Div. of WSA Inc., 11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121 (714) 755-5000
710-F
Occupational Safety Data Base
for Solid Waste Management
Final Report
Performed for
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Under Contract No. 68-01-4747
May 1980
-------
Div. of WSA Inc., 11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121 (714) 755-5000
710-F
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY DATA BASE FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Final Report
Performed for
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Under Contract No. 68-01-4747
EPA Project Officer: Martha Madison
May 1980
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Pilot Study 1-1
1.2 Field Test 1-3
1.3 IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information
System 1-5
1.4 National Safety Data Base 1-7
II. IRIS OPERATIONAL METHODS 2-1
2.1 Start-Up Data Collection 2-1
2.2 Routine Data Collection 2-3
2.3 Generation of Outputs 2-6
2.3.1 Multiple Factor Tabulations
With Rates 2-6
2.3.2 Single Factor Tabulations 2-8
2.3.3 Routine Multi-Factor Tabulations . . 2-9
2.3.4 Variable Factor Tabulations .... 2-9
2.4 Publishing Findings 2-13
2.4.1 Quarterly Safety Management
Reports (QSMR's) 2-13
2.4.2 Accident Trends Reports 2-15
2.4.3 IRIS News 2-15
2.4.4 IRIS Newsflash 2-15
III. FINDINGS 3-1
3.1 Characteristics of the Data Base 3-1
3.2 Findings 3-7
3.2.1 Analysis by Activity Being
Performed 3-7
3.2.2 Analysis by Accident Type 3-11
3.2.3 Analysis by Accident Site 3-11
i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
3.2.4 Analysis by Injury Type and
Part of Body Injured 3-11
3.2.5 Analyses by Age Group, Experience,
Height and Weight 3-11
3.2.6 Analysis by Standard Division . . . 3-14
3.2.7 Analysis by Crew Type 3-14
3.2.8 Analysis by Crew Size 3-14
3.2.9 Analysis by Type of Shift 3-14
3.2.10 Analysis by Point of Collection . . 3-21
3.2.11 Analysis by Three Factor Crew
Type 3-21
3.2.12 Analysis by Personal Protective
Equipment 3-21
3.2.13 Analysis by Geographical Region . . 3-35
IV. CONCLUSION 4-1
EXHIBITS
PUBLICATIONS
ii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Pa9e
TABLE 1-1 Description of Users by Operational
Characteristics 1-8
TABLE 1-2 Summary of Data Bases Developed in IRIS . . 1-9
TABLE 3-1 Summary of National Safety Data Base. . . . 3-1
TABLE 3-2 Distribution of IRIS Users and Man-Hours
by Employment Size 3-2
TABLE 3-3 Geographical Distribution of IRIS Users
and Man-Hours 3-2
TABLE 3-4 Distribution of IRIS Users and Man-Hours
by Type of Solid Waste Organization .... 3-4
TABLE 3-5 Distribution of IRIS User Man-Hours by
Division (Function) 3-4
TABLE 3-6 Distribution of IRIS User Man-Hours by
Point of Collection 3-5
TABLE 3-7 Distribution of IRIS User Man-Hours by
Crew Size 3-6
TABLE 3-8 Distribution of IRIS Users and Man-Hours
by Type of Shift 3-7
TABLE 3-9 Comparison of IRIS Participant Data with
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Data. . . . 3-10
TABLE 3-10 Ten Most Common Injuries 3-12
TABLE 3-11 Ten Most Costly Injuries 3-12
TABLE 3-12 Average Injury Rates by IRIS Standard
Divisions 3-12
TABLE 3-13 Average Injury Rates by Crew Type 3-16
TABLE 3-14 Average Injury Rates by Crew Size 3-17
TABLE 3-15 Average Injury Rates by Type of Shift . . . 3-19
TABLE 3-16 Average Injury Rates by Point of
Collection 3-22
iii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
TABLE 3-17 Average Injury Rates for Three Man Crews
by Type of Collection 3-23
TABLE 3-18 Average Injury Rates for Task (Incentive)
Shift by Type of Collection 3-23
TABLES 3-19A- Three Factor Crew Analyses by Point of
3-19G Collection, Size of Crew and Type of
Shift 3-24
TABLES 3-20A- Three Factor Crew Analyses by Crew Type,
3-20G Size of Crew and Type of Shift 3-28
TABLE 3-21 Gloves 3-32
TABLE 3-22 Safety Glasses/Goggles 3-32
TABLE 3-23 Safety Shoes 3-33
TABLE 3-24 Head Protection 3-33
TABLE 3-25 Average Injury Rates by Region 3-36
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 2-1 Summary of the Basic Operating Steps
of 'IRIS' 2-2
FIGURE 2-2 Data Factors 2-5
FIGURE 2-3 Seven Injury Rates IRIS Computes 2-7
FIGURE 2-4 All Users - Detailed Description of
Lifting Container Accidents - OSHA
Reportable Injuries Only 2-10
FIGURE 2-5 Example of the Data Input Sheet to
the Query Program 2-11
FIGURE 2-6 Example of the Output of the Query
Program 2-12
FIGURE 3-1 Map of IRIS Users 3-3
FIGURE 3-2 List of Publications 3-8
FIGURE 3-3 Analysis of Incidence of Injuries by
Hours Worked Prior for Task Vs. Fixed
Hour Type of Shift 3-20
FIGURE 4-1 Some Facts About the Injury/Illness
Problem in the Solid Waste Industry as
Shown by the Occupational Safety Data
Base for Solid Waste Management 4-3
v
-------
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT I;
EXHIBIT 2:
EXHIBIT 3:
EXHIBIT 4:
EXHIBIT 5:
EXHIBIT 6:
EXHIBIT 7:
EXHIBIT 8:
EXHIBIT 9:
EXHIBIT 10:
EXHIBIT 11:
EXHIBIT 12:
Activities Ranked from Highest to Lowest
Percent of OSHA Recordable Injuries, Days
Lost and Direct Costs
Accident Types Ranked From Highest to
Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs
Accident Sites Ranked from Highest to
Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs
Injury Types Ranked From Highest to
Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs
Parts of Body Ranked From Highest to
Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs
Average Injury Rates by Age Group for
the Collection Division
Average Injury Rates by Experience
Group for the Collection Division
Average Injury Rates by Height Group
for the Collection Division
Average Injury Rates by Weight Group
for the Collection Division
Speeches On IRIS and Solid Waste Safety
Article On IRIS
List of Previous IRIS Publications From
Contract No. 68-03-0231
vi
-------
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
ACCIDENT TRENDS REPORTS
PUBLICATION 1: Fourth Quarter 1977
PUBLICATION 2: First Quarter 1978
PUBLICATION 3: Second Quarter 1978
PUBLICATION 4: Third Quarter 1978
IRIS NEWS ARTICLES
PUBLICATION 5:
PUBLICATION 6:
PUBLICATION 7:
PUBLICATION 8:
PUBLICATION 9:
PUBLICATION 10
Vol. 1, No. 7, October 1977, "Safety
Incentive Programs"
Vol. 1, No. 8, November 1977, "The Hidden
Costs of Occupational Accidents"
Vol. 1, No. 9, December 1977, "Personal
Protective Equipment Summary"
Vol. 2, No. 1, January 1978, "New IRIS
Injury Rate Printouts for Division and
Crew Type"
Vol. 2, No. 2, February 1978, "Injury
Analyses of Personal Protective Equipment"
Vol, 2, No. 3, March 1978, "Adoption of
Refuse Collection Standards in California
and Analyses of Injuries Involving the Use
of Gloves"
PUBLICATION 11: Vol. 2, No. 4, April 1978, "The Ten Most
Common and Ten Most Costly Injuries in the
Solid Waste Industry"
PUBLICATION 12: Vol. 2, No. 5, May 1978, "Overexertions
by Type of Shift and Size of Crew and 1977
Injury Rates"
PUBLICATION 13: Vol. 2, No. 6, June 1978, "The Effect of
Height and Weight on Overexertions from
Handling Containers"
PUBLICATION 14: Vol. 2, No. 7, July 1978, "Vehicle Acci-
dents by Task/Hourly for Collection Di-
vision and Employees Falling off Moving
Vehicles"
vii
-------
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS (Cont'd)
PUBLICATION 15: Vol. 2, No. 8, August 1978, "At What Point
During Their Shift Are Collection Employees
More Prone to Injury?"
PUBLICATION 16: Vol. 2, No. 9, September 1978, "A Comparison
of When Injuries Occur During Their Work
Shift of Task vs. Fixed Hour Employees"
IRIS NEWSFLASH TOPICS
PUBLICATION 17: Vol. 1, No. 5, December 1977, "Being Run
Over by the Collection Vehicle Accidents"
PUBLICATION 18: Vol. 2, No. 1, March 1978, "Occurrence of
Getting On and Off Moving Vehicle Accidents
and Struck By Vehicle Accidents"
PUBLICATION 19: Vol. 2, No. 2, July 1978, "Solid Waste
Fatalities"
PUBLICATION 20: Vol. 2, No. 3, September 1978, "Prompt
Action Saved a Severed Body Part"
viii
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This is the Final Report on Contract No. 68-01-47 47,
"National Safety Data Base"*. Work on the contract began in
October 1977, and continued work previously performed on EPA
Contract 68-03-0231 on IRIS, an Injury Reporting and Informa-
tion System for the Solid Waste Management Industry. This pre-
vious work, and the relationship of the current contract, is
discussed in this section of the report. Section II reviews
IRIS operational methods. Section III gives the findings of
this contract as shown by computer analyses of the IRIS data
base. Some of these computer analyses are given in EXHIBITS,
following the text of this report. Other, and in many ways
more important, findings of the contract period are given in
20 publications, appended to this report. Section IV provides
brief conclusions.
1.1 PILOT STUDY
There is abundant evidence that both the frequency
and severity of injuries are very high in the solid waste man-
agement industry. The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes
annual tabulations of Injury Rates by Industry. For 197 0, the
last year in which municipal workers were included in this
tabulation, the category "local government, refuse collection
and disposal" had a higher injury frequency rate than any other
industry shown. Recognizing the need for information on the in-
jury problem that could be used as a basis for action, a contract
(CPE-70-114) was funded to perform "A Pilot Study in the Field
of Occupational Health in the Solid Waste Management Industry"
(referred to hereafter as the Pilot Study).
The Pilot Study was performed during the period of June
1970 through June 1972. A final report** was submitted in 1973.
The objective of the Pilot Study was to examine the feasibility
of two approaches to an eventual larger scale study: (1) a retro-
spective approach in which existing records held by solid waste
agencies on injuries that had occurred, and personnel that had
*The title of this contract has been modified to "Occupational
Safety Data Base for Solid Waste Management" on the title page
of this report in order to make the subject matter more readily
recognizable.
**A Pilot Study in the Field of Occupational Health in the Solid
Waste Management Industry. Final Report on Contract CPE-70-114,
ENVIRO-MED, Inc., succeeded by SAFETY SCIENCES Division of WSA
Inc., San Diego, California, 1973.
1-1
-------
been employed, in previous years would be used to give useful
data on injuries; and (b) a prospective approach, in which a data
collection system would be devised, and information on injuries
and employees would be collected in an on-going fashion. In order
to cover a range of agency characteristics, the Pilot Study was
conducted in six cities: Washington, D.C.; San Diego, California;
Des Moines, Iowa; Birmingham, Alabama; Brookline, Massachusetts;
and Inglewood, California. In addition to the six main municipal
solid waste agencies studied, two private agencies were studied in
detail and six others in less detail.
An examination of 3,500 injury records and 3,000 per-
sonnel files in the six cities was performed, and the conclu-
sions reached were that:
• There was no standard injury recording format
consistent with the needs of accident preven-
tion. The rationale and design of the injury/
illness reporting system were aimed at meeting
legal and fiscal requirements, especially those
for the administration of Worker * s Compensation
benefits, rather than to elicit information on
the causes of injuries/illnesses. Little atten-
tion was given in these records to the cause of
the injury/illness, because "fault" was not an
issue in determining eligibility for Worker's
Compensation. For similar reasons, there was no
incentive for monitoring the reliability of
records except to insure that the employee and
the benefits were properly identified.
Because the entire structure of the injury/
illness recording system was designed for
purposes inconsistent for use in determining the
causes of injuries/illness, the available records
could not be easily or reliably adapted for this
use.
• Primary data on such essential injury/illness
factors as lost time, direct costs, and the ex-
act nature of the injury/illness were often never
recorded or were recorded and stored in a multi-
tude of offices and in such a piece-meal fashion
as to make the data virtually unretrievable, even
to those immediately involved.
• There was no means to compare the injury/illness
experience from agency to agency. The wide vari-
ety in what constituted an injury/illness, in the
time loss allowed, in the wage continuation policies,
in the choices made of which injuries/illnesses
1-2
-------
and what data to record, and in other factors made
comparison of questionable value.
• The inadequate recording of injury/illness data,
the isolation of management from the records that
were available, the lack of standardization re-
quired to make valid multi-city comparisons, and
the lack of analyses of available records (espe-
cially those on cost data), meant that all but a
few in solid waste management were unaware of the
magnitude of their injury/illness problems. It
was common for management to hold the unsubstan-
tiated view that their injury/illness rate was
not high, was comparable with other cities, and
was essentially unavoidable.
It should be noted that these conclusions were reached
in 1972, and based on a review of records from 1971 and previous
years, at which time OSHA regulations on recording injuries/
illnesses were not in effect. However, the conclusions are still,
in general, valid, because almost all agencies use a surrogate, or
Worker's Compensation form, in place of the OSHA Form 101 (Sup-
plementary Record of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses), and the
OSHA 101 itself is generally not completed in a way that can be
compared from one agency to another. One very useful feature of
the OSHA regulations, however, is the OSHA 200 Log of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses that does now provide a simple way of deter-
mining the amount of time lost for each injury/illness, for those
agencies that are subject to OSHA regulations.
The injury/illness records were also analyzed to iden-
tify a list of data factors related to injuries/illnesses that
could be used as the basis for an injury/illness reporting and
analysis system. The selection of data factors was based upon
the extent to which collecting information about the factor was
expected to throw light on the causation of injury/illness or on
applicable countermeasures, the availability of data on that
factor, and the precision with which information on the factor
could be recorded. After a process of trial and error, approxi-
mately 50 factors concerning each injury, and 40 factors for each
employee were isolated.
The Pilot Study concluded that, while a retrospective
study using existing records would not be feasible, a prospec-
tive system, in which solid waste agencies record and report
data on injuries as they happen, would be feasible.
1.2 FIELD TEST
As a result of the Pilot Study a Field Test was funded
under EPA Contract 68-03-0231, "Field Test of an Injury Reporting
1-3
-------
and Information System for the Solid "Waste Management Industry"
starting in June 1973. The purpose of the Field Test was to de-
velop a workable prospective injury/illness reporting and analysis
system. The goals of the system were defined as supplying data to
(a) line management of solid waste agencies that would enable them
to improve their safety awareness by providing valid comparisons
with the performance of other agencies, and to identify, set priori-
ties for, and evaluate injury/illness reduction programs; (b) to
national groups responsible for setting standards for equipment and
work practices in the solid waste management industry; and (c) to
the U.S. EPA, to enable the agency to set priorities for and monitor
programs of injury/illness control as related to productivity and
work practices. These goals required the development of a system in
which solid waste management agencies referred to as participants
or users, feed information into a central office which analyzed the
information and sent reports back to the participants. The need for
a common system, using a central office, arose from the need to
accumulate a sufficient volume of data for statistically valid con-
clusions to be drawn, and from the need to obtain data that was com-
parable from one solid waste agency to another, using consistent
definitions and methods.
The system developed in the Field Test had several
novel features:
• the injuries were analyzed in terms of factors
specifically applicable to the solid waste
management industry
• the factors selected allowed the identification
of the relative hazards of various aspects of
the work environment
• in order to compare various aspects of the work
environment, exposure data (also referred to as
basing data) were collected. These data included
the man-hours at risk for various employee fac-
tors. For example, it is not enough to know
what fraction of the injuries/illness happened
to collectors under age 20. It was also necessary
to know how many man-hours were spent by collec-
tors under age 20. The injury/illness risk (injury/
illness rate per man-hour) could then be computed
and used, for example, to compare the injury/illness
experience of different solid waste agencies for
collectors in this same age group.
In order to collect this data, the system provided for
acquiring data in three time frames. The first was at the time
that a participant joined the system, when data was collected
1-4
-------
on all existing employees, all equipment, and certain key work
practices (e.g., crew size, collection methods). The second
was at a periodic updating of this data (monthly for employee
information). The third was on each injury/illness, as it occur-
red. Only the details of the injury/illness needed to be collec-
ted, at the time of injury/illness since data on the injured em-
ployee's age, experience, job class, etc., was already on file.
The Field Test of this system involved 15 participants
and was conducted from August 1973 through June 1975. Initially,
much of the data needed for start-up was collected through visits
to participants by contractor staff. Visits were also made to
train participant staff in methods required for data collection and
reporting. As the Field Test continued, forms and procedures were
streamlined so that participants could collect start-up data with-
out visits from contractor personnel, and could report data on
injuries/illnesses without on-site training by contractor staff.
The final forms and procedures developed in the Field Test were
designed to meet the requirements of an Injury Reporting and Infor-
mation System for the solid waste management industry (IRIS).
A variation in which injury/illness information was
telephoned to the central office, rather than sent on an Injury
Report Form, was developed and tested with one participant at the
end of the Field Test. This variation proved to be highly success-
ful, and was later implemented in IRIS.
During the Field Test it was found that there was ample
evidence of high demand for the type of information that could be
provided by IRIS, since many types of organizations requested
information from the contractor.
Successful operation of the system to provide routine,
periodic analyzed data was demonstrated. Because the Field Test
was primarily directed towards examining feasibility and under-
went major changes, it was not possible to generate a large amount
of analyzed data that was immediately applicable. However, some
significant findings were made.
The conclusion reached as a result of the Field Test
was that an injury/illness reporting and analysis system was
feasible and that there was an industry need for the information
generated from it.
1,3 IRIS - INJURY REPORTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEM
In September 1975, Contract 68-03-0231 was modified to
support larger scale operation of the IRIS system.
With this support and a large injury/illness data base,
IRIS was designed:
1-5
-------
• To provide a service to its "users" in identify-
ing problem areas, making comparisons with other
users, and making recommendations for injury/illness
reduction measures. This was performed through
publication of Quarterly Safety Management Reports
(QSMR1 s) .
• To provide the solid waste management industry
with answers to safety questions that were not
possible without a large data base (e.g., the
effect on injury/illness rates for various crew
sizes, types of shift, types of equipment, types
of collection, etc.). These were published in
the form of quarterly Accident Trends reports and
Special Reports.
• To provide data to the U.S. EPA's Office of Solid
Waste Management Programs to use in setting priori-
ties for action.
• To provide data to individuals, solid waste organi-
zations, state agencies, and national groups con^
cerned with safety research and standards develop-
ment for the solid waste industry.
A maximum of 100 users was decided to be optimum use of
IRIS, in representing the various solid waste agency types and
functions, in obtaining a large injury/illness data base, in being
small enough for SAFETY SCIENCES to provide individualized atten-
tion, and in keeping the operating costs feasible for the U.S. EPA.
IRIS was fully operational, after improvements to the
Field Test collection and analyses methods, by December 1975, at
which time there were 11 users reporting injuries. An interim
period of nearly a year was allowed to recruit the goal of 100
users. To solicit and bring on line the 100 users by October 1976,
the EPA Project Officers as well as SAFETY SCIENCES personnel con-
tacted individual solid waste agencies, made presentations on IRIS
at regional and national solid waste conferences, and published
articles in solid waste magazines on the availability and usefulness
of IRIS.
The goal of obtaining 100 users who had agreed to join
IRIS was met by the beginning of October 1976. However, by the
end of 1976, only 89 users actually came on-line; these represented
nearly 2 0,000 employees and it was decided to proceed with this
number of users. This phase of IRIS lasted from December 197 5
through September 1977.
1-6
-------
1.4 NATIONAL SAFETY DATA BASE
Contract 68-01-4747, for which this is the Final Report,
was awarded in September 1977 to provide core support for IRIS for
the period of October 1977 through September 197 8. Each user pro-
vided additional support which covered the user-oriented services.
Most of the smaller users could not continue when they had to par-
tially fund their IRIS participation.
Most of the IRIS users during this contract period were
large solid waste agencies. A summary of their operational char-
acteristics is provided in TABLE 1-1.
The combined data base from the IRIS operational stage
(described in Section 1.3) and from the period covered by this
contract was named, by this contract, the National Safety Data Base.
A summary of the number of cases, man-hours of exposure, direct costs
and time lost is given in TABLE 1-2.
1-7
-------
TABLE 1-1
DESCRIPTION OF USERS BY OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
User
Number
M=Muni ci pal
P=Pri vate
Geograph.
Area
No. of
Employees
Point of Collection:
M=Mechanical
A=A11ey
BY=Backyard w/o intermed. can
BYT=Backyard-Tub
BYC=Backyard-Cart
CS=Curb side
Type
of
Shift
Type of Service Provided
Coll.
Crew Size(s)
Disposal
L=Landfill
I-Incinerator
T=Trans. Stn.
Resid.
Comm.
Resid.
&
Comm.
103
M
Midwest
80
BY/CS/A
T
3
111
M
West
280
CS
T
2
L
125
M
South
650
CS
T
1
3
L.I
146
M
South
295
CS/A
T
1,2,3
1,2
L.T
181
M
Mi dwest
278
BY
T
4
L
221
M
West
210
CS
T
2
316
M
Northeast
475
CS/A/BYT
F
2,3
2,3
337
M
Northeast \
CS
F
3
338
M
Northeast \
405
CS
F
3
339
M
Northeast )
CS
F
3
©cstasicD©©
-------
TABLE 1-2
SUMMARY OF DATA BASES DEVELOPED IN IRIS
TOTAL
PERIOD
FIELD TEST
6/73 - 9/75
IRIS
OPERATIONAL
STAGE
12/75 - 9/77
THIS CONTRACT
10/77 - 9/78
OSHA Recordable Cases
10,536
1,508
7,558
1,470
Lost Workday Cases
6,258
837
4,493
928
Workdays Lost
79,926
10,175
56,647
13,104
Direct Costs
$4,414,742
$693,981
$2,974,457
$746,304
Man-Hours of Exposure
54,520,115*
7,948,075*
39,418,672
7,605,045
*Was estimated; not able to convert to IRIS system.
NATIONAL SAFETY
DATA BASE
47,023,717
sffifetty y
Sffi8©iBS©S
-------
II. IRIS OPERATIONAL METHODS
A detailed description of the operating procedures
developed under the previous IRIS contract (EPA Contract 68-03-
0231) was published in an IRIS Operational Procedures Report
in December 1977. Accordingly, only a brief review of these
procedures will be given here.
FIGURE 2-1 summarizes the operating steps of IRIS
into three groups: start-up data collection, which will be re-
viewed in Section 2.1; routine data collection, reviewed in
Section 2.2; and generation of outputs, reviewed in Section 2.3.
2.1 START-UP DATA COLLECTION
To add a new IRIS user "on-line" requires the col-
lection of start-up data describing and identifying the solid
waste operation, employees and equipment. This included:
• Background information on the organization
in terms of department and job classifica-
tion systems, persons to contact, safety
rules and policies, etc.
• Worker's Compensation and injury leave policy
to describe wage continuation benefits for on-the
job injuries/illnesses.
• Information on current employees to be in-
cluded in IRIS. Employee data is collected on
each current employee to be included. (A user
is allowed to include only its collection divi-
sion if it wishes.) Employee data include date
of hire, job classification, division, age, sex,
height, weight and other characteristics.
• Information on equipment/vehicles in use by
the division(s) to be included in IRIS. Equip-
ment data include the make and model of the
cab and body, the sill height, the type of use
and other features.
• Hours worked by each job classification in
each division included in IRIS. The job
classification and divisions of each IRIS
user were grouped into standard classifica-
tions by the IRIS staff using the employee
and background data that were collected.
2-1
-------
FIGURE 2-1
SUMMARY OF THE BASIC OPERATING STEPS OF 'IRIS'
STEP 1
STArt-up data collection period
STEP 2
ROUTINE DATA COLLECTION
Receive Start-up
Data from Users;
• Baseline exposure
data
| Process Start-up Data I
by IRIS; Generate:
Employee data \
files f
• Equipment datal.
file I
Send Training Package
to Users
I Collection of Injury/ |
Illness Data
B
file
Other exposure!
data f
• Background
Information
Package
N)
I
t-O
• Users phone-inj
Daily to IRIS
| Feedback to Users |
for Data Verification
and Updating
Employee listing ^
Quarterly
Equipment listing
Quarterly
Annually
Case descriptions to
users with request
for Severity Data on
new and open cases
Input from Users on
Data Verification
and Updating
Add, delete, change
baseline exposure
data base
Input of new or
updated Severity
Data
Processing of Data
by IRIS
• Receipt of data
& quality control
• Coding
• Entering
• Printout
generation
STEP 3
GENERATION OF ROUTINE OUTPUTS
B
Reports to 1
Individual Users:
Quarterly Safety
Management Reports
- findings
- comparisons
- recommendations -4
for counter-
measures
- request for
information on
new counter-
measures and
experience with
countermeasures
Exchange of
Information Among
Users on
Countermeasures
1
Ideas from users
on new or improved
countermeasures
Reports to all Users
• Monthly Newsletter:
- brief data analyses
specific hazards or
countermeasures
• Newsflashes (as needed):
- notification of new or
very rare/highly
serious hazards
-------
This standardization enables the data to be
compared from user to user.
• Hours worked by each collection crew type.
The crew type data obtained included crew
size, point of collection, type of shift,
hours worked on each day of the week and
other factors. The crew types were also
grouped into standard classifications.
Once the start-up data is collected, the IRIS user
is put "on-line" and can start reporting injuries/illnesses
as they occur in a routine fashion. Many of the data items
collected are coded and input to the computer, forming the
basis for various computer analyses. Other data items, e.g.,
the worker's compensation and wage continuation benefits
policies, were not coded but were used to enable users to be
assigned to groups, e.g., comparing the injury experience of
users with high benefits to those with lower benefits.
2.2 ROUTINE DATA COLLECTION
IRIS used a unique telephonic system for reporting
injuries/illnesses. The IRIS user had a list of 23 questions
to be covered on each injury/illness, and the answers were tape
recorded. This method has proven to be a fast (under 3 minutes
per injury/illness) and efficient method of reporting. Any lack
of clarity on missing items was identified on the spot and could
be corrected while the user was still on the telephone. Each
IRIS user paid for the telephone costs incurred.
All other data items were updated periodically by
IRIS users, through the use of mailed-in forms:
• Workdays lost and direct costs for each injury
or illness were updated quarterly for cases in-
dicated as open (until all days lost and direct
costs were complete).
• Employee data were updated quarterly for employ-
ees who were terminated, added, or changed job
classes. Confidentiality was maintained by using
employee or coded numbers.
• Equipment data were updated quarterly•for
equipment added or no longer in use.
• Injury/illness data. Quarterly lists of
injuries/illnesses reported telephonically to
IRIS were printed out and verified with the
2-3
-------
IRIS users to ensure that differences were
reconciled.
• Other data was updated annually unless other-
wise notified. For instance, if an IRIS user
decided to switch point of collection from
backyard to curbside, all the crew type data
were revised for that IRIS user since each
crew has the point of collection as part of
its identifying description.
The updating was coordinated by printing out update
lists on specific time frames, e.g., at the end of the quarter
for the time lost and cost worksheets. Reminder letters and
telephone calls were made to IRIS users late in returning their
data.
The receipt of data from all IRIS users was crucial in
getting out reports, since none of the data analyses could be
performed unless all IRIS users data was complete and edited.
On several occasions, much longer-than-anticipated delay times
were experienced, and it was necessary in a few cases to esti-
mate time lost and cost data. Typically, reports were prepared
and mailed four months after the end of the quarter to which
they referred.
Sometimes it was necessary to poll the IRIS users
for information that was not originally collected as part of
the start-up data collection, e.g., when preparing special top-
ics for the Accident Trends reports and the IRIS News articles.
FIGURE 2-2 gives a list of the data factors included in
the IRIS data base.
As the data was coded and entered into the computer
there were several data accuracy checks. Editing programs checked
the data as it was being entered into the computer terminal for
validity of codes and for various inconsistencies, e.g., the acci-
dent type "object in eye" can only have "eye" entered as part of
body. The computer also generated a sentence-description of the
injury/illness which was read by a trained person to catch errors
that were not caught by the editing program, e.g., the codes typed
for the injury/illness description of "overexerted self with 3 0 -
32 gallon container which was full while dumping wood injuring
back resulting in sprain or strain" were valid codes but the
employee could not have been handling wood and a container at
the same time.
2-4
-------
/ A
FIGURE 2-2
DATA FACTORS
BASING DATA
Hours-worked by job class
Hours worked by crew type
INJURY DATA
EMPLOYEE DATA
EQUIPMENT DATA
OPERATIONS DATA
Date
Day of week
Time of day
Hours worked prior
District
Equipment #
Activity
Accident type
Part of body
Nature of injury
General accident site
Exact site
Description of
container handling
Characteristics of
waste handling
Personal protective
equipment worn
Crew type
- collection point
- size
- type of shift
Weather conditions
Environmental
conditions
Surface conditions
Interaction
Packer operating
Age
Height
Weight
Education
Experience at
establishment
Establishment
division
Establishment job
classification
Standard division
Standard job
classification
District
Equipment type
Chassis
- make
- model
- year
Packer
- make
- model
- year
- capacity
- sill height
Date of purchase
Type of use
Maintenance
frequency
Average usage
Region
Worker's compensation
policy
Countermeasures in effect
- Container regulations
- Training
- Personal protective
equipment provi-
sions
- Safety rules
- Equipment modifica-
tions
TIME LOST 6
DIRECT COSTS
Days lost
Total costs
Severity level
©ailMy J
©(DfeiixD®®
-------
2.3
GENERATION OF OUTPUTS
Analysis of IRIS data was performed by minicomputer
programs using the BASIC language. The programs were designed
to be used interactively rather than in a batch mode, and a
total of approximately 130 programs provided for data entry and
editing, files management, and report generation.
The National Safety Data Base contained coded data
on approximately 9,000 OSHA recordable (e.g., non-first aid) in-
juries and illnesses. A series of standardized data analysis
programs generated tabulations of the number of injuries/
illnesses and of computed injury/illness rates by up to three
factors (e.g., nature of injury/illness, activity, age, divi-
sion, etc.). In addition, a more flexible "query" program was
developed to access the National Safety Data Base for any combi-
nation of factors including employee and equipment data; however,
this did not compute injury/illness rates and the output was
designed for further hand tabulation or review.
2*3.1 Multiple Factor Tabulations With Rates
Seven types of injury/illness rates, for frequency
severity and direct costs, were computed as shown in FIGURE 2-3,
in addition to totals and percentages. These rates make it pos-
sible to compare one IRIS user's injury/illness experience with
that of another IRIS user's. The following printouts, using both
the number of injuries/illnesses, and injury/illness rates are
available in IRIS:
• overall ranking of IRIS users by highest
to lowest average ratios (i.e., injury/
illness rate divided by average for all
users' injury/illness rate)
• crew type (e.g., brush collection,
residential collection)
• type of shift (e.g., task, fixed)
• accident type (e.g., fall to different
level)
• division (e.g., commercial collection)
• for collection division:
age group
height group
weight group
2-6
-------
FIGURE 2-3
SEVEN INJURY RATES IRIS COMPUTES
i . , No. OSHA recordable miuries nnn
1. OSHA incidence rate = ¦ ¦ , x 200,000
Total man-hours of exposure
, No. lost workday cases
2. OSHA lost workday cases rate = r —s x 200,000
J Total man-hours of exposure
M 3. OSHA severity rate = j-°st workdays x 200 000
^ Total man-hours of exposure
4. Average workdays lost per lost workday case = ^°* j"°S^ yor^ay?
3 J No. lost workday cases
Total direct costs for
c * ,. , . . OSHA recordable injuries
5. Average direct cost per OSHA recordable injury = — —— , -—:—: :
J J No. OSHA recordable injuries
Total direct costs for
c . OSHA recordable miuries _
6. Direct cost per man-year = : - ~r x 2,000
Total man-hours of exposure
Total direct costs for lost
7. Average direct cost per lost workday case = cases
No. lost workday cases _
~ J
-------
accident type
age group by accident
experience group by accident type
height group by accident type
weight group by accident type
• region (e.g., midwest)
• standard job classification (e.g., collector
non-driver)
• job title (IRIS user's) by accident type
• standard job classification by accident
type
Examples of this type of tabulation are given in
EXHIBITS 6-9.
2.3.2 Single Factor Tabulations
Certain data collected on injuries/illnesses are
independent of man-hours of exposure because their individual
factor categories must all have the same overall man-hours of
exposure, e.g., for a part of body such as hands vs. feet,
the man-hours of exposure will be the same for each part of
body whereas for the collection vs. disposal divisions, there
are differing numbers of employees in the divisions and there-
fore different man-hours of exposure apply to each division.
For this reason, the factors below are tabulated by number of
OSHA recordable injuries, days lost and direct costs and per-
centages of the totals derived, and rates are not used.
• activity e.g., lifting container
• accident site e.g., on collection route
at back of truck
• accident type e.g., struck by container
• injury/illness type e.g., cut
• part of body e.g., eyes
Each type of printout also has the capability of
tabulating each factor's categories, e.g., the category of
"foreign object in eye" for the factor of "accident type" either
by individual IRIS user or for all IRIS users (to derive an
average against which each user can be compared.).
Examples of this type of tabulation are given in
EXHIBITS 1-5.
2-8
-------
2.3.3
Routine Multi-Factor Tabulations
One very powerful feature of IRIS is its ability to
generate linked multi-factor accident profiles that both describe
the accident in an understandable way and enable similar profiles
to be grouped. Many of the IRIS publications use these profiles
to demonstrate the circumstances of specific accident types. An
example is shown in FIGURE 2-4.
2.3.4 Variable Factor Tabulations
A "master" computer program was developed to address
all additional multiple factor combinations. In order to re-
duce its complexity, injury/illness rates were not computed.
The "master" program is interactive and can be used to access
any piece or combination of coded injury/illness descriptive,
employee or equipment data. The selection desired is made by
answering questions at a computer terminal.
In specifying the factors desired, several options
are allowed by the program for the input as well as the output:
• A range or group of factor characteristics
for an employee or equipment factor (e.g.,
for employees whose ages are 25-36, collec-
tion vehicle sill heights greater than 20",
etc.).
• Exclusion of characteristics from an injury/
illness factor (e.g., all accident types for
the activity of "lifting container" except
the accident type of "dog bite").
• Specifications for title, column headings
and connecting words between factors in the
profile or sentence output (e.g., "injured
employee was lifting container resulting in
overexertion to the shoulder").
• Choice of time period.
• Choice of OSHA recordable injuries, lost time
injuries, etc.
FIGURES 2-5 and 2-6 give an example of the data input
sheet to the query program and the resulting output. This ex-
ample is for "caught in packer" accidents occurring to side load-
ers and the specific data items requested as output included the
make of packer and the date of injury.
2-9
-------
FIGURE 2-4
ai.i. nr-rflr.
DETAIL EO DESCRIPTION PF
LIFTING CrtuTAINER ACCIDENTS
OIUIA RECORDABLE INJURIES ONLY
REPORTING PERIOD! DEfEHBER 1775 - DECEMBER 1974
THIS PROFILE IS A FORMATTED SENTENCE CONSISTING OF ACTIVITY. ACCIDENT TYPE» NATURE OF INJURY AND PART OF BODY.
PROFILE
NO. INJ
DAYS
COSTS
EMPLOYEE MAS LIFTING STD HTL CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WJTtl STD HTL CONT WHICH UAS UNUSUALLY
ULAWY RESULT TNG IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO GROIN.
9
84
4093
Efirl OYFE UAS Lin IIIC PLASTIC BAG AND HE FELL ON OILY PAVEMENT IN STEPPING DOUN RESULTING IN SPRAIN
OR STRAIN TO PACK.
1
5
152
ErtPLOYrC UAS LIFTING HTB HTL CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH STD HTL CONT WHICH UAS UNUSUALLY
HEAVY RESUlTtNG IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO BACK.
02
960
47164
EHPLOtEE UAS i n TRIG STB HTL CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH STD HTL CONT WHICH UAS FULL
RESULTING IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO GROIN.
2
4
321
EMPLOYFE UAS LIFTING STD HTL CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF UITII STD HTL CONT WHICH UAS STUCK OR
FftO?EN Tfl GKNO RESULTING IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO BUTTOCKS.
1
1
100
EMPLOY! E MAS LirTUW STD HTL CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH STD HTL CONT WHICH WAS UNUSUALLY
HfAVY AMU ItltTiltl WITH COUIiKR RF Sill. TI NO IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO GROIN.
1
1
70
EMPLOME UAS LIFTING PLASTIC DAG AND HE UAS HURT BY HANDLING PLASTIC BAG WHICH HAD PROTRUDING GLASS
RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO HAND.
4
10
416
EMPLOYEE UAS LIFTrNG 300 GAL PLASTIC CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH 300 GAL PLASTIC CONT WHICH
UAS UNUSUALLY ICA"V AMD UNUSUALLY LO RESULTING IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO BUTTOCKS.
1
3
177
EHPLnYte UAS LIFTING STB HTL CONT AND HE FELL ON ICY GROUND RESULTING IN TORN CARTILAGE TO KNEE.
1
15
694
CHPIOYEE UAS LIFTING UNK CONT TYPE AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH UNK CONT TYPE WHICH UAS UNUSUALLY
IIFAVY RESULTING IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO HIPS.
1
4
IS
EMPLOYEE WAS t IFTTNO STD MTL CONT ANO HE WAS HURT BY HANDLING STD HTL CONT WHICH HAD PROTRUDING
r.l ASr. RESIJt TING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO FINGERS.
1
3
178
EMPLOYEE UAS LIFTING STD HTL CONT AND HC STRUCK SELF UITH STD HTL CONT WHICH WAS UNUSUALLY HEAVY
RESULTING IN DRUISE TO FOOT.
2
7
332
FMPinvrE UAS LIFTING PLASTIC BAG AND HE WAS HURT BY HANDLING PLASTIC BAG WHICH WAS FULL AND STRK
AONST PACKING MFCMANISH RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO HAND.
1
0
20
EMPLOYEE WAS LITTING STD HTL CONT AND ME WAS HURT BY HANDLING STD HTL CONT WHICH WAS FULL AND HAD
1IIARP EDGES RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO FINGERS.
3
253
9209
EMPLOYEE WAS LirTIMG PLASTIC CAN AND HE WAS HURT BY HANDLING PLASTIC CAN WHICH HAD PROTRUDING GLASS
RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO WRIST.
I
0
20
EMPLOYEE WAS LIFTING TOTE BARREL AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH TOTE BARREL WHICH WAS EMPTY RESULTING
IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO BACK.
1
2
33
EMPLOYEE UAS LIFTING PLASTIC BAG AND HE WAS HURT BY HANDLING PLASTIC DAG WHICH WAS FULL AND HAD
PROTRUDING 01 ASS RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO ANKLE.
1
20
668
EMPLOYTE UAS LIFTING Pl. AG TIC BAG ANO HE STRUCK SELF WITH PLASTIC KAB WHICH HAD PROTRUDING GLASS
RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO LEG.
10
IS
952
FHPLOYTE UAS LIFTING PLASTIC BAG AND HE STRUCK SELF UITH PLASTIC DAG WHICH WAS FULL AND HAD
PROTRUDING GLASS RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO LEG.
1
4
172
EMPLOYEE UAS 4 ITTING STO HTL CONT AND HE UAS HURT BY HANDLING STD HTL CONT WHICH HAD PROTRUDING
t-l ASS RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO HAND.
1
7
139
EHPLOYEE WAS LIFTING STD HTL CONT AND HE STRUCK AGAINST UNK OBJECT RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO FACE.
1
0
30
EHPLOYEC UAS LIFTING STD HTL CONT AND HE OVEREXERTED SELF WITH STD HTL CONT WHICH WAS FULL
rrnui ting in sprain or strain to eldow.
1
5
195
EMPLOYEE WA-i LIFTING PLASTIC BAG AND HE STRUCK SELF UITH PLASTIC UAO RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO LEG.
1
0
20
EMM.OYCE WAS LITTING TOTE BARREL AND HE SLIPPED STEPPING ON PAVEMENT RESULTING IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN
TO ABUOHEN.
1
0
20
g®ns(ty y
-------
r
DESCRIPTION:
FIGURE
trs>
DATE RUM jr/jf/fiO
1.USER *ML.
2.ENTER 1st QTR & YR, LAST QTR i YR (QYY.QYY) , /7/
3.# OF EMP CHARS?
LIST EM? CUAR? NO *SEE CODING BOOK*
EMP CHAR #1
SINGLE/GROUP (S/G)
IF SINGLE (DESIRED ANSWER))
IF GROUP BETWEEN XiX ' ) -
12
13
*4
4.» OF EQUIP CHARS? f.
EQUIP CHAR
SIMGLE/GROOP (S/G)
IF SINGLE (DESIRED ANSWER)\
IF GROUP BETWEEN X,X J
5.1 OF ACCIDENT CHARS?
«1 / #2
#3
#4
ACC *1 <9/ INCLUDE CODE # 7Qt IF O THEN *EXCLUDE CODE #
(SEE MAT) " "
ACC #2
INCLUDE CODE 4
IF 0 THEN *EXCLUDE CODE t
ACC 13
INCLUDE CODE t
IF O THEN 'EXCLUDE CODE #
TOTAL NO. OF ACCIDENT CHAR LIMITED TO 15,INCLUSIONS TO 10 AND
EXCLUSIONS TO 5.
RESULTS
NO. OF INJ. DAYS LOST~ COSTS
; ; lit!
V
2-5
6. PROFILE WILL CONSIST OF (WORDS FOR INSTRUCTIONS)SAcJfar/
dtd/urty, /?c<.tc/e/)/ Ty/rc, //afare e/"Zysiry, fbrt er3c
#7
" #8"
" #9"
"~10"
"111"
***FIRST COLUMN IS "NO. OF INJ."
13.# OF OTHER COLUMNS (0/1/2) JL
14.CODE #1, HEADING (XXX,AAAAAA) 28/ .Zfoj/S SEE MAT
15.CODE #2, HEADING (XXX, AAAAAA) , flgiM
16.ALL INJ, LOST TIME ONLY OR OSHA REC ONLY (A/L^)?
BATCH (HI/LO/NONE)
1. USER (XXX/ALL) /9it.
2.REPORTING PERIOD
3.TITLE £auaf>4
~MASTER*
4.PROFILE WICL CONSIST
/kfi'vtfg, A/aft/m etr x,mnt
* * * **FIRST COL IS "NO. OF!®
5.# OF OTHER COLUMNS (0/1/2)? £?
1. HEADING (AAAAAA) ?
2. HEADING (AAAAAA) ?/j5§Sa
6.ALL INJ, LOST TIME ONLY OR OSHA REC ONLY (A/L/q/?
POSITION PAPER THEN C/R
J
-------
FIGURE 2-6
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
DETAILED DESCRIPTION Of
CAUGHT IN PACKER ACCIDENTS; SIDE LOADERS
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES ONLY
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - MARCH 1978
THIS PROFILE IS A FORMATTED SENTENCE CONSISTING OF PACKER MAKE, ACTIVITY# ACCIDENT TYPE, NATURE OP INJURY, PART OF BODY AND DATE.
PROFILE
NO.
INJ DAYS
COSTS
PACKER HAKE: MAXON. EMPLOYEE HAS RIDING ON STEP OP VEH AND HE HAS CAUGHT IN PACKER BLADE RESULTING
IN FRACTURE TO TOES . DATE: 760210 .
1 73
5372
PACKER MAKE: HOB3S. EMPLOYEE WAS PUSHING OR PULLING PRINTED HATTER AND HE WAS CAUGHT EN PACKER
BLADE RESULTING IN AMPUTATION TO ARM . DATE: 7*0225 .
1 25
**77
PACKER MAKE: MAXON. EMPLOYEE WAS RIDING ON STEP OP VEH AND HE WAS CAUGHT IN PACKER BLADE RESULTING
IN BRUISE TO ARM . DATE: 770124 ~
1 fl
75
PACKER HAKE; MAXON. EMPLOYEE WAS DUMPING 30-32 GAL.CONT AND HE WAS CAUGHT IN PACKER BLADE
RESULTING IN CUT/PUNCTURE TO FINGERS . DATE: 770302 .
1 20
1059
PACKER MAKE: MAX3M. EMPLOYEE WAS PUSHING OR PULLING UNKNOWN WASTE AND HE WAS CAUGHT IN PACKER
BLADE RESULTING IN FRACTURE TO FOOT . DATE: 770520 .
