provided by Fonds voor Arbeidsongevallen (FAO), Belgium.

⁶⁵ Bengt Springfeldt: Cutting of Meat: Attitudes to safety problems, The Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Work Science, Stockholm, 1993.

⁶⁶ Ministry of Labour: Anzen no shihyou, Tokyo, 1991.

⁶⁷ The Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union and the Meat Industry Federation of Australia: National Guidelines for Health and Safety in the Meat Industry, Australia (the place of publication not mentioned), July 1995.

⁶⁸ European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions: Working Conditions in the European Meat Processing Industry, Luxembourg, 1995.

⁶⁹ The Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union and the Meat Industry Federation of Australia, op. cit.

⁷⁰ The Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union et al.: Guide for the beef and small stock processing industry, Australia (the date and the place of publication are not indicated).

⁷¹ Rodosho Anzen Eisei Bu: Rodo Anzen Eisei Kisoku, Chuo Rodo Saigai Boshi Kyokai, 1991.

⁷² The Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union and the Meat Industry Federation of Australia, op. cit.

⁷³ US Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA): All about OSHA, Washington, DC, 1985 (Revised).

⁷⁴ H. Ono and K. Enomoto eds.: Profile on Occupational Safety and Health in India, Asian and Pacific Regional Centre for Labour Administration (Bangkok, ILO, 1992).

⁷⁵ Information provided by the Government of Australia, 1995.

⁷⁶ Ministere de l'Emploi et du Travail: Administration de l'Hygiene et de la medecine du Travail, Inspection Medical du Travail, Rapport d'Activité 1993, Bruxelles, Belgique.

⁷⁷ Frank Swoboda and Stephen Barr: "Guardian of Employee Safety is about to get a Work-Over", in Washington Post, 16 May 1995.

⁷⁸ US Department of Labor, op. cit.

⁷⁹ Swoboda and Barr, op. cit.

⁸⁰ Paper entitled Induction Training Program, Inspectors of Occupational Health and Safety, 1994, for South Australia, provided by the Government of Australia.

⁸¹ US Department of Labor, op. cit.

International Labour Organization (ILO): Contact us | Site map |

Copyright and Permissions 1996-2008 International Labour Organization (ILO) - Disclaimer