1 31
904
PACKER MAKE: MAXQN. EMPLOYEE WAS COMPACTING WASTE IN HOPPER AND HE WAS CAUGHT IN PACKER BLADE
RESULTING IN FRACTURE TO WRIST . DATE: 770913 «
1 72
3079
PACKER MAKE: MAXON. EMPLOYEE WAS PUSHING OR PULLING PLASTIC BAG AND HE WAS CAUGHT IN PACKER BLADE
RESULTING IN SPRAIN OR STRAIN TO ARM . DATE: 770919 •
1 3
191
TOTAL
7 2 24
1757:0
-------
2.4
PUBLISHING FINDINGS
The findings of IRIS are published in several types of
reports, both on a routine and on an as needed basis. Each type
is tailored to the specific needs of the individual IRIS user, the
U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), the solid waste in-
dustry, and individuals requesting information on specific solid
waste safety issues. The following paragraphs review the type
of material included in each publication. The specific findings
published are discussed in Section III.
2.4.1 Quarterly Safety Management Reports (QSMR's)
These are the primary IRIS publications and are indi-
vidualized for each IRIS user. A QSMR is received by each user
once per quarter, about four months after the end of the quarter
to which it refers. Each QSMR is composed of three sections:
• A narrative "Evaluation of Problem Areas and
Recommendations"
• "Overall Injury/Illness Rates Compared with Other
IRIS Users", which contains printouts that rank
the IRIS users by the highest to the lowest injury/
illness rates for various important factors
• "Identification of Key Injury/Illness Problem
Areas", containing individualized printouts on the
injury/illness experience for the quarter of the
IRIS user-recipient.
The "Evaluation of Problem Areas and Recommendations"
section is the only section of the QSMR that is written indivi-
dually. The narrative evaluates the IRIS user's accident patterns,
shown in the computer printouts, by:
• pointing out areas where the frequency, time lost
and direct costs of injury/illness are high (or low)
compared with the average IRIS user
• pointing out trends with time of the accident
experience of the IRIS user
• comparing injury/illness rates of an IRIS user with
other users having similar operations (e.g., three
man rear-end loader crews)
• comparing injury/illness rates with alternative
operations lower in injury/illness rates
2-13
-------
• monitoring implemented countermeasures (e.g.,
whether the IRIS user's incidence of slips
and falls on ice decreased after issuing
"ice creepers")
Specific prevention methods proven to be effective at other
solid waste agencies, or proven by IRIS National Safety Data
Base data to be lower in injury/illness rates, are suggested
for management to consider. The cost/benefits of the suggested
prevention methods for the IRIS user are also outlined. In this
way, the solid waste managers are not only made aware of the
seriousness of their injury/illness problems in specific areas
but also how best to correct them.
In order to maintain IRIS user interest, the comparative
injury/illness rates section was altered from quarter to quarter.
With the development of a wide range of computer programs, the
injury/illness rates for the IRIS users could be compared by means
of a variety of factors. Some of the factors included:
• age of employee
• experience of employee
• division (e.g., landfill, street cleaning)
• crew size (including driver)
• crew type (e.g., brush collection, residential
collection
• type of shift (e.g., task, fixed hour)
• point of collection (e.g., curbside, backyard
with tub)
• two factor collection crew type (e.g., two-
man brush collection, three-man backyard
collection, residential task collection)
• standard job classification (e.g., collector
non-driver)
• equipment type, e.g., front-end loader
2-14
-------
2.4.2 Accident Trends Reports
The Accident Trends reports are published quarterly
and contain the quarterly injury/illness patterns derived from the
entire IRIS data base. This publication is suitable for use by non-
IRIS users, since a QSMR is issued only to the user for whom it is
individualized. Four Accident Trends reports covering the period
of this contract are included with this report.
2.4.3 IRIS News
IRIS News was first introduced in April 1977 to present
solid waste articles monthly in a more timely and brief fashion
than the quarterly Accident Trends reports. Three types of topics
are covered:
• IRIS data analysis, e.g., analyses of the reduction
of injuries associated with personal protective
equipment
• News of interest to the industry, e.g., safety in-
centive programs
• Calendar of events (announcing upcoming solid
waste conferences and seminars)
2.4.4 IRIS Newsflash
The IRIS Newsflash was conceived in January 1977 when
IRIS was notified of two very serious accidents from two IRIS
users. It was decided that the IRIS users should be aware of
the potential dangers that were involved in the accidents imme-
diately, rather than as part of the Accident Trends reports or
IRIS News. The IRIS Newsflash also serves the purpose of de-
scribing alarming trends noted in accidents being reported,
accidents highlighted are either those resulting in severe
injuries or accidents that could potentially result in
severe injuries, which the IRIS injury/illness reviewer
has noted. The IRIS Newsflash is published when needed,
but at least four times annually.
A typical example of a topic is "accidents involving
being run over by the collection vehicle."
2-15
-------
III. FINDINGS
This section reviews the findings resulting from final
computer analysis of the National Safety Data Base (December
1975 - September 1978).
3.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DATA BASE
TABLE 3-1 summarizes the National Safety Data Base in
terms of number of injuries, days lost, direct costs and man-
hours of exposure.
TABLE
3-1
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL
SAFETY
DATA BASE
OSHA Recordable Cases
9,028
Lost Time Cases
5,421
Workdays Lost
69,751
Direct Costs
$3,720,761
Man-Hours of Exposure
47,023,717
Taking the average hours worked per man-year as about 1,600 (230
days x 7 hrs. per day because of the large fraction of solid
waste employees who work about 6 hours per day on the task
system), this corresponds to about 29,000 man-years. One
percent of the data base is then about 300 man-years, so
that even small segments of the data base contain a signifi-
cant number of man-years.
The man-hours of exposure can also be used to char-
acterize the data base in terms of various factors by percentage
of man-hours in each category of that factor.
The distribution by employment size is shown in TABLE
3-2. Although the employment size groups, except for ">500
employees" were fairly evenly represented by number of IRIS
users, the two largest categories far outweighed the other
categories as a percent of total man-hours represented. This
was partly due to the fact that the larger IRIS users were
also on-line for a longer period.
-------
TABLE 3-2
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS AND
MAN-
-HOURS
BY EMPLOYMENT SIZE
Man-Hours of
Percent of
Employment Size
No.
Exposure
Total Man-Hours
1- 50 Employees
27
2,001,152
4%
51-100 Employees
21
2,932,819
6%
101-200 Employees
14
4,434,060
9%
201-500 Employees
20
20,965,073
45%
>500 Employees
7
16,690,613
35%
Geographical distribution is shown in TABLE 3-3.
The Northwest was under-represented in terms of man-hours
(3%) while the South was over-represented (44%). This is
because the majority of the large solid waste agencies on-
line were located in the South. However, there is reason-
able representation of a wide range of climatic conditions.
FIGURE 3-1 provides a dot gram of the geographical locations
of the IRIS users.
GEOGRAPHICAL
TABLE 3-3
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS
AND MAN-HOURS
Man-Hours of
Percent
of
Location
NO.
Exposure
Total Man-
Hours
West
22
8,727,154
19%
Northwest
4
1,634,531
3%
Midwest
25
7,912,938
17%
South
22
20,448,908
43%
Northeast
16
8,300,186
18%
lt-3
(1)
of solid
waste organization
is shown in
TABLE
3-4. The private sector only contributed 1% of the total man-
hours of exposure even though eight of the IRIS users were
private solid waste companies. None of the IRIS users during
this contract period were from the private sector. The private
companies were mainly small commercial collection operations.
3-2
-------
-------
TABLE 3-4
DISTRIBUTION
OF IRIS USERS AND MAN-HOURS
BY TYPE OF
SOLID WASTE ORGANIZATION
Type
NO.
Man-Hours of Percent
Exposure Total Man-
of
Hours
Private
Municipal
8
81
580,723 1%
46,126,367 99%
The distribution of man-hours by standard division
(function) is shown in TABLE :3-5. The standard division is
the division category name assigned by IRIS, since the IRIS
users have a variety of division names; the IRIS standard
divisions were grouped by similar functions. The collection
division, as expected, contained the majority of the man-
hours of exposure (77%) while the disposal division only
represented 8% of the man-hours. Other divisions, such as
street cleaning, represented the remaining 15%. The resi-
dential collection subdivision (55%) had the largest fraction
of man-hours of any subdivision.
TABLE 3-5
DISTRIBUTION
OF IRIS USER MAN-
¦HOURS
BY DIVISION (FUNCTION)
Percent
Man-Hours of
of Total
Division
Exposure
Division-Hours
Collection
33,484,636
77%
Residential Collection
24,156,152
55%
Residential & Commercial
Collection
7,938,458
18%
Commercial Collection
1,390,026
3%
Disposal
3,358,333
8%
Landfill
2,113,662
5%
Incinerator
1,019,027
2%
Transfer Station
225,644
4%
3-4
-------
Division
TABLE 3-5 (Continued)
Man-Hours of
Exposure
Other
Administration
Street Cleaning
Weed & Litter Control
Equipment Maintenance
Container Maintenance
Miscellaneous Services
Recycling Operations
6/574,538
1,477,503
3,369,090
594,271
793,249
18,737
312,697
8,991
Percent
of Total
Division-Hours
15%
3%
8%
1%
2%
1%
1%
1%
TABLE 3-6 shows the distribution of man-hours by
point of collection. Note that the analyses by crew charac-
teristics, e.g., point of collection, crew size, type of
shift, crew type, throughout this volume are only for the
time period October 1976 - September 1978 because the
crew basing information (hours of exposure) was not col-
lected during the first year of IRIS operation. The dif-
ference is noted in the heading "Percent of Total Crew
Man-Hours."
TABLE 3
-6
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS
USER MAN-HOURS
BY POINT OF COLLECTION
Point of Collection
Man-Hours of
Exposure
Percent of
Total Crew
Man-Hours
Curbside and Alley
Backyard without Intermediate
Container
Backyard with Tub
Backyard with Wheeled Cart
Backyard with Tub/Backyard
with Wheeled Cart
Other Combinations
— —
6,742,894
458,118
312,564
1,374,140
117,530
10,722,572
34%
2%
2%
7%
1%
54%
3-5
-------
The only individual category of point of collection
that was represented by a large percentage of man-hours was
"curbside and alley" (34%). The second largest category was
"other combinations" because many IBIS users' collection crews'
points of collection had backyard and curbside mixed together
such that each different type of point of collection had <1%
of the total man-hours. As TABLE 3-6 shows, backyard collection
was subdivided into four different collection types, depending
on their intermediate container usage, but backyard collection
as a whole represented 12% of the total man-hours.
Distribution of man-hours by crew size is shown in
TABLE 3-7. The crew size includes the driver in the total,
and five crew sizes were significantly represented. Three
man crews made up half the total man-hours (52%). The four
and five man crews were generally engaged in backyard collec-
tion. The three man crews were usually curbside and alley
rear-end loader collection crews, two man crews were usually
side-loader collection crews, and one man crews were usually
engaged in commercial front-end loader operations.
TABLE 3-7
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USER
MAN-HOURS
BY CREW SIZE
Percent of
Man-Hours of
Total Crew
Crew Size
Exposure
Man-Hours
One Man
1,758,480
9%
Two Man
3,911,370
20%
Three Man
10,225,700
52%
Four Man
2,121,840
11%
Five Man
1,552,140
8%
TABLE 3-8 shows the distribution of man-hours by
type of shift, i.e., whether a collection crews is on an
incentive (task) system or is paid hourly. This factor is
only applicable for the collection crew types and other
specialized divisions (e.g., recycling, street cleaning).
The task system collection crews made up about two-thirds
of the applicable man-hours of exposure.
3-6
-------
TABLE 3-8
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS AND
MAN-HOURS
BY TYPE OF SHIFT
Percent of
Man-Hours of
Total Crew
Type of Shift
NO. *
Exposure
Man-Hours
Task
64
13,480,300
68%
Hourly
34
6,261,170
32%
*A user can have both hourly and task collection employees.
3-2 FINDINGS
Many of the findings have been reported in publications
issued during this contract; these are listed in FIGURE 3-2. This
section will review numerical data resulting from analysis of the
complete data base. Many of the analyses given in this section are
by single factors: it should be noted that the main usefulness of
!RIS in accident prevention is the availability of multi-factor
accident profiles supplied to each user.
Although the National Safety Data Base was not designed
to provide information representative of the solid waste manage-
ment industry as a whole, since it does not include a sample of
users but a range of users, it is of some interest to compare the
overall injury/illness rates from IRIS with those for the average
U.S. employee in private industry. TABLE 3-9 compares IRIS par-
ticipant data with the rate for the U.S. private industry sector
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978). The degree of agreement be-
tween the two IRIS time periods, despite the change in mix of users,
suggests that the rates given are, in fact, reasonably representa-
tive of the industry as a whole, and that the average worker in the
solid waste management industry has a more than four times greater
risk of suffering an OSHA recordable injury/illness, and a more
than seven times greater risk of suffering a lost workday injury/
illness, than the average worker in the U.S. private sector.
3.2.1 Analysis by Activity Being Performed
The activity is the specific task the injured employee
was performing at the time of injury. Analysis by activity is
particularly useful in identifying areas in which employee training
would be fruitful.
EXHIBITS 1A, IB and 1C list activities in order of de-
creasing percent of OSHA recordable injuries, days lost and direct
cost, respectively.
3-7
-------
f
FIGURE 3-2
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
ACCIDENT TRENDS REPORTS
PUBLICATION 1: Fourth Quarter 1977
PUBLICATION 2: First Quarter 1978
PUBLICATION 3: Second Quarter 1978
PUBLICATION 4: Third Quarter 1978
IRIS NEWS ARTICLES
PUBLICATION 5:
PUBLICATION 6:
PUBLICATION 7:
PUBLICATION 8
PUBLICATION 9:
Vol. 1, No. 7, October 1977, "Safety
Incentive Programs"
Vol. 1, No. 8, November 1977, "The Hidden
Costs of Occupational Accidents"
Vol. 1, No. 9, December 1977, "Personal
Protective Equipment Summary"
Vol. 2, No. 1, January 1978, "New IRIS
Injury Rate Printouts for Division and
Crew Type"
Vol. 2, No. 2, February 1978, "Injury
Analyses of Personal Protective Equipment"
PUBLICATION 10: Vol. 2, No. 3, March 1978, "Adoption of
Refuse Collection Standards in California
and Analyses of Injuries Involving the Use
of Gloves"
PUBLICATION 11: Vol. 2, No. 4, April 1978, "The Ten Most
Common and Ten Most Costly Injuries in the
Solid Waste Industry"
PUBLICATION 12
Vol. 2, No. 5, May 1978, "Overexertions
by Type of Shift and Size of Crew and 1977
Injury Rates"
PUBLICATION 13: Vol. 2, No. 6, June 1978, "The Effect of
Height and Weight on Overexertions from
Handling Containers"
3-8
saSMy
©Sfl@Effi<8S
-------
FIGURE 3-2 (Continued)
PUBLICATION 14: Vol. 2, No. 7, July 1978, "Vehicle Acci-
dents by Task/Hourly for Collection Di-
vision and Employees Falling off Moving
Vehicles"
PUBLICATION 15: Vol. 2, No. 8, August 1978, "At What Point
During Their Shift Are Collection Employees
More Prone to Injury?"
PUBLICATION 16: Vol. 2, No. 9, September 1978, "A Comparison
of When Injuries Occur During Their Work
Shift of Task vs. Fixed Hour Employees"
IRIS NEWSFLASH TOPICS
PUBLICATION 17: Vol. 1, No. 5, December 1977, "Being Run
Over by the Collection Vehicle Accidents"
PUBLICATION 18: Vol. 2, No. 1, March 1978, "Occurrence of
Getting On and Off Moving Vehicle Accidents
and Struck By Vehicle Accidents"
PUBLICATION 19: Vol. 2, No. 2, July 1978, "Solid Waste
Fatalities"
PUBLICATION 20: Vol. 2, No. 3, September 1978, "Prompt
Action Saved a Severed Body Part"
3-9
salfefty -/
©©tarns©
-------
TABLE 3-9
COMPARISON OF IRIS PARTICIPANT DATA WITH U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS DATA
IRIS Participant Data
(October 1977- (December 1975-
September 1978) September 1978)
BLS (19 78) Private
Industry Sector*
OSHA Incidence Rate
Lost Workday Cases Rate
OSHA Lost Workdays Rate
(Severity)
Average Workdays Lost Per Lost
Workday Case
Average Direct Costs Per OSHA
Recordable Injury/Illness
Average Direct Costs Per Lost
Workday Case
Average Direct Costs Per Man-Year
41
26
366
14.12
$508
$804
$209
39
23
299
12.87
$412
$686
$160
9.4
4.1
63.5
15.6
*From BLS Report 586, "Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in 1978: Summary", March 1980.
-------
The activity lifting container is, as might be expected,
the highest in terms of number of injuries, days lost and direct
costs. However, the high risks associated with the activities
dumping container and getting off equipment are not so immediately
obvious. The need for attention to specific activities is pointed
out by this type of analysis of IRIS data, and priorities can be
set. The specific content of training programs and other correc-
tive actions must, however, be obtained from an accident profile
printout which groups sequences of events together. An example is
shown in FIGURE 2-5.
^•2.2 Analysis by Accident Type
Single-factor analyses by accident type are shown in
EXHIBIT 2. The accident type used here is the primary accident,
not the accident directly resulting in the injury. Some of the
accident type descriptions include key circumstances of the ac-
cident, e.g., "struck self with container being handled". How-
ever, the main use of accident type data in accident prevention
is as part of an accident pattern.
3.2.3 Analysis by Accident Site
EXHIBIT 3 provides an analysis by accident site, i.e.,
the location of the injured employee at the time of the accident.
3.2.4 Analysis by Injury Type and Part of Body Injured
EXHIBITS 4 and 5 give analyses by injury type and part
of body injured, respectively. TABLE 3-10 shows the ten most
common injury type - part of body combinations, and TABLE 3-11
shows the ten combinations with the highest average cost/injury
(the data base includes three amputated legs, and three amputated
arms) .
3.2.5 Analyses by Age Group, Experience, Height and Weight
Analyses by these factors were performed for employees
in the collection division only (about 75% of the total man-hours)
and are given in EXHIBITS 6, 7, 8 and 9.
The analysis by age in EXHIBIT 6A shows that the incidence
rate of OSHA recordable injuries falls rapidly with increasing age,
by a factor of over 3 from age <20 to age 60. The average cost per
OSHA recordable injury, shown in EXHIBIT 6C, increases with
3-11
-------
TABLE 3-10
TEN MOST COMMON INJURIES
% No. Injuries
% Days Lost
% Direct Costs
1.
Strained back
17.0
29.7
27.9
2.
Sprained ankle
5.2
5.0
4.0
3.
Object in eye
5.1
0.6
1.0
4.
Strained shoulder
3.7
3.7
3.6
5.
Cut/punctured leg
3.4
1.2
1.4
6.
Cut/punctured finger
3.0
1.3
1.3
7.
Bruised knee
2.7
1.8
1.8
8.
Punctured foot
2.6
0.9
1.0
9.
Sprained knee
1.9
3.2
3.2
10.
Bruised leg
1.8
1.1
1.0
% TOTAL
46.4%
of
9,028 48.5% of
69,751 46.2% o
TABLE 3-11
TEN MOST
COSTLY INJURIES
No. Injuries
Cost/Injury
1.
Amputated leg
3
$ 23,018
2.
Amputated arm
2
9,961
3.
Inflamed joints of shoulder
2
5,768
4.
Fractured back
2
5,080
5.
Amputated toes
2
4,492
6.
Fractured leg
13
4,028
7.
Amputated fingers
7
3,102
8.
Fractured arm
8
2,855
9.
Dislocated knee
3
2,736
10.
Chemical burn to abdomen
3
2,602
% TOTAL
45 (.5%)
$232,588 (6
-------
increasing age, also by a factor of about three from 20 years to
age 55-59. The resulting cost per man-year thus shows an increase
from age 20 because of the increasing cost/injury, reaching a
maximum at age 35-39, and falling again, because of the falling
incidence rate, for older age groups. Similarly, the average days
lost per lost workday case increases with increasing age, as shown
in EXHIBIT 6B, while the incidence of lost workday cases decreases
with increasing age, as shown in EXHIBIT 6A. The resulting severity
rate, shown in EXHIBIT 6A, peaks at age 35-39.
The analysis by experience group is shown in EXHIBIT 7.
Exhibit 7A shows that the incidence rate for OSHA recordable in-
juries decreases rapidly with increasing experience, the effect
being especially noticeable in the first three months of employ-
ment. The average incidence rate for the first three months is
more than double that for the second three months of experience.
This strongly suggests the need for increased emphasis on training
of newly hired collection employees. The cost per injury, cost
Per man-year and average days lost per injury are also much higher
for the first three months than for the second three months of
employment, as shown in EXHIBITS 7A, B and C. For employees with
wore experience, the rates follow the trends with age discussed
above.
EXHIBITS 8A, B and C give analyses by height of employ-
ee. There is a weak trend to an increasing incidence of OSHA
Recordable injuries with increasing height. However, the average
cost and average days lost per injury do not show significant trends
with height.
EXHIBITS 9A, B and C give similar analyses by employee
weight (weight at the time of completing the employee data sheet),
and show no significant consistent trends for any of the computed
injury rates.
An IRIS News, included in this report as PUBLICATION 13,
analyzed the effect of height and weight on overexertions from
handling containers. Height and weight were cross-tabulated for
back strains; only categories with over 100,000 man-hours of ex-
posure (60 full-time employees for one year) were shown. The IRIS
News article concluded that weight did not appear to be a signifi-
cant factor; however, employees over six feet tall have slightly
more back strains.
3-13
-------
3.2.6 Analysis by Standard Division
TABLE 3-12 gives injury rates by the IRIS standard divi-
sion, i.e., the IRIS grouping that refers to the functions perform-
ed by the division, rather than the name given by the user. The
collection divisions are shown to have the highest injury incidence
rates. However, incinerators and weed/litter control tend to have
injuries resulting in higher than average days lost and costs.
3.2.7 Analysis by Crew Type
TABLE 3-13 shows injury rates by crew type. The crew
types are differentiated by the material being handled or type of
service performed. Of the crew types representing more than 2% of
the total hours of exposure, residential collection plainly has the
highest risk, either when performed alone or jointly with commer-
cial collection. Commercial collection (alone) had relatively low
incidence rates but high cost per injury, due to a small number of
high cost injuries.
3.2.8 Analysis by Crew Size
TABLE 3-14 gives injury rates for collection worker by
crew size, for crew size 1-4 (including the driver). Three man
crews, which made up the majority of the man-hours, had the best
accident record. These crews were typically residential curbside
rear-end loader collection crews and brush collection crews. The
two-man crews, typically residential rear-end loader, side loader
and commercial front and rear-end loader crews, have much higher
incidence rates.
A Special Report entitled "Crew Type Variations in Size,
Type of Shift, and Point of Collection and Their Effects on Injury
Rates", published under U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-03-0231, con-
cluded that the two-man hourly curbside collection crew had the
worst injury/illness rates when the three individual factors of
crew size, type of shift and point of collection were cross
tabulated. In addition, PUBLICATION 12, included in this report,
entitled "Overexertions by Type of Shift and Size of Crew", con-
cluded that the two-man task crews had the highest injury/illness
rates for the accident type overexertion.
3.2.9 Analysis by Type of Shift
This type of analysis is important to many solid waste
collection agencies because of the "task" system adopted by many
agencies to encourage their collection crews to finish their route#
3-14
-------
TABLE 3-12
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY IRIS STANDARD DIVISIONS
IRIS Standard Division
1
id
o
+>
(0
o
a)
•p 1
U nj
U CO
U
K
>i id
¦a
id
id t3
-p u
-P u
•P
C
a>
•a
o o
o
u
id
-p
0) o
a) >i
0 u
S
(0
H o
u ra
Q) EC
0) 0
a> c
-P o
On O
cncn >i
tn id
c a
CO
u
(0 tl
(COM
id
id S
a) *
a)
<0
U
H 3
u -p
O H
CO
>
0) U
0
> a)
a) m
o
W
< a«
< ft H
< J
ISJJ ft
ft 0
Administration
8
3
40
12.42
$309
$ 675
$ 24
3%
Residential and Commercial
Collection
43
33
377
11.49
485
480
209
18%
Residential Collection
50
29
347
6.92
375
624
188
56%
Commercial Collection
27
14
301
11.25
555
1,010
149
3%
Landfill
23
10
128
12.42
353
719
80
5%
Incinerator
21
14
291
20.63
693
996
144
2%
Transfer Station
19
9
67
7.60
204
381
38
<1%
Street Cleaning
16
9
139
14.61
295
463
48
8%
Weed and Litter Control
36
19
243
12.65
560
1 f 006
200
1%
Equipment Maintenance
33
14
210
14.61
328
694
100
2%
Miscellaneous Services
40
21
398
18.89
365
645
147
<1%
Container Maintenance
85
32
181
5.67
81
156
69
<1%
V
©silMy J
-------
TABLE 3-13
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY CREW TYPE
Crew Type
Residential Collection
Commercial Collection
Brush Collection
Dead Animal Collection
Paper Collection
Bulky Waste Collection
Street Cleaning
Litter Crew
Residential and Commercial
Combined
Manual Street Sweeping
Litter Can Pick-up
Brush and Bulky Waste
Collection
+> a>
Ifl in
i
<»
0 (fl
-P H
CO
fd
id
>i
O XI
0
S 0)
«
ra
co >i
O to
u
5-1
¦d
i* ni
> 3
a)
M
n}
-P M
-p
0) CO
o
M
a)
13 X
o o
o
n o
a
0
-p
U
QJ O
a) Vi
O ft
.
¦P
<
1
m
G
o «
-p
i
Cn <0
d
CO
nS i-l
nJ O U
a) u
0) M -r»
CD H
u a
W
W
d)
> d)
> Q) C
>
-------
TABLE 3-14
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY CREW SI2E
Crew Size
Iniurv Rate
OSHA Incidence Rate
OSHA Lost Workday Cases Rate
OSHA Severity Rate
Average Workdays Lost Per
Lost Workday Case
Average Direct Cost Per
OSHA Recordable Injury
Average Direct Cost Per
Man-Year
Percent of Crew Man-
Hours of Exposure
One
Man
Two
Man
Three
Man
43
23
410
110
60
702
49
30
388
17.96
11.67
12.76
$649
$356
$392
$281
$397
$192
9%
20%
52%
Four
Man
77
53
449
8.43
$307
$238
11%
-------
more quickly. The employees are allowed to go home when their
route is finished. A second type of shift, fixed hour, is
based on a straight 8 hour shift that pays for the number of
hours spent rather than the amount of tonnage collected or
the number of stops made. A third type of shift that is a
compromise between the two is a modified task system where
the employees are not allowed to leave unless all of the
crews in their area have completed their work.
The task system has been suspected by many agencies
of contributing to a higher injury risk because of haste on
the part of the^employees. The IRIS data shown in TABLE 3-15
appear to bear this out. The task system employees were much
higher in incidence rates and slightly lower in workdays lost
per lost workday case and the OSHA lost workday cases rate
for the task shift was 43% higher than hourly.
Three IRIS NEWS Publications, included in this report,
dealt with type of shift during this contract period. PUBLICA-
TION 12 compared "Overexertion by Type of Shift and Size of
Crew." It concluded that while two-man crew task collectors
had far worse severity and direct cost rates for overexertion
injuries than hourly collectors, the three-man crew task col-
lectors had lower overexertion injury rates than three-man
crew hourly collectors. PUBLICATION 14 compared "Vehicle
Accidents by Task/Hourly for the Collection Division;" the
task system had a severity rate that was six times higher
than that of the hourly system and had a four times higher
direct cost per man-year. (Note that IRIS only collects
vehicle accident data on accidents that resulted in injury.)
PUBLICATION 16 made "A Comparison of When Injuries
Occur During Their Work Shift for Task vs. Fixed Hour Employees."
The hours worked prior to the injury were analyzed to observe
the influence of factors such as fatigue, haste and breaks
from work for the two types of shift. FIGURE 3-3 pictorially
shows the OSHA incidence rates vs. the hours worked prior for
the task and the fixed hour shifts. The anticipated increase
in injury rates, just prior to lunch and at the end of the day,
because of fatigue did not occur. However, there was signifi-
cantly larger injury rates for the morning vs. afternoon hours
that perhaps indicate the influence of haste.
3-18
-------
TABLE 3-15
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY TYPE OF SHIFT
OSHA Incidence Rate
OSHA Lost Workday Cases Rate
OSHA Severity Rate
Average Workdays Lost Per
Lost Workday Case
Average Direct Cost Per OSHA
Recordable Injury
Average Direct Cost Per Man-Year
Percent of Man-Hours of Exposure
Task
Hourly
63
55
40
28
463
367
11.65
13.03
$374
$404
$235
$224
68%
32%
3-19
-------
FIGURE 3-3
ANALYSIS OF INCIDENCE OF INJURIES BY
HOURS WORKED PRIOR FOR TASK VS. FIXED HOUR TYPE OF SHIFT
HOURS WORKED PRIOR
3-20
saillBtty _y
©sfi©an
-------
3.2.10 Analysis by Point of Collection
TABLE 3-16 gives injury rates for residential collec-
tion employees analyzed by point of collection. The categories
used separate residential collection by location of pick up and
collection method used (e.g., tubs, wheeled cart). Fully
mechanical residential collection, in which the employee does
not lift the container of refuse, is treated as a separate
category. Backyard collection can be seen to be more hazard-
ous to employees than curbside or curb/alley collection,
unless a wheeled intermediate container is used. The use
of the "tub" method of collection, in which the employees
carry a large (up to 80 gallon) container that can weigh
over 100 lbs. when loaded by dumping into it several house-
hold cans of refuse, is associated with high risks of injury.
See also the Special Report performed under U.S.
EPA Contract No. 68-03-0231, "Crew Type Variations in Size,
Type of Shift and Point of Collection and Their Effects on
Injury Rates" (TABLES 3-17 and 3-18) , which indicated that
backyard collection had higher OSHA lost workday cases rates
than curbside/alley collection but similar direct cost per
man-year.
3.2.11 Analysis by Three Factor Crew Type
TABLES 3-19A through 3-19G give analyses by the
three crew type factors of point of collection, size of crew
and type of shift and TABLES 3-20A through 3-20G by crew
type, size of crew and type of shift. Note that TABLES 3-21G
and 3-20G indicate that most of the three factor combinations
had less than 1% of the total crew man-hours. The two-man
collection crews were the worst overall in injury rates.
3.2.12 Analysis by Personal Protective Equipment
TABLES 3-21 through 3-27 summarize the findings of
analyses by the four major types of personal protective equip-
ment used by solid waste employees; gloves, safety glasses/
goggles, safety boots, and head protection. These analyses
were performed under this contract and occur in PUBLICATIONS
7, 9 and 10. Note that TABLE 3-27 shows the dramatic cost/
benefits of employees who wear versus employees who do not
wear these types of personal protective equipment. For
instance, direct costs expended for on-the-job injuries
were shown to be able to be reduced by as much as $3.50
Per solid waste employee per year on the payroll (for
providing employees not wearing safety glasses/goggles
with eye protection).
3-21
-------
TABLE 3-16
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY POINT OF COLLECTION
0)
-P
i
-p
•H
M
d)
>
a)
w
-P i
>i <1)
u
<1) >i
M
3
-p -n
•P
co a
CO
O H
O
u
U
0)
-P i-H
-P
O .Q
O
a> at
(U M
U Tf
i-i CO
> <13
rtj O
Point of Collection
Backyard without Intermediate
c
HJ
a
-------
TABLE 3-17
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
FOR THREE MAN CREWS BY
TYPE OF COLLECTION
CURBSIDE/
ALLEY BACKYARD
1. OSHA Incidence Rate 50 94
2. OSHA Lost Workday Cases Rate 30 51
3. OSHA Severity Rate 377 335
4. Average cost per OSHA
Recordable Injury $373 $188
5. Direct Cost Per Man-Year $179 $177
TABLE 3-18
AVERAGE INJURY RATES FOR
TASK (INCENTIVE) SHIFT BY
TYPE OF COLLECTION
CURBSIDE/
ALLEY BACKYARD
1. OSHA Incidence Rate 50 57
2. OSHA Lost Workday Cases Rate 31 42
3. OSHA Severity Rate 415 3 65
4. Average Cost Per OSHA
Recordable Injury $412 $356
5. Direct Cost Per Man-Year $206 $203
3-23
saiMy
sdS®n»s®s
-------
TABLE 3-19A
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSES BY POINT OF
COLLECTION, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
OS HA INCIDENCE RATE
One
Han
Two
Man
Three
Man
Four
Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
110
94
162
274
49
55
73
Alley
—
—
—
—
83
—
—
—
Curbside and Alley-
104
16
73
335
32
38
50
40
Backyard without Inter-
mediate Container
—
—
—
—
56
--
103
—
Backyard with Tub
—
—
333
—
189
—
—
—
Backyard with Cart
—
—
—
—
19
—
383
—
Backyard with Tub/Cart
—
—
—
16
—
84
—
Backyard
333
——
93
185
Curbside/Alley
105
26
130
333
45
48
54
40
TABLE 3-19B
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSES BY POINT OF
COLLECTION, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
OSHA LOST WORKDAY CASES RATE
One
Man
Two
Man
Three
Man
Four
Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
89
47
115
137
33
38
54
„
Alley
—
—
—
—
63
—
Curbside and Alley
37
13
40
73
13
20
16
6
Backyard without Inter-
mediate Container
—
—
—
—
10
—
77
—
Backyard with Tub
—
—
187
—
64
—
—
—
Backyard with Cart
—
—
—
—
10
—
281
—
Backyard with Tub/Cart
—
—
—
—
11
—
46
—
Backyard
—
—
187
--
54
135
_ _
Curbside/Alley
50
17
88
76
28
i I
22
6
-------
TABLE 3-19C
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSES BY POINT OF
COLLECTION, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
SEVERITY RATE
One
Han
Two
Han
Three
Han
Four
Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
1,450
663
1,413
2,943
425
437
399
Alley
—
—
—
—
548
—
—
—
Curbside and Alley
521
190
476
543
221
315
187
89
Backyard without Inter-
mediate Container
—
--
—
—
378
—
785
—
Backyard with Tub
—
—
2,036
—
768
—
—
—
Backyard with Cart
—
—
—
—
82
—
1,973
—
Backyard with Tub/Cart
—
—
—
—
87
—
279
—
Backyard
—
2,036
—
404
—
1,103
—
Curbside/Alley
840
255
1,076
644
355
385
223
89
U>
t
NJ
TABLE 3-19D
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSES BY POINT OF
COLLECTION, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
One
Han
Two Han
Three
Man
Four Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
19.37
14.10
12.29
21.50
12.72
11.36
7 .45
_ _
Alley
—
—
—
—
8.68
—
—
Curbside and Alley
13.74
14.88
12.05
7.39
17.41
15.92
11.69
13.86
Backyard without Inter-
mediate Container
—
—
—
—
37.00
—
10.18
—
Backyard with Tub
—
—
10.90
—
6.47
—
—
—
Backyard with Cart
—
—
—
—
8.50
—
7.03
—
Backyard with Tub/Cart
—
—
—
—
8.50
—
6. 00
—
Backyard
10.90
7.47
8.20
Curbside/Alley
16.80
14.59
12.22
8.46
12.90
12.62
9.96
13.86
mrfMy y
-------
s \
TABLE 3-19E
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSES BY POINT OF
COLLECTION. SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
AVERAGE DIRECT COST PER OSHA RECORDABLE INJURY
One
Man
Two Man
Three
Man
Four Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
$677
$379
$474
$553
$385
$544
$207
—
Alley
—
—
—
—
296
136
—
—
Curbside and Alley
231
703
376
125
273
434
171
121
Backyard without Intermediate
Container
—
—
—
—
199
—
414
—
Backyard with Tub
—
—
540
—
218
—
—
—
Backyard with Cart
—
—
—
—
176
—
219
—
Backyard with Tub/Cart
37
""
144
"
Backyard
—
540
—
213
—
286
—
Curbside/Alley
359
545
453
140
342
507
526
121
U>
I
to
TABLE 3-19F
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSIS BY POINT OF
COLLECTION, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
AVERAGE DIRECT COST PER HAM-YEAR
One
Han
Two
Man
Three
Man
Four Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
$794
$357
$765
$1,514
$187
$300
$151
Alley
—
—
—
—
246
14
—
Curbside and Alley
243
Ill
273
420
88
166
85
49
Backyard without Intermediate
Container
—
—
—
—
112
—
427
Backyard with Tub
—
—
1,797
430
Backyard with Cart
—
—
—
34
840
Backyard with Tub/Cart
—
—
—
6
—
120
—
Backyard
—
1.797
—
198
528
_ _
Curbside/Alley
378
144
589
465
153
2 4 3
138
49
-J
-------
\
TABLE 3-19G
THREE FACTOR CREW ANALYSES BY POINT OF
COLLECTION, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
PERCENT OF CREW MAN-HOURS OF EXPOSURE FOR COLLECTION CREWS
One
Man
Two
Man
Three
Man
Four
Man
Point of Collection
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Curbside
<1*
<1%
6%
<1%
16%
6%
<1%
—
Alley
—
—
—
—
2%
—
—
—
Curbside and Alley
1%
1%
3%
2%
11%
4%
1%
1%
Backyard without Intermediate
Container
—
—
—
—
<1%
—
2%
—
Backyard with Tub
—
—
<1%
—
1%
—
—
—
Backyard with Cart
—.
—
—
—
<1%
—
1%
—
Backyard with Tub/Cart
—
—
<1%
<1%
—
Backyard
—
<1%
—
1%
—
3%
—
Curbside/Alley
2%
2%
9%
2%
30%
10%
1%
1%
U>
I
to
Nl
mrfMj J
Sdl©JJD
-------
TABLE 3-2OA
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
Crew Type
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
87
24
119
292
43
81
150
21
Commercial Collection
29
14
33
17
13
9
—
60
Brush Collection
99
—
14
75
21
44
73
42
Dead Animal Collection
63
37
17
40
—
—
—
¦ —
Paper Collection
101
37
48
—
—
—
—
—
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
99
—
54
13
—
—
Street Cleaning
498
9
—
—
4
2
—
—
Residential £ Commercial
Combined
52
17
33
24
80
44
—
—
Manual Sweeper Crew
41
15
817
—
511
—
—
—
Brush & Bulky Waste
288
157
52
70
TABLE 3-2OB
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE. SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
OSHA LOST WORKDAY CASES RATE
Crew Type
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four
Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
38
15
80
77
25
57
105
19
Commercial Collection
16
9
20
10
6
7
36
Brush Collection
26
—
14
37
13
17
54
7
Dead Animal Collection
49
12
17
40
Paper Collection
82
—
—
—
—
—
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
71
—
30
7
Street Cleaning
268
7
—
—
1
1
__
Residential £ Commercial
Combined
41
17
22
24
52
27
Manual Sweeper Crew
29
10
408
—
408
—
Brush £ Bulky Waste
192
36
29
26
-------
TABLE 3-2OC
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
SEVERITY RATE
Crew Type
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
421
245
935
700
292
795
864
163
Commercial Collection
835
90
290
187
125
89
635
Bush Collection
132
—
57
532
119
264
399
93
Dead Animal Collection
377
25
157
80
—
Paper Collection
2,986
—
—
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
1,639
—
250
114
Street Cleaning
5,706
78
—
—
1
26
Residential & Commercial
Combined
877
52
383
48
619
386
Manual Sweeper Crew
663
213
2,553
—
7,046
Brush & Bulky Waste
767
441
247
783
"
"
TABLE 3-20D
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
Crew Type
One Man
Two
Man
Three Man
Four Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
14.11
16.17
11.65
9.05
11.67
13.99
8.26
8.65
Commercial Collection
53.21
9.67
14.58
18.58
21.00
13.57
17.67
Brush Collection
5.00
—
4.00
14.29
9.00
15.85
7.45
13.86
Dead Animal Collection
7.71
2.00
9.00
2.00
Paper Collection
45.00
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
18.75
12.82
16.37
....
Street Cleaning
21.29
11.80
—
1.00
18.00
__
——
Residential & Commercial
Combined
14.33
—
21.11
12.50
14.21
Manual Sweeper Crew
16.67
18.50
6.17
16.10
___
Brush & Bulky Waste
4.00
12.31
11.75
19.39
—
©dteno®©©
-------
TABLE 3-2OE
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
AVERAGE DIRECT COST PER OS HA RECORDABLE INJURY
Crew Type
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
271
572
427
164
318
604
276
593
Commercial Collection
4,332
1,112
479
737
573
571
—
345
Brush Collection
64
—
174
311
254
322
207
121
Dead Animal Collection
280
85
345
85
—
—
—
—
Paper Collection
979
20
20
—
—
—
—
—
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
678
—
188
236
—
—
Street Cleaning
366
301
—
—
32
1,125
—
—
Residential & Commercial
Combined
520
141
476
542
299
424
—
—
Manual Sweeper Crew
421
598
140
—
266
—
—
—
Brush & Bulky Waste
112
175
408
624
TABLE 3-2OF
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE, SIZE OF CREW AND TYPE OF SHIFT
AVERAGE DIRECT COST PER MAN-YEAR
Crew Type
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
237
137
511
478
137
488
413
130
Commercial Collection
1,263
154
158
124
77
54
207
Brush Collection
64
—
25
232
54
142
151
51
Dead Animal Collection
176
32
60
34
—
—
Paper Collection
988
7
10
—
—
—
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
» 671
—
102
30
Street Cleaning
1,821
28
—
—
1
25
Residential & Commercial
Combined
273
25
158
130
241
188
Manual Sweeper Crew
173
87
1,160
—
1,541
—
—
Brush & Bulky Waste .
321
275
49
436
-------
TABLE 3-2OG
THREE FACTOR CREW TYPE ANALYSES BY CREW
TYPE, SIZE OF CREW AMD TYPE OF SHIFT
PERCENT OF CREW MAN-HOURS OF EXPOSURE
Crew Type
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Task
Hourly
Residential Collection
2%
2%
11*
2%
27%
7%
4%
5%
Commercial Collection
<1%
<1%
4%
1%
<1%
1%
—
<1%
Brush Collection
<1*
—
<1%
<1%
<1%
2%
<1%
1%
Dead Animal Collection
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
—
—
—
—
Paper Collection
<1%
<1%
<1%
—
—
—
—
—
Bulky Waste Crew
—
—
<1%
—
<14
1%
—
—
Street Cleaning
<1%
2%
—
—
<1%
1%
—
—
Residential S Commercial
Combined
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
6%
2%
—
—
Manual Sweeper Crew
<14
<1*
<1%
—
<1%
—
—
—
Brush & Bulky Waste
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
-------
TABLE |3-21
GLOVES
Wearing Not Wearing
No. OSHA Recordable Injury/Illness
275
141
OSHA Days Lost
693
284
Direct Costs
$37,422
$16,501
Man-Hours of Exposure
25,562,319
6,847,355
OSHA Incidence Rate
2.15
4.10
OSHA Severity Rate
5.4
8.3
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
$2.90
$4.80
TABLE 3-22
SAFETY GLASSES/GOGGLES
Wearing Not Wearing
No. OSHA Recordable Injury/Illness
46
483
OSHA Days Lost
25
451
Direct Costs
$2,973
$40,776
Man-Hours of Exposure
12,009,333
20,400,340
OSHA Incidence Rate
.77
4.74
OSHA Severity Rate
.42
4.42
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
$.50
$4.00
V
3-32
satefly
©stem©®©
-------
TABLE 3-23
SAFETY boots
No. OSHA Recordable Injury/Illness
OSHA Days Lost
Direct Costs
Man-Hours of Exposure
OSHA Incidence Rate
OSHA Severity Rate
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
Wearing
]Cio-h Wearing
117
1,184
$47,771
16,431,485
234
1,271
$56,212
15,978,189
1.42
14.2
$5.81
2.93
15.9
$7.03
TABLE 3-24
pffan PROTECTION
No. OSHA Recordable Injury/Illness
OSHA Days Lost
Direct Costs
Man-Hours of Exposure
OSHA Incidence Rate
OSHA Severity Rate
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
Wearing
Not Wearing
3-33
-------
FIGURE 3-4
\
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT SUMMARY
OF COSTS/BENEFITS
Wearing Gloves (Cuts, abrasions, dermatitis, burns to hands,
wrists, fingers)
• Half as many non-first aid injuries
• 65% less days lost due to injury
• 60% less direct costs expenditure per employee per
year on the payroll ($1.90 savings)
Wearing Safety Glasses/Goggles (Irritation, abrasion, cut, bruise/
chemical burn, heat burn to eyes)
• Reduce non-first aid injuries by 5/6
• Reduce days lost due to injury by 9/10
• Reduce direct costs expenditure per employee per
year on the payroll by 7/8 ($3.50 savings)
Wearing Safety Boots (Sprained ankles)
• Half as many non-first aid injuries
• Reduce days lost due to injury by 1.5 days per year
per 100 employees
• 17% less direct costs expenditure per employee per
year on the payroll ($1.22 savings)
Wearing Head Protection (Concussions, fractures, cuts, bruises
to the head)
• A third as many non-first aid injuries
• Reduce days lost due to injury by 7/8
• 88% less direct costs expenditure per employee per
year on the payroll ($3.05 savings)
3-34 S(T;ji(
-------
3.2.13 Analysis by Geographical Region
TABLE 3-25 gives injury rates by geographical region.
The Western Region's IRIS users had the highest injury/illness
rates. This may be linked with their higher usage of two-man
crews which had the highest injury/illness rates for crew size
(see Section 3.2.8).
3-35
-------
TABLE 3-25
AVERAGE INJURY RATES BY REGION
ut
I
w
Region
Western Region
Mid-Western Region
Southern Region
North Eastern Region
1
d)
to
i
-p
to a)
H
0
id
a3
o u>
-P
-p
ffi
*0
«
rd
co a)
to
i
*>
U
0 H
o
c
u
co
O Xi
u
(d
o
+>
n3
23
:s
•H
id m
-P T)
¦p
Q)
U U
M O
Sh i-l
W
O 05
a)
O 0
¦h a)
-h id
•P O
A
CO
S &
Q «
Q Q)
G 04
10
Q) X
C a)
<
• -P
• <
• 1
O W
W to
X
Cn co
C
to nS
w
> o
> CO
> nJ
Q) 4-t
o u
o
< ^
< O
C S
04 o
54
35
440
12.58
$469
$255
22%
43
28
258
9.29
341
146
17%
31
16
201
12.38
448
139
44%
32
20
305
14.93
511
165
18%
-------
IV. CONCLUSION
IRIS, the Injury Reporting and Information System for
the Solid Waste Management Industry, has proven to be a viable,
useful service to the solid waste industry and to the U.S. EPA's
Office of Solid Waste Management. IRIS has operated for five
years (under U.S. EPA Contract Nos. CPE-70-114, 68-03-0231, and
68-01-4747) collecting prospective injury/illness, employee,
equipment and exposure data voluntarily from its "users" for the
National Safety Data Base for the solid waste industry.
Several novel ideas were used in IRIS:
• a telephonic system which allowed for instanta-
neous editing of the phoned-in injury/illness
descriptions,
• obtaining voluntary information from its partici-
pants by furnishing them with individualized
Quarterly Safety Management Reports that analyzed
their injury/illness record and suggested cost/
beneficial countermeasures aimed at their indivi-
dual needs,
• profiles, or sentence descriptions reconstruct-
ing the accident in a set format, that were useful
in analyzing sequence of events so as to be able
to make suggestions for countermeasures,
• and a "query" program that performed tabulations
on the National Safety Data Base for any combina-
tion of coded data factors.
IRIS achieved its goal of building a large, detailed,
consistently coded National Safety Data Base for the solid waste
'p£a9ement industry that provided decision-making data to the U.S.
*«PA, solid waste industry groups, IRIS participants, and other
research organizations (e.g., State Standards Boards evaluating
their refuse collection standards). The Data Base is large enough
to derive statistically valid findings on the solid waste industry
th ^ Problems (one percent of the total man-hours of exposure of
the Data Base is equivalent to approximately 300 solid waste em-
ployees working full time for one year) to the level of providing
detailed cross tabulations of data factors, e.g., injury rates for
one-man side loader crews that collect from the curb. The IRIS
findings were routinely published in the monthly IRIS News and
the as needed IRIS Newsflash in addition to the individualized
Quarterly Safety Management Reports.
The IRIS findings were received very favorably by its
Participants. Some of the written evaluation comments were;
4-1
-------
"I evaluate IRIS analysis of injury problems with
an A plus, and I agree with it whole-heartedly."
"The report is concise and easily understood.
There are no points of disagreement; so far, there
appear to be no area(s) that require attention
beyond that given."
"IRIS has provided through the QSMR a review of the
importance of Safety in the solid waste industry.
Management is usually not aware of the high costs
of injuries."
"They provide a guide which can be used to strength-
en our safety program."
A summary of the IRIS findings using the Data Base is
contained in Table 4-1. It outlines the current safety problems
of the solid waste industry.
One of the "lessons learned" in operating IRIS is that
the Quarterly Safety Management Reports should be given to the
individual users in a more timely fashion. Future periodic analy
sis of this type that require prospective data to be turned in on
time should estimate the inevitable few missing data items for
data that is difficult to obtain by the end of the reporting period
(e.g., time lost and cost data) rather than wait for all data to
received prior to analysis (IRIS QSMR's were published four months
after the end of the reporting quarter). The findings could then
have a more immediate impact that would prompt earlier implementa-
tion of the suggested injury reduction measures.
SAFETY SCIENCES developed an algorithm that can be used
for this purpose. It can be used to assign an estimated standard
direct cost of an injury/illness based upon knowing the nature
of injury/illness and part of body combination . (When the
actual value is received it will supplant this index value.) Eigh*
severity index levels with assigned costs were derived by SAFETY
SCIENCES using Idaho Worker's Compensation data (120,000 cases)
and nature of injury/illness and part of body combinations were
assigned to each level. For example, severity index level 1 had
an average direct cost of $73 and included such combinations as
cut fingers, bruised hands, etc. SAFETY SCIENCES has already
demonstrated the use of the severity index in two studies in
which no cost data were gathered.(2)(3)
(1)Under OSHA Contract No. J-9-F-5-0135, August 19 77, "Feasibility
of Developing a Severity Index for Occupational Injuries".
(2)Contract No. DOT-FH-11-95935 for the Department of Transporta-
tion, Federal Highway Administration, "Analysis of Personal
Injury and Illness Hazards Associated with Working In, On or
About Commercial Motor Vehicles".
(3)Contract No. MDA-79-3-C-0521 for the Department of Defense,
"Development of an Investment Strategy for Occupational Safety
and Health".
-------
FIGURE 4-1
SOME FACTS ABOUT THE
INJURY/ILLNESS PROBLEM IN THE SOLID WASTE INDUSTRY
AS SHOWN BY THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY DATA BASE FOR
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Pooling the data from 100 IRIS users:
• On the average, every year, 4 out of 10 solid waste work-
ers suffer job related injuries or illnesses...not includ-
ing first aid injuries. This is four times the rate for
private industry as a whole. Four IRIS users averaged
more than one job related injury/illness per person per
year.
• 59% of these injuries/illnesses resulted in lost workdays...
this is twice the percentage for the average manufacturing
industry.
• 12.9 workdays are lost, on the average, for each lost work-
day case.
• The average direct cost per OSHA recordable injury/illness
is $412. These direct costs include only wage continuation,
medical payments, death and disability benefits...indirect
costs are not included (e.g., down time).
• Every year the average direct costs of injury/illness amount
to $160 for every person on the payroll. Among the IRIS
users, this amount ranged from $2 to $1,227 per person.
• On the average, every solid waste worker loses 3 workdays
per year from injuries/illnesses.
• The average solid waste worker has a 4.5% chance of suffer-
ing an amputation during a 25-year work life.
• Younger workers have a higher injury/illness rate than older
workers, but older workers lose more workdays per injury/
illness.
• Inexperienced workers (on the job less than 3 months) have
a much higher injury/illness rate, double that of workers
on the job during their second three months.
-------
r
FIGURE 4-1 (Continued)
• The injury/illness rate at landfills (for all workers while
they are at the landfill and not just for landfill employ-
ees) is nearly as high as for collection routes.
• The collection crew size of two-man has the highest rates
of injury/illness, twice that of three-man crews.
• Employees that wear eye protection (e.g., safety glasses/
goggles) sustain one-sixth of the non-first aid injuries/
illnesses that employees without eye protection sustained.
• Employees that wear gloves sustain half the hand injuries/
illnesses of employees not wearing gloves.
• Two-man task crews have the worst injury/illness rates for
overexertion injuries.
• Back strains that occur while handling waste containers
tend to be more frequent for employees that are over 6 feet
tall while employees that were 5'5" - 5'6" had the lowest
injury rates.
• Task system collection employees had more vehicle accidents
than hourly employees, and the direct cost per man-year for
these accidents was four times higher.
• Employees with less than one month's experience in collec-
tion have a 50% higher chance than employees with two or
three month's experience of sustaining a back strain while
handling a container or waste.
4-4
s&My J
©©SSffiKSS®
-------
In conclusion, IRIS successfully provided safety in-
formation to the solid waste management industry that was useful
in appraising operational methods that would provide optimum safe-
ty. The IRIS findings can be used by solid waste managers to
gauge the costs/benefits impact of proposed changes to their op-
erational methods.
4-5
-------
EXHIBITS
-------
EXHIBIT IK
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OP OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RBCORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL T^ATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST W0RJ°JY' Twrriin
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE
OSHA RECORDABLE
ACTIVITY
LIFTING CONTAINER
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
DUMPING CONTAINER
GETTING off equip
STANDING OR WALKING
CARRYING CONTAINER
RIDING ON EQUIP
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
GETTING ON EQUIP
DRIVING EQUIP
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
LIFTING WASTE
OPERATING CONTROLS
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTQOL
DUMPING WASTE
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
OPENING EQUIP PT
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
CLOSING EQUIP PT
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
EMPTYING VF-H
DIRECTING VEH
CARRYING WASTE
DISLODGING WASTE FRO*) VEH
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
RUNNING
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
LIFTING 03JECT
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIP
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
washing equip
INJURIES
NO.
1,304
1,053
1,043
735
575
535
505
313
307
292
259
172
124
122
115
105
10 3
95
79
78
71
59
59
54
49
44
39
35
31
29
28
25
24
24
24
23
21
21
%
14.44
11.55
11. 55
8.14
7. 49
7. 04
5.59
3.47
3.40
3.23
2.93
1.91
1.37
1.35
1.23
1.15
1.14
1.05
0.88
0.85
0.79
0.75
0.75
0. 50
0.54
0. 49
0. 43
0, 39
0.34
0.32
0. 31
0.29
0.27
0.27
0.2?
0.25
0.23
0.21
-------
PAGE 2
EXHIBIT 1A (Cont'd)
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
LIFTING VEH PART
19
0 . 21
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
19
0. 21
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
19
0. 21
ARRANGING LOAD
13
0. 20
DISLODGING WASTE.FROM CONT
17
0.19
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
15
0. lfi
UNLOADING WASTE
16
0. IS
CATCHING CONT
15
0. 17
CARRYING OBJECT
13
0. 14
DOING JANITORIAL WORK
12
0.13
MOWING
12
0.13
CATCHING WASTE
10
0.11
REPAIRING CONT W HANDTOOL
10
0.11
DOING OFFICE WORK
8
0.09
WASHING CONT
4
0.04
RIDING ON CONT
3
0.03
FIGHTING
3
0.03
DOING HORSEPLAY
3
0.03
PUTTING OUT FIRE
3
0.03
TOTAL
9, 028
100.00
-------
EXHIBIT IB
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN' WSJC2HIHf^rIDENTEE TNCURRE'
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE A-CI.
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACTIVITY
CONTAINER
TO DUMP CONTAINER
OFF EQUIP
CONTAINER
LIFTING
LIFTING
GETTING
DUMPING
CARRYING CONTAINER
RIDING ON EQUIP
STANDING OR WALKING
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
DRIVING EQUIP
GETTING ON EQUIP
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
LIFTING WASTE
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
OPENING EQUIP PT
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
OPERATING CONTROLS
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
COMPACTING WASTE IN VSH
CLOSING EQUIP PT
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
emptying veh
dumping waste
arranging load
doing no one activity
lifting object
directing veh
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
REPAIRING EQUIP w HANDTOOL
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
CARRYING WASTE
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
CATCHING WASTE
hooking or unhooking equip
no.
9, 873
7, 383
6,798
5,829
5,745
5,152
4,874
3,453
2,895
2,219
1,330
1, 302
1,259
1,259
952
898
848
512
605
490
398
375
330
331
312
271
251
259
25**
252
241
237
230
211
208
207
.171
150
14. 15
10. 58
9.75
3.35
8.24
7. 39
5.99
4.96
4.15
3. .18
1.95
1.87
1.82
l.ao
1. 36
1.29
1.22
0.88
0.87
0.70
0.57
0.54
0.52
0. 47
0.45
0. 39
0.37
0. 37
0. 37
0.35
0. 35
0. 34
0.33
0.30
0. 30
0.30
0. 25
0.23
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
.11. 18
11. 59
13.57
10.43
13.12
15.67
12.28
15. 39
15. 99
11.93
11.93
13.85
19.23
13.25
18.57
24.27
15.70
9.42
21.51
40.83
15.31
11.03
30.00
25.45
8.57
22.58
7.05
23.55
12.29
18.00
9.27
7.55
12.11
11.72
16.00
8 .28
28.50
13:
-------
EXHIBIT IB (Cont'd)
PAGE 2
OSHA DAYS LOST
AVG DAYS LOST/
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
LOST DAYS CASE
WASHING EQUIP
140
0 . 20
12.73
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
137
0. 20
15. 22
LIFTING VEH PART
125
0.13
9.00
CARRYING OBJECT
122
0. 17
13. 56
RUNNING
111
0. IS
7.93
MOWING
107
0.15
11.39
UNLOADING WASTE
78
0.11
11.14
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
72
0. 10
4.80
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
54
0. 08
5.00
DOING OFFICE WORK
54
0.03
13.50
CATCHING CONT
50
0.07
5.56
DOING JANITORIAL WORK
34
0.05
11.33
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
29
0.04
3. 22
DOING HORSEPLAY
29
0 . 04
14. 50
REPAIRING CONT W HANDTOOL
18
0.03
4. 50
FIGHTING
16
0.02
3. 00
WASHING CONT
8
0.01
2. 67
RIDING ON CONT
3
0. 00
1.50
TOTAL
59,751
100.00
12. 87
-------
exhibit 1C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED PROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS-. OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
t-ASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS
AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT
COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
ACTIVITY
LIFTING CONTAINER
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
GETTING OFF EQUIP
CARRYING CONTAINER
STANDING OR WALKING
DUMPING CONTAINER
RIDING ON EQUIP
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
DRIVING EQUIP
OPENING EQUIP PT
GETTING ON EQUIP
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
LIFTING WASTE
OPERATING CONTROLS
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
DUMPING WASTE
CLOSING EQUIP PT
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
EMPTYING VEH
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
LIFTING OBJECT
ARRANGING LOAD
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
CARRYING WASTE
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
PUSHING QR PULLING OBJECT
AMT.
504, 149
333,035
318,455
283,797
230,150
274, 552
2.4 2,820
164,459
151,115
118,630
105,179
71,854
70,541
68,409
67,257
62,145
53,278
50,383
47,80.2
41.126
39,453
24.127
22,489
19,919
18,727
18,162
18,026
16 , 280
16,263
15,781
12, 277
12,007
11,399
11,109
10,901
10,748
avg costs/
OSHA REC INJ
13. 55
10. 29
9.56
7.76
7. 53
7.38
6.53
4.42
4.06
3.19
2.83
1.93
1.90
1.84
1.81
1.67
1.43
1. 35
I. 28
1.11
1.06
0.65
0.60
0, 54
0.50
0.49
0.48
0.44
0. 44
0. 42
0. 33
0. 32
0.31
0. 30
0, 29
0. 29
387
364
433
454
414
263
481
525
518
1,502
343
267
608
561
701
2,143
517
293
386
935
1,644
1,503
214
407
240
4 66
644
678
904
229
181
169
368
585
202
457
-------
PAGE 2
EXHIBIT 1C (Cont'd)
DIRECT COSTS
ACTIVITY
AMT.
%
AVG COS
OSUA RF.C
DIRECTING VEH
9,875
0. 27
28 2
HOOKING OR UNHOOKIMG EQUIP
8, 195
0. 22
341
WASHING EQUIP
7, 707
0.21
357
CATCHIMG WASTE
7, 211
0. 19
721
CARRYING OBJECT
7, 133
0.19
549
RUNNING
5,572
0. 15
213
LIFTING VEH PART
5, 295
0.14
279
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
4,935
0. 13
252
UNLOADING WASTE
4, 127
0.11
253
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
3,335
0. 10
229
MOWING
2,930
0.03
2 4 8
DOING OFFICE WORK
2, 345
0. 05
293
CATCHING CONT
2, 3 35
0.05
155
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
1,951
0.05
93
DOING JANITORIAL WORK
1,755
0.05
145
DOING HORSEPLAY
1, 058
0 .03
353
REPAIRING CONT W HANDTOOL
1,045
0.03
105
FIGHTING
54 3
0. 02
214
WASHING CONT
38 0
0.01
95
RIDING ON CONT
284
0.01
95
PUTTING OUT FIRE
35
0.00
28
TOTAL
3,720,761 100.00
412
-------
EXHIBIT 2A
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: OSH\ RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE
ACCIDENT TYPE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
STRUCK BY WASTE
PALL ON SAME LEVEL
PALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
BODILY REACTION
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
INSECT BITE
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
ANIMAL BITE
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
PARTICLES IN EYE
struck by veh part
hurt by handling waste
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
struck by obj
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
struck AGAINST OBJECT
overexertion
QODILY reaction in CATCHING CONT
pALL AGAINST VEH PART
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
°EVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
struck self with obj being handled
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
contact with caustic or toxic waste
unknown accident type
struck against waste
injuries
NO.
1,632
536
512
474
365
357
348
340
333
274
263
237
229
224
20 2
192
138
151
142
123
118
117
11*
114
113
100
97
76
75
71
70
68
62
61
58
53
46
4 3
42
4,1
.8.08
5. 94
5.67
5. 25
4.04
3.95
3. 85
3.77
3.69
3.04
2.91
2.63
2.54
2. 48
2. 24
2.13
2.08
1.67
1.57
1.42
1.31
1. 30
1 . 23
1. 26
1. 25
1.11
1.07
0.84
0. S3
0.79
0.78
0.75
0.69
0.68
0.64
0. 59
0 . 51
0. 48
0.47
0.45
-------
EXHIBIT 2A (Cont'd)
PAGE
2
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. %
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
31
0
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING HANDLED
30
0
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
23
0
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
27
0
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
25
0
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
24
0
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
22
0
FALL AGAINST CONT
20
0
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
20
0
FALL AGAINST OBJ
19
0
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
19
0
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
19
0
HURT BY HANDLING 08J
14
0
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
12
0
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
8
0
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ
7
0
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
7
0
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
5
0
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEH
5
0
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
5
0
FALL AGAINST WASTE
4
0
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING CONT
¦5,
0
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
2
0
CONTACT WITH ELECTRIC CURRENT
1
0
F LASH3URN
1
0
34
33
31
30
23
27
24
22
22
21
21
21
IS
13
09
OB
08
07
OS
OS
04
03
02
0.1
01
TOTAL
9,02fS 100.00
-------
EXHIBIT 2B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTION PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN W"JC"HpH^c^j^t!E
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO TH .
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
PALL ON SAME LEVEL
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
BODILY REACTION
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
STRUCK BY WASTE
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
STRUCK BY VEH PART
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
OVEREXERTION
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
STRUCK BY OBJ
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
FALL AGAINST CONT
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER
PARTICLES IN EYE
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
INSECT BITE
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
FALL AGAINST OBJ
EXTREMES
NO.
15,959
5,583
5, 503
5 f 104
4,965
3,856
3,067
2, 190
2, DOB
1,781
1,611
1, 529
1,462
1,293
1, 259
1, 184
1,099
923
840
650
581
540
535
439
48 6
455
353
323
303
30 2
27 3
196
180
ISO
179
17ft
177
154
149
137
129
122
2 2. S3
8.00
7.90
7. 32
7.12
5.53
4. 40
3. 14
2.88
2.55
2.31
2. 19
2. 10
1.85
1.80
1.70
1.58
1. 33
1. 20
0.95
0.83
0.77
0.77
0.70
0.70
0.<15
0 . 51
0. 4 3
0.44
0.43
0. 39
0. 28
0.2*5
0. 26
0 . 26
0. 26
0. 25
0. 22
0.21
0. 20
0. IS
0*17
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
12.85
21. 31
20.71
14.67
12. 57
18.72
17.63
19.04
12. 17
9.52
17.90
7. 35
7. 54
11.05
17.73
9. 47
26.80
12.89
19.53
10.82
12. 10
10.80
9.55
6.70
6.66
32.50
7.31
21. 53
8.80
6. 16
15. 17
7.00
2.73
12.00
9.94
3. 24
6.81
2.52
12.42
27. 40
21.50
10,17
-------
EXHIBIT 2B (Cont'd)
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE MO.
ANIMAL BITE
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
BODILY REACTION IM AVOIDING WASTE
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ •
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
CONTACT WITH ELECTRIC CURRENT
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING HANDLED
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEH
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING CONT
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
FALL AGAINST WASTE
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
119
0. 17
115
0. 16
112
0. IS
112
0. IS
110
0. IS
10 2
0.15
90
0.13
87
0. 12
83
0.12
73
0. 10
58
0 .10
SO
0.09
59
0.08
A 3
o.os
40
0. OS
34
0.05
33
0. 05
29
0 . 04
25
0.04
23
0.0 3
12
0.02
5
0.01
AVG DAYS
lost/
LOST DAYS
case
2. 90
S. 39
10. 18
S. 59
27. 50
2.91
4. 29
4. 35
3. SI
14. SO
5.2 3
SO. 00
S. 56
7. 17
10.00
3.78
8. 2.5
7.25
12. 50
7. S7
S.00
5.00
TOTAL
69,7 51
ino.on
12.87
-------
EXHIBIT 2C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED PROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1>73
DEFINITIONS: OSHA REC ORD^Ew^OUT1 LOST^ORKDAYS \ /aND LOST WORKDAY,
CASES (I.E. NOW-FATAL C ^!!?eL FIRST AID INJURIES ARE MOT INCLUDED.
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPR ' y LBAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS
WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY
ARE MOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT
ACCIDENT TYPE
COSTS
AMOUNT
AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL 0„TnpNT
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIUt
STRUCK BY VEH PART
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
BODILY REACTION
STRUCK BY WASTE rtf,TMr HJUinTFD
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HA.
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
STRUCK BY OBJ n.__
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
OVEREXERTION
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
FALL AGAINST CONT
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
OBJ
STRUCK
STRUCK
AGAINST OBJECT
BY CONTAINER
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
STRUCK
insect
AMIUAL
STRUCK
SELF
BITE
BITE
WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
795,
307,
306,
252,
242,
239
137
129,
104,
93,
37,
85,
33,
54,
59
59,
57,
53
47
45
32
151
545
3 59
59^
9 32
713
,959
, 320
, 234
, 33 2
,471
,517
,345
, SO2
, RIO
, 203
,939
,595
,1.19
, 207
,339
23,715
, 330
, 5 53
,354
, 303
,415
, 574
21
8
9
7
6
AGAINST CONTAINER
PARTICLES IN EYE
27
25,
24 ,
22
21
20
13,333
17,727
17,534
15,9 22
13,555
11,984
11,973
11,5 52
40
21
25
05
53
5. 44
3.71
3. 43
2. 30
2. 51
2. 35
2. 30
2. 25
1
L •
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0,
0,
0,
0
0
0
0
0
0
74
51
59
55
44
27
21
, 37
. 77
. 75
.72
. 57
. 50
. 53
. 55
. 51
43
47
45
35
32
32
31
433
334
341
739
513
447
525
,010
<590
275
359
157
235
557
218
510
287
553
7 50
779
4 25
153
371
1,333
1 , 309
323
214
175
150
422
77
149
2*0
32
-------
EXHIBIT 2C (Cont'd)
PAGE 2
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT TYPE AMOUNT % AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
9
875
0. 27
353
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
8
515
0. 23
273
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
8
527
0. 23
122
SLIP AMD STRUCK AGAINST CONT
7
907
0. 21
390
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
7
757
0. 21
1
, 103
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
6
950
0. 19
170
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
6
566
0.18
92
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
6
256
0. .17
118
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
6
213
0. 17
2 30
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
6
0 31
0. 16
1
, 206
FALL AGAINST ORJ
5
6 67
0. 15
298
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
5
583
0. 15
254
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ
5
543
0. 15
7 92
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
5
361
0.14
125
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
5
217
0. 14
86
HURT 3Y HANDLING VEH PART
4
891
0. 13
196
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING HANDLED
3
574
0. 10
119
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
3
331
0. 09
4 16
CONTACT WITH ELECTRIC CURRENT
3
325
0.09
3
,325
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
2
917
0. 03
122
HURT 3Y HANDLING OBJ
2
313
0 . 06
165
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
2
101
0. 06
350
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
1
662
0.04
87
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEH
1
576
0.04
315
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING CONT
1
367
0.04
4 56
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
878
0.02
73
FALL AGAINST WASTE
564
0.02
141
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
296
0.01
148
FLASHBURN
25
0. 00
25
TOTAL
3,720,
761
100.00
412
-------
EXHIBIT 3A
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT SITES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AMD FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT SITE NO. %
ON COLLECTION ROUTE
IN STREET AT BAGS' OF TRUCK 2,33 5 2 5.42
IN ST AT CURB 1,044 11.55
IN CUSTOMER'S YD 333 9.73
IN ALLEY AT BACK OF TRUCK 773 8.55
ON STEP OF VEH 525 5.3 3
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 35 3 4.0 2
IN ALLEY AT CURB 354 3.92
IN CUSTOMER'S DRIVEWAY 235 2.51
ON RUNNING BOARD 224 2.43
I.N MIDSTREET 157 1.74
ON VEHICLE 119 1.32
IN MIDALLEY 110 1.2 2
ON SIDEWALK 90 1.00
IN ST AT FRONT OF TRUCK 40 0.44
ON TRUCK BED 31 0.34
IN ALLEY AT FRONT OF TRUCK 20 0.22
IN CUSTOMER'S RESIDENCE 10 0.11
SUBTOTAL 7,59 5 8 5.23
ENROUTE BETWEEN SITES
INSIDE CAB 77 0.85
ON STEP OF VEH 5 0.07
ON TRUCK BED 3 0.0 3
ON RUNNING BOARD 2 0.02
ON VEHICLE 1 0.01
SUBTOTAL 91 1.01
AT LANDFILL
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMP SITE 124 1.37
AT DUMP SITE 55 0.72
IN YARD 5 2 0.53
ON VEHICLE 43 0.43
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 43 0.43
NEXT TO VEH 33 0.4 2
IN SHOP/GARAGE 17 0.19
ON STEP OF VEH 9 0.10
INSIDE CAB ENROUTE TO DUMP SITS 9 0.10
ON RUNNING BOARD 7 0.08
-------
EXHIBIT 3A (Cont'd)
PAG!
ACCIDENT
OSHA
SITE
RECORDABLE
IN OFFICE/GATEHOUSE
INSIDE CAB AT DUMP SITE
OM STEP AT DUMP SITE
ON TRUCK BED
ON RUNNING 30ARD AT DUMP SITE
ON TRUCK BED AT DUMP SITE
ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
SUBTOTAL
AT INCINERATOR
IN PLANT
IN SHOP/GARAGE
AT DUMPING FLOOR
IN YARD
NEXT TO VEH
ON VEHICLE
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMPING FLOOR
O.N VEHICLE AT DUMPING FLOOR
ON STEP OF VEH
IN OFFICE/GATEHOUSE
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
ON TRUCK BED
INSIDE CAB AT DUMPING FLOOR
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMPING FLOOR
SUBTOTAL
AT TRANSFER STATION
IN YARD
NEXT TO VEHICLE
ON VEHICLE
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
ON TRUCK BED
ON RUNNING BOARD
SUBTOTAL
INJURIES
NO.
7
7
7
5
3
3
2
4 3 I
22
19
15
10
8
6
5
4
3
3
2
2
2
1
109
20
17
4
4
4
2
(57
n. 08
O.OB
0.0R
0. 07
0.0 3
0.03
0.02
5.33
0. 24
0 . 21
0. IB
0.11
0. 09
0. 07
0. 0
-------
EXHIBIT 3A (Cont'd)
PAGE 3
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT SITE NO. %
AT REFUELING STATION 13 0.14
AT WASHRACK 10 0.11
INSIDE CAR OF VEH 9 0.10
ON RUNNING BOARD R 0.09
ON STEP OF VEH 4 0.04
IN TRUCK 3ED 1 0.01
SUBTOTAL 423 4.74
IN ROADWAY/FIELD
SUBTOTAL 70 0.73
AT OTHER SITE
AT UNKNOWN SITE 50 0.
SUBTOTAL 77 0.85
TOTAL
9028
100.00
-------
EXHIBIT 3B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT SITES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER .1975 - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS OME IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT SITE
ON COLLECTION
IN
IN
IN
ON
IN
STREET AT
ROUTE
BACK OF
TRUCK
ST AT CURB
CUSTOMER'S YD
STEP OF VEH
ALLEY AT BACK
OF TRUCK
INSIDE CAB OF
CUSTOMER'S
MIDSTREET
ALLEY AT CURB
RUNNING BOARD
SIDEWALK
VEHICLE
MIDALLEY
TRUCK BED
IN
IN
IN
ON
ON
ON
IN
ON
IN ST AT
IN ALLEY
IN CUSTOMER
SUBTOTAL
VEH
DRIVEWAY
FRONT OF TRUCK
AT FRONT OF TRUCK
RESIDENCE
NO. % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS C^SE
17, 455 25.04 11.57
3,340 12.57 12.57
5,412 7.7", 9.55
5,035 7.29 14.57
3,99 3 5.73 12.23
3.034 4.42 12.15
2,534 3.85 17.10
2,03 4 2.99 19.12
1,713 2.4 5 11.57
1,710 2.45 12.95
1.035 1.43 15.17
732 1.12 10.35
533 0.91 10.81
355 0.51 17.75
20 0 0.29 11.11
77 0.11 7.70
34 0.05 4.85
57,7 30 3 2.77 12.33
ENROUTE BETWEEN SITES
INSIDE CAB
ON STEP OF VEH
ON RUNNING BOARD
ON VEHICLE
SUBTOTAL
1,249 1.79 24.93
107 0.15 25.75
20 0.03 10.00
2 0.00 2.00
1,404 2.01 23.30
AT LANDFILL
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMP SITE
1, 257
] .32
21.-17
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
422
0.51
17. 53
O.N VEHICLE
375
0. 54
12. 50
INSIDE CAB ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
359
0.51
44.37
AT DUMP SITE
273
0. 40
9.9 3
IM YARD
213
0.31
3. 37
NEXT TO VEH
137
0. 27
9. 35
IM OFFICE/GATEHOUSE
15 3
0. 22
30. 50
IM SHOP/GARAGE
0/[
0.13
13.43
ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
52
0. 07
2 5.00
ON STEP OF VEH
45
0. 05
9. 00
0\' TRUCK BED AT DUMP SITE
3 3
0.05
11.00
-------
EXHIBIT 3B (Cont'd)
Page 2
OSHA DAYS
ACCIDENT SITE
INSIDE CAB AT DUMP SITE
ON STEP AT DUMP SITE
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMP SITE
ON RUNNING BOARD
ON TRUCK BED
SUBTOTAL
AT INCINERATOR
IN PLANT
AT DUMPING FLOOR
IN SHOP/GARAGE
ON TRUCK BED
ON VEHICLE AT DUMPING FLOOR
IN YARD
ON VEHICLE
IN OFFICE/GATEHOUSE
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMPING FLOOR
NEXT TO VEH
ON STEP OF VEH
INSIDE CAB AT DUMPING FLOOR
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMPING FLOOR
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
SUBTOTAL
AT TRANSFER STATION
NEXT TO VEHICLE
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
IN YARD
ON TRUCK BED
ON RUNNING BOARD
ON VEHICLE
SUBTOTAL
AT RECYCLING STATION
IN PLANT
ON RUNNING BOARD
IN YARD
SUBTOTAL
AT HEADQUARTERS
IN YARD PARKING LOT
IN SHOP/GARAGE
ON VEHICLE
NEXT TO VEH
IN OFFICE
ON RUNNING BOARD
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
AT REFUELING STATION
AT WASHRACK
ON STEP OF VEH
IN TRUCK BED
SUBTOTAL
IN ROADWAY/FIELD
SUBTOTAL
LOST
NO. % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
28
0. 04
7.00
26
0.04
6.50
19
0.03
9.50
12
0. 02
12.00
6
0. 01
6.00
3,687
5.29
14. 87
451
0.65
25.06
352
0.50
29.33
119
0.17
10. 82
87
0.12
43.50
55
0.08
55.00
47
0.07
6.71
30
0.04
7.50
29
0.04
29.00
28
0.04
7.00
26
0. 04
6.50
22
0.03
11.00
10
0.01
10.00
8
0.01
8.00
3
0.00
3.00
1,288
1.85
17.89
168
0.24
18. 67
55
0.08
18.33
34
0.05
5.67
23
0.03
7.67
19
0.03
9.50
12
0.02
6.00
332
0.48
10.71
47
0.07
15.67
15
0.02
15.00
9
0.01
9. 00
76
0.11
12.67
1,636
2.35
21.53
1,386
1.99
14.59
718
1.03
42.24
190
0.27
15. 83
107
0.15
9.73
99
0.14
16.50
71
0.10
11.83
37
0.05
7.40
25
0.04
5.00
21
0.03
5.25
3
0.00
3.00
4,317
6.19
17.69
279
0.40
8.45
-------
EXHIBIT 3B (Cont'd)
?-\Gr: 7
OS HA DAYS LOST'
ACCIDENT SITE NO.
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASF.
AT OTHER SITR
AT 'JUKMOWM SITR
SUBTOTAL
270 0.30
0.91
3.19
TOTAL
S9,751 100.00
1 7.9,1
-------
EXHIBIT 3C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT SITES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION
BENEFITS AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE)
ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
INSTRUCTIONS: DETERMINE YOUR ORGANIZATION'S PROBLEM AREAS BY
IDENTIFYING THE AREAS WITH THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGES.
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT SITE
AMOUNT
AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
ON COLLECTION SITES
IN STREET AT BACK OF TRUCK
IN ST AT CURB
IN CUSTOMER'S YD
ON STEP OF VEH
IN ALLEY AT BACK OF TRUCK
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
IN CUSTOMER'S DRIVEWAY
IN MIDSTREET
IN ALLEY AT CURB
ON RUNNING BOARD
ON SIDEWALK
ON VEHICLE
IN MIDALLEY
ON TRUCK BED
IN ST AT FRONT OF TRUCK
IN ALLEY AT FRONT OF TRUCK
IN CUSTOMER'S RESIDENCE
SUBTOTAL
ENROUTE BETWEEN SITES
INSIDE CAB
ON STEP OF VEH
ON RUNNING BOARD
ON TRUCK BED
ON VEHICLE
SUBTOTAL
AT LANDFILL
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMP SITE
ON VEHICLE
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
INSIDE CAB ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
911,514
451,798
261,435
227,657
221,052
161,078
130,947
95,317
92,956
86,771
57,797
52,113
43,200
17,417
10,351
3,348
1,808
2,958,359
56,796
3,060
660
181
111
62,395
139,530
75,698
25,704
18,574
24.50 382
12.14 132
7.03 296
6.12 432
5.94 285
4.33 443
3.52 554
2.56 607
2.50 262
2.33 387
1.55 642
1.40 437
1.16 392
0.47 561
0.28 258
0.09 167
0.05 180
79.51 384
1.53
0.08
0.02
0.00
0.00
1.68
3.75
2.03
0.69
0.50
737
510
330
60
111
686
1,125
1,760
597
2,063
-------
EXHIBIT 3C (Cont'd)
PAGE 2
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT SITE AMOUNT % AVG COST
OSHA REC I
AT DUMP SITE
14,842
0 .40
228
IN YARD
12,133
0 .33
233
NEXT TO VEH
10,447
0 .28
274
IN OFFICE/GATEHOUSE
9,269
0.25
1
, 324
ON STEP OF VEH
3,757
0.10
417
ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
3,462
0.09
1
,731
IN SHOP/GARAGE
3,428
0.09
201
ON STEP AT DUMP SITE
2,115
0.06
302
ON TRUCK BED AT DUMP SITE
2,078
0.06
692
INSIDE CAB AT DUMP SITE
1,692
0 .05
241
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMP SITE
1,356
0 .04
452
ON RUNNING BOARD
705
0.02
100
ON TRUCK BED
572
0 .02
95
SUBTOTAL
331,552
8.91
689
AT INCINERATOR
IN PLANT
22,176
0.60
1
,008
AT DUMPING FLOOR
8,166
0.22
510
IN SHOP/GARAGE
6,918
0.19
364
ON TRUCK BED
3,368
0.09
1
f 684
IN OFFICE/GATEHOUSE
3,111
0.08
1
,037
ON VEHICLE AT DUMPING FLOOR
2,421
0.07
605
IN YARD
1,768
0.05
176
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMPING FLOOR
1,377
0.04
275
NEXT TO VEH
1,185
0.03
148
ON STEP OF VEH
889
0.02
296
ON VEHICLE
870
0 .02
145
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
490
0.01
245
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMPING FLOOR
350
0.01
350
INSIDE CAB AT DUMPING FLOOR
305
0.01
152
SUBTOTAL
54,003
1.45
495
^T TRANSFER STATION
NEXT TO VEHICLE
10,235
0.28
602
IN YARD
2,569
0.07
128
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
2,112
0.06
528
ON TRUCK BED
1,257
0.03
314
ON VEHICLE
759
0.02
189
ON RUNNING BOARD
727
0.02
363
SUBTOTAL
19,161
0.51
286
AT RECYCLING STATION
IN PLANT 2<6^ 0.07 660
ON RUNNING BOARD 473 0.01 473
IN YAR° 75 0*00 ?9
NEXT TO VEH ?5
SUBTOTAL 3,802 0.10 38q
AT HEADQUARTERS
IN YARD PARKING LOT ",651 2.52 743
IN SHOP/GARAGE 79,737 2.14 450
-------
EXHIBIT 3C (Cont'd)
PAGE 3
ACCIDENT SITE
ON VEHICLE
NEXT TO VEH
IN OFFICE
ON RUNNING BOARD
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
AT REFUELING STATION
AT WASHRACK
ON STEP OF VEH
IN TRUCK BED
SUBTOTAL
IN ROADWAY/FIELD
SUBTOTAL
AT OTHER SITE
AT UNKNOWN SITE
SUBTOTAL
DIRECT COSTS
AMOUNT
AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
54,164
1.46
2,256
9,110
0 .24
455
5,370
0.14
206
4,388
0.12
548
2,854
0.08
317
2,201
0 .06
169
1,345
0.04
134
1,068
0.03
267
284
0.01
284
256,425
6.89
599
11,995
0.32
171
13,555
0.36
225
23,069
0 .62
300
TOTAL
3,720,761 100.00
412
-------
IR-I-A
EXHIBIT 4A PAGE 1
ALL USERS
INJURY TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDE!!
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
TYPE OF INJURY NO. %
SPRAIN OR STRAIN
3,702
41.01
BRUISE
1,772
19.63
CUT/PUNCTURE
1,682
18.63
IRRITATION
476
5.27
FRACTURE
231
2.56
STING
210
2.33
UNKNOWN TYPE OF INJURY
173
1.92
ABRASIONS
152
1.68
DERMATITIS
102
1.13
CHEMICAL BURN
72
0.80
BURN FROM IIEAT
64
0.71
OTHER TYPE OF INJURY
62
0.69
MULTIPLE INJURIES
56
0.62
POISONING OR ALLERGIC REACTION
48
0.53
INFECTION
41
0.45
DISLOCATION
29
0.32
ASPHYXIATION OR DROWNING
25
0.28
INFLAMMATION OF THE JOINTS
24
0.27
HERNIA
19
0.21
AMPUTATION
16
0.18
HEAT STROKE,EXHAUSTION OR CRAMPS
15
0.17
CONCUSSION
14
0.16
FROSTBITE OR OTHER LOW TEMP EFFECT
14
0.16
DENTAL INJURY
11
0.12
TORN CARTILAGE
7
0.08
0.04
NOSEBLEED
4
HEART ATTACK
2
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
AVULSION
1
BLINDNESS IN BOTH EYES
1
CONTAGIOUS DISEASE
1
ELECTRIC SHOCK
1
1
PARALYSIS
J.
TOTAL
9/028
100.00
-------
EXHIBIT 4B
PAGE 1
ALL
USERS
INJURY TYPES RANKED
FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF
OSHA DAYS
LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE
IN
WHICH THE
EMPLOYEE
INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS
DUE
TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS
LOS
T
TYPE OF INJURY
NO.
%
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
SPRAIN OR STRAIN
37,950
54.41
13. 69
BRUISE
10,147
14. 55
9.53
FRACTURE
6, 961
9.93
34.31
CUT/PUNCTURE
4,753
6.3 2
7.33
UNKNOWN TYPE OF INJURY
1,535
2. 27
14.42
AMPUTATION
1,333
1.91
83. 31
MULTIPLE INJURIES
1,151
1.65
25.02
DISLOCATION
1,080
1. 55
41. 54
OTHER TYPE OF INJURY
631
0.98
21. 23
HERNIA
56 1
0.30
33.00
IRRITATION
412
0. 59
2.73
INFLAMMATION OF THE JOINTS
399
0. 57
23.47
CONCUSSION
332
0. 55
38. 20
PARALYSIS
36 9
0.53
369.00
ABRASIONS
330
0. 47
5. 41
CHEMICAL BURN
275
0.39
7.36
TORN CARTILAGE
265
0. 38
37.86
BURN FROM HEAT
215
0. 31
5.81
DERMATITIS
162
0. 23
4.63
POISONING OR ALLERGIC REACTION
159
0. 23
7. 57
FROSTBITE OR OTHER LOW TEMP EFFECT
154
0. 22
14.00
INFECTION
148
0. 2.1
7.05
STING
137
0. 20
2.53
HEART ATTACK
40
0. 06
40. 00
ASPHYXIATION OR DROWNING
31
0.04
2. 38
HEAT STROKE,EXHAUSTION OR CRAMPS
27
0.04
3. 37
AVULSION
25
0.04
25.00
NOSEBLEED
3
0.01
2.17
CONTAGIOUS DISEASE
5
0.01
5.00
DENTAL INJURY
1
0. 00
1.00
TOTAL
69,751
100.00
12.37
-------
IR-I-C
EXHIBIT 4C PAGE 1
ALL USERS
INJURY TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION
BENEFITS AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE)
ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT
TYPE OF INJURY
SPRAIN OR STRAIN
BRUISE
FRACTURE
CUT/PUNCTURE
MULTIPLE INJURIES
AMPUTATION
PARALYSIS
UNKNOWN TYPE OF INJURY
DISLOCATION
IRRITATION
OTHER TYPE OF INJURY
HERNIA
INFLAMMATION OF THE JOINTS
ABRASIONS
CONCUSSION
CHEMICAL BURN
STING
TORN CARTILAGE
BURN FROM HEAT
DERMATITIS
INFECTION
FROSTBITE OR OTHER LOW TEMP EFFECT
POISONING OR ALLERGIC REACTION
ASPHYXIATION OR DROWNING
HEAT STROKE,EXHAUSTION OR CRAMPS
AVULSION
HEART ATTACK
DENTAL INJURY
NOSEBLEED
CONTAGIOUS DISEASE
ELECTRIC SHOCK
BLINDNESS IN BOTH EYES
TOTAL
COSTS
AMT. % AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
1,865,347
50.13
504
528,205
14.20
298
357,292
9.60
1,547
275,613
7.41
164
123,897
3.33
2,212
123,745
3.33
7,734
88,642
2.38
88,642
67,330
1.81
389
41,488
1.12
1,431
37,386
1.00
79
33,623
0.90
542
29,189
0.78
1,536
24,438
0.66
1,018
21,376
0.57
141
16,982
0.46
1,213
15,083
0.41
209
12,245
0.33
58
10,551
0.28
1,507
9,989
0 .27
156
8,345
0.22
82
8,188
0.22
200
7,993
0 .21
571
5,958
0 .16
124
2,501
0.07
100
1,932
0.05
129
917
0.02
917
845
0.02
422
842
0 .02
77
532
0.01
133
245
0.01
245
24
0 .00
24
20
0 .00
20
3720,761
100.00
412
-------
EXHIBIT 5
PAGE ]
ALL USERS
PARTS OF RODY INJURED RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST PERCENT OF
OS HA RECORDABLE INJURIES, WORKDAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATHLITY CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY.
INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES OSHA DAYS LOST DIRECT COSTS
PART OF BODY OSHA'REC INJ PART OF BODY DAYS LOST AVG/LOST PART OF BODY DIRECT COSTS AVG COSTS/
NO.
%
NO.
% D^YS CASE
AMT.
% OS
HA REC I
BACK
1,713
19.31
BACK
22,435
32. 17
11.29
BACK
1134,502
30. 49
149
LEG
705
7.81
ANKLE
4,132
1.14
11.08
MULTIPLE BODY PARTS
337,744
9.03
1,114
EYES
199
7.74
LEG
4,489
1.44
11.94
LEG
271,093
7.42
392
AMXLE
571
1. 32
KNEE
4,353
1. 25
13.09
KNEE
227,974
1.13
437
FIMGERS
547
3.05
MULTIPLE BODY PARTS
4,231
1.07
20.95
ANKLE
207,190
5. 58
3 14
KNEE
522
5.78
SMOULDER
3,995
5.73
11.13
SHOULDER
191,942
5. 29
•*81
SHOULDER
510
5.55
FOOT
3,179
4.51
10.39
FOOT
157,319
4. 24
3)4
FOOT
502
5.55
FINGERS
2,972
4. 21
11.79
FINGERS
143,714
3.31
213
ARM
453
5.07
HAND
2,118
3.75
11.58
HAND
131,831
3*. 54
2
-------
EXHIBIT 6A
ALL USERS
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY AGE GROUP
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIODJ DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA INCIDENCE RATE =-• (NUMBER OF OSHA RECORDABLE CASES /
MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE ) X 200*000~
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF CASES PER 100 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES
PER YEAR* DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENT* LOST TIME* PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
SEVERITY RATE = (NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST / MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE) X 200*000.
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST PER 100 FULL TIME
EMPLOYEES PER YEAR.
OSI
IA INCIDENCE
RATE-
INCIDENCE
RATE - LWC
SEVERITY
RAl
AGE
MAN-HOURS
NO.
RATE
NO.
RATE
WKDYS
R
GROUP
EXPOSURE
IN J
IN J
LOST
< 20
YEARS
1*186 *550
432
72.82
224
38
1 *991
31
20-24
YEARS
5*415*107
1*723
63.64
960
35
9*488
31
25-29
YEARS
5*685*181
1*705
59.98
1002
35
10*490
31
30-34
YEARS
4*412*646
1*059
48.00
680
31
8*239
3l
35-39
YEARS
4*212*532
879
41.73
571
27
8*176
3*
40-44
YEARS
3*909*567
686
35.09
452
23
6 * 662
3«
45-49
YEARS
3*347*115
595
30.93
387
20
5 * 968
3i
50-54
YEARS
3 * 470 * 866
473
27 * 26
298
17
5*352
S
55-59
YEARS
2*229*805
282
25.29
200
18
3*328
31
60-64
YEARS
903*987
90
19.91
64
14
651
il
> 6 4
YEARS
199 * 190
21
21.09
16
16
114
11
UNKNOWN
72*156
20
55.44
15
42
287
71
TOTAL
35*544*700
7*965
44.82
4869
27
60*746
3«
-------
EXHIBIT 6B
ALL USERS
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
GROUPED BY AGE
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 9175 - SEPTEMBER 1978
AGE
NO LOST
ACTUAL DAYS
AVG WKDYS
GROUP
WKDY CASES
LOST
LOST
<20
YEARS
224
1,991
8.88
20-24
YEARS
960
9,488
9.88
25-29
YEARS
1,002
10,490
10.47
30-34
YEARS
680
8,239
12.12
35-39
YEARS
571
8,176
14.32
40-44
YEARS
452
6,662
14.74
45-49
YEARS
387
5,968
15.42
50-54
YEARS
298
5,352
17.96
55-59
YEARS
200
3,328
16.64
60-64
YEARS
64
651
10.17
>64 '
inTEARS
16
114
7.13
UNKNOWN
15
287
19.13
TOTAL
4,869
60,746
12.48
-------
EXHIBIT 6C
ALL USERS
DIRECT COSTS
GROUPED BY AGE
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD! DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES ,
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS, AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAUE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2,000 HOURS PER YEAR.
DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENT, LOST TIME, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
AUG DIRECT
COST PER OSHA
RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT COST
PER MAN YEAR
AGE
NO. OSHA
AVG
MAN-HRS
COSTS
CiROUP
RECORD INJ
COST
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
20 YEARS
432
194
1,186,550
142
20-24 YEARS
1,723
278
5,415,107
178
25-29 YEARS
i ,705
337
5,685,181
203
30-34 YEARS
1 ,059
458
4,412,646
220
35-39 YEARS
879
535
4,212,532
224
40-44 YEARS
686
432
3,909,567
173
45-49 YEARS
595
545
3,847,115
169
50-54 YEARS
473
580
3,470,866
159
55-59 YEARS
282
593
2,229,805
151
GO-64 YEARS
90
405
903,987
81
>64 YEARS
21
284
199,190
60
UNKNOWN
20
550
72,156
305
TOTAL
7,965
408
35,544,700
183
-------
EXHIBIT 7A
ALL USERS
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY EXPERIENCE GROUP
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
Reporting period: December 1975 - September 197s
Xjif-FINITIONS! OS HA INCIDENCE RATE » (NUMBER OF OSIIA RECORDABLE CASES /
Han-hours exposure > x 200*000.
K'OUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF CASES PER 1.00 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES
l-ER YEAR. DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
Treatment, lost time? permanent disability and fatality cases.
SEVERITY RATE - (NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST / MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE) X 200*000.
Ia'OUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST PER 100 FULL TIME
EMPLOYEES PER YEAR.
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
INCIDENCE
RATE - LWC
SEVERITY
RATE-
EXPERIENCE
MAN-HOURS
NO.
RATE
NO.
RATE
UKDYS
RATE
OROUP
EXPOSURE
IN J
IN J
LOST
x- 1 MONTH
456 * 340
315
138.05
147
64
1 * 333
584
1-2 MONTHS
433*769
266
122.65
127
59
1*847
852
^-3 MONTHS
412*396
209
101.36
102
49
1*067
517
X 3 MONTHS
1*302v512
790
121.30
376
58
4*247
652
<3-6 MONTHS
1*231,277
367
59.61
205
33
1*631
265
*5-12 MONTHS
2*342*209
633
54.05
323
28
2*951
oso
Am W Am
1-2 YEARS
3*461 * 0 61
917
52.99
552
32
6* 139
355
;s-5 YEARS
6*418? 901
1*766
55.03
1,139
35
12,173
379
$5-10 YEARS
8*197*429
1 * 783
43.50
1,179
29
17,250
421
to YEARS
11 * 702 v650
1 *594
27 ~ 24
1,046
18
15,598
267
Unknown
783 * 039
115
29.34
49
13
757
193
TOTAL
35*439*860
7*965
44.95
4,869
.27
60,746
343
-------
EXHIBIT 7B
ALL USERS
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
GROUPED BY EXPERIENCE
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
EXPERIENCE
NO LOST
OSHA DAYS
AVG WKDYS
GROUP
WKDAY CASES
LOST
LOST
<1 MONTH
147
1,333
9.07
1-2 MONTHS
127
1,847
14.54
2-3 MONTHS
102
1,067
10.46
< 3 MONTHS
376
4,247
11.30
3-6 MONTHS
205
1,631
7.96
6-12 MONTHS
323
2,951
9.14
1-2 YEARS
552
6,139
11.12
2-5 YEARS
1,139
12,173
10.69
5-10 YEARS
1,179
17,250
14.63
>10 YEARS
1,046
15,598
14.91
UNKNOWN
49
757
15.45
TOTAL
4,869
60,746
12.48
-------
EXHIBIT 7C
ALL USERS
DIRECT COSTS
GROUPED BY EXPERIENCE
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS» DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES*
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS* AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2*000 HOURS PER YEAR~
DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENT > LOST TIME? PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
AVG
DIRECT CO
ST PER OSHA
RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT COST
PER MAN
EXPERIENCE
NO. OSHA
AVG
MAN--MRS
COSTS
GROUP
RECORD INJ
COST
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
< 1
MONTH
315
236
456*348
326
1-2
MONTHS
266
288
433»769
354
2-3
MONTHS
209
530
412*396
538
3
MONTHS
790
331
1 *302*5.1.2
403
3" 6
MONTHS
367
223
1*231*277
134
6-12
MONTHS
633
239
2*342*208
130
1-2
YEARS
917
417
3*461*061
22 L
2-5
YEARS
1*7 66
360
6*418*901
199
5--10
YEARS
.1. y 783
478
8*197*429
208
> 10
YEARS
1*594
529
1:1*702*658
145
UNKNOWN
115
372
783*839
110
TOTAL
7 * 965
408
35*439*860
184
-------
EXHIBIT 3A
ALL USERS
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY HEIGHT GROUP
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD: DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER .1978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA INCIDENCE RATE = (NUMBER OF OSHA RECORDABLE CASES /
MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE ) X 200*000.
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF CASES PER .100 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES
PER YEAR. DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENTi LOST TIME* PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
SEVERITY RATE = (NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST / MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE) X 200*000'
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST PER 100 FULL TIME
EMPLOYEES PER YEAR.
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE INCIDENCE RATE - LWC SEVERITY fi
HEIGHT
MAN-HOURS
NO.
RATE
NO.
RATE
WKDYS
GROUP
EXPOSURE
INJ
INJ
LOST
<5 ' 3
817,514
121
30
85
21
1,611
5' 3-5'
999,936
208
42
126
25
1,779
5* 5-5'
3,987,320
807
40
474
24
6,013
5' 7-5'
7,376,940
1,680
46
1,057
29
13,091
5' 9-5'
8,108,155
1,725
43
1,083
27
14,317
5' 11-6'
7,823,531
1,886
48
1,122
29
12,660
6' 1-6»
3,855,934
950
49
581
30
7,158
6' 3-6'
1,038,344
280
54
165
32
2,024
> 6 '4
261,373
68
52
37
28
240
UNKNOWN
1,249,018
240
38
139
22
1,853
TOTAL
35,518,060
7,965
45
4,869
27
60,746
-------
EXHIBIT 8B
:'()RTING F-!rT-: L 0l.r t
HEIGHT
GROUP
< 5'3
5' 3-5'
5 ' 5 5'
5' 7--5/
5' 9 •••-'. j'
5 ' 11-6'
6 ' 1 - 6 ¦'
6'
> AM
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
ALL USERS
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
GROUPED BY HEIGHT
* COL.LECTION DIVISION *
DECEMBER .1975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
NO LOST OSHA DAYS AVG WKDY
WKDY CASES LOST LOST
85 1 > 6 J. I. 18.96
126 1. > 779 :l.4 . 12
4 74 6 •> 013 .1.2.6?
1. "057 13 r 091 1.2,39
1 •' 0 8 3 14*317 1.3,22
I. ? 122 12 •/ 660 11.29
501 7?158 12.33
16 5 2 024 12.27
37 240 6.49
•1-39 1.853 13.34
4-869 60»746 12.48
-------
EXHIBIT 8C
ALL USERS
DIRECT COSTS
GROUPED BY HEIGHT GROUP
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD? DECEMBER 1975 •••• SEPTEMBER 1978
definitions: direct costs include medical expenses?
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEEITS? AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2 >000 HOURS PER YEAR.
DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES~ DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENT* LOST TIME ? PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES~
AVG DIRECT COST PER
OSHA RECORDABLE INJ !
DIRECT COST
PER MAN YE
HEIGHT
NO. OSMA
AUG !
MAN-HPS
COSTS
GROUP
RECORD INJ
COST !
|
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
< 5'3
121
!
525 !
8.1.7 t 514
269
5' 3-5'
208
403 !
999v936
200
5 ' 5—5 '
807
¦476 !
3 y 9071320
210
5' 7-5'
1, 680
309 !
7t376v940
199
5' 9-5'
1,725
434 !
8 * .1.00 y 155
212
5' .11-6'
1,886
308 !
7 •>023 v531
210
6' 1-6'
950
35 8 !
3 »855 y934
197
6' 3-6'
280
390 !
11038 r344
228
> 6'4
68
198 !
261r373
116
UNKNOWN
240
290 !
1 f 249» 0.1.8
126
TOTAL.
7,965
408 !
35t518t060
187
-------
EXHIBIT 9A
ALL. USERS
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY WEIGHT GROUP
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD J DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER .1978
PEFINI7 10 N 6 i 0 $ HA |. t\i (.; j; j j ^ (•; ^ ^ r- ... ,. M..........,
HAN-HOIJRS EXPOSURE ) X 200,000. RECORDABLE CASES /
ROUGHLY I::. QUI VALENT TO THE' NUMBER OF PArrn r-rn
PER YEAR. DOES MOT INCLUDF FTRST Mn VwrnPTr-- rn-U" T™E EMPLOreES
TREATMENT, LOST TIME, PERMANENT' DISABILI Ty ' FATrtfl rinSn MEDIMl-
SEVERITY RATE - (NUhRER OF WORKDAYS LOST / MAN-HOI Rr r¦ 't v
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT 10 THE NUMBER OF MORKBAYq I n ^T rr ^ * 200'00°
EMPLOYEES PER YEAR. wuKiUAY,, LOS I PER .1.00 FULL TIME
OSHh INC1DEMCE RATE
WEIGHT
MAN-HOURS
NO.
(3 ROUP
EXPOSURE
INJ
< 130
LBS
440 y 416
106
.130-139
LBS
1r251,880
313
140-149
LBS
21709 y 601
651
150-159
LBS
4 »086 v865
944
160-169
LBS
5» 3 7 6 * 2 0 0
1
*265
170-179
LBS
4 r 9 6.1 y 914
1
* 188
180-189
LBS
4y548y255
1
.»0 71.
.190-199
LBS
3v126*720
651
200-209
LBS
2r516y843
547
210-219
LBS
.1 *67.1 *928
329
220••22 9
LBS
.1 y 193 * 117
285
230-239
LBS-
623y38?
141
240-249
LBS
496y136
106
> 249
LBS
714»675
158
UNKNOWN
1 y 133 ¦! 900
210
TOTAL-
3 4-851*858
7 p
¦965
RATE
48. 1.4
50~00
48.05
46. 20
47.06
47.88
47.09
41 .64
43.47
39.36
47.77
45.24
42.73
44.22
37.04
45. 70
INCIDENCE
NO.
INJ
64
184
380
542
751
748
654
414
345
207
183
99
71
101
126
4,869
RATE •¦¦¦
RATE
29
/
28
oy
28
30
29
26
27
25
31
32
29
20
'¦>'?
LWC
SEVERITY RATE
28
WKDYS
LOST
674
.1 y 839
4 t 668
5 r 820
10 ,278
8,489
8,813
6 r 305
4»568
2 * 623
2y0 96
974
742
1» 447
:i. 14 :i. (>
60,746
RATE
306
294
345
285
382
342
388
403
363
314
351
312
299
405
249
349
-------
EXHIBIT 9B
AI.L USERS
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
GROUPED DY WEIGHT
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIODt DECEMBER 1975 - SEPTEMBER 1970
WEIGHT NO LOST OSHA DAYS AUG WKD¦
GROUP WKDY CASES LOST LOST
<130 LBS 64 674 10.53
130-139 LBS .1.04 1 , 839 9.99
140-149 LBS 380 4,668 12.28
.1.50- .1.59 LBS 542 5 >820 10,74
160-169 LBS 751 10,278 13.69
170-179 LBS 748 8x489 11.35
180-189 LBS 654 8?813 13.48
190-199 LBS 414 6y 305 .1.5.23
200-209 LBS 345 4>568 13.24
210-219 LBS 207 2*623 12.67
220-229 LBS 183 2*096 11.45
230-239 LBS 99 974 9.84
240-249 LBS 71 742 10,45
> 249 LBS 101 1v 447 14.33
UNKNOWN 126 1>410 11.19
I OTAL. 4 9 869 60 y 746 .1.2 . 48
-------
EXHIBIT 9C
ALL USERS
DIRECT COSTS
GROUPED BY WEIGHT GROUP
* COLLECTION DIVISION *
REPORTING PERIOD! DECEMBER 1.975 - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES*
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION DENEFITS» AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY . INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2*000 HOURS PER YEAR ~
DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENTy LOST TIME * PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
AVG DIRECT COST PER OBHA RECORDABLE INJ
WEIGHT-
NO OSHA
AVG
GROUP
RECORD INJ
COST
< 130
LBS
.1.06
335
130-139
I...BS
313
294
140-149
LBS
651
429
150-159
LBS
944
301
160-169
LBS
1 *265
439
170-179
LBS
1 *188
393
180-189
I...BS
.1 *071
449
190-199
LBS
65.1.
560
200-209
LBS
547
379
210-219
LBS
329
483
220-229
LBS
285
394
230-239
LBS
141
301
240-249
LBS
106
341
> 249
LBS
158
453
UNKNOWN
2.1.0
301
TOTAL
7*965
408
DIRECT COST PER MAN YEAR
MAN-MRS COSTS
EXPOSURE PER M-Y
440*416 161
1*251*880 148
2*709*601 207
4*086*865 .140
5*376*200 207
4*961*914 189
4*548*255 212
3*126*720 234
2*516*843 165
1*671*928 190
1*193*117 189
623*387 137
496*136 146
714*675 20.1.
1*133*900 11-2
34*851*858 187
-------
EXHIBIT 10
/-
SPEECHES ON IRIS AND
SOLID WASTE SAFETY
(October 1977 - September 1978)
1. Ms. King and Ms. Reiley spoke at the National Safety Congress
for the Refuse Collction and Disposal Division, Chicago,
Illinois, October 1977.
2. Ms. King spoke on "Solid Waste Collection Safety" before the
University of Wisconsin Extension, Madison, Wisconsin, Decem-
ber 1977.
3. Ms. King spoke at the Southwest Safety Congress & Exposition
in Phoenix, Arizona, April 1978.
4. Ms. Reiley spoke on "How to Keep and Analyze Injury Statis-
tics", for Oklahoma State University, sponsored by NSC and
GRCDA, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, April 1978.
-------
FePII! lep^ri
Safety and the refuse worker:
some programs and publications
By John J. Dunn, Jr., executive secre-
tary of the American Public Works In-
•tiiwte for Solid Wastes. Washington,
OC
In the 1978 edition of Work, Injury
and Illness Rates, the National
Safety Council reports that the ref-
ute collection industry reported an in-
cidence rate that was over four times
the national average for all industries,
more than t*»ce the rate for fire
righting and five times the rate for
bituminous coal mining. In further
contrast 10 all industries as a group,
the 1977 refuse collection incidence
rate was higher than its three-year av-
erage; this implies that the refuse col-
lection industry is not improving its
safety record.
In 1977 the refuse collection sector
lost the equivalent of 1.5 man-years
per reporting unit; the comparable all-
industries figure was .2 man-years.
Public vs. private records
The National Safety Council also re-
ported figures for public employes sep-
arately for 1977. These figures suggest
This column represents the views of
th« writer and not necessarily those of
So'id Wastes Management Magazine.
We are publishing it in the interests of
our readership.
that the publicly-employed refuse col-
lection worker may not be working as
safely as his counterpart in the private
sector. It should be noted that public
refuse collection is more residential
than the private sector; thus public em-
ployes may be exposed to a more haz-
ardous work environment than private
sector employes in commercial collec-
tion service. The significantly higheT
incidence rates for public employes in
refuse collection may be, in pan. due
to this factor. It can be clearly said,
however, that there is much improve-
ment needed.
Safety is an issue, not only of
worker health and well being but also
of money. A figure like 1.5 man-years
can cost a community S30.000 in lost
wages and benefits.
Most experts agree that the total
costs of an accident can be five times
the direct costs. Thus the need and
utility of a safety and loss prevention
program can be clearly understood.
Sources of information
As a solid waste manager con-
templates the design and implementa-
tion of a safety program for his organ-
ization, he now has some additional
sources of information and guidance.
An important background document
to prepare a safety and loss prevention
program is Solid Waste Collection
Practice, prepared and published by
the American Public Works Associa-
tion. It is available from APWA. 1313
East 60th St.. Chicago. IL 60637. At-
tention: Publication Department. The
price is S14.40 to members and S20 for
non-members.
Another important resource is the
Injury Reporting and Information Ser-
vice (IRIS) operated by Safety Sci-
ences. Inc.. of San Diego. CA. This
system gathers information on acci-
dents and injuries to refuse workers
from subscribers and then prepares an-
alytic reports. These reports are avail-
able to members and to others at cost.
Additionally, member communities
may request special analyses to suit
particular needs or to aid in identifying
locally specialized occurrences.
IRIS was originally set up with
funds from the Office of Solid Waste,
EPA. This funding has now ceased
and IRIS is supported entirely by sub-
scription.
IRIS can be reached by contacting:
Barbara Riley. Safety Sciences, Inc..
(IRIS), 11772 Sorrento Valley Road,
San Diego, CA 92121, 714/755-9359.
The utility of this service is perhaps
best shown by some examples. Since its
inception in 1975, IRIS has prepared
analyses based on 43 million man-
hours of refuse collection work and
over 10,000 injuries. This quantity of
data is the result of reports filed by
member communities, and, therefore,
the data base will become larger and
more useful as time goes on. It will in-
crease with the addition of new sub-
scribers.
IRIS sent subscribers earlier this year
a detailed analysis with illustrative
drawings of the requirements of the
ANSI Z245.1 standard. This safety
standard, which applies to both sta-
tionary and mobile compactors, was
designed in response to the most com-
mon packer related accidents.
Another issue featured a detailed
discussion of injuries involving con-
tainers, including a brief description of
each incident and its direct cost. The
report also discussed preventive mea-
sures including clothing, modifications
to equipment, employe training and
other practices.
Each quarterly issue of Accident
Trends, an IRIS publication, contains
detailed analyses of accidents and in-
juries reported by subscribers. Advice
on conduct of an effective safety pro-
gram is distilled from these analyses
and clearly presented in each issue.
Special IRIS reports
Additionally, IRIS produced special
reports on such topics as:
C Time of injur)' occurrence for task
vs. fixed-hour employes.
C Effects of fatigue, haste and break
periods on injuries.
C Vehicle accidents for task vs. fixed-
hour employes.
C Over-exertions by type of shift and
size of crew.
Continued on page 86
70
SOLID WASTES MANAGEMENT/RRJ/FEBRUARY 1979
Continued from page 70
~ Analysis of contributory factors in
nine fatalities.
~ Accidents related to mounting/dis-
mounting refuse vehicle.
OSU program
A comprehensive training program
in the elements of an effective safety
and loss prevention program is offered
by the Center for Local Government
Technology, Oklahoma State Univer-
sity. The next workshop. Safety and
Loss Prevention for the Refuse Work-
er, will be offered on February 28th
and March 1st in Atlanta. GA, and
April 4-5 in Kansas City. MO.
The seminar includes such topics as:
~ The management role in safety.
C Employe incentives.
~ The impaired employe.
~ How to identify an accident before
it happens.
~ Accident investigation.
~ Refuse truck specifications.
~ Truck and fleet safety. ..
~ Refuse truck fires. j-j]
D Getting the injured back to work.
Further information can be obtained EC
from W« Beitl at OSU at 405/624- W
6049. D DO
H
t-3
-------
EXHIBIT 12
LIST OF PREVIOUS IRIS PUBLICATIONS
FROM CONTRACT NO. 68-03-0231
I. ACCIDENT TRENDS REPORTS
1. Equipment Related Accidents
2. Container Handling Accidents
3. Caught in Packer Accidents
4. Slips and Falls
5. Specialized Collection Accidents
6. Employee Characteristics (e.g., Age, Experience, Height and Weight)
II. IRIS NEWS ARTICLES
1. Equipment Modifications
2. Safety Manual in Progress by SAFETY SCIENCES
3. ANSI Z245.1 and Z245.3 Standards
4. Task/Hazard Analysis of Equipment Related Accidents and Over-
exertion Accidents
5. Task vs. Hourly Type of Shift Injury Rates and Safety Literature
List
6. Annual Injury Rates
7. Safety Incentive Programs
8. The Hidden Costs of Occupational Accidents
9. Personal Protective Equipment Summary
III. IRIS NEWSFLASH TOPICS
1. Riding on Step While Truck is Backing and Unlatching Tailgate -
Two Severe Injuries
2. "Packing on the Run" Accidents
3. Exploding Bomb Accident
4. Catching Objects Falling from Operating Packer, Accidentally Oper-
ating Packer Wrong, and Hazardous Waste Accidents
5. Being Run Over by the Collection Vehicle Accidents
IV. SPECIAL REPORT TOPICS
1. The Use of Personal Protective Equipment and Its Effect on Accident
Reduction
2. The Occurrence of Back Strains (Overexertions) in Relation to the
Age and Experience of the Employee
3. Crew Type Variations in Size, Type of Shift, and Point of Collection
and Their Effects on Injury Rates
4. How Differences in Worker's Compensation Policies and Wage Continu-
ation Benefits Affect the Incidence of Injuries
5. The Relationship of Injury Rates of Solid Waste Collection to the
Type of Equipment in Use
-------
PUBLICATIONS
-------
ACCIDENT TRENDS
-------
ACCIDENT TRENDS
In the Solid Waste Management Industry
QUARTER: October 1 to December 31, 1977
developed by SAFETY SCIENCES, division of WSA Inc.,
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Under Contract No, 68-01-4747
U'vtsfon of WSA Inc.,1W72 Sorrento Valley Roa.l
^ ¦>) San Diego, CA 9,'121 (714) 755-9359 A 452-1010
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 1: Summary of Injuries by Frequency,
Severity, and Costs. 1
FIGURE 2: Comparison of Injury Rates and OSHA
Days Lost for All Users 3
FIGURE 3: Comparison of Direct Costs by Reporting
Period of All Users 9
FIGURE 4: Summary of Accident Factors for
Selected Accident Characteristics with
Highest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct
osts 15
FIGURE 5A- Activities Ranked from Highest to
5C: Lowest Percnet of OSHA Recordable Injur-
ies, Days Lost and Direct Costs: Average
of All Users 16
FIGURE 6A- Accident Types Ranked from Highest to
6C: Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable Injur-
ies Days Lost and Direct Costs: Average
of All Users 21
i
-------
FIGURE 1
SUMMARY OF INJURIES
BY FREQUENCY, SEVERITY AND COSTS
FREQUENCY
• There were 529 cases reported by the 12 IRIS users
on-line: 4 first-aid cases, 206 non-fatal cases
without lost workdays, 317 lost workday cases, 2
permanent disability cases, and 0 fatality. Total
man-hours for this quarter were 2,261,748.
• The AVERAGE OSHA incidence rate was 39 for this
quarter. This means that more than one out of
every three solid waste industry employees will
experience a non-first aid injury a year. The
national rate for all industries was 9.4. There-
fore, the solid waste industry is experiencing more
than three times as many injuries as the average
industry.
• IRIS users ranged in frequency rates from User
No. 103 which was experiencing almost 2 injuries
per employee per year, to User No. 125 which was
experiencing 16 injuries per 100 employees per
year.
SEVERITY
(Days lost given are not final. These figures reflect
what was received from IRIS users by June 30, 1978, and may
be gross underestimates. For example, in the months since
the publication of the first quarter Accident Trends for
1976, the OSHA severity rate has increased from 269 to 417,
and not all cases are final yet.)
• So far, 319 cases this quarter incurred workdays
lost and light duty days.
• 60% of the total cases resulted in workdays lost
and/or light duty days. The national average
for all industries is 43%. This means that the
solid waste industry has almost 1.4 times as
many lost workday injuries as the average
industry.
1
-------
• The AVERAGE OSHA severity rate was 316. This means
that on the average, each employee is losing 3.16
days per year for injuries. One user's rate was as
high as 15 days per year per employee.
• On the AVERAGE, each lost workday case resulted in
13.01 workdays lost so far.
DIRECT COSTS
(Costs given are not final. These figures reflect what
was received from IRIS users by June 30, 1978, and may be gross
underestimates. For example, first quarter of 1976's AVERAGE
cost per OSHA recordable injury has gone up from $511 to $538.)
• Total direct costs so far for injuries that occurred
during the fourth quarter was $301,108.
• The AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury was $465.
• The AVERAGE cost per man-year was $181. This means
that the average solid waste injury (non-first aid)
costs $181 per full-time employee per year so far.
2
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 2
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE
RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
DAYS LOST
US Eft
QTR 1
QTR 2 QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
ioi
12
33
46
20
47
391
102
145
6.50
27. 00
8. 33
21. 14
103
103
370
3. 44
i09
36
49
51
22
195
176
199
126
8.03
8. i 5
7.65
6. 27
111
r>5
73
77
53
1059
1283
648
341
23.73
24.79
11. 59
16.76
i. i 3
23
0
0. 00
i i. 5
29
160
10. 55
i 25
3i
35
42
20
875
393
560
439
35. 54
13.71
16.72
32.43
133
11
80
10. 50
i36
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 00
0.00
0. 00
*» 140
31
55
347
680
15. 37
16. 56
146
25
2 i
34
36
664
138
288
260
82. 17
20. 60
19.73
13. 47
i 4 8
23
5
18
151
0
61
12.86
0.00
9. 25
i49
125
1146
13. 22
152
87
355
8. 14
157
16
90
6. 29
1 61
13
41
62
53
0
33
98
38
0.00
1.60
5.00
1.11
170
23
171
9. 64
17i
44
52
59
47
209
229
294
525
9. 58
5.96
10. 53
19. 58
172
50
55
59
33
475
1116
443
590
14.56
27. 51
11. 23
32. 79
173
18
105
11. 07
179
13
29
143
430
19.17
24. 21
181
44
50
66
51
367
148
310
425
11. 43
4. 26
8.15
13.04
iR2
12
22
4. 60
183
38
163
6.62
x86
13
24
25
23
69
279
102
108
12.25
• 22.00
3. 22
7. 36
191
57
46
94
47
189
150
232
505
4.00
5.11
4.62
15.73
197
38
31
320
2357
10.00
93.75
20i
8
233
61.00
204
79
13-5
48
30
342
84
55
273
13.00
8.00
7.00
12. 00
207
78
9 6
72
97
576
251
622
348
10.30
5.35
13. 19
3. 53
210
104
0
49
148
4 67
0
1347
3142
9.00
0.00
27.50
29. 30
211
9
68
34
63
539
281
94
211
62.00
4.71
2.75
3.36
212
79
44
759
403
9. 65
11.00
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1976
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
QSHA INCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
USER • OTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 : QTR I QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 : QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
215
0
0
22
0
0
0
1504
0
0.00
0. 00
72.57
0.00
21^
4 4
SO
43
193
153
70
11.22
12. 38
3. 57
221
10
69
43
900
4.50
13. 07
2 2 S
18
0
0. 00
235
7
55
40
35
II
0
0
50
3.00
0.00
0.00
2.30
235
83
104
73
57
1478
555
248
50
18.53
8.85
5.00
1.78
237
15
33
47
35
35
152
93
128
3.50
5.40
3. 14
4.33
242
4
0
0
5
100
0
0
18
25.00
0. 00
0.00
3. 50
244
93
57
42
55
170
199
184
183
2.75
3. 50
5. 50
5.50
260
53
54
104
117
759
519
1190
1295
19.42
15. 20
17. 54
14. 25
2 Si
43
0
0
48
145
0
0
429
3.00
0.00
0.00
9.00
255
34
46
54
59
245
300
401
514
8.54
7.80
7. 30
10. 55
272
11
15
19
40
243
11
93
149
32.00
1.50
5. 50
5.83
275
50
59
93
535
79
384
10.57
2.57
9. 25
283
12
50
51
20
0
134
118
10
0.00
3.00
3. 50
2.00
285
7
0
13
0
2.00
0.00
28 5
0
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0.00
0. 00
0.00
0.00
292
3
11
7
5
28 4
20
15
7
85.00
4. 33
2.75
3.00
295
17
20
20
29
54
20
102
212
4.75
2.00
15. 50
13. 33
295
19
7«5
53
55
475
2943
221
1755
25.00
51.50
5.75
32.17
299
45
155
28. 00
315
53
GO
29
508
425
332
17.05
12.82
18. 14
3x0
79
45
2453
345
31.09
7 . 57
323
10
53
13.00
324
79
71
45
0
235
23
0.00
3. 33
1.00
325
42
45
45
134
345
719
4.75
13.00
18. 57
325
0
18
0
35
0.00
2.00
323
0
0
0.00
329
37
17
50
37
102
17
2.00
5.00
I.00
330
25
59
43
82
77
735
5.00
2.50
20.50
331
O
O
•
O
O
x
0.00
O - GO
-
Q.1
-x-x
¦s.
*2. - CiQ
-3,-1 - QQ
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 197 6 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY RATE
AVERAGE 03H\ DAYS LOST
ISER
QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
317
45 38
415 262
9.29 6.92
3 38
32 25
251 193
7.78 7.57
330
23 34
116 193
5.12 5.67
34 0
29
691
66. 37
34 i
78 53
1382 737
19.50 12.75
343
50 75
100 50
2.00 2.00
344
ii
80
7. 00
345
10
632
65. 00
34 5
29
95
3. 25
347
20
20
3. 00
348
33
186
8. 50
34 9
49
121
10. 00
350
42
96
3. 00
35i
5i
101
2. 00
353
35
122
7. 00
354
129
388
9. 00
355
33
16
1. 50
35S
88
4230
145.00
359
57
447
12.43
3 Si
23
0
0. 00
362
4
301
72.00
363
6
0
0. 00
AVG.
34 44 45 33
417 396 299 286
17.73 14.74 11.85 14.83
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
101
17
25
18
60
67
22
103
89
210
172
191
177
3301
1217
476
109
14
13
22
79
252
231
lii
37
53
94
60
333
261
712
274
113
23
0
339
0
115
32
516
125
25
2 6
23
16
297
188
227
133
133
38
30
603
141
146
23
15
30
29
416
70
51
55
i 4 8
13
10
0
163
21
0
149
124
145
105
1197
835
254
152
53
76
23 3
467
157
48
97
1
57
313
170
31
42
53
275
205
241
171
42
51
53
291
358
199
172
51
63
51
43
237
310
421
234
178
4
65
179
36
11
426
212
181
43
47
46
24
244
366
237
259
1R2
15
25
2
86
154
11
183
64
72
162
256
186
35
17
0
158
41
0
19i
65
87
65
415
277
326
197
25
12
57
130
129
1063
201
25
47
53
317
204
24
0
207
84
59
70
457
313
299
210
22
92
36
22
369
107
211
37
13
213
VvS
c\
Ck
c*
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
13.00
23. 00
3. 20
5.60
22.92
10. 13
5.83
16. 26
11.30
13.65
8.63
11.16
24.00
0.00
19. 37
13.31
9. 20
11. 24
31.60
S. 17
32.10
3. 00
CO
•
CO
o
24. 25
3.25
0.00
17.86
9. 20
4.83
8.80
10. 57
4.18
13.57
10.19
6. 50
•
00
9.16
8. 16
4.75
13.00
12. 76
12.77
15.50
17.05
32.09
9.67
9.78
7. 54
8.90
7. 36
12.00
4.82
5. 24
7.31
3.87
0.00
8.24
4.18
6.82
5.25
10.50
18.50
6.50
16. 00
0.00
12.47
9.12
1.00
5.00
3.00
a. 33
3.33
o • 6 0
O.DO
Ck . CVO
QTR 4
4.43
6.70
9. 55
B. 17
14.75
11.83
9.06
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
USER
226
235
2 3 o
237
24 2
244
260
265
272
27 5
283
28 6
292
296
299
316
313
323
324
325
326
328
329
330
331
333
336
337
3 38
339
340
341
343
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
SEVERITY RATE
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR I QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
35
191
11.00
4 6
47
502
352
12.91
7.57
61
59
IB
263
175
21
7.32
12. 40
3. 00
41
24
62
43 3
56
147
29.50
4. 67
4. 22
0
0
0.00
54
94
67
2371
336
226
105.50
4.17
4. 25
80
714
14.24
52
30
77
322
444
664
10. 40
7.77
11.45
11
7
32
11
4
175
1.50
1.00
3. 17
62
0
0
591
0
0
14. 25
0.00
0.00
24
34
2. 33
0
37
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
9
14
12
195
16
24
26.17
7.00
7.57
27
8
0
36
220
0
2. 00
26.00
0. 00
72
93
144
236
5. 20
3.71
46
51
43
42
750
797
711
574
23.15
23.64
22.71
33
33
55
273
876
148
13.67
27.40
8.00
17
200
27.00
23
0
47
680
0
234
29. 00
0.00
10.00
72
63
79
601
181
194
9. 20
4.14
2.91
51
16
0
2700
0
0
52.67
0.00
0.00
0
121
40
0
1048
0
0. 00
13.00
0.00
17
48
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
2i
19
25
326
13
430
23.50
1.00
23.00
30
15
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
43
16
15
0
0
0
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
16
15
7
23
15
0
3,00
2.00
0.00
35
26
19
25
216
293
262
439
7.44
11. 37
13.83
33
13
7
39
233
38
40
630
8.12
4.80
5. 50
47
52
23
20
329
242
310
1500
7.53
6.38
13.62
35
0
280
0
18.55
0. 00
101
104
1835
1073
21.83
15.00
72
96
44
24
72
244
1. 00
1.50
11.00
21.36
19. 36
19.56
105.60
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
USER
1 QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
344
69
49
83
552
312
1349
8.00
6.40
345
59
40
39
235
20
39
5.80
1.00
316
118
213
4. 14
347
34
59
33
68
388
102
3.33
9.83
34 8
51
49
87
698
243
1034
11.50
3.33
349
94
46
53
1175
0
466
25.00
0.00
350
77
50
53
1902
299
4 71
43.50
7.50
35i
52
153
50
0
612
0
0.00
6.00
352
9i
454
3 3.00
353
18
200
11.00
354
83
99
0
99
0.00
355
11
48
10
6
263
77
1.00
16.33
353
58
27
232
0
4.00
0.00
361
11
0
0.00
362
21
32
23
267
394
152
15.75
20.00
353
33
17
25
98
0
185
5.00
0.00
AVG. :
35
41
39 39 :
281
247
237
316
13.05
10.45
QTR 3 QTR 4
15. 40
2.00
5. 33
12. 50
17. 50
12. 25
0.00
5.00
8.00
10.00
18.00
10.31
13.01
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA REC.
INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
SER ! QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
iru
4, 210
29,631
5,755
5, 260
vc
CO
CO
986
127
263
51
330
58
51
iO 3
3,627
20 3
244
109
13,513
12,994
19,851
12,958
312
213
275
345
112
104
139
73
ill
57,135
42,443
32,087
15,035
1,190
771
503
341
773
563
389
179
1x3
102
51
14
1 x 5
6,895
328
95
125
54,614
27,955
47,458
36,266
895
388
499
755
280
135
209
143
133
638
212
24
136
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
140
33,842
59,843
711
688
219
382
146
14,599
5,442
5,980
8,421
773
340
230
300
197
72
79
103
iia
3,577
110
2, 092
255
36
190
60
1
34
j. 49
4, 202
323
404
a5?
3,365
240
209
157
2,977
37 2
61
1 'Si
135
815
1,526
633
18
80
93
48
5
33
59
25
170
23,177
340
77
171
3,582
6,376
9,506
21,455
148
163
237
613
65
102
139
2 85
172
27,167
53,431
27,413
39,401
393
749
274
667
197
415
189
253
173
7,107
253
48
179
8,681
35,411
413
737
53
217
181
1.1,510
5,190
11,627
16,264
391
157
247
451
175
78
164
230
182
1,032
82
9
183
7,535
313
119
18-3
1,295
8,021
2,950
3,550
143
471
163
208
18
113
40
47
191
1,475
1,635
2,101
11,128
85
120
70
695
49
55
65
325
j. 97
2,710
89,142
451
17
,8 28
173
5,603
201
2,571
1
,285
100
204
2,481
517
300
2,142
275
39
50
535
217
54
23
162
207
4,523
9,636
12,903
6,786
141
235
403
150
110
225
289
145
210
1,445
0
3, 2i8
9,667
361
0
1,609
1
, 381
37 4
0
788
2,038
211
794
1,937
600
1,687
758
248
145
195
68
168
51
131
212
14,297
7, 138
621
549
488
243
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST
PER
OSHA REC
. INJ.
AVERAG
E COST
PER MAN
YEAR
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
215
0
0
5,725
0
0
0
1,908
0
,0
0
421
0
217
87,684
36,713
18,317
956
259
163
419
156
70
221
1,045
14,110
253
491
25
346
2 26
60
20
3
235
251
725
240
886
125
48
21
88
9
26
8
31
23$
12,758
9, 550
8,223
1,442
608
329
3 57
80
536
341
261
45
237
604
1,813
1,583
1,925
201
259
143
218
30
3 6
67
84
242
6,877
0
0
278
6,877
0
0
139
274
0
0
7
241
706
904
748
9S2
117
226
249
240
109
128
105
135
2 60
2, 317
5,620
3,797
17,68 3
110
330
258
442
7 5
180
269
518
2 61
159
0
0
960
159
0
0
960
76
0
0
457
2 65
2, R20
8, 216
14,019
9,500
214
455
519
306
72
210
334
210
272
1, 861
109
1, 224
1,444
620
27
244
131
70
4
46
52
275
1,437
272
1, 297
239
45
144
142
26
134
283
119
1,346
1,890
173
59
147
210
43
7
75
105
8
285
6x
0
61
0
4
0
236
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
30
292
7, 327
894
483
376
3,663
127
96
94
121
13
5
4
295
911
578
1,172
5,257
177
96
195
477
30
19
38
139
296
1,932
16,786
1,256
10,471
991
2,
098
209
1,745
183
1,593
120
957
299
2,010
125
56
3i6
37,917
24,016
21,162
631
338
604
337
204
176
3i8
14,061
4,253
1,278
593
1,010
277
323
893
20 5
21
324
92
491
62
30
163
31
24
115
14
325
2,159
4,7 36
5,701
359
67 6
80S
151
313
365
3 2r,
0
91
0
91
0
16
329
0
0
0
329
153
378
194
66
338
64
28
64
32
330
1,053
480
2,612
351
53
435
86
36
186
331
0
0
0
0
0
0
333
223
2,044
55
340
36
329
336
>
60
20
A
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER OSHA RF1C. INJ.
AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
SER !
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 ! QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
337
11,442 7,654
817 638
364 241
338
6,431 4,938
714 709
230 130
339
3,152 6,265
394 522
89 173
34 0
15,012
682
195
341
9,864 4,348
895 597
699 350
34 3
341 453
170 151
85 113
344
318
318
36
345
1,670
1,670
16 2
34 6
619
154
45
347
331
110
22
343
1,17 2
390
128
349
729
182
88
350
481
120
51
35 j.
64
64
32
353
238
119
41
354
1,193
198
255
355
165
27
9
3 58
3,953
1,317
1,153
359
2,06 i
187
105
361
40
20
4
.IS 2
1,934
1,934
80
363
31
31
1
AVG. : 291,530 465,732 353,785 559,093 : 538
513
330 463 : 183
226 150 153
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COS
TS
AVG. COST
PER
OSHA REC
. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
JSER ! QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
101
2,805
4,636
2,897
147
136
ill
25
3 3
19
259
103
2, 399
46,595
10,601
5,574
167
1,
331
318
134
151
2,795
553
i 09
9,361
30,631
35,475
356
963
795
53
175
186
165
1 11
19,743
11,102
35,882
14,737
658
284
484
278
241
151
458
113
1, 286
0
643
0
181
0
I x 5
17,674
734
247
83
37
125
25,994
16,605
22,746
11,330
442
259
360
236
111
65
133
9,022
2,335
902
292
345
38
145
22,782
4,187
4,093
5,107
1, 265
347
157
196
295
52
47
57
148
3,559
554
0
458
92
0
61
9
0
149
7,593
3,761
2,886
534
235
240
727
341
252
152
3, 265
4,585
359
382
210
289
157
3,005
130
63
161
3,770
251
144
170
32,193
29,022
28,544
353
237
175
110
99
93
171
iO,230
13,837
8,544
311
314
155
130
159
39
101
172
23,439
21,835
34,802
20,395
285
202
316
234
147
129
191
173
3, 233
533
22
57
179
22,753
9,636
392
535
142
181
11,402
14,107
10,263
10,647
367
414
293
560
159
195
134
136
182
3, 337
5,931
505
222
228
252
32
55
4
103
6,553
6,981
156
162
100
117
IBS
4,388
1,628
0
168
125
0
59
21
0
191
4,182
2,910
3,482
190
100
151
124
87
97
197
1,124
1,458
5,301
281
729
530
69
39
304
201
741
1,911
123
159
30
75
204
350
116
27
134
207
6,857
4,990
7,308
175
172
192
147
100
210
80
1,771
437
80
354
218
17
326
78
211
3,305
547
1,600
300
109
160
264
39
103
215
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
211
ll.^S
12,204
11,
109
IS
70
i 44
41
33
, -s JV no
\ A. *1 A.C
, neve.
-v
A Q
•>1 &
Cvl CV
n*. c
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ.
AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
QTR 4
USER !
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 i QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
226
1,276
212
73
235
6,068
9,807
465
700
214
325
23*
12,041
7, 394
2,312
602
352
330
367
208
60
237
9,743
902
2,664
974
150
162
398
36
102
242
0
0
0
244
15,247
1,799
1,346
3,811
257
269
2,074
241
179
260
6,984
258
206
265
6,452
8,258
13,292
258
196
324
133
157
243
272
160
80
2,456
53
40
272
5
2
87
275
1,872
0
0
312
0
0
193
0
0
233
473
94
22
285
0
20
0
0
20
0
0
7
0
292
3,533
1,333
1,584
504
111
144
43
15
16
295
440
i , 354
0
146
1,364
0
39
115
0
299
2,275
2,317
87
96
63
89
315
50,812
58,064
54,855
41,510
923
879
843
728
422
445
408
318
1,566
5,393
1,411
313
893
156
104
344
86
323
2,676
380
66
324
312
50
889
312
0
444
73
11
207
325
8,345
3,049
5,235
758
304
402
545
190
316
326
34,976
4
0
11,658
4
0
5,977
0
0
329
0
644
65
0
214
65
0
259
25
329
40
102
0
40
34
0
6
16
0
330
1,749
139
2,394
583
46
598
121
8
149
331
55
34
0
28
34
0
8
4
0
333
79
43
20
26
43
20
12
6
3
335
40
40
20
20
20
20
3
3
1
337
5,740
3, 350
7,757
12,903
521
1,043
1, 292
1,612
185
269
244
338
4,213
1,622
1,085
12,175
468
324
542
1,106
154
59
39
339
6,779
7,744
10,665
47,012
423
430
1,065
6,716
197
225
302
340
13,006
0
500
0
178
0
341
18,009
8,972
1,286
560
1,295
583
343
154
479
40
51
119
20
37
115
8
302
407
435
1, 335
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ. AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
USER I QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
344
2,637
1, 265
6,045
447
253
604
308
123
529
345
1,672
322
348
278
30
37
164
31
33
34*}
1,101
68
81
347
652
2,067
120
132
229
20
45
135
7
348
3,870
1,086
4, 288
645
217
428
391
105
371
349
2,833
181
2,726
354
45
681
332
20
352
350
6,595
1,907
2,041
942
381
340
720
189
196
351
20
800
20
20
266
20
10
407
10
352
3,593
256
247
353
252
252
45
354
205
587
51
117
42
115
355
108
3,199
699
54
355
349
5
171
33
358
495
8
247
8
143
2
361
20
20
2
352
2,888
9,407
1,808
577
1,175
301
122
370
68
3 53
7i5
129
1,369
143
43
273
45
7
70
AVG.
546,284
417,995
379,559
203,444
420
337
313
465
151
137
122
-------
FIGURE 4
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT FACTORS FOR SELECTED ACCIDENT
CHARACTERISTICS WITH HIGHEST PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
OSHA DAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
October - December 1977
Type of
Factors with the:
characteristic
Highest % of OSHA Recordable Injuries
Highest % of OSHA Days Lost
Highest % of Direct Costs
Activity
Lifting or dumping container - 36%
Standing or walking - 9%
Carrying container - 8%
Lifting or dumping container - 31%
Getting off equipment - 12%
Carrying container - 11%
Lifting or dumping container - 32%
Refueling vehicle or routine maintenance - 15.
Getting off equipment - 12%
Accident Type
Overexertion involving container - 17%
Struck by waste - 9%
Slip on same level - 7%
Overexertion involving container - 22%
Fall to a different level - 16%
Slip on same level - 9%
Fall to a different level - 23%
Overexertion involving container - 20%
Vehicle accident - 8%
Accident Site
On collection route at back of truck - 39%
On collection route at curb - 11%
On collection route in customer's yard - 10%
On collection route at back of truck - 36%
On collection route at curb - 10%
On collection route in customer's yard - 6%
On collection route at back of truck - 3 3%
On collection route at curb - 9%
On collection route in customer's yard - 41
Nature of injury
Sprain or strain - 41%
Cut or puncture - 21%
Bruise - 19%
Sprain or strain - 59%
Bruise - 16%
Fracture - 8%
Sprain or strain - 57%
Bruise - 18%
Fracture - 7%
Part of Body
Back - 19%
Eyes - 8%
Leg - 8%
Back - 37%
Multiple body parts - 7%
Knee - 7%
Back - 37%
Leg - 7%
Multiple body parts - 7%
-------
FIGURE 5A
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES-
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE
NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURIES
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
LIFTING CONTAINER
77
14.67
DUMPING CONTAINER
59
11.24
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
54
10.29
STANDING OR WALKING
46
8.76
CARRYING CONTAINER
41
7.81
GETTING OFF EQUIP
38
7.24
RIDING ON EQUIP
28
5.33
DRIVING EQUIP
17
3.24
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
16
3. 05
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
15
2.86
GETTING ON EQUIP
14
2.67
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
13
2.48
LIFTING WASTE
11
2.10
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
8
1. 52
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
7
1. 33
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
6
1.14
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
5
0. 95
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
5
0.95
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
5
0.95
CLOSING EQUIP PT
5
0.95
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
5
0.95
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
5
0.95
DOING OFFICE WORK
5
0. 95
OPERATING CONTROLS
4
0.76
DUMPING WASTE
4
0.76
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
4
0.76
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
4
0.76
DIRECTING VEH
3
0. 57
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
3
0.57
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
3
0.57
OPENING EQUIP PT
2
0.38
LIFTING OBJECT
2
0.38
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
2
0.38
16
-------
FIGURE 5A (CONTINUED)
PAGE 2
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACTIVITY NO. %
RUNNING 1 0.
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL 1 0.
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIP 1 0.
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT 1 0.
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT 1 0.
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT 10.
LIFTING VEH PART 1 0.
ARRANGING LOAD 1 0.
MOWING 1 0.
TOTAL 525 100.
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
00
17
-------
FIGURE 5B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 197 7
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE
INCURRED WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE
ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS LOST
AVG DAYS LOST/
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
LOST DAYS CASE
LIFTING CONTAINER
829
14.99
15.35
GETTING OFF EQUIP
671
12.13
20. 97
CARRYING CONTAINER
615
11.12
21.21
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
534
9.65
89. 00
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
483
8. 73
13.80
DUMPING CONTAINER
407
7.36
11.97
RIDING ON EQUIP
336
6.07
19.76
STANDING OR WALKING
320
5.79
11.85
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
285
5.15
35.63
DRIVING EQUIP
179
3.24
22.78
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
159
2.87
39.75
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
117
2.12
14. 63
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
98
1.77
24.50
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
98
1.77
32. 67
CLOSING EQUIP PT
66
1.19
33. 00
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
52
0. 94
14.25
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
44
0. 80
44. 00
GETTING ON EQUIP
41
0.74
6.83
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
33
0. 60
6. 60
LIFTING WASTE
28
0.51
3.11
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
21
0.38
21. 00
DIRECTING VEH
19
0.34
6.33
DOING OFFICE WORK
14
0. 25
4.67
DUMPING WASTE
12
0. 22
12. 00
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
10
0.18
5. 00
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
10
0.18
10. 00
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
9
0.16
2.25
LIFTING OBJECT
9
0.16
9.00
OPENING EQUIP PT
7
0.13
7.00
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
7
0.13
3.50
MOWING
6
0.11
6. 00
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
4
0. 07
4. 00
LIFTING VEH PART
3
0.05
3.00
OPERATING CONTROLS
2
0. 04
1.00
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
2
0. 04
2. 00
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
1
0. 02
1.00
TOTAL
5,531
100.00
17.34
18
-------
FIGURE 5C PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION
BENEFITS AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE)
ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT
COSTS
ACTIVITY
AMT.
%
LIFTING CONTAINER
44,527
14.79
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
44,489
14.78
GETTING OFF EQUIP
35,057
11.64
CARRYING CONTAINER
27,598
9.17
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
27,542
9.15
DUMPING CONTAINER
23,995
7.97
STANDING OR WALKING
20,413
6.78
RIDING ON EQUIP
19,461
6.46
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
9,029
3.00
DRIVING EQUIP
8,065
2.68
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
6,833
2. 27
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PART
5,243
1.74
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
4,403
1.46
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
4,390
1.46
GETTING ON EQUIP
2, 926
0.97
LIFTING WASTE
1,803
0.60
DOING OFFICE WORK
1,523
0.51
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
1,518
0.50
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
1,480
0.49
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
1,479
0.49
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
1,083
0.36
CLOSING EQUIP PT
929
0.31
DIRECTING VEH
927
0.31
DUMPING WASTE
779
0.26
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
749
0.25
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
749
0.25
OPENING EQUIP PT
646
0.21
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
633
0.21
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
517
0.17
LIFTING OBJECT
487
0.16
AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
578
2,966
923
673
510
407
444
695
1,129
474
427
5,243
1,468
732
209
164
305
117
370
296
217
186
309
195
107
150
323
211
259
244
19
-------
FIGURE 5C (CONTINUED)
PAGE 2
ACTIVITY
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
LIFTING VEH PART
OPERATING CONTROLS
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
MOWING
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIP
ARRANGING LOAD
RUNNING
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
TOTAL
DIRECT COSTS
AVG COSTS/
AMT. % OSHA REC INJ
403
0.13
81
354
0.12
71
294
0.10
74
284
0.09
284
126
0.04
32
113
0.04
113
110
0. 04
110
60
0.02
60
36
0. 01
36
25
0. 01
25
16
0.01
16
14
0.01
14
301,108
100.00
574
20
-------
FIGURE 6A
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID
INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. %
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT 87 16.57
STRUCK BY WASTE 46 8.76
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL 36 6.86
FALL ON SAME LEVEL 29 5.52
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL 21 4.00
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED 21 4.00
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART 20 3.81
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS 18 3.43
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT 17 3.24
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE 14 2.67
STRUCK BY VEH PART 14 2.67
HURT BY HANDLING CONT 13 2.48
VEHICLE ACCIDENT 12 2.29
BODILY REACTION 10 1.90
PARTICLES IN EYE 10 1.90
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE 10 1.90
STRUCK BY OBJ 9 1.71
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL 9 1.71
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE 8 1.52
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART 8 1.52
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE 8 1.52
STRUCK BY CONTAINER 7 1.33
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT 7 1.33
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE 7 1.33
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE 7 1.33
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME 7 1.33
ANIMAL BITE 6 1.14
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED 6 1.14
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT 6 1.14
INSECT BITE 5 0.95
OVEREXERTION 5 0.95
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ 5 0.95
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ HANDLED 5 0.95
21
-------
FIGURE 6A (CONTINUED)
PAGE 2
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. %
FALL AGAINST VEH PART 4 0.
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE 4 0.
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE 4 0.
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT 4 0.
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER 3 0.
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT 2 0.
FALL AGAINST OBJ 2 0.
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ 2 0.
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ 1 0.
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE 1 0.
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART 1 0.
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE 1 0.
FALL AGAINST CONT 1 0.
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART 1 0.
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ 1 0.
TOTAL 525 100.
76
76
76
76
57
38
38
38
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
00
22
-------
FIGURE 6B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE
INCURRED WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE
ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS LOST
AVG DAYS LOST/
ACCIDENT TYPE
NO.
%
LOST DAYS CASE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
1, 243
22.47
19.12
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
904
16.34
47.58
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
523
9.46
20.12
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
434
7.85
39.45
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
419
7.58
19.05
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
262
4.74
21.83
STRUCK BY WASTE
216
3.91
10.29
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
212
3.83
17.67
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
158
2.86
19.75
BODILY REACTION
158
2.86
19.75
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
157
2.84
11.21
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
79
1.43
13.17
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING
HANDLED
69
1.25
6.90
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
67
1.21
16.75
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
65
1.18
9.29
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING
CONT
58
1.05
9.67
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
57
1.03
11.40
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH
PART
54
0.98
13.50
STRUCK BY OBJ
49
0.89
12.25
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
45
0.81
7.50
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING
OBJ
43
0.78
43.00
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
39
0.71
9.75
OVEREXERTION
33
0.60
8.25
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
26
0.47
8.67
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC
WASTE
24
0.43
6.00
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING
HANDLED
23
0.42
11.50
STRUCK BY VEH PART
20
0.36
5.00
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING
HANDLED
14
0.25
4.67
23
-------
FIGURE 6B (CONTINUED) PAGE 2
OSHA DAYS LOST
AVG CAYS LOST/
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. % LOST DAYS CASE
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
ANIMAL BITE
PARTICLES IN EYE
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ
INSECT BITE
TOTAL
12
0.22
2.40
12
0.22
12.00
10
0.18
2.00
8
0.14
4.00
7
0.13
3.50
7
0.13
3.50
7
0.13
3.50
7
0.13
7. 00
4
0.07
4.00
3
0. 05
3. 00
2
0.04
2.00
1
0.02
1.00
5/531
100.00
17.34
24
-------
FIGURE 6C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID
INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED. DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL
EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND WAGE CONTINUATION
BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT
INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
AVG COSTS/
ACCIDENT TYPE AMT. % OSHA REC INJ
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
68,470
22.74
3
,260
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
59,529
19.77
684
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
25,141
8.35
2
,095
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
23,954
7.84
665
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
15,727
5.22
542
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
14,775
4.91
821
STRUCK BY WASTE
12,987
4.31
282
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
11,425
3.79
1
,428
BODILY REACTION
10,034
3.33
1
,003
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
8,891
2.95
523
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
8,666
2.88
433
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH
PART
3,905
1.30
488
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
3,628
1.20
518
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING
CONT
3,536
1.17
589
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING
HANDLED
3,326
1.10
158
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
2,555
0.85
284
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
2,371
0.79
339
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
2,030
0.67
290
STRUCK BY OBJ
1,574
0.52
175
STRUCK BY VEH PART
1,448
0.48
103
OVEREXERTION
1,403
0.47
281
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
1,403
0. 47
468
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
1,393
0.46
279
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING
OBJ
1,241
0.41
621
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC
WASTE
1,225
0.41
175
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
1,191
0.40
85
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
933
0.31
72
25
-------
FIGURE 6C (CONTINUED)
PAGE 2
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT TYPE AMT.
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING
HANDLED 893
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT 849
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING
HANDLED 839
PARTICLES IN EYE 775
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE 730
STRUCK AGAINST OBJ 726
FALL AGAINST VEHICLE PART 710
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE 688
ANIMAL BITE 524
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC
SUBSTANCE 294
INSECT BITE 271
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ 196
FALL AGAINST CONT 180
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT 160
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART 151
FALL AGAINST OBJ 128
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE 123
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE 72
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART 20
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ 15
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE 3
TOTAL 301,108
AVG COSTS/
% OSHA REC INJ
0.30
149
0.28
212
0.28
168
0.26
78
0.24
91
0.24
104
0.24
178
0.23
69
0.17
87
0.10
74
0.09
54
0.07
196
0.06
180
0.05
80
0.05
151
0.04
64
0.04
123
0.02
18
0.01
20
0.01
15
0.01
3
100.00
574
26
-------
ACCIDENT TRENDS
In the Solid Waste Management Industry
QUARTER: January 1 to March 31, 1978
developed by SAFETY SCIENCES, division of WSA Inc.,
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Under Contract No. 68-01-4747
uiv,5inn of WSA Inc..11/72 Sorrento Valley Koa.l
taxdlJll<.»>Ufy
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 1: Summary of Injuries by Frequency,
Severity, and Costs 1
FIGURE 2: Comparison of Injury Rates and OSHA
Days Lost for All Users 3
FIGURE 3: Comparison of Direct Costs by Reporting
Period for All Users 10
FIGURE 4: Summary of Accident Factors for
Selected Accident Characteristics with
Highest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct
Costs 17
FIGURE 5A- Activities Ranked from Highest to Lowest
5C: Percent of OSHA Recordable Injuries,
Days Lost and Direct Costs: Average of
All Users 18
FIGURE 6A- Accident Types Ranked from Highest to
6C: Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable "
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs:
Average of All Users . 21
i
-------
FIGURE 1
SUMMARY OF INJURIES
BY FREQUENCY, SEVERITY AND COSTS
FOR FIRST QUARTER 1978
FREQUENCY
• There were 361 cases reported by the 10 IRIS users
on-line: 51 first aid cases, 91 non-fatal cases with
out lost workdays, 219 lost workday cases, 0 perma-
nent disability cases, and 0 fatality. Total man-
hours for this quarter were 1,805,645.
• The AVERAGE OSHA incidence rate was 34 for this
quarter. This means that one out of three solid
waste industry employees will experience a non-
first aid injury a year. The national rate for all
industries was 9.4. Therefore, the solid waste
industry is experiencing more than three times as
many injuries as the average industry.
• IRIS users ranged in frequency rates from User
No. 221 which was experiencing about 1 injury per
employee per year, to User No. 338 which was ex-
periencing 11 injuries per 100 employees per year.
SEVERITY
(Days lost given are not final. These figures reflect
what was received from IRIS users by Februrary 15, 1980 and
may be gross underestimates. For example, in the months
since the publication of the first quarter Accident Trends
for 1976, the OSHA severity rate has increased from 269 to
417, and not all cases are final yet.)
• So far, 219 cases this quarter incurred workdays
lost and light duty days.
• 61% of the total cases resulted in workdays lost
and/or light duty days. The national average for
all industries is 43%. This means that the
solid waste industry has almost 1.4 times as many
lost workday injuries as the average industry.
1
-------
• The AVERAGE OSHA severity rate was 272. This
means that on the average, each employee is
losing 2.72 days per year for injuries. One
User's rate was as high as 6.3 days lost per
year per employee.
• On the AVERAGE, each lost workday case resulted
in 11.23 workdays lost so far.
DIRECT COSTS
(Costs given are not final. These figures reflect what
was received from IRIS users by February 15, 1980, and may
be gross underestimates. For example, first quarter of
197 6's AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury has gone up
from $511 to $538.)
• Total direct costs so far for injuries that
occurred during the first quarter was $141,447.
• The AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury was
$456.
• The AVERAGE cost per man-year was $157. This
means that the average solid waste injury (non-
first aid) costs $157 per full-time employee per
year so far.
2
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 2
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
DAYS LOST
USER !
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR
iOi
12
33
45
20
47
391
102
145
6.50
27.00
8.33
21.
i03
103
370
3.
i.09
36
49
51
22
195
175
199
125
8.03
8.15
7.65
5.
XXI
r,5
73
77
53
1059
1283
543
341
23.73
24.79
11.59
15.
X x 3
23
0
0.
i x5
29
150
10.
x 25
3x
35
42
20
875
393
550
439
35.54
13.71
16.72
32.
133
11
80
10.
136
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
*> x40
31
55
347
680
15. 37
16.56
x 45
25
2 i
34
33
354
138
283
260
82.17
20. 60
19.73
13.
x 4 8
23
5
18
151
0
61
12.86
0.00
9.
i49
125
1146
13.
152
87
355
8.
157
15
90
6.
iol
13
41
62
53
0
33
98
38
0.00
1.60
5.00
1.
170
23
171
9.
171
44
52
59
47
209
229
294
625
9.58
5.96
10.53
19.
172
50
55
59
33
475
1115
443
590
14.56
27. 51
11.23
32.
179
18
106
11.
x79
13
29
143
430
19.17
24.
181
44
50
55
51
367
143
310
425
11. 43
4. 26
8.15
13.
x8 2
12
22
4.
133
38
168
5.
x86
13
24
25
23
69
279
102
103
12.25
22.00
3.22
7.
i 9i
57
4 5
94
47
189
150
232
505
4.00
5.11
4.62
15.
x97
33
31
320
2357
10.00
93.
201
3
238
6i.
204
79
i3-'5
43
30
342
84
55
273
13.00
3.00
7.00
12.
207
73
9?
72
97
575
251
522
348
10.30
5. 35
13. 19
3.
2i0
104
0
49
148
457
0
1347
3142
9.00
0.00
27. 50
29.
211
9
68
34
63
539
281
94
211
62.00
4.71
2.75
3.
212
79
44
759
488
9.55
11. 00
4
14
44
27
7 3
00
55
43
50
47
25
22
14
29
11
64
58
79
07
21
04
SO
52
3$
73
75
00
00
53
30
36
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1976
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA IMCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
USER
QTR i
OTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
2 j. 5
0
0
22
0
0
0
1604
0
0.00
0.00
72. 67
0. 00
217
44
SO
43
193
153
70
11.22
12. 38
3. 67
221
10
69
43
900
4.50
13.07
221
18
0
0.00
2 35
7
55
40
35
11
0
0
50
3.00
0.00
0.00
2. 80
236
08
104
73
57
1473
665
243
50
18.53
8.86
6.00
1.78
2 37
15
33
47
35
35
152
93
128
3.50
6.40
3. 14
4.83
242
4
0
0
5
100
0
0
18
25.00
0.00
0. 00
3.50
24 4
93
57
42
56
170
199
184
183
2.75
3. 50
6.50
6. 50
260
63
54
104
117
759
519
1190
1296
19. 42
16. 20
17.64
14. 26
2oi
4 3
0
0
48
145
0
0
429
3.00
0.00
0.00
9. 00
235
34
46
64
69
245
300
401
514
8.64
7.80
7. 30
10.55
272
11
15
19
40
24 3
11
98
149
32.00
1.50
6. 50
6.83
275
60
59
93
6 36
79
384
10.67
2.67
9. 25
283
12
50
51
20
0
134
IIP,
10
0.00
8.00
3. 50
2. 00
285
7
0
13
0
2.00
0.00
23 6
0
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0. 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
292
3
11
7
5
284
20
15
7
86.00
4. 33
2.75
3. 00
295
17
20
20
29
64
20
102
212
4.75
2.00
15.50
13. 33
29 3
19
7
53
55
47 6
2 94 3
221
1765
25. 00
51.50
5.75
32. 17
299
4 5
156
28.00
316
53
60
29
603
4 25
332
17.05
12.82
18. 14
318
79
4 6
2453
346
31.09
7. 57
323
10
63
13. 00
324
79
71
4 6
0
236
23
0.00
3. 33
1.00
325
4 2
46
45
134
345
719
4.75
13.00
18. 67
3 26
0
18
0
36
0.00
2.00
328
0
0
0. 00
329
37
17
50
37
102
17
2.00
5.00
1.00
330
25
69
43
82
77
735
5.00
2.50
20.60
*
o
O
.
O
o
O .00
O.GO
-
-a.-i
-V
-s.
O . CVC\
"X~J _ C\C\
-------
STARTING:
JANUARY, 197 6 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
USER
QTR j. QTR 2 QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
337
45
33
415
252
9. 29
5.92
138
32
25
251
193
7.73
7. 57
339
23
34
1 io
193
5. 12
5. 67
340
29
691
66. 37
341
73
53
1382
737
19.50
12.75
343
50
75
100
50
2.00
2. 00
344
11
80
7.00
3 4 5
ID
532
55.00
34 5
29
95
3. 25
347
20
20
3. 00
34 8
33
135
a. so
34 9
49
121
10.00
350
42
95
3. 00
3 51
51
101
2.00
353
35
122
7. 00
354
129
388
9.00
355
33
io
1. 50
353
83
4230
145.00
359
57
447
12.43
351
23
0
0.00
362
4
301
72. 00
36 3
6
0
0.00
A VG.
34 44 46
33
417
395
299
285
17.73
14.74
i 1.85
14.33
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSH^
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
DAYS LOST
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
iOi
17
25
18
60
67
22
13.00
23.00
3. 20
i 0 3
B9
210
172
191
177
3301
1217
476
5.60
22. 92
10.13
4.43
109
14
13
22
79
252
231
5.8 3
16. 26
11. 30
ill
37
5 3
94
60
333
261
712
274
13.65
8.68
11.16
6.73
u3
23
0
339
0
24.00
0. 00
115
32
516
19. 37
1 25
25
26
23
16
297
188
227
133
13.81
9. 20
11. 24
9. 55
133
33
30
608
141
31.60
5. 17
146
23
15
30
29
416
70
51
55
32.10
8.00
8.80
3. 17
i4R
13
10
0
163
21
0
24. 25
3.25
0. 00
149
124
145
105
1197
835
254
17.86
9. 20
4.83
152
53
7 6
28 3
4 67
8. 80
10.57
1 57
43
97
4.18
1 6i
57
3i3
13.67
i 70
3 i
42
53
275
205
241
10.19
6. 50
6.86
1 7 x
42
51
58
291
3 58
199
9.16
8. 16
4.75
172
51
63
51
43
237
310
421
234
13.00
12.76
12.77
14.75
178
4
65
15. 50
179
3")
11
426
212
17.05
32.09
i 8 i
43
47
46
24
244
3 66
237
259
9.67
9.78
7. 54
11.83
182
15
25
2
86
154
11
8.90
7. 36
12.00
i 8 3
r>4
72
162
256
4.82
5. 24
186
35
17
0
153
41
0
7.31
3. 87
0.00
19a
65
87
65
415
277
326
8. 24
4.18
6.32
197
25
12
57
130
129
1063
5. 25
10. 50
18. 50
201
25
47
53
317
6.50
16. 00
20-3
24
0
0.00
207
B 4
59
70
" 457
313
299
12. 47
9.12
9.06
210
22
92
36
22
369
107
1.00
5.00
3.00
?.Vi
31
13
B. 33
3-33
?>. 60
Ivl.
Cv
C\
C\
• C\
JO
rx r^c-v
n (\/\
o
-------
LNG:
SER
223
235
233
2 37
242
24-1
260
265
272
275
283
236
292
2 93
299
313
3 i 3
323
324
325
326
328
329
3 30
331
333
3 3 3
337
3 33
339
340
341
343
JANUARY , 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
IMC IDEN
CE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHJ
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
35
191
11.00
4 3
47
502
352
12.91
7. 57
$ 1
59
18
263
175
21
7.82
12. 40
4 i
24
32
483
56
147
29.50
4. 67
0
0
0.00
54
94
57
2871
335
226
105.50
4.17
80
714
14.24
52
SO
77
322
444
664
10.40
7.77
I i
7
3 2
11
4
175
1. 50
1. 00
f>2
0
0
591
0
0
14.25
0. 00
24
34
2. 33
0
37
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
9
14
12
195
16
24
26.17
7.00
27
8
0
33
220
0
2. 00
26. 00
7 2
93
144
235
5.20
3.71
43
51
48
42
750
797
711
574
23.15
23.64
33
33
55
2.7 3
876
148
13.67
27.40
17
200
27.00
23
0
47
580
0
234
29.00
0.00
72
53
79
601
181
194
9. 20
4. 14
51
1 6
0
2700
0
0
52.67
0.00
0
121
40
0
1048
0
0.00
13. 00
17
48
0
0
0
0
0.00
0. 00
21
19
25
326
13
430
23.50
I. 00
30
15
0
0
0
0
0.00
0. 00
43
IS
15
0
0
0
0.00
0. 00
16
15
7
23
15
0
3.00
2. 00
35
23
19
25
216
293
262
439
7. 44
11. 37
33
IS
7
39
238
38
40
630
8.12
4. 80
47
5 2
28
20
329
242
310
1500
7.53
6. 38
35
0
280
0
18.55
0.00
101
104
1885
1073
21.83
72
93
44
24
72
244
1.00
1. 50
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA D^YS LOST
USER
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
: QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
3 44
69
49
83
552
312
1349
8.00
6.40
15. 40
345
59
40
39
235
20
39
5.80
1.00
2.00
316
im
213
4. 14
347
34
59
33
63
388
102
3.33
9.83
5. 33
348
5 i
4 9
87
698
243
1034
11.50
3. 33
12. 50
34 9
94
46
53
1175
0
466
25.00
0.00
17. 50
350
77
50
58
1902
299
471
43. 50
7. 50
12. 25
35-l
52
153
50
0
612
0
0.00
6. 00
0.00
352
95
454
3 3. 00
353
13
200
11.00
354
83
99
0
99
0.00
5.00
355
11
48
10
6
263
77
1.00
16.33
8.00
353
53
27
232
0
4.00
0.00
3 61
11
0
0.00
352
21
32
23
267
394
152
15.75
20.00
10. 00
35 3
33
17
2 5
98
0
185
5. 00
0.00
18.00
AVG. :
35
41
39 39 :
281
247
237
316
13.05
10.45
10.31
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1978
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
USER ! QTR I QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
SEVERITY RATE
QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR 4 : QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
103 :
85
264
4.69
x i I :
63
586
16.38
125 :
13
94
9.90
146 :
20
60
9.00
181 :
48
486
15.08
22i :
95
630
7.68
316 :
27
334
13. 24
337 :
61
451
10.21
338 :
11
95
8.67
339 :
52
232
8.08
AVG. :
34
272
ii.23
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA REC.
INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MA>
JSER ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
lOx
4, 2x0
29,631
5,755
5, 260
386
CO
127
2 63
51
330
53
i 0 3
3, 627
203
109
x3,513
12,994
19,851
12,953
312
213
275
345
112
104
139
ill
57,x35
42,443
32,037
15,035
1, 190
771
503
341
773
563
389
1x3
102
51
1x5
6,895
328
x 25
54,614
27,965
47,458
3 6,266
895
388
499
755
280
135
209
133
6 38
212
136
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14 0
39,842
69,343
711
688
219
332
x46
14,599
5,442
5,930
3, 421
773
340
2 30
300
197
72
79
x43
3, 577
110
2,092
255
36
190
60
1
i 4 9
4, 202
323
x52
3,365
240
157
2,977
372
i 6x
135
315
1, 526
633
13
30
93
48
5
33
59
170
23,177
340
171
3, 532
6, 376
9, 505
21,455
143
163
237
613
65
102
139
172
27,167
53,431
27,413
39,401
393
749
274
667
197
415
139
i 73
7,107
263
179
3,631
35,411
413
737
53
i 8 x
x x,510
5,190
11,627
16,264
391
157
247
451
175
78
164
x 3 2
1,032
32
10 3
7, 535
313
136
1, 295
3,021
2,950
3, 550
143
471
163
203
18
113
40
191
1, 475
1,635
2,101
11,123
86
120
70
695
49
55
65
x 97
2,710
39,142
451
17
, 8 2.8
173
201
2, 571
1
, 285
20 4
2,481
517
300
2,142
275
39
50
535
217
54
23
207
4,523
9,636
12,903
6,786
141
23 5
403
150
110
226
239
210
1,445
0
3,218
9 ,667
361
0
1,609
1
, 381
37 4
0
783
7. i. i.
F>00
1, 681
isa
248
145
195
63
168
51
n , vva
-2.4^
QTR 4
51
244
73
179
14
95
143
24
103
34
404
209
61
25
77
235
253
43
217
230
9
119
47
325
5,603
100
162
145
2,033
131
-------
STARTING; JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ. AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
USER J QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
215
0
0
5,725
0
0
0
1,908
0
0
0
421
0
217
87,63 4
36,713
18,317
956
259
163
419
156
70
221
1,045
14,110
253
491
25
346
2 26
60
20
3
235
251
725
240
385
125
48
21
88
9
2o
8
31
2 36
12,768
9, 550
3, 223
1,442
608
329
357
80
536
341
261
45
237
604
1,813
1,58 3
1,925
201
259
143
218
30
36
67
34
24 2
6, 877
0
0
278
6, 877
0
0
139
274
0
0
7
24 A
706
90 4
748
962
117
2 25
249
240
109
128
105
135
2 30
2, 317
5,620
3,797
17,68 3
110
3 30
258
442
75
180
269
518
2 61
159
0
0
960
159
0
0
960
76
0
0
457
2 65
2,820
3, 216
14,019
9,500
214
455
519
306
72
210
334
210
272
1, 861
109
1, 224
1,444
620
27
244
131
70
4
46
52
275
1,437
272
1, 297
239
45
144
142
26
134
2E3
1x9
1, 346
1,890
173
59
147
210
43
7
75
106
8
2 85
61
0
61
0
4
0
236
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
30
292
7,327
894
483
376
3,663
127
96
94
121
13
6
4
295
91a
578
1, 172
5, 257
177
96
195
477
30
19
38
139
296
1,932
16,786
1, 255
10,471
991
2,098
209
1,745
188
1, 593
120
957
299
2,010
125
56
316
37,917
24,016
21,162
631
338
604
337
204
176
3^8
14,061
4, 258
1,278
593
1,010
277
323
893
205
21
324
92
491
62
30
163
31
24
115
14
325
2,159
4,736
5,701
359
676
805
151
313
365
3 26
0
91
0
91
0
16
323
0
0
0
329
153
378
194
66
338
64
28
64
32
330
1,053
480
2,612
351
53
435
86
36
186
331
0
0
0
0
0
0
333
223
2, 044
55
340
36
329
336
60
20
4
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS AVG. COST PER OSHA RF.C. INJ. AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
USER ! QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 ! QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 : QTR I QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
337
11,442 7,654
817 633
364 241
333
5,4 31 4,968
714 709
230 180
339
3,152 6,255
394 522
89 178
340
15,012
58 2
195
341
9,864 4,843
895 5 97
699 350
343
341 453
170 151
85 i 13
344
318
318
35
345
1,670
1,670
162
3 4 6
619
154
45
347
331
110
22
3 43
1,172
390
128
349
729
182
88
350
481
120
51
35x
64
64
32
353
238
119
41
354
1, 193
198
25S
355
165
27
9
3 53
3,953
1, 317
1, 153
359
2,061
187
105
36i
40
20
4
3 52
1,934
1,934
80
353
31
31
1
AVG. :
291,530 468,732 353,786 559,093 :
538 513 330 463
183 226 150 153
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COS
TS
AVG- COST
PER
OSHA REC
. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
iOi
2, BOS
4 , 633
2,897
147
133
ill
25
3 3
19
x03
2, 399
43,595
10,301
5, 574
167
1
, 331
318
134
151
2,796
553
259
i 09
9,331
30,331
3 3,475
353
938
795
53
175
185
U1
19,743
11,102
35,882
14,737
658
284
484
278
241
151
458
165
x i 3
1, 283
0
343
0
181
0
1x5
17,674
734
247
i 25
23,994
13,603
22,745
ii,330
442
259
330
235
111
36
83
37
x 3 3
9,022
2, 333
902
292
345
88
143
22,782
4,137
4,093
5,107
1, 265
347
157
196
295
52
47
57
148
3,539
554
0
458
92
0
61
9
0
149
7, 593
3,731
2,883
534
235
240
727
341
252
152
3, 235
4, 585
359
382
210
289
157
3,005
130
63
161
3, 770
251
144
170
32,193
29,022
28,544
353
237
175
110
99
93
17 x
10,230
13,8 37
8,544
311
314
155
130
159
39
172
23,439
21,835
34,802
20,395
285
202
316
234
147
129
191
101
173
3, 233
533
22
179
22,753
9,633
392
535
142
57
181
lx,402
14,107
10,233
10,647
337
414
293
560
159
195
134
135
182
3, 337
5,931
505
222
228
252
32
53
4
183
3, 553
3,931
153
162
100
117
183
4,388
1,328
0
168
125
0
59
21
0
191
4 . 182
2.910
3,482
190
100
151
124
87
97
197
1,124
1, 458
5, 301
281
729
530
69
89
304
201
741
1,911
123
159
30
75
204
350
113
27
207
3,857
4,990
7, 308
175
172
192
147
100
134
210
80
1,771
437
80
354
218
17
323
78
2x1
3, 303
547
1P 300
300
109
160
234
39
103
215
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2x7
11,398
12, 204
12,455
109
75
70
44
41
33
221
24,149
34,433
11,237
14,746
703
1
, 143
274
351
570
733
216
282
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ. AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
226
1, 276
212
73
235
6,069
9,807
465
700
214
325
2 36
12,041
7, 394
2,312
602
352
330
367
203
50
237
9,743
902
2,664
974
150
162
393
36
102
242
0
0
0
244
15,247
1,799
1, 346
3,811
257
269
2,074
241
179
2 60
6,934
258
206
2 65
6,452
8, 253
13, 292
258
196
324
133
157
243
272
160
30
2,456
53
40
272
5
2
87
275
1,872
0
0
312
0
0
193
0
0
23 3
473
94
22
286
0
20
0
0
20
0
0
7
0
292
3,533
1, 333
1,584
504
ill
144
43
15
16
2 96
440
1,364
0
146
1,364
0
39
115
0
299
2, 275
2, 317
87
96
63
89
3 i 6
50,Si 2
58,064
54,855
41,510
923
379
843
728
422
445
403
302
318
1, 566
5, 393
i? 411
313
893
156
104
344
85
323
2,676
380
66
324
312
50
889
312
0
444
73
11
207
325
8, 345
3,049
5,235
758
304
402
545
190
316
325
34,976
4
0
11,658
4
0
5,977
0
0
323
0
644
65
0
214
65
0
259
25
329
40
102
0
40
34
0
6
16
0
330
1,749
139
2, 394
533
46
598
121
8
149
331
55
34
0
28
34
0
8
4
0
333
79
43
20
26
43
20
12
6
3
336
40
40
20
20
20
20
3
3
1
337
5,740
3, 350
7,757
12,903
521
1,043
1, 292
1,612
185
269
244
407
333
4, 213
1,622
1,085
12,175
468
324
542
1,106
154
59
39
435
339
6,779
7 ,744
10,665
47,012
423
430
1, 065
6,716
197
225
302
1, 335
340
13,006
0
500
0
17 8
0
a ,^11
550
1,295
533
<=- 6.
ft.Cv
-V "V cv
~> c\
- "VI
-i -»«=>
a
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA REC. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
USER
OTR 1
OTR 2
OTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
344
2,537
1, 255
6,045
447
253
504
308
123
529
345
1,572
322
348
278
80
87
154
31
33
3 4-">
1, 101
58
81
347
55 2
2,057
120
132
229
20
45
135
7
3 48
3,870
1,085
4, 288
645
217
428
391
105
371
349
2,833
181
2,725
354
45
581
332
20
352
350
5, 595
1,907
2,041
942
381
340
720
189
195
351
20
800
20
20
255
20
10
407
10
352
3,593
255
247
353
252
252
45
354
20 5
587
51
117
42
115
355
109
3,199
599
54
355
349
5
171
33
358
495
8
247
8
143
2
35a
20
20
2
3 52
2,883
9,407
1,808
577
1,175
301
122
370
53
353
7 i 5
129
1, 359
143
43
273
45
7
70
OTR 4
AVG.: 545,234 417,995 379,559 203,444
420
337
313
455
151
137
122
181
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1978
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS AVG. COST PER 05HA REC. INJ. AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
USER ! QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 ! QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 : QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
103
3,162
158
135
ill
28,633
440
27 6
125
20,185
480
61
14 6
3,783
210
42
181
19,850
535
255
221
18,244
357
339
316
23,401
632
173
337
13,221
695
426
331
2,435
811
89
3 39
8, 518
473
247
AVG.: 141,447
156
-------
FIGURE 4
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT FACTORS FOR SELECTED ACCIDENT
CHARACTERISTICS WITH HIGHEST PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
OSHA DAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
January - March 1978
Type of
Factors with the:
Characteristic
Highest % of OSHA Recordable Injuries
Highest % of OSHA Days Lost
Highest % of Direct Costs
Activity
Lifting or dumping container - 31%
Carrying container - 12%
Getting off equipment - 8%
Lifting or dumping container - 27%
Carrying container - 13%
Getting off equipment - 11%
Lifting or dumping container - 28%
Carrying container - 12%
Getting off equipment - 13%
Accident Type
Overexertion involving container - 16%
Fall on same level - 12%
Slip on same level - 9%
Overexertion involving container - 15%
Fall on same level - 14%
Fall to a different level - 10%
Overexertion involving container - 15%
Fall to a different level - 9%
Fall on same level - 13%
Accident Site
On collection route at back of truck - 35%
On vehicle - 14%
On collection route at curb - 12%
On collection route at back of truck - 30%
On vehicle - 18%
On collection route at curb - 11%
On collection route at back of truck - 29%
On vehicle - 15%
On collection route at curb - 10%
-J
Nature of Injury
Sprain or strain - 46%
Bruise - 21%
Cut or puncture - 16%
Sprain or strain - 53%
Bruise - 24%
Cut or puncture - 6%
Sprain or strain - 46%
Bruise - 29%
Cut or puncture - 10%
Part of Body
Back - 19%
Multiple body parts - 9%
Ankle - 7%
Back - 23%
Multiple body parts - 13%
Ankle - 13%
Back - 23%
Multiple body parts - 15%
Ankle - 11%
-------
FIGURE 5A
PAGE i
All USERS
AC i i VI ric.3 RANKED FRGfi hIuHEST TO LOWEST
P£RCc.N i uF GSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY
MARCH 1S7S
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAYr
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED
OSHA RECORDABLE
ACTIVI
INJURIES
NO.
CARRYING CONTAINER
LIFTING CONTAINER
DUMPING CONTAINER
GETTING GFF EQUIP
STANDING OR WALKING
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
RIDING ON EQUIP
DRIVING EQUIP
GETTING ON EQUIP
LIFTING WASTE
CLEARING WAS"
DOING REPETI"
PUSHIi
E W HANDTGCL
' IDUS WORK
OR PULLING CONTAINER
DUMPING WASTE
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAI NT
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
OPERATING CONTROLS
E M P T Y IN G v E H
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
CARRYING WASTE
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
LIFTING VEH PART
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
u P E N IN G £ 5 U I P P T
CLOSING EQUIP PT
DOING jANITORIAl WORK
DOING no one activity
37
3B
34
30
29
23
'
IS
i l
10
g
5
5
11 ,
11 ,
10 ,
9,
3 ,
8,
G ,
5 ,
94
s i
97
38
35
33
77
IS
. 3 7
3.55
3.23
2.90
1.31
1 . B1
1 .31
i '"V r~,
i. . wj
i.)
o
o
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
o
o
0
,S7
.65
,65
.85
. 35
.32
.32
.32
, 32
,32
, 32
,32
32
TOTAL
310
I 00.00
18
-------
FIGURE 5B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - MARCH 1978
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS
ACTIVITY
LIFTING CONTAINER
CARRYING CONTAINER
GETTING OFF EQUIP
STANDING OR WALKING
RIDING ON EQUIP
DUMPING CONTAINER
GETTING ON EQUIP
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
DRIVING EQUIP
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
LIFTING WASTE
LIFTING VE1I PART
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
CARRYING WASTE
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
DUMPING WASTE
OPERATING CONTROLS
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
CLOSING EQUIP PT
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
TOTAL
LOST
NO.
%
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
3 29
13.33
13.71
317
12. 89
10.93
275
11. 18
11.00
274
11. 14
15. 22
225
9. 15
15. 00
209
3 . 50
8.04
131
5. 33
13 .10
123
5. 21
6.40
126
5.12
14 . 00
101
4.11
10.10
99
4 . 03
24.75
79
3 . 21
11. 29
35
1 . 42
35 . 00
19
0 . 77
6.33
14
0 . 57
14 . 00
14
0 . 57
14 . 00
13
0 . 53
4.33
13
0 . 53
6. 50
10
0.41
10.00
9
0 . 37
4 . 50
9
0 .37
4 . 50
9
0 . 37
9.00
9
0 . 37
4 . 50
5
0 . 20
5.00
5
0 . 20
5.00
2
0.03
2.00
2,459
100.00
11. 23
19
-------
FIGURE 5C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - MARCH 197 8
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY, PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS
AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT
COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
nTRFPT ro'iTc;
ACTIVITY AMT. % AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
LIFTING CONTAINER
18,639
13.18
518
GETTING OFF EQUIP
17,749
12. 55
592
CARRYING CONTAINER
16,725
11.82
452
STANDING OR WALKING
16,255
11.49
561
RIDING ON EQUIP
11,245
7.95
535
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
10,848
7 .67
417
DUMPING CONTAINER
10,658
7.53
313
DRIVING EQUIP
7,533
5.33
471
GETTING ON EQUIP
7,400
5.23
617
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
5,473
3.87
1,095
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
5,217
3.69
580
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
4,010
2.83
401
LIFTING WASTE
3,094
2.19
281
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
1,054
0.75
351
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
911
0.64
456
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
812
0.57
162
DUMPING WASTE
761
0. 54
152
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
682
0.48
682
OPERATING CONTROLS
577
0.41
289
CARRYING WASTE
498
0.35
498
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
366
0.26
92
CLOSING EQUIP PT
286
0.20
286
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
212
0.15
212
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
151
0.11
76
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
130
0.09
130
EMPTYING VEH
66
0.05
33
DOING JANITORIAL WORK
35
0.02
35
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
20
0.01
20
LIFTING VEH PART
20
0.01
20
OPENING EQUIP PT
20
0.01
20
TOTAL
141,447
100.00
456
20
-------
¦A
FIGURE 6A
PAGE
ACCIDENT TYPES
PERCENT OF
ALL USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD? JANUARY - MARCH 1978
definitions: osha RECORDABLE cases include medical treatment
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS)> LOST WORKDAY*
CASES
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASE*
J ~
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED,
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. %
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT 49 IS.81
FALL ON SAME LEVEL 36 11.61
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL 29 9.35
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL 19 6.13
VEHICLE ACCIDENT 15 4.84
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART 14 4.52
STRUCK BY WASTE 12 3.87
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT 11 3.55
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART 11 3.55
HURT BY HANDLING CONT 10 3.23
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED 7 2.26
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE 6 1*94
fall against veh part 6 1,94
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME a 1*94
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED 5 1*61
BODILY REACTION 5 1*61
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE 5
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART 4 1.29
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE 4 1.29
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS 4 1.29
particles in eye 3 0,97
slip to a different level 3 0.97
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT 3 0.97
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE 3 0.97
Exposure to weather extremes 3 0.97
ANIMAL BITE 3 0.97
STRUCK BY VEH PART 2 0.65
STRUCK BY CONTAINER 2 0.65
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED 2 0.65
waste particles in eye 2 o.65
fall against obj 2 0.65
bodily reaction in avoiding o$j 2 o.as
OVEREXERTION 2 0.65
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE 2 0.65
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE 2 0.65
INSECT BITE 2 0.65
STRUCK BY OBJ * 0.32
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT 1 0.32
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER * 0.32
Hurt by handling veh part 21 * o..?a
-------
FIGURE 6A (Continued)
page:
OSHA RECORDABLE
ACCIDENT TYPE
AGAINST OBJ
IN CATCHING CONT
IN CATCHING WASTE
IN AVOIDING VEH
SLIP AND STRUCK
BODILY REACTION
BODILY REACTION
BODILY REACTION
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
CONTACT WITH ELECTRIC CURRENT
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
INJURIES
NO.
1
1
.1.
0 ~ 32
0.32
0 ~ 32
0 ~ 32
0*32
0,32
0.32
0.32
0 ~ 32
0,32
TOTAL
310 100.00
22
-------
FIGURE 6B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
Keportion period: January - march i97&
definitions: a lost days case is one in which the employee incurred
Workdays lost and/or light duty days due to the accident*
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
pall on same level,
pall to a different level
slip on same level
Vehicle accident
V>EH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
pall against veh part
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
Developed injury over time
CONTACT WITH ELECTRIC CURRENT
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
PALL AGAINST OBJ
bodily reaction
OVEREXERTION
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
STRUCK BY WASTE
StIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
particles in eye
hurt by HANDLING WASTE
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
STRUCK BY VEH PART
bodily reaction in catching cont
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
unknown accident type
waste particles in eye
slip and struck against cont
STRUCK BY OBJ
bodily reaction in avoiding obj
animal bite
bodily reaction in catching waste 23
total
NO*
%
AVG DAYS L
LOST DAYS
363
14 ~ 76
9.31
348
14*15
12.00
247
10.04
15.44
219
8.91
8.76
192
7.81
16.00
96
3.90
13.71
96
3.90
24.00
91
3.70
9.10
69
2.81
13.80
60
2.44
60.00
57
2.32
28.50
56
2.28
28.00
52
2.11
7.43
«'•>
2*11
13.00
49
1*99
16.33
46
1.87
6.57
45
1.83
22.50
33
1.34
11.00
30
1.22
15.00
25
1.02
8*33
24
0.98
24.00
21
0*85
21.00
18
0.73
6.00
16
0 * 6b
16.00
15
0.61
3.00
15
0.61
15.00
14
0*57
14.00
14
0.57
7.00
13
0.53
4.33
12
0.49
4*00
11
0 *45
5.50
10
0.41
5.00
9
0.37
9.00
8
0.33
4.00
8
0.33
8.00
6
0.24
3.00
5
0,20
5.00
4
0.16
4.00
4
0.16
4.00
4
0.16
4.00
o
Am
0.08
2.00
2 >459
100.00
11.23
-------
FIGURE 6C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - MARCH 1978
DEFINITIONS: OSIIA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST WORKDAY, (
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDE*
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AN®
WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS
ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT TYPE AMOUNT % AVG COSTS/
OSIIA REC INJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
20,999
14.85
429
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
18,074
12.78
502
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
12,588
8.90
663
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
12,390
8.76
427
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
12,374
8.75
825
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
8,520
6.02
775
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
5,544
3.92
504
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
4,803
3.40
801
STRUCK BY OBJ
4,413
3.12
4
,413
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
4,262
3.01
304
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
3,704
2.62
370
CONTACT WITH ELECTRIC CURRENT
3,325
2.35
3
,325
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
2,983
2.11
994
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
2,661
1.88
887
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
2,483
1.76
414
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
2,055
1.45
514
OVEREXERTION
1,600
1.13
800
BODILY REACTION
1,572
1.11
314
FALL AGAINST OBJ
1,554
1.10
777
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
1,526
1.08
382
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
1,216
0.86
243
STRUCK BY WASTE
1,144
0.81
95
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
1,094
0.77
156
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
961
0.68
160
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
809
0.57
809
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
791
0.56
264
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
760
0.54
760
PARTICLES IN EYE
722
0.51
241
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
681
0.48
136
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
655
0.46
164
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
645
0.46
645
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
513
0.36
257
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
500
0.35
167
STRUCK BY VEH PART
485
0.34
243
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
447
0.32
447
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
420
0.30
420
24
-------
FIGURE 6C (Continued) PAGE 2
ACCIDENT TYPE
DIRECT COSTS
AMOUNT
ANIMAL BITE
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
COMTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
AGAINST CONTAINER
REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
SELF WITH OOJ BEING HANDLED
WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
STRUCK
BODILY
BODILY
STRUCK
CONTACT
INSECT BITE
HURT 3Y HANDLING VEH PART
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
TOTAL
AVG COSTS/
OS'HA REC INJ
417
0. 29
139
380
0.27
190
362
0.26
181
234
0.20
284
212
0.15
212
161
0.11
81
96
0.07
96
52
0.04
52
52
0. 04
52
40
0.03
20
40
0.03
20
33
0.03
19
20
0.01
20
20
0.01
20
141,447
100.00
4 56
25
-------
ACCIDENT TRENDS
In the Solid Waste Management Industry
QUARTER: April 1 to June 30, 1978
developed by SAFETY SCIENCES, division of WSA Inc.,
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Under Contract No. 68-01-4747
mvYriiiMhU7 Qf USA .">72 Sorrento Valley Road
wU]l(l.'Hy Siin Difyo, CA 92)2) (714) 755-9359 i 452-10)0
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 1: Summary of Injuries by Frequency,
Severity, and Costs 1
FIGURE 2: Comparison of Injury Rates and OSHA
Days Lost for All Users 3
FIGURE 3: Comparison of Direct Costs by Reporting
Period for All Users 10
FIGURE 4: Summary of Accident Factors for
Selected Accident Characteristics with
Highest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct
Costs 17
FIGURE 5A- Activities Ranked from Highest to
5C: Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs;
Average of All Users 18
FIGURE 6A- Accident Types Ranked from Highest to
6C: Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs:
Average of All Users 22
i
-------
FIGURE 1
SUMMARY OF INJURIES
BY FREQUENCY, SEVERITY AND COSTS
FOR SECOND QUARTER 1978
FREQUENCY
• There were 354 cases reported by the seven IRIS
users on-line: 67 first-aid cases, 102 non-fatal
cases without lost workdays, 185 lost workday cases,
0 permanent disability cases, and 0 fatality. Total
man-hours for this quarter were 1,742,141.
• The AVERAGE OSHA incidence rate was 33 for this
quarter. This means that one out of three solid
waste industry employees will experience a non-
first aid injury a year. The national rate for all
industries was 9.4. Therefore, the solid waste
industry is experiencing more than three times as
many injuries as the average industry.
• IRIS users ranged in frequency rates from User
No. 103 which was experiencing about one injury
per employee per year, to User No, 125 which was
experiencing 16 injuries per 100 employees per year.
SEVERITY
(Days lost given are not final. These figures reflect
what was received from IRIS users by February 15, 1980 and
may be gross underestimates. For example, in the months
since the publications of the first quarter Accident Trends
for 197 6, the OSHA severity rate has increased from 269 to
417, and not all cases are final yet.)
• So far, 185 cases this quarter incurred workdays
lost and light duty days.
• 52% of the total cases resulted in workdays lost
and/or light duty days. The national average for
all industries is 43%. This means that the
solid waste industry has almost 1.2 times as many
lost workday injuries as the average industry.
1
-------
• The AVERAGE OSHA severity rate was 262. This
means that on the average, each employee is
losing 2.62 days per year for injuries. One
user's rate was as high as 7.32 days lost per
year per employee.
• On the AVERAGE, each lost workday case resulted
in 12.40 workdays lost so far.
DIRECT COSTS
(Costs given are not final. These figures reflect what
was received from IRIS users by February 15, 1980, and may be
gross underestimates. For example, first quarter of 1976's
AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury has gone up from $511
to $538.)
• Total direct costs so far for injuries that
occurred during the second quarter was $144,213.
• The AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury was
$502.
• The AVERAGE cost per man-year was $166. This
means that the average solid waste injury (non-
first aid) costs $166 per full-time employee per
year so far.
2
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 2
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
USER !
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
: QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
101
12
33
45
20
47
391
102
103
103
j.09
36
49
51
22
195
176
199
iil
65
73
77
53
1059
1283
548
113
28
i 15
29
125
31
35
42
20
875
393
550
133
11
136
0
0
0
0
0
0
140
31
55
347
680
145
25
21
34
35
654
138
238
143
23
5
18
151
0
149
125
152
87
157
16
151
x3
41
62
53
0
33
98
170
23
171
44
52
59
47
209
229
294
172
50
55
59
33
475
1116
443
178
18
a 79
13
29
143
181
44
50
55
51
367
148
310
182
12
183
38
186
13
24
25
23
69
279
102
i9i
57
45
94
47
189
150
232
197
38
31
320
201
8
204
79
135
48
30
342
84
55
207
78
95
72
97
575
251
622
210
t04
0
49
148
457
0
1347
211
9
68
34
63
539
281
94
212
79
44
759
4 88
LOST FOR ALL USERS
QTR 4 :
14 5 :
370 :
126 :
341 :
0 :
160 :
4 39 :
80 :
260
51
1146
355
90
38
171
525
590
105
430
425
22
163
103
505
2357
238
273
348
3142
211
AVERAGE OSHA
QTR 1 QTR 2
6.50 27.00
8.03 8.15
23.73 24.79
35.54 13.71
0.00 0.00
15.37 16.56
82.17 20.60
12.86
0.00 1.60
9.58 5.96
14.56 27.51
11.48 4.26
12.25 22.00
4.00 5.11
13.00 8.00
10.30 5.35
9.00 0.00
62.00 4.71
9,55 11.00
DAYS LOST
QTR 3 QTR 4
8.33 21.14
3.44
7.65 6.27
11.59 16.76
0.00
10.55
16.72 32.49
10.50
0.00
19.73 13.47
0.00 9.25
13. 22
8.14
6. 29
5.00 1.11
9. 64
10.53 19.58
11.23 32.79
11.07
19.17 24.21
8.15 13.04
4. 60
5.62
8.22 7.36
4.62 15.73
10.00 93.75
61.00
7.00 12.00
13.19 3.53
27.50 29.80
2.75 3.85
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1976
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
USER ! OTR i OTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 : QTR x QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4 : QTR I QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
215
0
0
22
0
0
0
1604
0
0.00
0.00
7 2.67
0.00
217
44
50
43
193
153
70
11. 22
12. 38
8. 67
221
10
59
43
900
4.50
13.07
225
18
0
0.00
2 35
7
55
40
36
11
0
0
50
3. 00
0.00
0.00
2. 80
23=5
83
104
73
57
1478
655
248
50
18.53
8.86
6.00
1.78
2 37
15
33
47
35
35
152
93
128
3. 50
5.40
3.14
4.83
242
4
0
0
5
100
0
0
18
25.00
0.00
0. 00
3.50
244
93
57
42
55
170
199
184
133
2.75
3.50
6. 50
6. 50
260
63
54
104
117
759
519
1190
1295
19. 42
16. 20
17. 54
14. 26
2oi
43
0
0
43
145
0
0
429
3.00
0.00
0.00
9. 00
255
34
45
64
69
245
300
401
514
8.64
7.80
7. 30
10. 55
272
11
15
19
40
24 3
11
93
149
32.00
1.50
5. 50
6.83
275
60
59
93
636
79
384
10.57
2.67
9. 25
233
12
50
51
20
0
134
118
10
0.00
8.00
3. 50
2. 00
28 5
7
0
13
0
2.00
0.00
28 5
0
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0. 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
292
3
11
7
5
284
20
15
7
85. 00
4.33
2.75
3. 00
295
17
20
20
29
54
20
102
212
4.75
2.00
15.50
13. 33
295
19
7 5
58
55
476
2943
221
1765
25.00
51.50
5.75
32.17
299
45
155
28.00
316
53
GO
29
608
425
332
17.05
12.82
18.14
3x0
79
46
2453
346
31.09
7. 57
323
10
63
13.00
324
79
71
4 5
0
235
23
0.00
3.33
1.00
325
42
45
45
134
345
719
4.75
13.00
18. 67
32?;
0
18
0
36
0.00
2.00
328
0
0
0.00
329
37
17
50
37
102
17
2.00
5.00
1.00
330
25
69
43
82
77
735
5.00
2.50
20.50
.
0
O
-
Q
O
.
0.00
o.oo
¦ "V*"*
t
"2.-00
n . Ck O
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSH/V INCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
USER !
QTR i QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 : QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
337
45
38
415
252
9.29
6.92
138
32
25
251
193
7.78
7.57
330
23
34
116
193
5.12
5.67
340
29
591
66. 37
341
78
53
1382
737
19. 50
12.75
343
50
75
100
50
2.00
2. 00
ui 344
i I
80
7. 00
345
iO
632
65.00
3 46
29
95
3. 25
347
20
20
3.00
348
33
186
8. 50
34 9
49
121
10.00
350
42
96
3. 00
35i
51
101
2.00
353
35
122
7. 00
354
i29
388
9.00
355
33
16
1. 50
353
83
4230
145.00
359
57
447
12.43
3 Si
23
0
0.00
362
4
301
72.00
36 3
6
0
0.00
AVG.
34 4 4
46
33
: 417
395
299
286
: 17.73
14.74
11.85
14.33
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
USER !
101
103
109
ill
Ii3
i i 5
125
131
146
148
149
152
157
161
170
171
172
173
179
181
1R2
183
186
191
197
201
20 4
207
210
211
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
DAYS LC
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
17
25
18
60
67
22
13.00
23.00
3. 20
89
210
172
191
177
3301
1217
476
5.60
22.92
10.13
14
13
22
79
2 52
231
5.83
16.26
11. 30
37
53
94
60
333
261
712
274
13. 65
8.68
11.16
23
0
339
0
24.00
0.00
32
516
19. 37
25
2 6
23
16
297
138
227
133
13.81
9.20
11. 24
38
30
603
141
31.60
5.17
23
15
30
29
416
70
51
55
32. 10
3.00
8.80
13
10
0
163
21
0
24. 25
3.25
0.00
124
145
105
1197
835
254
17.86
9. 20
4.83
53
76
28 3
467
8. 80
10. 57
43
97
4.18
57
313
13. 67
31
42
53
275
205
241
10.19
6. 50
6.86
42
51
53
291
3 58
199
9.16
8.16
4.75
51
63
51
43
237
310
421
234
13.00
12.76
12.77
4
65
15. 50
36
11
426
212
17.05
32.09
43
47
46
24
244
356
237
259
9.67
9.78
7.54
15
25
2
86
154
11
8.90
7. 36
12.00
<*>4
72
162
256
4.82
5. 24
35
17
0
153
41
0
7. 31
3.87
0. 00
65
37
65
415
277
325
8. 24
4.18
6.82
25
12
57
130
129
1063
5. 25
10.50
18.50
25
47
53
317
6. 50
16.00
24
0
0.00
84
53
70
457
313
299
12.47
9.12
22
92
36
22
359
107
1.00
5.00
3.00
37
399
13
213
8.33
3.33
6 . 60
QTR 4
4.43
<5.73
9.55
8.17
14.75
11.83
9.06
.qq
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
SER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
226
35
191
235
4 6
47
502
352
231
61
59
18
263
175
21
237
41
24
62
48 3
56
147
24 2
0
0
244
54
94
57
2871
335
226
260
80
714
265
52
80
77
322
444
664
272
11
7
32
11
4
175
275
6 2
0
0
591
0
0
283
24
34
286
0
37
0
0
0
0
292
9
14
12
195
16
24
296
27
8
0
36
220
0
299
72
93
144
235
316
46
51
48
42
750
797
711
313
33
33
55
273
876
148
323
17
200
324
23
0
47
680
0
234
325
72
63
79
601
181
194
326
5i
16
0
2700
0
0
328
0
121
40
0
1048
0
329
17
48
0
0
0
0
330
21
19
25
326
13
430
331
30
15
0
0
0
0
333
43
16
15
0
0
0
336
16
15
7
23
15
0
337
35
25
19
25
216
293
262
338
33
18
7
39
238
88
40
339
47
52
28
20
329
242
310
340
35
0
280
0
341
101
104
1885
1073
343
72
96
44
24
72
244
QTR 4
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
574
439
630
1500
11.00
12.91
7.32
29. 50
0.00
105.50
14. 24
10.40
1.50
14. 25
2. 33
0.00
26.17
2. 00
5. 20
23.15
13.67
27.00
29.00
9. 20
52.67
0.00
0. 00
23. 50
0.00
0.00
3.00
7.44
8.12
7.53
18. 55
21.83
1.00
7.57
12. 40
4.67
4.17
7.77
1.00
0.00
0.00
7.00
26.00
3.71
23.64
27. 40
0.00
4.14
0.00
13.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
11. 37
4.80
6.38
0.00
1.50
8.00
4. 22
4. 25
11.45
8.17
0. 00
0.00
7.57
0. 00
22.71 21.86
8. 00
10.00
2.91
0.00
0.00
0. 00
23.00
0.00
0. 00
0.00
13.83 19.86
5.50 19.56
13.62 105.60
15.00
11.00
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
314
69
49
88
552
312
1349
8.00
5.40
345
59
40
39
235
20
39
5.80
I.00
315
1x8
213
4.14
347
34
59
39
58
388
102
3. 33
9.83
348
*51
4 9
87
598
243
1084
11.50
3.33
349
94
45
53
1175
0
455
25.00
0.00
350
77
50
58
1902
299
471
43.50
7.50
35x
52
153
50
0
512
0
0.00
5.00
352
95
454
3 3.00
353
13
200
11. 00
354
83
99
0
99
0.00
355
11
48
10
6
253
77
1.00
16.33
353
53
27
232
0
4.00
0.00
351
11
0
0.00
3 52
21
32
23
257
394
152
15.75
20.00
353
33
17
25
98
0
185
5.00
0.00
AVG.
35
41
39 39
281
247
237
316
13.05
10.45
QTR 3 QTR 4
15. 40
2.00
5. 33
12. 50
17.50
12. 25
0. 00
5.00
3.00
10.00
18.00
10. 31
13.01
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1978
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
USER !
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
QTR i
86
63
13
20
48
95
27
61
ii
52
SEVERITY RATE
AVG. :
34
QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
94
264
631
4.69
12.38
58
586
732
16.38
18.73
16
94
79
9.90
10.77
23
60
15
9.00
2.80
28
486
144
15.03
5.14
58
630
545
7.68
10.53
43
334
372
13.24
13.00
46i
10.21
95
8.67
282
8.08
33
272
262
11. 23
12.40
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR 3 QTR
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA REC
. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
SER ! QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 I QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
i(U
4, 210
29,631
5,755
5,260
386
986
127
263
51
330
58
51
j.0 3
3,627
203
244
109
13,513
12,994
19,851
12,958
312
213
275
345
112
104
139
78
ill
57,18 5
42,443
32,087
15,035
1,190
771
503
341
773
563
389
179
113
102
51
14
1x5
6,895
328
95
125
54,614
27,965
47,458
36,266
895
388
499
755
280
135
209
143
133
638
2i2
24
13 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
140
39,842
59,843
711
688
219
382
x46
14,699
5,442
5,980
8,421
773
340
230
300
197
72
79
103
x43
3,577
110
2,092
255
36
190
50
1
34
149
4,202
323
404
152
3,365
240
209
157
2,977
372
61
x6x
135
915
1,526
683
13
30
93
48
5
33
59
25
170
23,177
340
77
171
3,582
6, 376
9,505
21,455
143
163
237
613
65
102
139
285
172
27,167
58,431
27,413
39,401
393
749
274
667
197
415
189
253
178
7,107
263
48
179
8, 681
35,411
413
737
53
217
18x
i x,510
5,190
11,627
16,264
391
157
247
451
175
78
164
230
132
1,032
82
9
133
7,535
313
119
i 86
1, 295
3,021
2,950
3, 550
143
471
163
203
18
113
40
47
i 91
1,475
1,685
2,101
11,128
8 6
120
70
695
49
55
65
325
x 97
2,710
39,142
451 17,82.8
173
5,603
201
2,571
1, 285
100
204
2,481
517
300
2,142
275
39
50
535
217
54
23
162
207
4,523
9,636
12,903
6,786
141
235
403
150
110
2 26
239
145
210
1,445
0
3, 218
9,667
361
0
1,609
1, 331
374
0
783
2,033
2 ix
794
1,937
600
i, 637
753
248
145
195
S3
163
51
131
\a .
t . wa,
S.'iTL
ins,
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
USER ! QTR i
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
215
0
0
5,725
0
217
87,53 4
35,713
18,317
22 i
1,045
14,110
2 25
60
235
251
725
240
385
2 35
12,768
9, 550
8, 223
1,442
237
604
1,813
1,583
1,925
242
6,877
0
0
273
24 4
705
904
748
952
260
2, 317
5,520
8,797
17,683
251
159
0
0
950
255
2,820
3, 216
14,019
9,500
272
1,851
i09
1, 224
1,444
275
1,437
272
1,297
283
119
1,346
1,890
173
285
61
0
285
0
0
0
80
292
7,327
894
483
376
295
9i!i
578
1, 17 2
5, 257
295
1,932
16,785
1,256
10,471
299
2,010
316
37,917
24,016
21,152
318
14,061
4, 258
3 23
893
324
92
491
62
325
2,159
4,736
5,701
3 26
0
91
328
0
329
153
378
194
330
1,053
480
2,612
331
0
0
333
223
2,044
336
60
AVG. COST PER
OS HA REC
. INJ.
AVERAG
E COST
PER MAN
YEAR
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
0
0
1,908
0
0
0
421
0
955
259
163
419
155
70
253
491
25
345
20
3
125
48
21
88
9
25
8
31
608
329
3 57
80
535
341
251
45
201
259
143
218
30
3 5
67
84
6,877
0
0
139
27 4
0
0
7
117
225
249
240
109
128
105
135
110
3 30
258
442
75
180
269
518
159
0
0
950
76
0
0
457
214
455
519
305
72
210
334
210
620
27
244
131
70
4
4 5
52
239
45
144
142
25
134
59
147
210
43
7
75
105
8
61
0
4
0
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
30
3,653
127
95
94
121
13
5
4
177
95
195
477
30
19
38
139
991
2,098
209
1,745
188
1, 598
120
957
125
56
631
338
504
337
204
175
1,278
593
1,010
277
205
21
30
163
31
24
115
14
359
675
805
151
313
355
0
91
0
15
0
0
66
338
54
28
64
32
351
53
435
86
36
185
0
0
0
0
55
340
36
329
20
4
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA RE
C. INJ.
ISER
QTR 1
QTR 2 QTR 3
QTR 4 i QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
337
11,442
7,664
817
638
338
6, 431
4,968
714
709
339
3,152
6,265
394
522
3 40
15,012
682
341
9,864
4,843
89 S
597
343
341
453
170
151
344
318
318
345
1,670
1,670
346
619
154
347
331
110
343
i, i72
390
349
729
182
350
431
120
35x
64
64
353
238
119
354
1,193
198
355
165
27
3 58
3,953
1,317
359
2,061
187
361
40
20
362
1,934
1,934
363
31
31
AVG.
291,530
468,732 353,786
559,093
533
5i 3
330
463 :
AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
364
230
89
699
85
183
226
150
241
130
173
195
350
113
36
162
45
22
128
88
51
32
41
255
9
153
105
4
80
153
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
USER !
iOi
103
109
ill
113
i jl5
125
133
146
148
149
152
157
161
170
171
172
173
179
181
182
183
186
191
197
201
204
207
210
211
215
217
221
AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ.
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
2,808
4,636
2,897
147
136
ill
25
33
19
2,399
46,595
10,601
5,574
167
1,331
318
134
151
2,796
553
9,361
30,631
35,475
356
968
795
53
175
186
19,743
11,102
35,882
14,737
658
284
484
278
241
151
458
1, 285
0
643
0
181
0
17,674
734
247
25,994
16,606
22,746
11,330
442
259
360
235
ill
66
83
9,022
2,336
902
292
345
88
22,782
4,187
4,093
5,107
1,265
347
157
196
295
52
47
3,669
554
0
458
92
0
51
9
0
7,593
3,761
2,886
584
235
240
7 27
341
252
3,265
4,585
359
382
210
289
3,005
130
63
3,770
251
144
32,193
29,022
28,544
353
237
175
110
99
93
10,290
13,837
8,544
311
314
155
130
159
39
23,439
21,835
34,802
20,395
285
202
316
234
147
129
191
3,233
533
22
22,753
9,636
392
535
142
57
11,402
14,107
10,263
10,647
367
414
293
560
159
195
134
3 , 337
5,931
505
222
228
252
32
55
4
6,558
6,931
156
152
100
117
4,388
1,628
0
168
125
0
59
21
0
4,182
2, 9i0
3,482
190
100
151
124
87
97
1 ? 124
1,458
5, 301
281
729
530
69
89
304
741
1,911
123
159
30
75
350
116
27
6,857
4,990
7,308
175
172
192
147
100
80
1,771
437
80
354
218
17
326
78
3,306
547
1,600
300
109
160
264
39
103
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,698
12,204
12,465
109
75
70
44
41
33
24,143
34,463
11,287
14,746
705
1,148
274
351
570
736
216
QTR 4
259
165
37
57
101
136
134
282
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST
PER
OSHA REC
. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
USER ! QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
22 6
1,276
212
73
325
235
5,063
9,807
465
700
214
60
236
12,041
7, 394
2,312
602
352
330
367
208
237
9,743
902
2,664
974
150
162
398
35
102
242
0
0
0
244
15,247
1,799
1,346
3,811
257
269
2,074
241
179
2 50
6,934
258
206
248
265
6,452
8, 258
13,292
258
196
324
133
157
272
160
80
2,456
53
40
272
5
2
87
275
1,872
0
0
312
0
0
193
0
0
233
473
94
22
285
0
20
0
0
20
0
0
7
0
292
3,533
1,333
1,584
504
ill
144
43
15
16
29$
440
1,364
0
145
1
,364
0
39
115
0
299
2, 275
2, 317
87
96
63
89
403
316
50,312
53,064
54,855
41,510
923
879
843
728
422
445
318
1,566
5, 39 3
1,411
313
893
156
104
344
86
323
2,675
380
66
324
312
50
389
312
0
444
73
11
207
325
8, 345
3,049
5,235
758
304
402
545
190
316
325
34,976
4
0
11,658
4
0
5,977
0
0
329
0
644
55
0
214
55
0
259
25
329
40
102
0
40
34
0
6
16
0
330
1,749
139
2, 394
533
46
598
121
8
149
331
56
34
0
28
34
0
8
4
0
333
79
43
20
26
43
20
12
5
3
3 36
40
40
20
20
20
20
3
3
1
337
5,740
3, 350
7,757
12,903
521
1
,043
1,292
1,612
185
269
244
33B
4,213
1,622
1,085
12,175
468
324
542
1,105
154
59
39
339
6,779
7,744
10,665
47,012
423
430
1,065
6,716
197
225
302
340
13,006
0
500
0
178
0
583
..Mi,
v
a, *12
1,23S
550
i, 295
* ¦¦ ¦
i
a
QTR 4
302
J. /
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ. AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
USER
QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
344
2,637
1, 265
6,045
447
253
604
308
123
529
345
1,672
322
348
278
80
37
164
31
33
346
i, iOi
68
81
347
652
2,067
120
132
229
20
45
135
7
348
3,870
1,086
4,288
645
217
428
391
105
371
349
2,833
181
2,726
354
45
681
332
20
362
350
6,595
1,907
2,041
942
381
340
720
189
196
35i
20
800
20
20
266
20
10
407
10
352
3,593
256
247
353
252
252
45
354
205
587
51
117
42
115
355
108
3,199
699
54
355
349
5
171
33
358
495
8
247
8
143
2
36i
20
20
2
362
2,883
9,407
i, 808
577
1,175
301
122
370
68
363
715
129
1,369
143
43
273
46
7
70
AVG.
: 546,284
417,995
379,559
203,444
420
337
313
465
151
137
122
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1978
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
CT\
TOTAL INJURY
COSTS
AVG. COST
PER
OS HA
REC. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2 QTR
3
QTR 4 I QTR I
QTR 2
QTR
3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
103
3,162
27,002
158
1»
125
136
1,057
i ii
28,633
42, 362
440
631
276
3 67
125
20,185
20,746
480
377
61
58
146
3,788
2,023
210
91
42
21
181
19,850
5,971
535
270
255
76
221
18,244
18,901
357
524
339
305
316
23,401
27,268
632
447
173
190
337
13,221
695
426
333
2, 435
811
89
3 39
8, 518
473
247
AVG.
141,447
144,273
456
502
156
155
QTR 3 QTR 4
-------
FIGURE 4
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT FACTORS FOR SELECTED ACCIDENT
CHARACTERISTICS WITH HIGHEST PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
OS HA DAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
April - June 1978
Type of
Factors with the:
Characteristic
Highest % of OSHA Recordable Injuries
Highest % of OSHA Days Lost
Highest % of Direct Costs
Activity
Lifting or dumping container - 38%
Standing or walking - 10%
Getting off equipment - 8%
Lifting or dumping container - 42%
Carrying container - 13%
Getting off equipment - 10%
Lifting or dumping container - 47%
Carrying container -
Standing or walking - 10%
Accident Type
Overexertion involving container - 15%
Slip on same level - 7%
Struck by waste - 7%
Overexertion involving container - 24%
Overexertion involving waste - 10%
Bodily reaction in avoiding object - 8%
Overexertion involving container - 34%
Bodily reaction in avoiding object - 9%
Vehicle accident - 7%
Accident Site
On collection route at back of truck - 41%
On collection route at curb - 16%
On collection route on vehicle - 12%
On collection route at back of truck - 57%
On collection route at curb - 30%
On collection route on vehicle - 14%
On collection route at back of truck - 44%
On collection route at curb - 26%
On collection route on vehicle - 11%
Nature of Injury
Sprain or strain - 38%
Cut or puncture - 21%
Bruise - 20%
Sprain or strain - 55%
Bruise - 19%
Cut or puncture - 8%
Sprain or strain - 55%
Bruise - 16%
Cut or puncture - 7%
Part of Body
Back - 16%
Eyes - 9%
Fingers - 9%
Back - 32%
Thumb - 11%
Knee - 10%
Back - 44%
Multiple body parts - 8%
Knee - 8%
-------
FIGURE 5A
PAGE :!.
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: APRIL - JUNE 3.978
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS). LOST WORKDAY»
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED
OSHA REC
:ORDABL.E INJURIES
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
49
17.07
DUMPING CONTAINER
36
12.54
STANDING OR WALKING
'? n
9.76
LIFTING CONTAINER
2 A
0,36
SETTING OFF EQUIP
' •> A
o .<
K.f *r
S, 01
LIFTING WASTE
o
f
3. 14
RIDING ON EQUIP
0
1
3 i 1 4
GETTING ON EQUIP
3,:! *
C1 EARING WASTE (J HAND TOOL..
o
3: :l. 4
DRIVING EQUIP
B
2 , 79
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
6
2.09
DOING IJNK ACTIVITY
6
2.09
P(JSIIING 0R PU1... 1...ING CONTAINEFi
5
.1. . 74
DUMPING WASTE
5
1. . 74
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
4
1 .39
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
3
1 .05
OPERATING CONTROLS
3
1. .05
OPENING EQUIP PT
3
:L .05
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT-
n
0.70
LIFTING VEH PART-
2
0, 70
ARRANGING LOAD
9
0.70
REPAIRING EQUIP W HAND TO 01...
O
0 ~ 70
FIGHTING
'*>
0,70
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
0.70
CARRYING OBJECT-
l
.0.35
CARRYING WASTE-
l
0.35
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
l
0,35
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
l
0.35
LIFTING OBJECT
i
0.35
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
j.
0.35
WASHING EQUIP
i
0.35
CHECKING EQUIP MALI"'NCTN
0,35
DIRECTING VEH
l
0,35
MOWING
1.
0.35
UNLOADING WASTE
1
0,35
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
i
0 5
18
-------
FIGURE 5B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: APRIL - JUNE 1978
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
493
21.83
13.46
CARRYING CONTAINER
305
13. 37
20.33
LIFTING CONTAINER
271
11. 88
15.94
GETTING OFF EQUIP
219
9.60
11. 53
LIFTING WASTE
192
8.42
38.40
DUMPING CONTAINER
190
8.33
11.18
STANDING OR WALKING
180
7.89
10.59
RIDING ON EQUIP
59
2.59
8.43
GETTING ON EQUIP
47
2.06
7.83
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
39
1.71
9.75
DRIVING EQUIP
35
1. 53
5.83
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
34
1.49
11.33
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
30
1.32
15.00
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
24
1.05
12.00
UNLOADING WASTE
23
1.01
23.00
LIFTING VEH PART
16
0.70
8.00
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
15
0.66
3.00
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
13
0.57
13.00
DIRECTING VEH
12
0. 53
12.00
FIGHTING
12
0.53
12.00
ARRANGING LOAD
9
0.39
9.00
OPERATING CONTROLS
9
0. 39
4. 50
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
8
0.35
8.00
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
8
0.35
8.00
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
7
0.31
7.00
dumping WASTE
6
0. 26
6.00
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
4
0.18
4.00
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
4
0.18
2.00
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
3
0.13
3.00
CARRYING WASTE
2
0.09
2.00
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
2
0.09
2.00
OPENING EQUIP PT
2
0.09
2.00
WASHING EQUIP
2
0.09
2.00
lifting OBJECT
1
0.04
1.00
total
2,281
100.00
12.40
19
-------
FIGURE 5C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIODt APRIL - JUNE 1978
DEFINITIONS I OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES
-------
FIGURE 5C (Continued) PAGE 2
DIRECT COSTS
activity amt. % Ave C0STS/
OSHA REC INJ
M0WING 20 0.01 20
T0TAL 144 7213 100*00
502
21
-------
FIGURE 6A
PAGE
1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: APRIL - JUNE 1973
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE
NO.
%
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
43
14.93
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
20
6.97
STRUCK BY WASTE
19
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
15
5. 23
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
15
5. 23
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
14
4.33
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
12
4. 13
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
10
3. 43
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
10
3.48
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
9
3. 14
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
3
2.79
STRUCK BY OBJ
7
2.44
PARTICLES IN EYE
5
2.09
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
5
2. 09
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
5
1.74
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
5
1.74
BODILY REACTION
5
1.74
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
5
1.74
ANIMAL BITE
5
1.74
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
5
1.74
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
5
1.74
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
4
1. 39
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
4
1. 39
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
4
1. 39
INSECT BITE
4
1. 39
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
4
1. 39
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
3
1.05
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
3
1.05
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
3
1.05
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
3
1.05
STRUCK BY VEH PART
2
0.70
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING HANDLED
2
0.70
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
2
0.70
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
2
0.70
FALL AGAINST OBJ
2
0.70
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
2
0.70
OVEREXERTION
2
0.70
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
2
0.70
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
2
0.70
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ 22
1
0. 35
-------
FIGURE 6A (Continued)
PAGE 2
OSHA REC0RDA3LE INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. %
FALL AGAINST VEH PART 1 0.35
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ 1 0.35
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ 1 0.35
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE 1 0.35
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART 1 0.35
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ 1 0.35
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE 1 0.35
TOTAL 287 100.00
23
-------
FIGURE 6B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTION PERIOD: APRIL - JUNE 1978
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
558
24.46
15.08
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
232
10.17
29.00
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
183
8.02
183.00
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
148
6.49
24.67
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
137
6.01
17.12
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
123
5.39
17.57
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
118
5.17
10.73
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
90
3.95
12.86
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
78
3.42
7.80
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
73
3.20
9.12
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
70
3.07
4.67
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
61
2.67
12.20
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
54
2.37
13.50
STRUCK BY OBJ
50
2.19
10.00
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
49
2.15
16.33
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
38
1.67
19.00
BODILY REACTION
30
1.32
7.50
STRUCK BY WASTE
29
1.27
3.22
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
25
1.10
6.25
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
16
0.70
8.00
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
15
0.66
7.50
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
14
0.61
7.00
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
13
0.57
6.50
OVEREXERTION
8
0.35
8.00
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
8
0.35
8.00
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
7
0.31
3.50
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
7
0.31
3.50
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
6
0.26
6.00
FALL AGAINST OBJ
6
0.26
6.00
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
5
0.22
5.00
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
5
0.22
5.00
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
4
0.18
4.00
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
4
0.18
2.00
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
4
0.18
4.00
STRUCK BY VEH PART
3
0.13
1.50
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING HANDLED
3
0.13
3.00
PARTICLES IN EYE
3
0.13
3.00
INSECT BITE
2
0.09
1.00
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
1
0.04
1.00
ANIMAL BITE
1
0.04
1.00
TOTAL
2,281
100.00
12.40
24
-------
FIGURE 6C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: APRIL - JUNE 1978
DEFINITIONS: 03HA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND
WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS
ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT TYPE AMOUNT % AVG COSTS/
OSHA
REC INJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
48,709
33.73
1,
133
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
13,410
9. 30
13,
410
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
9,730
6. 78
1,
223
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
9,167
6.36
1,
019
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
7,407
5.14
529
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
7,223
5.01
722
fIURT BY HANDLING CONT
4,622
3.20
308
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
4,350
3.02
435
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
4,278
2.97
214
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
3,992
2.77
333
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
3,909
2.71
261
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
3,123
2.17
625
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
2,661
1.85
837
STRUCK !3Y OBJ
2,590
1.30
370
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
1,883
1.31
377
STRUCK BY WASTE
1,791
1.24
91
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
1,631
1.17
336
BODILY REACTION
1,648
1.14
3 30
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
1,414
0.98
283
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
1,110
0.77
555
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
976
0.68
244
OVEREXERTION
805
0. 56
403
STRUCK 3Y CONTAINER
748
0. 52
249
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
629
0.44
157
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEII PART
556
0.3 9
139
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
538
0. 37
108
FALL AGAINST OBJ
477
0.33
239
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
441
0.31
74
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
441
0.31
147
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ
426
0. 30
4 26
INSECT BITE
416
0. 29
101
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
378
0.26
95
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
352
0. 24
176
PARTICLES IN EYE
333
0.23
56
STRUCK SELF WITH 03J BEING HANDLED
273
0.19
139
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
273
0.19
137
25
-------
FIGURE 6C (Continued)
PAGE 2
ACCIDENT TYPE
DIRECT COSTS
AMOUNT
AVG COSTS/
OSIIA REC INJ
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAIIJST
OB J
260
0.18
260
STRUCK SELF WITH VEII PT
BEING
HANDLED
225
0. 16
113
ANIMAL BITE
218
0.15
44
STRUCK 3Y VEH PART
20 4
0 .14
102
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR
TOXIC
SUBSTANCE
174
0.12
53
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
83
0.06
83
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
64
0.04
64
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
58
0.04
58
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR
TOXIC
WASTE
57
0.04
29
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC
WASTE
35
0.02
35
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
20
0.01
20
TOTAL
144,213 100.00
502
26
-------
ACCIDENT TRENDS
In the Solid Waste Management Industry
QUARTER: July 1 to September 30, 1978
developed by SAFETY SCIENCES, division of WSA Inc.,
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Under Contract No. 68-01-4747
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 1: Summary of Injuries by Frequency,
Severity, and Costs 1
FIGURE 2: Comparison of Injury Rates and OSHA
Days Lost for All Users 3
FIGURE 3: Comparison of Direct Costs by Reporting
Period for All Users 10
FIGURE 4: Summary of Accident Factors for
Selected Accident Characteristics with
Highest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct
Costs 17
FIGURE 5A- Activities Ranked from Highest to
5C: Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs:
Average of All Users 18
FIGURE 6A- Accident Types Ranked Highest to
6C: Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
Injuries, Days Lost and Direct Costs:
Average of All Users 22
i'
x
-------
FIGURE 1
SUMMARY OF INJURIES
BY FREQUENCY, SEVERITY AND COSTS
FOR THIRD QUARTER 1978
FREQUENCY
• There were 429 cases reported by the seven IRIS
users on-line: 81 first-aid cases, 140 non-fatal
cases without lost workdays, 208 lost workday
cases, 0 permanent distability cases, and 0 fatal-
ity. Total man-hours for this quarter were 1,818,139.
• The AVERAGE OSHA incidence rate was 38 for this
quarter. This means that more than one out of every
three solid waste industry employees will experience
a non-first aid injury a year. The national rate for
all industries was 9.4. Therefore, the solid waste
industry is experiencing more than three times as
many injuries as the average industry.
• IRIS users ranged in frequency rates from User No.
103 which was experiencing almost 1-1/2 injuries
per employee per year, to User No. 181 which was
experiencing 19 injuries per 100 employees per
year.
SEVERITY
(Days lost given are not final. These figures reflect
what was received from IRIS users by February 15, 1980 and
may be gross underestimates. For example, in the months
since the publication of the first quarter Accident Trends
for 1976, the OSHA severity rate has increased from 269 to
417, and not all cases are final yet.)
• So far, 208 cases this quarter incurred workdays
lost and light duty days.
• 48% of the total cases resulted in workdays lost
and/or light duty days. The national average for
all industries is 43%. This means that the solid
waste industry has almost 1.1 times as many lost
workday injuries as the average industry.
1
-------
• The AVERAGE OSHA severity rate was 312. This means
that on the average, each employee is losing 3.12
days per year for injuries. One user's rate was as
high as 9.4 days lost per year per employee.
• On the AVERAGE, each lost workday case resulted
in 13.62 workdays lost so far.
DIRECT COSTS
(Costs given are not final. These figures reflect what
was received from IRIS users by February 15, 1980, and may be
gross underestimates. For example, first quarter of 1976's
AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury has gone up from $511
to $538.)
• Total direct costs so far for injuries that
occurred during the third quarter was $159,536
• The AVERAGE cost per OSHA recordable injury was
$458
• The AVERAGE cost per man-year was $176. This means
that the average solid waste injury (non-first aid)
costs $176 per full-time employee per year so far.
2
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976 FIGURE 2
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE
RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
DAYS LOST
USER !
QTR 1
QTR 2 QTR
3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
iOi
12
33
45
20
47
391
102
145
6. 50
27. 00
8. 33
21.14
103
103
370
3.44
i09
36
49
51
22
195
175
199
126
8.03
8.15
7.65
6. 27
X JL i.
55
7 3
77
53
1059
1283
543
341
23.73
24.79
11. 59
15.75
i i 3
23
0
0.00
n 5
29
160
10.55
i 25
3i
35
42
20
875
393
550
439
35.54
13.71
16.72
32.'43
133
11
80
10. 50
j. 35
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
u» i40
31
55
347
680
15. 37
16.55
145
25
21
34
35
554
133
288
260
82.17
20.60
19.73
13. 47
x43
23
5
18
151
0
51
12.85
0.00
9. 25
i49
125
1146
13. 22
152
87
355
8. 14
157
15
90
6. 29
i 61
13
41
52
53
0
33
98
38
0.00
1.60
5.00
1.11
170
23
171
9.64
171
44
52
59
47
209
229
294
525
9.58
5.96
10. 53
19. 58
172
50
55
59
33
475
1116
443
590
14.55
27. 51
11. 23
32.79
173
18
106
11.07
179
13
29
143
430
19.17
24.21
181
44
50
55
51
367
148
310
425
11.43
4.25
8.15
13.04
182
12
22
4.60
183
38
168
5.62
x8o
13
24
25
23
69
279
102
108
12. 25
22.00
3. 22
7.35
191
57
45
94
47
189
150
232
505
4.00
5.11
4.62
15.73
j. 97
38
31
320
2357
10.00
93.75
20i
8
238
61.00
204
79
13-5
43
30
342
84
55
273
13.00
8. 00
7.00
12. 00
207
78
95
72
97
575
25i
622
348
10.30
5. 35
13.19
3.53
210
104
0
49
148
457
0
1347
3142
9.00
0.00
27.50
29.80
211
9
58
34
63
539
281
94
211
62.00
4.71
2.75
3.85
212
79
44
759
4 88
9.55
11.00
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1976
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE SEVERITY RATE AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
USER ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
215
0
0
22
0
0
0
1504
0
0.00
0.00
72.67
0.00
217
44
50
43
193
153
70
11. 22
12. 38
3. 57
2 2i
10
59
43
900
4.50
13.07
225
18
0
0.00
235
7
55
40
35
11
0
0
50
3.00
0.00
0.00
2.30
236
88
x 04
73
57
1478
555
248
50
18. 53
8.85
5.00
1.78
237
15
33
¦ 47
35
35
152
93
128
3.50
5.40
3.14
4.33
242
4
0
0
5
100
0
0
18
25.00
0.00
0.00
3.50
244
93
57
42
55
170
199
184
183
2.75
3. 50
5. 50
5. 50
260
53
54
104
117
759
519
1190
1295
19.42
15.20
17.54
14. 25
251
4 3
0
0
48
145
0
0
429
3. 00
0.00
0.00
9.00
255
34
4 5
64
59
245
300
401
514
8.54
7.80
7. 30
10.55
272
ii
15
19
40
243
11
93
149
32.00
1.50
5.50
5.83
275
50
59
93
535
79
384
10.57
2.57
9. 25
283
12
50
51
20
0
134
118
10
0.00
8.00
3. 50
2.00
205
n
0
13
0
2.00
0.00
28 5
0
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
292
3
i i
7
5
284
20
15
7
85.00
4. 33
2.75
3.00
295
17
20
20
29
54
20
102
212
4.75
2.00
15.50
13. 33
295
19
7 5
53
55
475
2943
221
1755
25.00
51.50
5.75
32.17
299
45
155
28.00
315
53
GO
29
508
425
332
17.05
12.82
18. 14
3x8
79
45
2453
345
31.09
7.57
323
10
S3
13.00
324
79
71
45
0
235
23
0.00
3. 33
1.00
325
42
45
45
134
345
719
4.75
13.00
18. 57
325
0
18
0
35
0.00
2.00
328
0
0
0.00
329
37
17
50
37
102
17
2.00
6.00
1.00
330
25
69
43
82
77
735
5.00
2.50
20.50
"VI1
•
•
G
O
.
0
Q
O.OO
O .OO
¦ «
2-OQ
~S1 . DO
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
USER
OSH\ INCIDENCE RATE
QTR i QTR 2 QTR 3
45
32
23
78
50
AVG. :
34
44
46
SEVERITY RATE
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR 4
QTR I QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1 QTR 2 QTR 3 QTR 4
38
415 252
9. 29 5.92
25
251 193
7.78 7.57
34
116 193
5.12 5.67
29
691
66. 37
53
1382 737
19.50 12.75
75
100 50
2.00 2.00
ii
80
7.00
10
632
65.00
29
95
3. 25
20
20
3.00
33
185
8.50
49
121
10.00
42
95
3.00
51
101
2.00
35
122
7.00
129
388
9.00
33
16
1.50
88
4230
145.00
57
447
12.43
23
0
0.00
4
301
72.00
6
0
0.00
33
417 395 299 286
17.73 14.74 11.85 14.83
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSH®i
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
DAYS LOST
USER ! QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
iOi
17
25
18
60
67
22
13.00
23.00
3. 20
i 0 3
89
210
172
191
177
3301
1217
476
5.60
22.92
10.13
4.43
i 09
14
18
22
79
252
231
5.83
16. 26
11. 30
ill
37
53
94
60
333
261
712
274
13.65
8.68
11.16
6.78
ii 3
23
0
339
0
24.00
0.00
115
32
516
19. 37
125
25
26
23
16
297
188
227
133
13.81
9.20
11.24
9.55
131
38
30
608
141
31.60
5.17
14S
23
15
30
29
416
70
51
55
32.10
3. 00
8.80
8.17
i 4 8
13
10
0
163
21
0
24.25
3.25
0.00
149
124
145
105
1197
835
2 54
17.86
9.20
4.83
152
53
7 <5
28 3
467
8.80
10. 57
157
48
97
4.18
isi
57
313
13.67
170
31
42
53
27 5
205
241
10.19
6. 50
6.86
171
A 2
51
58
291
358
199
9.16
8.16
4.75
172
51
63
51
43
237
310
421
234
13.00
12.76
12.77
14.75
178
4
65
15.50
179
35
i 1
426
212
17.05
32.09
131
43
47
46
24
244
366
237
259
9.67
9.78
7.54
11.88
1R2
15
25
2
86
154
11
8.90
7. 36
12.00
183
64
72
162
255
4.82
5. 24
186
35
17
0
158
41
0
7. 31
3.87
0.00
191
65
87
65
415
277
325
8. 24
4.18
6.82
197
25
12
57
130
129
1063
5. 25
10. 50
18. 50
201
25
47
53
317
6.50
16.00
204
24
0
0.00
207
84
53
70
457
313
299
12.47
9.12
9. 06
210
22
92
36
22
359
107
1.00
5.00
3.00
1. i-X
S3
11
399
11
213
8.33
3.33
S.60
TtSiSm
% cv
-
o
- Q .OO
o .no
- »o
-------
STARTING: JANUARY , 1977
COMPARISON OF
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
USER !
QTR 1
QTR -2
QTR 3
QTR 4
226
35
235
4 6
47
2 3 6
61
59
18
237
41
24
62
24 2
0
244
54
94
67
2 SO
80
265
52
80
77
272
11
7
32
275
62
0
0
283
24
286
0
37
0
292
9
14
12
296
27
8
0
299
72
93
316
46
51
48
42
313
33
33
55
323
17
324
23
0
47
325
7 2
63
79
326
51
16
0
328
0
121
40
329
17
48
0
330
21
19
25
331
30
15
0
333
48
16
15
336
16
15
7
337
35
26
19
25
3 38
33
18
7
39
339
47
52
28
20
340
36
0
341
101
i04
343
72
96
44
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
CNJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
SEVERITY RATE
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
: QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
191
11.00
502
352
12.91
7.57
263
175
21
7.82
12. 40
3. 00
433
56
147
29.50
4.67
4. 22
0
0.00
2871
336
226
105.50
4.17
4. 25
714
14.24
322
444
664
10.40
7.77
11.45
11
4
175
1. 50
1.00
8.17
591
0
0
14. 25
0.00
0.00
34
2. 33
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
195
16
24
26.17
7.0 0
7.57
36
220
0
2.00
26.00
0.00
144
236
5. 20
3.71
750
797
711
574
23.15
23.64
22.71
2.7 3
876
148
13.67
27.40
S.00
200
27.00
680
0
234
29.00
0.00
10.00
601
181
194
9.20
4.14
2.91
2700
0
0
52.67
0.00
0.00
0
1048
0
0.00
13.00
0.00
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
326
13
430
23. 50
I.00
23.00
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
0
0. 00
0.00
0. 00
23
15
0
3.00
2.00
0.00
216
293
262
439
7.44
11. 37
13.83
238
88
40
630
8.12
4.80
5.50
329
242
310
1500
7.53
6. 38
13.62
280
0
18.55
0.00
1885
1073
21.83
15.00
24
72
244
I.00
1.50
11.00
QTR 4
21. 36
19.86
19. 56
105.60
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA
INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY
RATE
AVERAGE OSHA
USER ! QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I
QTR 2
344
69
49
88
552
312
1349
8.00
6.40
345
59
40
39
285
20
39
5.80
1.00
3 46
118
213
4.14
347
34
59
38
68
388
102
3. 33
9.83
348
61
49
87
698
243
1034
11.50
8. 33
349
94
46
53
1175
0
466
25.00
0.00
350
77
50
58
1902
299
471
43.50
7.50
35 j.
52
153
50
0
612
0
0.00
6.00
352
9 5
454
33.00
353
18
200
11.00
354
83
99
0
99
0.00
355
a
48
10
6
263
77
1.00
16. 33
353
58
27
232
0
4.00
0.00
361
11
0
0.00
362
21
32
23
267
394
152
15.75
20.00
353
33
17
25
98
0
185
5.00
0.00
AVG.
35
41
39 39
281
247
237
316
13.05
10.45
QTR 3 QTR 4
15. 40
2.00
5. 33
12.50
17. 50
12. 25
0.00
5.00
8.00
10.00
18.00
10. 31
13.01
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1978
FIGURE 2 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF INJURY RATES AND OSHA DAYS LOST FOR ALL USERS
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
SEVERITY RATE
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
103
86
94
142
264
531
416
ill
63
58
57
586
732
681
125
13
16
21
94
79
172
146
20
23
25
60
15
16
181
48
28
19
486
144
168
221
95
58
88
630
546
940
316
27
43
43
334
372
323
3 37
61
451
338
11
95
339
52
282
QTR 4
AVERAGE OSHA DAYS LOST
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
4.69
12. 38
6.71
16. 38
18.73
20. 12
9.90
10.77
16. 21
9.00
2.80
3.00
15.03
5.14
10. 31
7.68
10.53
12. 38
13. 24
13.00
11. 29
10.21
8.67
8.08
QTR 4
AVG. :
34
33
33
272
262
312
11.23
12.40
13.62
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA REC.
INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
SER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 ! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
itU
4, 210
29,631
5,755
5,250
386
985
127
263
51
330
58
51
i03
3,627
20 3
244
109
13,513
12,994
19,851
12,958
312
213
275
345
112
104
139
7 3
ill
57,185
42,448
32,087
15,035
1,190
771
503
341
773
553
389
179
113
102
51
14
1x5
6,895
328
95
x25
54,614
27,955
47,458
35,265
895
388
499
755
280
135
209
143
133
638
2i2
24
135
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
140
39,842
59,84 3
711
688
219
382
x46
14,699
5,442
5,980
8, 421
773
340
230
300
197
72
79
103
±48
3, 577
110
2,092
255
35
190
50
1
34
149
4,202
323
404
152
3, 365
240
209
157
2,977
372
61
j.6 j.
135
815
1, 525
683
13
80
93
48
5
33
59
25
170
23,177
340
77
171
3,582
6, 375
9,505
21,455
148
163
237
613
65
102
139
285
172
27,167
53,431
27,413
39,401
393
749
274
667
197
415
189
253
173
7,107
263
48
179
8,681
35,411
413
737
53
217
181
1 j., 510
5,190
11,527
16,264
391
157
247
451
175
78
164
230
182
1,032
82
9
183
7,535
313
119
i Bo
1,295
8,021
2,950
3,550
143
471
153
208
18
113
40
47
i 91
1, 475
i , 6 3 5
2,101
11,123
86
i 20
70
595
49
55
55
325
197
2,710
39,142
45i
17
,828
173
5,603
201
2,571
1
, 285
100
204
2,481
517
300
2,142
275
39
50
535
217
54
23
162
207
<,523
9,636
12,903
5,786
141
235
403
150
110
225
289
145
210
1,445
0
3,218
9 ,667
361
0
1,609
1
, 381
37 4
0
788
2,033
194
1,931
*00
1, 681
153
248
145
195
68
168
51
131
v
"1 ,
43%
•2.43
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
USER 1 QTR i
215
217
221
226
235
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ,
AVERAGE COST
23*5
237
242
244
2 SO
2 6i
265
272
275
283
285
236
292
295
295
299
316
318
323
324
325
326
329
329
330
331
333
336
251
12,768
604
6,877
706
2, 317
159
2, 820
1,861
119
61
0
7,327
911
1,932
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
: QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
0
5,725
0
0
0
1,908
0
0
0
421
87,684
36,713
18,317
956
259
163
419
156
1,045
14,110
253
491
25
60
20
725
240
886
125
48
21
88
9
26
8
9, 550
3,223
i, 442
608
329
357
80
536
341
261
1, 8i3
1,583
1,925
201
259
143
218
30
36
67
0
0
278
6,877
0
0
139
274
0
0
904
748
9S2
117
226
249
240
109
128
105
5,620
3,797
17,68 3
110
330
259
442
75
180
269
0
0
960
159
0
0
960
76
0
0
8,216
14,019
9,500
214
455
519
306
72
210
334
109
1,224
1,444
620
27
244
131
70
4
46
1,437
272
1,297
239
45
144
142
26
1,346
i, B90
173
59
147
210
43
7
75
106
0
61
0
4
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
894
483
376
3,663
127
96
94
121
13
6
578
1,17 2
5,257
177
96
195
477
30
19
38
16,786
1, 256
10,471
991
2,098
209
1,745
183
1, 598
120
37,917
2,010
125
24,016
21,1^2
631
338
604
337
204
14,061
4, 258
1,278
593
1,010
893
205
92
491
62
30
163
31
24
115
2,159
4,736
5,701
359
676
805
151
313
0
91
0
91
0
0
0
153
378
194
66
338
64
28
64
1,053
480
2,612
351
53
435
86
36
0
0
0
0
0
223
2,044
55
340
36
60
20
PER MAN YEAR
QTR 4
0
70
346
3
31
45
84
7
135
518
457
210
52
134
8
30
4
139
957
56
176
277
21
14
365
16
0
32
186
0
329
A
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1976 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER
OSHA REC
. IMJ.
AVERAGE COST
PER MAN
YEAR
USER
! QTR i
QTR 2 QTR 3
QTR 4
! QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR I QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
337
11,442
7,554
817
533
354
241
338
5,431
4,958
714
709
230
130
339
3,152
5,255
394
522
89
178
340
15,012
532
195
34 i
9,864
4,343
895
597
599
3 50
343
341
453
170
151
85
113
344
3i8
318
35
345
1,570
1,570
152
34 5
519
154
45
347
331
110
22
343
1,172
390
123
349
729
182
83
350
481
120
51
35x
54
54
32
353
238
119
41
354
1,193
198
255
355
155
27
9
355
3,953
1,317
1,153
359
2,051
187
105
35i
40
20
4
352
1,934
1,934
80
353
31
31
i
AVG. :
291,530
453,732 353,785
559,093 :
538
513
330
453
183 225
150
153
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOT»lL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST
PER
OSHA REC
. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
USER •
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 !
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4 :
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
101
2,808
4,635
2,897
147
136
ill
25
33
19
103
2,399
46,595
10,601
5,574
167
1,
331
318
134
151
2,796
553
259
i 09
9,361
30,631
36,475
356
968
795
53
175
185
ill
19,743
11,102
35,882
14,737
658
284
484
278
241
151
458
165
113
1,285
0
643
0
181
0
i x5
17,674
734
247
x 25
25,994
16,605
22,746
11,330
442
259
360
236
ill
66
83
37
133
9,022
2,335
902
292
345
88
145
22,782
4,187
4,093
5,107
1,265
347
157
196
295
52
47
57
148
3,669
554
0
458
92
0
61
9
0
149
7,593
3,761
2,886
584
235
240
7 27
341
252
152
3,255
4,585
359
382
210
289
157
3,005
130
63
151
3,770
251
144
170
32,193
29,022
28,544
353
237
175
110
99
93
171
10,280
13,837
8,544
311
314
155
130
159
39
172
23,439
21,835
34,802
20,395
285
202
316
234
147
129
191
101
178
3,233
538
22
179
22,753
9,636
392
535
142
57
181
li,402
14,107
10,263
10,647
367
414
293
560
159
195
134
135
182
3, 337
5,931
505
222
228
252
32
55
4
183
6,553
5,931
156
162
100
117
185
4,388
1,628
0
168
125
0
59
21
0
191
4,182
2,910
3,482
190
100
151
124
87
97
197
1,124
1,458
5,301
281
729
530
69
89
304
201
741
1 f 911
123
159
30
75
204
350
116
27
207
6,857
4,990
7,308
175
172
192
147
100
134
210
80
1,771
437
80
354
218
17
3 26
78
211
3,305
547
1,600
300
109
160
264
39
103
215
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
217
11,698
12,204
12,465
109
75
70
44
41
38
221
24,143
34,468
11,287
14,746
706
1
,148
274
351
570
736
216
282
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ.
AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
QTR 4
USER
QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
225
1, 275
212
73
235
6, 053
9,807
465
700
214
325
2 3 a
12,041
7, 394
2,312
602
352
330
367
203
50
237
9,743
902
2,554
974
150
162
393
35
102
242
0
0
0
244
15,247
1,799
1,346
3,811
257
269
2,074
241
179
2 60
5,994
258
205
265
5,452
8, 258
13,292
258
196
324
133
157
243
272
150
30
2, 456
53
40
272
5
2
87
275
1,872
0
0
312
0
0
193
0
0
23 3
473
94
22
235
0
20
0
0
20
0
0
7
0
292
3,533
1, 333
1,584
504
ill
144
43
15
16
295
440
1,354
0
145
1, 354
0
39
115
0
299
2,27 5
2, 317
87
96
63
89
316
50,812
53,054
54,855
41,510
923
879
843
728
422
445
403
3ia
1,555
5, 393
1,411
313
898
156
104
344
86
323
2,575
380
65
324
312
50
889
312
0
444
73
11
207
325
8, 345
3,049
5,235
758
304
402
545
190
316
326
34,975
4
0
11,658
4
0
5,977
0
0
329
0
644
55
0
214
55
0
259
25
329
40
102
0
40
34
0
6
16
0
3 30
1,749
139
2,394
583
46
593
121
8
149
331
55
34
0
28
34
0
8
4
0
333
79
43
20
26
43
20
12
6
3
3 3-5
40
40
20
20
20
20
3
3
1
337
5,740
S, 350
7,757
12,903
521
1,043
1/292
1,612
185
269
244
339
4,213
1,522
1,085
12,175
468
324
542
1,105
154
59
39
339
6,779
7,744
10,665
47,012
423
430
1,065
5,716
197
225
302
340
13,005
0
500
0
178
0
^41
aA.WV}
\
1,295
SS3
302
407
435
. 335
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1977 FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST PER OSHA REC. INJ.
AVERAGE COST PER MAN YEAR
QTR 4
USER
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
344
2,637
1, 265
6,045
447
253
604
308
123
529
345
1,672
322
348
278
80
37
164
31
33
346
1,101
68
81
347
6S2
2,067
120
132
229
20
45
135
7
343
3,870
1, 085
4, 288
645
217
428
391
105
371
349
2,833
181
2,725
354
45
681
332
20
362
350
5,595
1,907
2,041
942
381
340
720
189
196
351
20
800
20
20
266
20
10
407
10
352
3,593
256
247
353
252
252
45
354
205
587
51
117
42
115
355
108
3,199
699
54
355
349
5
171
33
358
495
8
247
8
143
2
361
20
20
2
352
2,883
9,407
1,808
577
1,175
301
122
370
58
3 S3
715
129
1, 369
143
43
273
45
7
70
AVG.
: 545,234
417,995
379,559
203,444
420
337
313
465
151
137
122
181
-------
STARTING: JANUARY, 1978
FIGURE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON OF DIRECT COSTS BY REPORTING PERIOD FOR ALL USERS
TOTAL INJURY COSTS
AVG. COST
PER
OSHA REC. INJ.
AVERAGE
COST
PER MAN
USER ! QTR i
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4 I QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3 QTR 4
QTR 1
QTR 2
QTR 3
103
3,162
27,002
7,550
158
1
,125
193
136
1,057
275
ill
28,633
42, 362
58,268
440
631
820
276
367
469
125
20,185
20,746
22,551
480
377
290
61
58
61
146
3,788
2,023
2,001
210
91
83
42
21
20
181
19,850
5,971
7,152
535
270
476
255
76
89
221
18,244
18,901
35,928
357
524
619
339
305
545
316
23,401
27,263
25,936
632
447
412
173
190
177
337
13,221
695
426
333
2,435
811
89
3 39
8,518
473
247
AVG. :
141,447
144,273
159,556
456
502
458
156
165
175
-------
FIGURE 4
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT FACTORS FOR SELECTED ACCIDENT
CHARACTERISTICS WITH HIGHEST PERCENT OF OS HA RECORDABLE INJURIES
OSHA DAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
July - September 1978
Type of
Factors with the:
Characteristic
Highest % of OSHA Recordable Injuries
Highest * of OSHA Days Lost
Highest * of Direct Costa
Activity
Lifting or dumping container - 42*
Getting off equipment - 9%
Standing or walking - 6%
Lifting or dumping container - 34*
Lifting waste - 14*
Compacting waste in vehicle -6*
Lifting or dumping container - 37*
Riding on equipment - 9%
Compacting waste in vehicle - 7*
Accident Type
Overexertion involving container - 20*
Slip on same level - 8%
Struck by waste - 8*
Overexertion involving container - 25*
Struck by waste - 11*
Slip on same level - 8*
Overexertion involving container - 26%
Struck against vehicle part - 11%
Slip on same level - 8%
Accident Site
On collection route at back of truck - 49*
On collection route in midstreet - 13*
On collection route on vehicle - 7*
On collection route at back of truck - 40*
On collection route on vehicle - 14*
On collection route in midstreet - 14*
On collection route at back of truck - 46*
On collection route on vehicle - 17%
On collection route in midstreet - 13%
Nature of Injury
Sprain or strain - 39*
Cut or puncture - 22*
Bruise - 14*
Sprain or strain - 51*
Bruise - 15*
Fracture - 13*
Sprain or strain - 53%
Fracture - 16%
Bruise - 15%
Part of Body
Back - 18*
Eyes - 9*
Fingers - 7*
Back - 29*
Foot - 10*
Toes - 7*
Back - 29%
Shoulder - 9%
Toes - 9%
-------
FIGURE 5A
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCEUT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JULY - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE IMJ'JRIES
ACTIVITY NO. %
DUMPING CONTAINER
r-> 5
in.
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
51
14. ^
GETTING OFF EQUIP
3?
9.43
LIFTING CONTAINER
29
*.3 3
STANDING OR WALKING
21
5. 03
GETTING ON EQUIP
20
5.75
CARRYING CONTAINER
lp.
5. 17
RIDING ON EQUIP
19.
5. 17
DRIVING EQUIP
11
3.1 S
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
in
2.9,1
LIFTING WASTE
3
2. 30
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
1.72
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
1.72
DOING NO OME ACTIVITY
1.72
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
5
1.44
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
5
1.44
MOWING
5
1. 44
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
4
1.15
DUMPING WASTE
1.15
OPERATING CONTROLS
£
1.15
CARRYING WASTE
3
n.ss
UNLOADING WASTE
2
0. 57
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
1
0. 29
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
1
n. 29
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
.1
o. 29
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
1
0 . 29
CATCHING CONT
1
0 . 29
ARRANGING LOAD
1
0. 29
COMPACTING WASTE TM VEH
1
0. 29
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
1
0 . 29
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
]
0. 29
OPENING EQUIP PT
1
0. 29
CLOSING EQUIP PT
0 . 29
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
1
0. 29
RUNNING
1
0. 29
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
1
0. 29
TOTAL 18
34 0
100.00
-------
FIGURE 5B PAGE
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: JULY - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT. URRE°
OSHA
ACTIVITY
DUMPING CONTAINER
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
LIFTING WASTE
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
DRIVING EQUIP
RIDING ON EQUIP
CARRYING CONTAINER
GETTING OFF EQUIP
LIFTING CONTAINER
STANDING OR WALKING
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
DUMPING WASTE
ARRANGING LOAD
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
GETTING ON EQUIP
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
MOWING
UNLOADING WASTE
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
CARRYING WASTE
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
OPERATING CONTROLS
RUNNING
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
CATCHING CONT
TRIMMING SHRUBBERY
TOTAL
LOST
NO.
%
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
462
16. 31
11.85
402
14.19
10.05
383
13.52
76.60
175
6.18
175.00
166
5.86
18.44
162
5. 72
20. 25
159
5.61
19.87
155
5.47
6.74
113
3.99
11.30
104
3.67
8.00
77
2. 72
38.50
69
2.44
23.00
62
2.19
62.00
56
1. 98
56.00
52
1.84
6.50
48
1. 69
24.00
35
1.24
7.00
28
0.99
4.67
22
0.78
7.33
21
0.74
10.50
19
0 . 67
6.33
14
0.49
4.67
12
0.42
4.00
9
0.32
9.00
8
0. 28
8.00
7
0.25
2.33
6
0.21
6.00
3
0.11
3.00
2
0.07
2.00
1
0.04
1.00
1
0. 04
1.00
2,833
100.00
13.62
19
-------
FIGURE 5C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD J JULY - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS J OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I . E 4 N0N•••• FATAL CASES WITH0UT I...0ST W0RKDAYS ) * AND I...0ST
WORKDAY* PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES *
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLIJDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES* WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS
AND WAGE C0NTINIJAT10N BENEFITS < E. G. * INJURY LEAVE) ONLY ~ INDIRECT
COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT-
ACTIVITY
DUMPING CONTAINER
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
RIDING ON EQUIP
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
DRIVING EQUIP
CARRYING CONTAINER
GETTING OFF EQUIP
LIFTING WASTE-
LIFTING CONTAINER-
STANDING OR WALKING
DOING (JNK ACTIVITY
GETTING ON EQUIP
DUMPING WASTE
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT
ARRANGING LOAD
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
UNLOADING WASTE
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
MOWING
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE-
CARRYING WASTE-
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
RUNNING
OPERATING CONTROLS
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
CATCHING CONT
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
T RIM MIN G S H R IJ B B E R Y
OPENING EQUIP PT
CLOSING EQUIP PT
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
COSTS
AMT *
%
AVG
COS
OSHA
REC
26 y 8:1.9
16.81
413
25»072
15,72
492
13*597
8 . 52
755
11r765
7.37
11
*765
11*554
7 . 24
1
*050
9*0 3 5
5,66
502
8 t 86 A
5.56
269
7 * 921
4 ~ 97
990
6-j 360
3.99
219
5 * 7 21
3.59
272
5 * 309
3,33
531
4 v 73.1.
2.97
237
3 v 892
2 .44
973
2*918
1 .83
730
2 *914
1 *83
2
*914
21> 022
1.27
2
* 022
1 * 701
1.07
340
1 v 6 A 4
1 .03
274
1 *064
0.67
532
891
0.56
170
836
0.52
167
824
0.52
137
780
0.49
260
757
0 < 4 7
1.26
723
0,45
723
554
0.35
139
498
0.31
498
179
0. .1.1
.1.79
178
0.11
178
.1.21
0.08
.1.21
.1.07
0.07
107
75
0.05
75
47
0.03
47
27
0.02
27
20
0 .0.1.
20
16
0 .0.1.
16
-------
TOTAI.
FIGURE 5C (Continued) PAGE
DIRECT COSTS
ACTIVITY AMT. "A AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
159*536 100.00 458
21
-------
FIGURE 6A
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JULY - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AMD FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE MO.
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
^3
19. 54
STRUCK 3Y WASTE
3 . 05
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
23
3 . 05
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
22
5. 3 2
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
13
3. 74
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
12
3.-15
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
11
3.1^
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
in
2. 37
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
9
2. 59
PARTICLES IN EYE
3
2 . 30
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
8
2 . 30
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEII PART
R
2. 30
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
3
2. 30
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
3
2. 30
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
8
2. 30
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
7
2.01
INSECT BITE
7
2.01
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
1.72
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
5
1.7 2
STRUCK BY VEH PART
5
1.44
STRUCK BY OBJ
5
l.*4
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
5
1.44
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
5
1.44
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
A
1. 15
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
A
1. 15
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
A,
1. 15
ANIMAL BITE
A
1. 15
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
4
1.15
SLIP AMD STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
3
o. n'
BODILY REACTION
3
0.35
OVEREXERTION
3
o.
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
3
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
->
o.
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
2
0 . 57
FALL AGAINST OBJ
0. 57
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
2
0 . 57
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
2
0 . 57
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
1
0. 29
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
1
0. 29
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
1
0. 29
-------
FIGURE 6A (Continued)
ACCIDENT
OSHA
TYPE
RECORD\BLE
FALL AGAIMST WASTE
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
bodily reaction in avoiding waste
COWTPkCT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
STEPPED ON S'fARP. OBJ
INJURIES
NO.
0. 29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0. 29
0. 29
0. 29
total
343 100.00
23
-------
FIGURE 6B
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTION PERIOD: JULY - SEPTEMBER 1978
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSIIA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING COUT
703
24.81
15. 28
STRUCK BY WASTE
310
10.94
20.67
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
217
7.66
9.86
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
210
7.41
42.00
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
210
7.41
35.00
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
181
6.39
36. 20
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
154
5.44
38. 50
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
132
4.66
14.67
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
95
3.35
13. 57
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
73
2.58
10.43
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
63
2.22
31.50
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
51
1.80
5.67
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
49
1.73
16. 33
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
47
1.66
11.75
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
42
1.48
14.00
STRUCK BY VEH PART
37
1.31
9. 25
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
34
1.20
11.33
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
33
1.16
11.00
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
29
1.02
5.80
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
23
0.81
5.75
FALL AGAINST OBJ
16
0.56
8.00
OVEREXERTION
13
0.46
6.50
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
12
0.42
12.00
STRUCK BY OBJ
11
0.39
2.75
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
11
0.39
5. 50
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
9
0.32
3.00
BODILY REACTION
9
0.32
4.50
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
8
0.28
2.67
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
7
0.25
3.50
PARTICLES IN EYE
6
0.21
2.00
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
6
0.21
6.00
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
5
0.18
2.50
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
5
0.18
1.67
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
4
0.14
4.00
INSECT BITE
4
0.14
1.33
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
3
0.11
3.00
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
2
0.07
2.00
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
2
0.07
2.00
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
2
0.07
2.00
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
2
0.07
2.00
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
1
0.04
1.00
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE 24
1
0.04
1.00
-------
FIGURE 6B (Continued)
PAGE 2
OSIIA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
total
NO. %
1 0.04
2,833 100.00
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
1.00
13. 62
25
-------
FIGURE 6C
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: JULY - SEPTEMBER 1973
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDASLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST WORKDAY,
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND
WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS
ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT TYPE AMOUNT % AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
41
,172
25. 31
605
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
18
,002
11. 34
2
,010
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
12
,704
7 . 96
454
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
12
, 213
7 . 66
1
,111
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
9
,042
5 . 67
1
,507
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
8
,631
5.41
1
,079
STRUCK BY WASTE
1
,451
4.67
266
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
6
, 778
4. 25
521
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
5
,9 69
3.74
597
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH
PART
4
,216
2. 64
527
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
3
,831
2.40
479
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
3
,510
2. 20
160
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
2
,103
1. 32
422
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
2
,068
1. 30
1
,03 4
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
2
,045
1 . 23
632
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
1
,956
1. 23
245
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
1
, 709
1.07
285
STRUCK BY VEH PART
1
,704
1. 07
341
BODILY REACTION
1
, 524
0 . 96
50 8
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
1
, 509
0.95
377
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
973
0 . 61
19 6
OVEREXERTION
847
0. 53
282
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING
HANDLED
335
0. 52
70
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING
OBJ
723
0.45
723
STRUCK BY OBJ
703
0.4 4
141
PARTICLES IN EYE
67 3
0.42
85
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
657
0.41
164
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
563
0.35
8 0
FALL AGAINST OBJ
5 59
0. 35
230
BODILY REACTION III AVOIDING
WASTE
5 28
0.33
32 8
•JAST2 PARTICLES IN EYE
4 74
0 . 30
59
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
4 53
0.29
115
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING
1 HANDLED
420
0.26
210
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
405
0 . 2 3
131
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
3 99
0. 25
13 3
INSECT BITE
3 30
0. 24
5 4
26
-------
FIGURE 6C (Continued)
PAGE 2
DI
ACCIDENT TYPE
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
CONTACT WITH MOT SUBSTANCE
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
FALL AGAINST WASTE
ANIMAL BITE
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
HURT 3Y HANDLING VEH PART
STEPPED ON 3HASP OBJ
COUTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
TOTAL
ECT COSTS
AMOUNT i AVG COSTS/
0311A REC IN J
322
0 . 20
161
304
0 .19
304
223
0.14
74
161
0.10
161
157
0.10
39
142
0.09
142
142
0.09
142
142
0.09
142
47
0.03
47
27
0.02
27
2d
0.02
25
159,536
100.00
453
27
-------
IRIS NEWS
-------
PUBLICATION 5
Vol. 1
No, 7
OCTOBER 1977
Safety Incentive Programs
Employee incentive programs are frequently used in industry to motivate workers.
The goal may be to increase production, reduce employee turnover, increase safe-
ty, or even reduce the number of workers out on sick leave. Whatever the goal,
it is essential that the focus be not on the incentive itself, but on the desired
result.
A safety incentive program should be designed to bring the issue of safety to the
fore in the workers' minds, and to motivate them to achieve in this area. There-
fore, the effectiveness of any incentive plan can be measured in part by how
closely it meets the following characteristics:
• creates and maintains a continued high interest in safety;
• recognizes crew and individual performance;
• sets the stage for the regular presentation of safety information;
• rewards those who are working safely;
• establishes the safety committee in a recognized position of authority with
the right to review and recommend on items of safety
Unfortunately, most solid waste collection organizations do not keep detailed
records on the effectiveness of a particular safety incentive program being tested.
As a rule, however, employee response to a new incentive will be initially high,
gradually tapering off, and then settling back to near the original injury inci-
dence rate. This process usually takes from six months to a year. One solution
to the problem of diminishing returns is to periodically change the incentive.
This technique complements the results of the famous Hawthorne study which demon-
strated that almost any change in the workers' environment will increase produc-
tivity. (1) What is important is not what is done, but that something is done.
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse in
this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Implementa-
tion of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evaluation by
each user and at each user's discretion.
^TTlfe'il'W Otvlsion Of WSA Inc. ,11 772 Sorrento Valley Road
.vXWilDilil'LAr.W San Oieyo. CA 92121 (714) 755-DJS9 S 45?-1010
-------
By the same token, if focus is continually paid to the issue of safety by vary-
ing the program, the employees will be kept interested, and also believe that
their well being is indeed a matter of real concern to management.
When deciding upon a specific incentive, it is essential to know what will moti-
vate the employees. A classic example of the use of an ineffective reward is the
one of the foundry that was concerned about the high injury rates in one depart-
ment. In the hopes of reaching that department, a company-wide injury rate re-
duction contest was instigated with tickets to a baseball game as the prize. The
safety department overlooked the fact that the majority of the employees in the
target department were black, and more interested in basketball. As a result,
the baseball tickets did not motivate them, and that department'sinjury rate re-
mained unchanged. However, the people in the office staff were interested in base-
ball, and in the end their injury rate, which was low already and not as great
an area of concern, was the one in the company that improved the most.l2)
The scope of possibilities for incentives is almost unlimited. However, accord-
ing toal976 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) study
performed by Cohen, Smith, and Cohen, the companies that were most successful in
their safety incentive programs tended to use low-key incentives that provide safe
behavior feedback to the worker.(3) The following are incentive techniques in
descending order of preference selected by those outstandingly safe companies:
• keeping a running tally of accident-free man-hours;
• publicizing outstanding safety performance;
• offering a variety of recognition awards
Keeping a running tally of accident-free man-hours can be handled in a variety
of ways. It can be a company-wide tally, divided up by departments, or for solid
waste collection, by districts, crews or individuals. The count can be for gen-
eral injuries, or as in the case of a safe driving program effected at User No.
265, for years of accident-free driving. The program combines tally-keeping with
a recognition and awards program. Those employees who complete an accident-free
year of driving receive a safe driving sticker for their bump caps. An accumu-
lation of five years of safe driving qualifies them for a belt buckle, a green
bump cap, and a special five year safety sticker for the cap. Those who continue
to drive safely for an additional two years also receive a ruby to be placed in
the rosettes that are designed on the buckle.
Recognition for employees with a safe working record can take many forms. Infor-
mation sources such as bulletin boards, posters, signs, displays, and handouts
can be combined to serve as safety education as well as publicity for the safe
workers of the month. An article about a safe working individual in the depart-
ment Or city publication can be a source of pride. A centrally displayed bronze
plaque engraved with the names of safe working employees is another possibility.
Some cities have annual or biannual safety dinners with the mayor and town coun-
cil members attending to make the safety presentations. Another city presents
leather jackets with safety patches to crew members who can operate for a year
without a disabling injury. Cash bonuses are popular incentives, as well as green
stamps.
-------
Organizations with sophisticated and successful safety programs usually find that
the fanfare and award-giving incentive techniques have a much shorter lived ef-
fectiveness than day-to-day safety reinforcement. Management should project con-
cern about the employees and their safety, and confirm that it is an issue of key
importance. One excellent way of demonstrating that point, whileatthe same time
actively involving the workers, is to allow them to participate in the develop-
ment of the safe work rules, and the investigation of injuries.
A good device to involve the worker in the safety process is to hold "tailgate
sessions" with the crew of each truck. These meetings should be frequent and in-
formal. The workers can feel free to discuss hazards along their route, possible
solutions, and any other issues that may be on their minds. At the same time,
the safety officer can commend the safe workers to reinforce their behavior, and
point out unsafe practices. In this manner, the very specific safety needs of
each crew are met ina "grass roots" situation, and each worker is allowed to make
his own recommendations on safety.
A safety officer who is using safety incentives, especially highly competetive
ones, should be alert to the possibility that the workers may stop reporting in-
juries in order to maintain a clean injury record. When that occurs, the purpose
of the program is defeated; the injury records become inaccurate, and hazards
which should be noticed and removed go undetected.
The safety incentive is a device that should be used as an adjunct to a compre-
hensive program that includes careful employee training and overall safety aware-
ness at all levels. Used alone, without the support of a strong safety founda-
tion, they become very flimsy. However, they can be an excellent complement to
a soundly built safety structure.
In response to the questions posed in issue Number 4 of the IRIS News, several
users have brought forward solutions:
1. GLOVES. User No. 186 reports:
"We have tested several types but have not yet found the 'perfect' one.
Presently we are using one with a canvas back and a leather palm, with safe-
ty cuff and a leather protective strap across the knuckle. The men find
these gloves comfortable. However, they do not give complete protection
from sharp objects which have been known to cut through them. They do pro-
vide a firm grip. Usefulness of the glove can be extended only from three
weeks to a month on the average. Costwise.they are very economical since
they are priced at slightly over $1 per pair. We have had less problems
with this type than any others tested."
2. NON-OPERABLE EJECTOR BLADE. User No. 115 reports:
"If the hydraulic system is operable but the engine or components have put
it out of service, you can plugawet pack hook up into the main hydraulic
system, run off a separate motor and/or engine, and push off the load.
-------
If everything is down and the truck has to be unloaded by hand, have jacks
made up already that fit into the ears on the side of the tailgate lugs so
they can be tightened and locked down, keeping the tailgate safely up."
IRIS hopes more users will describe their experience so that it may be shared
with all users.
REFERENCES
1. Roethlisberger, F.L. and Dickson, William J., "Management and the Worker -
an Account of a Research Program Conducted by the Western Electric Company,
Hawthorne Works, Chicago," Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.,1939.
2. Smith, Michael J., Ph.D., Cohen, H. Harvey, Ph.D., Cohen, Alexander, Ph.D.,
and Cleveland, Robert 0., Ph.D., "On Site Observations of Safety Practices
in Plants with Differential Safety Performance," U.S. Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health,
in press as a NIOSH technical report.
3. Cohen, H. Harvey, Ph.D., Smith, Michael J., Ph.D., and Cohen, Alexander,
Ph.D., "Successful Safety Program Practices Among Industry Leaders," U. S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute for Occupa-
tional Safety & Health, in press as a NIOSH technical report.
-------
PUBLICATION 6
Vol, I
No. 8
NOVEMBER 1977
The Hidden Costs of Occupational Accidents
Cost effective decisions in solid waste management safety require a knowledge of
the total costs of injuries, including both direct and indirect costs.
Only the direct costs of occupational injuries are collected and analyzed by IRIS.
Direct costs are easily determined by review of the forms and other documentation
that accompany every injury accident. These costs include the injured employee's
medical payments, wage continuation payments through worker's compensation and/or
injury leave (or sick or vacation leave), court settlements and court awards for
permanent partial or total disabilities and fatalities.
Indirect costs of injuries are hidden among the day-to-day costs of operation. They
cannot be determined, for any one accident, except by a detailed and time consuming
study. For this reason, long term collection and analysis of indirect costs, via
a system such as IRIS, is impractical, and other methods of estimating indirect costs
must be found.
A study by H.W. Heinrich lists the major indirect costs associated with any occu-
pational accident.(') Key indirect costs listed include costs of:
1. Time lost by the injured employee to the extent that the employee is "irre-
placeable" or has a value in excess of his wages.
2. Time lostby the injured employee's coworkers, who stop work to assist or com-
fort him.
3. Time lost by supervisors and administrators to -
(a) Assist or bring aid to the injured employee.
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse in
this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Implementation
of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evaluation by each
user and at each user's discretion.
IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information System
yr«v-^)/3> -? Division of WSA Inc.,1177? Sorrento Vallfy Road
dL. v , v- J®.--*? D.*ao, U (7)4) 755-5359 * 452-1010
-------
b. Assure that a worker is brought in to replace the injured employee for
the rest of the day.
c. Investigate the cause of the accident and complete an investigation report.
d. Prepare an insurance first report of injury.
e. Select and train a new employee to temporarily or permanently replace the
injured worker.
4. Time spent by office personnel to complete additional in-house forms and
filing them.
5. Time spent by personnel in giving first aid to the injured employee.
6. Possible damages to the organization's equipment or to a customer's property.
7. Down time of equipment.
8. Temporary, reduced productivity of the injured employee when he returns to work.
9. Overhead costs for each injured employee who remains on the payroll.
10. Possible increased absenteeism and reduced morale of the recovered worker and
his friends and coworkers.
The above listof ten key indirect cost items is believed to be reasonably compre-
hensive. It is suggested as a starting point for estimating indirect injury costs
and for identifying high cost problem areas within your organization. Each "trans-
action" listed should be measured in terms of personnel time (and associated pay-
roll and overhead costs) for a variety of recent injury accidents. The results to
be expected from this exercise should be (a) an indication of the most important
indirect injury cost components for your organization, (b) some idea of the total
indirect costs for a "typical" injury, relative to direct costs for the same injury,
and (c) an identification of problem areas (where indirect costs could be reduced
by procedural changes). Attempts to obtain a more exact average indirect injury
cost estimate, without performing a detailed long term study, are likely to be
frustrated by the small sample size and the vague nature of some indirect cost
components.
By performing such a study, the solid waste safety professional can determine the
multiplying factor for his organization to apply to direct costs to fairly accu-
rately estimate his total injury costs. He can then utilize this data as an argu-
ment for implementing cost effective safety measures.
Some estimates of the ratio of indirect injury costs to direct costs have been made,
for industry as a whole, with varied results. Heinrich estimated indirect costs
to be about four times the direct costs."' More recent researchers, such as Simonds
have suggested that the average ratio is somewhat less than four to one and varies
greatly from industry to industry.^) The 1973 President's Report on Occupational
Safety and Health avoided quoting any specific numerical ratio but stated that in-
direct costs of accidents are "probably larger than the direct costs."
-------
REFERENCES
1. Heinrich, H.W., Industrial Accident Prevention, McGraw-Hill, 1963.
2. Simonds and Grimaldi, Safety Management, Irwin, 1963.
-------
PUBLICATION 7
Vol. 1
No. 9
DECEMBER 1977
Personal Protective Equipment Summary
IRIS has recently completed a survey on personal protective equipment provided
by the users. Out of 76 users, 50 provide some type of uniform for their employ-
ees. The type of uniform most often issued is a standard work shirt and pants of
cotton and polyester. Another style is the coverall, and 11 users are presently
using this. Coveralls are usually of a heavier material and will give more pro-
tection from sharp objects the employee may brush against. Also, they are warm-
er during cold weather, although, this in itself can be a problem during hot sum-
mer months. Six users provide both types of uniform as a workable solution to
this.
Providing uniforms which are safety oriented as well as appealing to the employ-
ee can be a challenge. In response to this some of the users are experimenting
with bright orange or a lime yellow color for the jumpsuits or shirts. The ad-
vantage, of course, is better visibility of the worker. The use of brightly
colored uniforms is effective in decreasing the number of injuries due to traf-
fic accidents as well as identifying the employee to customers. Some employees
complain that the orange shirts are too hot in warm climates so some users are
trying fluorescent strips sewn on the shoulders and across the backs instead.
Sixty users are presently supplying gloves to the men. The preferred type of
glove is usually a canvas work glove with a suede or leather palm with leather
on the finger tips and across the knuckles. This type of glove is used by 46
users. In addition, 13 users provide an all leather glove for driving. Also,
those users with extreme weather conditions have available to their men gloves
which are weather-proofed with a rubber or vinyl material and/or mittens. It is
important that gloves have a good fit in order to keep the employees' hands from
slipping. Gloves that are improperly fitted (either too small or too large) tend
to wear out quickly and need frequent replacing. The frequency with which a glove
is replaced is dependent on several factors:
1. the glove fit
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse in
this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Implementa-
tion of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evaluation by
each user and at each user's discretion.
^^'SN'ts? Division of WSA Inc.,11772 Sorrento Valley Road
^ XcK? San Dieqo, CA 92121 (714) 755-9359 & 452-1010
-------
2. the quality of the glove
3. the budget allotment of the user for this particular item
Those users who replace gloves as needed and are able to pay a higher price per
pair of gloves (i.e., around $2.70 per pair) usually need to replace them every
three months. Those users who pay around $1.00 per pair find they replace them
from every month to every week. All leather gloves, and those gloves for spec-
ial tasks (i .e., hazardous waste or incinerator), cost considerably more, but are
usually issued only once or twice a year.
The number of pairs of gloves issued each year by users do not necessarily re-
flect the durability of the glove inasmuch as a limited budget can be the deter-
mining factor in issuing and replacing protective clothing.
Another protective equipment item is the hard hat or bump cap. This item is not
usually required of the men on the collection route but is used at the landfill
and incinerator and by employees working around heavy equipment such as cranes.
It is provided by 35 users and is not considered a costly item because replace-
ment is not frequent.
Raingear is also part of the protective equipment issued and consists most often
of a vinyl jacket, pants and hat. It is usually yellow but occasionally will be
orange.
An important item for the safety of the employee is safety or steel-toed shoes
but is not usually a part of the equipment that is offered. At present 17 users
provide shoes and replace them as needed. Fifteen users offer a discount to the
employee on each pair and/or replacement pair. While two users require that safe-
ty shoes be worn, they do not provide them.
A comparison of the costs of injuries to employees wearing protective equipment
versus those not wearing is in progress.
The following chart details the personal protective equipment that users provide
to their employees. "$ Allowance" means thattheuser either provides a discount
on the equipment or provides a certain amount toward the purchase of it.
-------
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED
User
:;o.
Gloves
Safety Shoes
Safety
Glasses/
Goggles
Hard Hat/
Bump Cap
Uniform
Rain
Gear
Fluorescent
Traffic Vest
101
suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
Coverall
Yes
No
103
rubber/suede
palm
$ Allowance
Yes
No
Coverall/jumpsuit
Yes
No
109
$ Allowance
$ Allowance
$ Allowance
No
No
Yes
No
111
Suede palm
$ Allowance
Yes
Yes
Coveralls
Yes
Yes
113
Rubber
Steel insert
NO
No
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
115
Suede palm
Steel toe
No
No
Jumpsuit
No
No
125
Suede palm
Steel toe
No
Yes
T-shirt
Yes
No
133
Suede palm
No
No
Yes
Coverall
NO
No
146
Suede palm
$ Allowance
$ Allowance
Yes
T-shirt/pants/
shirt
No
Yes
148
Suede palm/
rubber
mittens
No
No
No
Coverall
Yes
No
149
Rubber/all
leather/
cotton
Steel toe
Yes
No
Pants/shirt
No
No
152
$ Allowance.
No
No
No
$ Allowance
Yes
NO
161
Rubber
Steel insert
No
No
No
Yes
No
170
Ho
No
No
No
Pants/shirt/
jumpsuit
No
No
171
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
172
Suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
178
Suede palm
Steel toe
No
No
Pants/shirt
No
Yes
179
All canvas/
rubber
$ Allowance
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
-------
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED
User
No.
Gloves
Safety Shoes
Safety
Glasses/
Goggles
Hard Hat/
Bump Cap
Uniform
Rain
Gear
Fluorescent
Traffic Vest
181
Suede palm/
vinyl
No
Yes and ski
mask
Yes
Coverall
Yes
Yes
132
No
No
No
No
Pants/shirt
No
No
183
No
No
No
Yes
Coverall
Yes
No
186
Suede palm
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
191
Suede palm
Yes - $ Allow-
ance on
replacement
No
No
Pants/shirt/
coverall
No
No
197
Suede palm
$ Allowance
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
201
$ Allowance
$ Allowance
$ Allowance
$ Allow.
$ Allowance
$ A—
$ Allowance
207
Suede palm
$ Allowance
Yes
Yes
Coverall
Yes
Yes
210
All cloth
$ Allowance
No
No
Pants/shirt
No
No
211
Rubber/cloth
$ Allowance
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
No
Yes
215
Suede palm
$ Allowance
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
Yes
Yes
217
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
221
Suede palm
Yes
No
Scalp
Guard
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
235
Suede palm
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
236
No
No
No
No
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
237
Suede palm
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
242
No
Required/
Not provided
No
No
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
244
Suede palm
Required/
Not provided
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
^ 260 \
^ Suede palm
iNO
I
Yes
P arits/shirt
Yes
No
-------
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED
User
NO-
Gloves
Safety Shoes
Safety
Glasses/
Goggles
Hard Hat/
Bump Cap
Uniform
Rain
Gear
Fluorescent
Traffic Vest
265
Leather
$ Allowance
Yes
Yes
Coverall
Yes
No
272
Suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
No
Yes
275
Suede palm
No
No
No
Pants/shirt/
jacket
Yes
No
283
Suede palm
Steel insert
No
Yes
Pants/shirt/
Jacket
Yes
No
286
All leather
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
292
All leather/
rubber
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt/
jacket
Yes
Yes
296
Suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt/
j acket
Yes"
Yes
299
Suede palm
Yes
Yes
No
Jumpsuit
Yes
Yes
316
Suede palm
Yes
No
No
Coverall/parka/
pants/shirt
No
No
218
Suede palm
No
Yes + face
shield
Yes
Coverall
No
No
323
Suede palm/
rubber
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes + safety
straps
324
Required/not
provided
Steel insert
$ Allowance
No
Yes
Pants/shirt
No
Yes
325
No
No
No
No
Coverall
No
No
326
Suede palm
Yes
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
328
No
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
No
Yes
329
Suede palm
Steel toe
Ski goggles
No
Pants/shirt/cap
Yes
No
330
Suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
331
Suede palm
Creeper
cleats
No
No
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
-------
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED
User
No.
Gloves
Safety Shoes
Safety
Glasses/
Goggles
Hard Hat/
Bump Cap
Uniform
Rain
Gear
Fluorescent
Traffic Vest
333
Suede palm
Yes
Yes
No
Pants/shirt/jacket
Yes
No
336
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
337
$ Allowance
No
No
No
$ Allowance
No
No
338
$ Allowance
No
No
No
$ Allowance
No
No
339
$ Allowance
No
No
No
$ Allowance
No
No
340
Suede palm
No
No
Yes
Coverall/shirt
Yes
No
341
Suede palm
No
No
No
Pants/shirt/j acket
No
No
343
Suede palm
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
344
All cotton/
rubber/
suede palm
Yes
Yes
No
Pants/shirt
No
Yes
345
Suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
346
Suede palm/
rubber
No
No
No
Coverall/pants/
shirt/jacket
No
No
347
All leather/
rubber
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
348
All cotton/
suede palm
$ Allowance
No
No
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
349
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
350
No
No
No
Yes
Pants/shirt
No
No
351
All leather
$ Allowance
for steel toe
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
353
354
Suede palm/
rubber
Required/not
provided
No
No
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
-------
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED
User
No.
Gloves
Safety Shoes
Safety
Glasses/'
Goggles
Hard Hat/
Bump Cap
Uniform
Rain
Gear
Fluorescent
Traffic Vest
355
NO
No
No
No
No
No
No
358
Suede palm
Yes
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
Yes
No
361
Suede palm/
all leather
No
Yes
Yes
Coverall
No
No
362
Suede palm/
leather/
mittens
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt
Yes
Yes
363
Suede palm
No
Yes
Yes
Pants/shirt/j acket
Yes
Yes
-------
Progress of Safety Manual
The safety manual SAFETY SCIENCES is developing for the solid waste industry is
anticipated to be available by next spring. It is a hazards-oriented safety
manual which was developed utilizing IRIS data and existing safety measures em-
ployed by solid waste organizations (principally IRIS users). This project is
funded by the National Science Foundation under Contract No. NSF-C76-19132.
SAFETY SCIENCES is presently compiling a mailing list of persons interested in
obtaining a copy of the safety manual, and if you would like to be on that mail-
ing list, please complete the following, and address it to Ms. Catriona Tudor at
SAFETY SCIENCES. We thank everyone for submitting their organization's safety
measures, which greatly contributed to the writing of the safety manual.
COST: ABOUT $35.00 (COST OF PRINTING AND HANDLING)
NAME
TITLE
ADDRESS
THIS IS AN INTERMEDIATE WAY OF GETTING THE SAFETY MANUAL. THE NATIONAL SCIENCE
FOUNDATION WILL BE PUBLISHING IT AT A LATER DATE, AND IT WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE
THROUGH THEM.
-------
PUBLICATION 8
New IRIS Injury Rate Printouts
In the upcoming quarterly reports users will be receiving injury statistics
broken down in a new format, by crew size and by IRIS standard division (e.g.,
landfill, residential collection, etc.). The second quarter Quarterly Safety
Management Reports in progress contain the division printouts,which cover sec-
ond quarter's injury rates. Crew type information (e.g., size, type of shift,
type of collection, and combinations) is planned for discussion in third quar-
ter's QSMR and Accident Trends. (However, since crew type information was not
obtained until fourth quarter 1976, analyses will not cover prior quarters.)
The following two charts summarize the injury rates by division and by crew size
for the period of fourth quarter 1976 through second quarter 1977. Since div-
ision printouts are presently being received by users in their Quarterly Safety
Management Reports, to reproduce them here was felt to be unnecessary. How-
ever, users can look up their injury rates in the crew size printouts that are
included.'
For each applicable printout,users should observe their average ratios for the
injury rates to see how much higher or lower than the averages they are.
The purpose of this and other IRIS pub! ications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse
in this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Imple-
mentation of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evalua-
tion by each user and at each user's discretion.
IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information System
Division of WSA Inc. *11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, CA 92121 (714) 755-9359 & 452-1010
-------
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY IRIS STANDARD DIVISION
Reporting Period: October 1976 to June 1977
Division
/c?- d(A> <£y (£•
C9 / X*.
-V / «; .
<£> ^ oAl,
^ ^ ^t5> £
¦t. . / O
<1/ -V >£" *
Administration
9
5
56
12.26
$ 469
/ VJ X.
$41
/ X~ V/ VJ
$ 843
835,729
Resid.&Comm. Collection
38
29
356
12.24
490
187
629
3,893,129
Residential Collection
45
24
283
11.65
337
152
588
11 ,097,134
Commercial Collection
27
15
254
16.85
566
151
959
731,072
Landfill
19
9
93
10.21
200
38
369
838,328
Incinerator
20
15
306
20.85
599
122
811
367,641
Transfer Station
21
7
40
5.75
84
18
180
114,820
Street Cleaning
16
10
132
13.11
295
48
444
1 ,508,598
Weed & Litter Control
28
19
342
18.35
1,356
385
2,021
247,012
Equipment Maintenance
42
17
267
15.85
327
138
762
403,660
Miscellaneous Services
32
20
322
16.00
431
139
660
99,339
Container Maintenance
57
38
171
4.50
152
87
210
10,554
-------
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
BY CREW SIZE
Reporting Period: October 1976 to June 1977
Crew Size
f'S' Po
• ® /P J1
f*-. /nV-
/-S" ^ A* ,<&/ s/ <&/o A
W ^ x7 N/ <0 •<•/
£? «/
^ £
r?
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
33
84
46
55
18
41
28
38
319
456
366
320
18.71
12.04
13.64
8.43
$739
$246
305
257
390
181
294
164
1 ,273,740
2,802,520
7,290,360
1 ,722,490
-------
AVERAGE INJURY RATES BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW size: ONE MAN CREWS
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
DEFINITIONS: AVERAGE RATIO = RATE / AVERAGE FOR THE RATE.
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE = (NUMBER OF OSHA RECORDABLE CASES /
MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE ) X 200*000* ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO
THE NUMBER OF CASES PER 100 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES PER YEAR.
DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES~ DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENT* LOST TIME * PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
SEVERITY RATE = (NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST / MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE) X 200fOOO'
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST PER 100 FULI TIME
EMPLOYEES PER YEAR.
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN .1. .25.
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
MAN-HOURS NO. RATE AVG
EXPOSURE INJ
1
1
3
1
10
8
1
10
15
6
163
4
3
43
25
37
7
9
9
IS
15
37
27
¦2 73
o
21
/
14
6 7
365
365
432
560
140
775
925
720
600
825
020
914
120
407
896
440
400
360
9 37
444
600
440
105
740
n
1
10
8
'?
9
7
3
70
n
1
12
7
10
'?
i>
3
3
7
5
212
4/4
177
260
625
2
1
3
I
n
*»
7
9
4
0
Ai«
3
5
7
26
1
p
1
2
115
6
RATE
RATE
293
256
175
160
147
138
68
64
59
54
48
43
40
39
37
32
32
31
26
26
26
18
11)
.1.4
13
11
10
9
9
- L.WC
AVG
RATIO
.16.23
14.20
9.68
8.84
8.11
7.65
3.79
3.55
3.25
2.99
2.6 6
2.37
1 O'l
A. .
2.15
2.04
1 .79
1 .77
1.71,
1 . 4 2
1 .42
1 .42
1 . 00
SEVERITY RATE
IRIS RATE AVG
RATI"
0.99
0. 79
0. ? 1
0.59
0.58
0.52
0. 4f»
USER-
NO.
19727 r839
244 4 r487
210
103
125
133
221
296
111
341
324
201
.1.72
115
146
348
236
AVG
2»256
2 9 051
1» 953
1 ?667
If 538
If 191
If 026
1 f 019
879
846
607
583
562
544
513
319
.1.13
179
325
292
102
260
283
204
170
328
355
227
209
193
182
139
111
103
85
81
68
64
87«
14.
7<
6 <
6 <
5 -
4.
3 <
3<
3<
0 *
A—
2
1
.1.
0«
o.
0<
0>
0-
0<
0>
0<
0<
0<
0<
-------
RIS
ISER
NO.
283
236
292
109
178
179
260
336
235
170
217
PAGE 2
0S>HA INCIDENCE RATE
MAN-HOURS NO. RATE AYG
EXPOSURE INJ RATIO
7 * 800
1
26
0 , 77
15r600
2
26
0,77
59*280
6
20
0,61
28 t080
2
14
0,43
38t181
2
10
0,31
23 f 0.10
1
9
0,26
23 f400
1
9
0,26
23 f946
1
8
0,25
24 r960
1
8
0,24
61f 4 6 4
2
7
0,20
166 r 920
1
1
0,04
INCIDENCE RATE - LWC SEVERITY RATE
IRIS
NO ~
RATE
AUG
IRIS
RATE
AUG
USER
IN J
RATIO
USER
RATIO
NO.
NO,
260
1
9
0,47
343
64
0.20
235
1
8
0,44
178
58
0,18
A— * An
i)
Aa,
7
0,37
109
57
0,18
170
1
3
0,18
235
8
0,03
-------
ir-crb
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE-
BY MR IS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE,4 ONE MAN
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
INSTRUCTIONS? FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50,
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.*5.
RANK
USER NO.
NO LOST DAYS
WKDY CASES LOST
HIGHEST
197
2
190
1
244
1
70
3
133
2
83
4
236
1
40
5
341
1
33
6
201
*>
66
7
111
5
Y.J
139
8
*?9 2
2
54
9
170
1
25
10
296
9
O ~K
W
11
179
1
24
12
113
1
24
13
172
26
495
AVG
112
2*018
14
146
7
122
15
324
Am
30
16
210
7
99
17
125
7
99
.1.8
348
3
42
19
103
1
14
20
260
1
13
21
204
'*>
A..
16
"2
182
A
47
x
221
7
12
24
283
1
4
25
115
2
8
26
109
o
A..
8
27
325
7
25
23
355
2
5
29
34 3
4
6
30
328
1.
1
LOWEST
235
1
1
AVG WKDYS
LOST
95.00
70.00
41.50
40*00
33.00
33.00
27.80
27.00
25.00
24.70
24.00
24.00
19.04
18/7:1.
1.7.43
15.00
14.14
14.14
14.00
14.00
13.00
8.00
7.03
6.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
3.57
2.50
1.50
1.. 00
.1. .00
AVG RATIO
(DAYS / AVG)
5.0G
3.74
9 *? #:>
A~ ~ A.. A*..
2.14
1 .76
1 .76
1.49
1.44
1.34
1.32
1.28
1.28
1 .02
1 .00
0.93
0.80
0.76
0*76
0.75
0.75
0.69
0.43
0.42
0.32
0.21
0.21
0.21
0. 19
0.13
0.08
0.05
0.05
-------
DIRECT COSTS BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE? ONE HAN
REPORTING PERIOD} OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
DEFINITIONS} DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES»
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS» AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED»
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2*000 HOURS PER YEAR~
INSTRUCTIONS; FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
'HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
AVG DIRECT COST/OSHA RECORDABLE INJ
IRIS
USER
NO.
NO. OSHA
RECORD
INJ
AVG AVG RATIO
COST (AVG COST/AVG)
DIRECT COST PER MAN YEAR
USER
NO.
MAN-MRS
EXPOSURE
120
365
775
957
600
560
140
440
474
105
600
407
X) ^ 4
740
COSTS AVG RATIO
PER M-Y (COSTS/AVG)
197
9
31i827
43.08
244
3
244
1
4»700
6.36
103
1
236
o
257
1.70
236
15
296
10
1 r227
1.66
Am Am J*
1
111
5
1 r 107
1.50
125
10
201
3
919
1.24
296
37
348
3
806
1.09
341
6
179
1
739
1.00
111
27
AVG
212
739
1.00
201
15
210
8
735
0.9 9
146
43
103
715
0.97
348
15
260
1
709
0.96
AVG
1»273
146
12
621
0.84
115
3
170
*>
A*.
468
0.63
172
163
292
6
452
0.61
325
25
113
3
442
0.60
328
?
125
10
360
0.49
113
21
325
7
357
0.48
324
6
221
*«
335
0.45
343
18
172
70
261
0.35
292
59
109
">
233
0.32
179
«*• w#
283
1
177
0.24
204
37
204
7
168
0,23
260
23
178
n
164
0.22
283
7
182
9
117
0.20
182
67
324
3
125
0.17
109
28
343
9
100
0.13
170
61
32f]
n
93
0.13
265
4
235
1
83
0.11
355
15
432
020
096
925
177
825'
720
280
010
440
400
800
392
08 0
464
914
600
3»012~82
2,096.70
1t339.49
938.88
926.15
860.26
710.85
655.72
408.71
408.26
353.46
343.63
313.26
246.12
233.68
224.14
193.00
127.18
125.23
124.25
95.73
91.46
64.23
62.71
60.60
45.38
39.83
33.2 6
30.49
23.20
19.23
8.52
5.44
3.81
3.76
3.50
2.89
2.66
1.66
1.66
1.44
1.40
It 27
1.00
0.95
0.91
0.78
0.52
0.51
0.50
0.39
0.37
0.26
0.25
0.25
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.09
0,03
-------
PAGE" 1
AVG DIRECT COST/QSHA RECORDABLE INJ
IRIS NO* OSIIA AUG AUG RATIO
USER RECORD COST < AUG COST/AUG)
NO. INJ
115
5
80
0.11
363
1
53
0.07
340
46
0.06
217
1
31
0.04
265
n
28
0.04
355
7
21
0.03
336
1
20
0.03
191
20
0.03
316
2
17
0.02
DIRECT COST
IRIS MAN-MRS
USER EXPOSURE
NO.
178
38 « :l. 81
363
7 y 260
340
14,625
191
7 y 488
316
9 y 360
60 0.06
12*72 O.0J
10.68 0.04
7.26 0.03
6.65 O.Of
1.67 O.OJ
0.37 0»OJ
0.00 0.°°
-------
tRB
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE: TWO MAN
REPORTING PERIOD? OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
RANK
IRIS
NO LOST
DAYS
AVG WKDYS
AVG RATIO
USER NO.
WKDY CASES
LOST
LOST
(DAYS / AVG)
HIGHEST
125
1
105
105.00
8.72
172
9
736
81 .78
6.79
3
210
3
170
56.67
4.71
4
182
1
49
49.00
4.07
5
236
1
41
41.00
3.40
6
197
7
232
33.14
2.75
7
146
17
490
28.82
2.39
8
328
1
26
26.00
2.16
9
103
8
188
23.50
1.95
10
133
9
210
23.33
1.94
11
349
5
110
22.00
1.83
12
350
10
209
20.90
1.74
13
316
3
52
17.33
1.44
14
A«* A*. .!•
89
1*319
14.82
1.23
15
325
12
171
14.25
1.18
16
359
6
84
14.00
1.16
17
260
43
601
13.98
1.16
18
348
8
110
13.75
1.14
19
355
4
53
13.25
1.10
20
111
47
612
13.02
1.08
21
149
26
336
12.92
1.07
22
244
9
112
12.44
1.03
23
34.1.
18
218
12.11
1.01
AVG
571
6 * 391
12.04
1.00
24
115
3
34
11.33
0.94
25
299
5
54
10.80
0.90
26
235
1
10
10.00
0.83
27
265
61
579
9.49
0.79
28
207
9
85
9.44
0.78
29
152
18
167
9.28
0.77
30
161
1
8
8.00
0.66
31
344
11
84
7.64
0.63
32
217
67
416
6.21
0.52
33
211
16
87
5.44
0.45
34
157
18
90
5.00
0.42
35
351
3
14
4.67
0.39
36
283
<7
Am
0
4.00
0.33
37
242
1
4
4.00
0.33
38
346
11
42
3.82
0.32
39
358
1
3
3.00
0.25
-------
PAGE 2
RANK
IRIG
NO
LOST
DAYS
AVG WKDYS
AVG RATIO
USER NO,
WKDY
CASES
LOST
LOST
(DAYS / AVO
40
336
4
1.1
2 ~ 75
0.23
41
186
1
2.00
0.17
LOWEST
329
1
1
1.00
03
O
<¦
o
-------
CRC
DIRECT COSTS BY ' IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE J TWO MAN
reporting period: October i976 •- june 1977
definitions: direct costs include MEDICAL EXPENSES 1
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS * AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY~ INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2*000 HOURS PER YEAR.
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
AVG DIRECT COST/OSHA RECORDABLE INJ
IRIS
USER
NO.
103
210
146
221
316
325
350
355
172
133
328
344
14?
Hi
340
235
152
AVG
197
341
265
349
350
211
210
359
244
15?
351
115
207
NO. OSIIA
RECORD
INJ
12
5
29
90
4
13
15
6
30
14
1
11
42
98
10
1
33
1 , 100
U
36
85
14
n
24
06
9
14
31
5
0
15
AVG AVG RATIO
COST (AVG COST/AVG)
2 * 602 8.54
If 127 3.70
725 2.38
690 2.26
603 2.24
625 2.05
591 1.94
533 1.75
503 1.65
487 1.60
453 1.50
375 1.23
370 1.22
365 1.20
360 1.18
345 1.13
327 J.07
305 1.00
203
267
267
260
nn~f
*. Am t
226
220
214
209
193
177
176
13?
0.93
0.88
0.88
0.06
0»75
0,74
0,72
0.70
0.69
0.63
0.58
0.58
0.46
DIRECT COST PER MAN YEAR
U
RIS
MAN-
•MRS
COSTS
AVG RATH
SER
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
< COSTS/AVI
NO.
103
32
058
1>949.47
7.58
210
5
928
1>901.82
7.40
149
38
298
812.63
3.16
Am A *•
201
864
620.03
2.41
325
28
080
582.69
2*27
172
61
620
489.61
1.90
341
39
468
487.79
1.90
152
49
140
440.94
1.71
217
202
800
400.61
1.56
111
191
100
374.52
1.46
350
48
516
365.28
1.42
157
37
440
319.60
1.24
328
3
120
293.59
1.14
146
149
760
280.92
1.09
AVG
2 r 802
520
257.15
1.00
133
54
485
250.49
0.97
351
7
254
243.73
0.95
348
30
888'
233.42
0.91
211
49
920
221.96
0.86
235
3
120
221.15
0.86
265
205
842
220.60
0.86
344
37
440
220.51
0.86
260
196
560
192.19
0.75
358
5
070
179.09
0.70
244
34
320
170.80
0.66
359
25
5.14
151.13
0.59
299
31
200
115.83
0.45
125
O
At*
340
111.97
0.44
349
76
050
95.91
0.37
207
43
680
95.47
0.37
355
71
760
89.16
0.35
-------
PAGE 1
AVG DIRECT COST/OSHA RECORDABLE IN,J
IRIS
NO. OSHA
AVG
AVG RATIO
IRIS
MAN-MRS
COSTS
USER
RECORD
COST
(AVG COST/AVG)
USER
EXPOSURE
PER M--Y
NO.
INJ
NO.
125
1
131
0.43
329
4 * 680
84.62
217
359
113
0.37
115
48y672
60.77
299
17
106
0.35
346
59*280
58.03
242
o
87
0.29
197
82i-368
54.95
182
1
85
0.28
236
6 1240
46.79
186
1
77
0.25
132
3 y 744
45.4.1
236
o
73
0.24
316
152 y 256
35.87
346
25
69
0.23
186
4 r 6 8 0
32.91
329
3
66
0.22
161
20t280
30.47
113
1
62
0.20
242
16i770
20.75
161
5
62
0.20
283
56t160
10.97
283
5
62
0 ~ 20
113
14 y 664
8.46
292
1
56
0.18
336
29y640
5.40
178
n
25
0.08
292
50y388
Aw ~ A-»
336
4
20
0.07
178
.137 y 592
0.74
DIRECT COST PER MAN YEAR
AVG
RAT*.
-------
AVERAGE INJURY RATES BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZEi THREE MAN CREWS
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
DEFINITIONS' AVERAGE RATIO ¦ RATE / AVERAGE FOR THE RATE.
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE =» ,290
360
1.691
46
1 .00
340
34
22
0.80
237
291
0.79
340
305
136
69
45
0.97
326
3
22
0.79
183
279
0,76
362
56
511
12
42
0.92
109
17
20
0.72
201
258
0.70
323
81
432
17
42
0.90
237
14
19
0.69
323
255
0,70
-------
IRIS
USER
NO,
226
182
237
358
115
204
326
148
201
338
261
170
330
331
109
292
178
353
295
260
272
347
PAGE 2
OSHA
INCIDENCE
RATE
INCIDENCE
RATE
- LWC
SEVERITY
RAT!
AN-HOURS
NO.
RATE
AUG
IRIS
NO.
RATE
AVG
IRIS
RATE
A'
EXPOSURE
INJ
RATIO
USER
INJ
RATIO
USER
RA
NO.
NO.
58
149
12
41
0.89
172
46
19
0.66
261
240
0
226
746
40
35
0.76
330
8
.1.8
0.64
161
232
0
144
495
24
33
0.72
115
23
17
0.60
299
226
0
24
336
4
33
0.71
358
2
16
0.59
109
217
0
273
429
44
32
0.69
148
10
15
0.55
148
206
0
32
760
5
31
0.66
201
5
15
0.54
115
195
0
27
378
4
29
0.63
352
2
14
0.51
338
185
0
131
040
18
27
0.59
333
9
A-
14
0.49
182
183
0
66
690
9
27
0.58
170
6
13
0.45
186
175
0
103
896
14
27
0.58
354
9
12
0.45
330
135
0
7
488
1
07
K.• /
0.58
295
1
12
0.42
9 Q '!>
Am / A*.
8
9
0.31
170
124
0
24
570
3
24
0.53
353
n
V-
9
0.31
204
122
0
168
480
17
20
0.44
178
26
8
0.30
226
114
0
186
732
13
14
0.30
94?
A*. T A«*
o
Am
8
0.28
354
112
0
617
409
40
13
0.28
323
3
7
0.26
178
111
0
46
800
3
13
0.28
204
1
6
0.22
242
109
0
16
869
1
12
0.26
260
3
5
0.17
353
77
0
128
115
5
8
0.17
347
1
3
0.12
347
52
0
119
340
3
5
0.11
272
1
9
4..
0.06
979
A, r Am
3
0
58
032
1
3
0.07
-------
CRB
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE: THREE MAN
REPORTING PERIOD? OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS*
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN ~SO,
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
RANK
IRIS
NO LOST
DAYS
AVG WKDYS
AVG RATIO
USER NO.
WKDY CASES
LOST
LOST
(DAYS / AVG)
HIGHEST
146
o
500
250.00
18.33
n
260
3
682
227.33
16.67
3
341
1
226
226.00
16.57
4
350
153
76.50
5.61
5
325
3
•?9fi
Ah Aw «•
76.00
5.57
6
326
3
157
52.33
3.84
7
333
o
An
74
37.00
2.71
8
204
1
36
36.00
2.64
9
172
46
1 r 620
"X12; „
W W ~ Aw Am
2.58
10
323
3
104
34.67
2.54
11
352
2
66
33.00
~ *T A .
12
201
5
152
30.40
91.6
13.64
1.00
26
148
10
135
13.50
0.99
27
299
14
169
12.07
0.88
20
207
44
529
12.02
0.88
29
275
0
94
11.75
0.86
30
178
16
185
11.56
0.85
31
109
17
191
11.24
0.82
32
226
3
33
11.00
0.81
33
235
24
n
Am s r
10.50
0.77
34
17.1.
85
887
10.44
0.76
35
103
33
343
10.39
0.76
36
236
Tit
A« W
213
9,26
0.68
37
354
18
9.00
0.66
30
353
18
9.00
0.66
39
261
i
9
9.00
0.66
-------
PAGE 2
RANK
IRIS
NO I.
-OST
DAYS
AVG WKDYS
AVG RATIO
USER NO.
WKDY
CASES
LOST
LOST
(DAYS / AVO
40
182
29
256
8,83
0.65
41
337
9 c;
A**
217
8 . 68
0.64
42
191
48
393
8. 19
0.60
43
330
8
60
7*50
0.55
44
338
14
96
6.86
0.50
45
339
33
217
6,58
0.48
46
161
14
92
6 ~ 57
0.48
47
186
30
178
5.93
0.43
48
183
66
360
5.45
0.40
LOWEST
272
1
2
2.00
0.15
-------
DIRECT COSTS BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE J THREE MAN
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 ~ JUNE 1977
DEFINITIONS: DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES»
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS * AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2*000 HOURS PER YEAR~
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS~
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN ~50,
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
AVG DIRECT COS
TV OSIIA
RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
IRIS
NO. OSHA
AVG
AVG RATIO
IRIS
MAN-
•HR8
COSTS
AVG RATIO
USER
RECORD
COST
(AVG COST/AVG)
USER-
EXPOS
SURE
PER M-Y
(COSTS/AVG
NO.
INJ
NO.
326
4
0*539
21 ~ 87
326
27
378
2*495.29
13.75
295
1
2* 960
7.60
325
9
360
677.14
3.73
362
12
1*102
3.03
236
52
416
656.59
3.62
350
4
1 *001
2.56
316
351
936
622.52
3.43
260
5
987
2.53
362
56
511
502.17
2.77
261
1
960
2.46
318
37
440
500.59
2.76
325
4
792
2.03
341
4
680
463.25
2.55
316
144
761
1.95
235
70
200
452.11
2.49
337
27
724
1.85
103
44
226
396.28
2.18
237
24
683
1.75
337
103
896
376.20
2.07
109
17
611
1.57
295
16
869
35.1.90
1.94
340
69
607
1.55
358
24
336
320.90
1.81
318
16
536
1.50
339
103
896
326.04
1.80
341
*¦»
542
1.39
340
305
136
274.43
1.51
235
31
512
1.31
242
51
246
272.45
1.50
330
14
479
1.23
125
452
790
266.12
1.47
125
129
467
1.20
171
300
690
264.98
1.46
242
15
465
1.19
-icr^
W 4..
27
926
257.33
1 .42
339
30
4 46
1.14
261
7
488
256.41
1.41
179
107
423
1 .08
237
144
495
229.35
1 .26
AVG
1 ,691
390
1 .00
179
438
165
206.61
1 .14
1 7.1.
110
362
0.93
207
164
970
198.02
1.09
172
1 25
333
0.85
AVG
7*290
360
101.47
1.00
236
54
319
0.02
172
496
665
167.97
0.93
204
rr
317
0.81
19.1.
139
464
164.03
0.90
110
J.C
290
0.76
183
258
102
160.53
0.88
170
40
295
0. 75
33 3
29
250
148. .10
0.82
352
t 1
v» /'
0.66
275
4 4
226
143.31
0.79
115
44
w *„
0.64
338
103
896
129.17
0.71
¦t 7 0
12
231
0.59
146
6
552
128.21
0.71
201
Q
226
0.58
109
168
480
125.0.1
0.69
-------
PAGE 1
AVG DIRECT COST
/OS HA
RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT COST
PER MAN
IRIS
NO. OSHA
AVG
AVG RATIO
IRIS
MAN--HRS
COSTS
USER
RECORD
COST
(AUG COST/AVG)
USER
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
NO,
IN J
NO.
330
11
¦?22
0.57
161
72y306
114.62
333
10
217
0.55
204
32»760
96.89
275
15
211
0.54
299
101t907
88.02
182
40
203
0.52
354
32v175
86.96
103
106
195
0.50
115
273 y 429
83.55
323
17
193
0.50
323
81y432
82.89
191
62
184
0.47
148
131y040
81.91
•JOO
A«« / Am
13
182
0.47
186
201y240
77.81
103
48
174
0.45
260
128t115
77.06
207
97
168
0.43
182
226 y 746
71.72
353
3
163
0.42
201
66*690
6.1. .00
186
48
163
0.42
170
95y004
58.48
226
12
111
0.29
330
88y920
54.99
299
43
104
0.27
226
58y149
45 ~ 95
146
4
100
0.26
178
6.1.7 y 409
38.17
354
14
100
0 ~ 26
OCD'T
/ A«*
186y732
25»28
161
46
90
0.23
353
46 y 800
20.94
347
1
71
0.18
331
24y570
7.33
272
3
35
0.09
347
58y032
2.45
331
3
30
0.08
272
119 y 340
1.74
AVG RAtJj
0.<*3
0.53
0.4?
0.48
0.A6
0>At
0.45
0.43
0.42
0.4°
0.^4
0.32
0.3°
0.25
0.21
o.i4
J 1
o.ir
0*°A.
0.0}
o.o*
-------
AVERAGE INJURY RATES BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE? FOUR MAN CREWS
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
DEFINITIONS: AVERAGE RATIO ¦ RATE / AVERAGE FOR THE RATE»
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE = (NUMBER OF OSHA RECORDABLE CASES /
MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE ) X 200*000. ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO
THE NUMBER OF CASES PER 100 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES PER YEAR*
DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENT* LOST TIME * PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
SEVERITY RATE =
-------
AVERAGE WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
F
HIGHEST 148
<:>
A..
147
73 ~ 50
8*72
2 295
IP
41
20 * 50
2*43
3 101
.1.6
305
19*06
2*26
4 109
61
659
10*80
1 *28
5 181
66
684
10*36
1*23
AVG
329
2*758
8*43
1 *00
6 170
171
1 v 302
7*61
0*90
7 347
8
60
7*50
0 * 89
LOWEST 363
3
15
5.00
0*59
-------
DIRECT COSTS BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
CREW SIZE J FOUR MAN
REPORTING PERIOD? OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
'DEFINITIONSJ DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES*
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS, AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2i000 HOURS PER YEAR.
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
AVG
DIRECT COS
T/OSHA
RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT COST
PER MAN
IRIS
NO. OSIIA
AVG
AVG RATIO
IRIS
MAN-MRS
COSTS
USER
RECORD
COST
(AVG COST/AVG)
USER
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
NO.
INJ
NO.
109
69
466
1.59
170
1021960
1,051.32
181
90
403
1.37
181
2431360
297.96
AVG
477
294
1.00
AVG
1f722»490
164.19
170
210
257
0.88
347
38 ,688
130.94
101
73
174
0.59
109
730 * 080
91.29
347
15
169
0.57
101
318*240
79.84
295
5
139
0.47
295
37»954
36.52
148
7
135
0.46
363
58,080
28.31
363
8
103
0.35
148
175i500
10.80
AVG RATIO
(COSTS/AVG)
6.40
1.81
1 .00
0.80
0.56
0.49
0.22
0.17
0.07
-------
CALENDAR
January
January 24-25. National Safety Council symposium on improvement of occupation-
al injury information in Washington, D. C. Discuss implementing priority ac-
tivities that will lead to improvement of occupational injury information. Par-
ticipants will be top-level decision makers from companies, unions, government
agencies and other organizations.
April
April 13-14. 35th Annual Wisconsin Safety Conference and Exposition in Mil-
waukee, Wisconsin. Sectional sessions to be covered include occupational health,
highway safety, fire safety, and public employee safety.
April 25-27. 13th Annual Southwest Safety Congress & Exposition in Phoenix,
Arizona. Topics on the agenda include noise control, systems safety and the
Toxic Substances Control Act as well as a safety equipment exhibition.
-------
PUBLICATION 9
Vol, 2
No, 2
February 1978
Injuries With and Without Personal Protective Equipment
Safety shoes with steel inserts or insoles.
The IRIS reporting period analyzed
through 6/77. Of the injuries that occurred to the toes and feet (e.g. ,
punctures, fractures, amputations), punctures accounted for 53% of the
injuries, 16% of the days lost and 21% of the direct costs. Less
on-line were provided with puncture protection in their
was 1/76
bruises,
OSHA recordable
than 1% of the employees
safety shoes.
Safety shoes with ankle support. It was not possible to differentiate the injuries
that occurred with the different height (e.g., 6", 8") safety shoes and boots.
However, comparing sprained ankle injuries that occurred to employees who were
wearing or not wearing safety shoes proved interesting. Slightly more than half
of the employees are provided with safety shoes or are given discounts or money
toward their purchase. Their man-hours of exposure were only used in the "wearing
safety shoes" column if at the same time their employers required them to wear the
shoes on the job. The majority of the safety shoes provided did have ankle support.
Wearing
Not Wearing
Safety Shoes
Safety Shoes
No. OSHA Recordable Inj.
117
234
OSHA Days Lost
1,184
1,271
Direct Costs
$47,771
$56,212
Man-Hours of Exposure
16,431 ,485
15,978,189
OSHA Incidence Rate
1.42
2.93
OSHA Severity Rate
14.4
15.9
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
$5.81
$7.03
The injury rates indicate that perhaps when a sprained ankle occurs to an employee
that is wearing safety shoes, it results in a more severe injury (i.e., higher
days lost).
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse in
this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Implementa-
tion of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evaluation by
each user and at each user's discretion.
IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information System
^:*} Division of WSA Inc. ,11772 Sorrento Vdllcy Podd
San Diego, CA 92121 {714)755-9359 4 452-1010
-------
Safety shoes with steel toes. Only a quarter of the employees were required to
wear safety shoes with steel toes. Injuries to the toes (e.g., bruises, frac-
tures) accounted for 15% of the OSHA recordable injuries, 22% of the days lost
and 18% of the direct costs of the toe and foot injuries. Presumably, these in-
juries could have been prevented with the proper personal protective equipment.
Safety shoes with metatarsal protection and steel toes. Another large percentage
of the foot injuries are not protected, 29%ofthe OSHA recordable injuries, 63%
of the days lost and 61% of the direct costs. These were bruises and fractures
to the foot,excluding toe injuries. No present IRIS user provides their employees
with metatarsal protection, and the percentages given include those injuries to
employees that were wearing safety shoes.
Safety glasses or goggles. The injury rates for eye injuries (e.g., irritation,
abrasion, cut, bruise, chemical burn, etc.) was much higher for employees not
wearing eye protection.
Wearing Not Wearing
Safety Glasses/ Safety Glasses/
Goggles Goggles
No. OSHA Recordable Inj.
OSHA Days Lost
Direct Costs
Man-Hours of Exposure
46
25
$2,973
12,009,333
483
451
$40,776
20,400,341
OSHA Incidence Rate
.77
4.74
OSHA Severity Rate
.42
4.42
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
.50
4.00
A third of the employees on-line were provided with either safety glasses or goggles,
although they only sustained 1/6 of the eye injuries that employees without eye
protection sustained.
Hard hats or bump caps. The data on head protection is not well defined. This
may be due to inadequate reporting. Again, about a third of the employees wear
head protection.
Wearing Not Wearing
Heat Protection Head Protection
No. OSHA Recordable Inj.
OSHA Days Lost
Direct Costs
Man-Hours of Exposure
25
371
$15,123
12,264,928
91
537
$31,038
20,144,746
OSHA Incidence Rate
.41
.90
OSHA Severity Rate
6.05
5.33
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
$2.47
$3.08
The data on gloves is being analyzed presently and will be available in the next
i ssue.
-------
CALENDAR
March
March 14-16. 7th Annual Solid Waste Conference in Memphis, Tennessee.
April
April 11-13. Golden West Safety Congress & Exposition in Sacramento, California.
April 13-14. 35th Annual Wisconsin Safety Conference and Exposition in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin. Sectional sessions to be covered include occupational health, highway
safety, fire safety, and public employee safety.
April 25-27. 13th Annual Southwest Safety Congress & Exposition in Phoenix, Ari-
zona. Topics on the agenda include noise control, systems safety and the Toxic
Substances Control Act as well as a safety equipment exhibition.
April 26-27. Safety and the Refuse Collector, a seminar in Oklahoma City. Spon-
sored by the Center for Local Government Technology at Oklahoma State University,
Governmental Refuse Collection& Disposal Association and the Public Employee Sec-
tion of the National Safety Council.
-------
PUBLICATION 10
Vol, 2
No. 3
March 1978
Adoption of Refuse Collection Standards in California
For the past few months the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board of
the State of California in Sacramento, California, has been revising sections
of the CAL-OSHA standards which apply to refuse collection and disposal. The
next public hearing and meeting concerning the revisions is to be held on March
9th in Los Angeles. All interested persons should attend.
The proposed revisions will not only incorporate most of the ANSI 2245.1-1975
standards (see IRIS News, issue No. 3 of 1977) but includes several issues not
addressed by the standards. Of particular interest is:
1. Section 3667(b) Refuse Collection Equipment - "Every refuse collection
vehicle shall be equipped with an audible or visual warning device that
operates automatically when the vehicle moves in reverse."
2. Section 3667(e) Refuse Collection Equipment - "The maximum height of the
loading sill on curb service side loading equipment shall be 34 inches
above the standing/loading surface." (The loading sill height for rear
loading equipment was not addressed.)
3. Section 4347(c) Mobile Collection/Compaction Equipment - "When backing,
no employee shall be directly behind the vehicle, standing on rear of ve-
hicle or rear side step, or in any other location where he cannot be seen
by the vehicle operator and is subject to being struck by the vehicle or
being thrown off the vehicle."
4. Section 4344(a) Construction, Reconstruction, and Modification Require-
ments - "Refuse Compaction Equipment. Stationary and mobile refuse com-
paction equipment placed in service after March 15, 1978 shall be designed
and constructed in accordance with ANSI Z245.1-1975, "Safety Requirements
for Refuse Collection and Compaction Equipment," and be so labeled. In
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse
in this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Imple-
mentation of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evalua-
tion by each user and at each user's discretion.
IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information System
Division of WSA Inc..11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San D
-------
addition, the equipment shall comply with the requirements of these orders.
Equipment shall have a permanent identification of the name of the manu-
facturer and the date the equipment was placed in service. Any recon-
struction or modification of the equipment shall be in accordance with
ANSI Z245.1-1975."
Two other state standards boards, Kentucky and Massachusetts, are presently
considering the adoption of the ANSI Z245.1-1975 standards, and the State of
Michigan has already adopted standards in 1972 on which some of the ANSI Z245.1
standards were based.
Injuries while wearing or not wearing gloves. The injuries to the hand, fin-
gers, thumb or wrist which were considered preventable, orat least partially,
with the use of gloves included cuts/punctures, dermatitis, abrasions, and burns
from heat or chemicals. An attempt was made to verify the nature of the in-
juries that resulted in over 20 days lost. Over half of them were actually
fractures or infections that developed from cuts, rather than a cut that re-
quired stitches. These more severe natures of injury, along with amputations
to the fingers, were el iminated from the data analyzed, sinceitwould seem un-
likely that gloves would have prevented these. Needless to say, at least 95%
of the injuries analyzed were cut/punctures for which the degree of prevent-
ableness is difficult to determine. However, the incidence and severity of the
injuries analyzed appear to be affected by whether the employee was wearing
gloves or not. It should also be noted that the condition and quality of the
gloves worn at the time, which cannot be adequately measured by IRIS, has a
bearing on the incidence and severity of hand injuries.
Wearing Not Wearing
Gloves G1 oves
No. OSHA Recordable Inj.
275
141
OSHA Days Lost
693
284
Direct Costs
$37,422
$16,501
Man-Hours of Exposure
25,562,319
6,847,355
OSHA Incidence Rate
2.15
4.10
OSHA Severity Rate
5.4
8.3
Direct Costs Per Man-Year
$2.90
$4.80
As the man-hours of exposures indicate,only about a fifth of the IRIS employees
were not provided with gloves. A further look at the incidence rates of the
medical treatment cases that did not result in lost time still show that in-
juries that occurred to employees not wearing gloves were twice as hiqh (2.7
vs. 1.4).
-------
PUBLICATION 11
Vol, 2
No, H
April 1978
A recent computer run was completed for the two accident factors of nature of
injury and part of body from the IRIS data over the period of 1/76 through 6/77.
From the data the two following charts were developed of the "Ten Most Common
Injuries" and the "Ten Most Costly Injuries." Injuries that were costly but did
not occur more than once (e.g., paralysis) are not listed.
% No.
% Days
% Direct
Ten
Most Common Injuries
Inj.
Lost
Costs
1.
Strained back
18.0
31.8
28.7
2.
Object in eye
5.7
0.5
1.0
3.
Sprained ankle
5.5
4.9
3.8
4.
Strained shoulder
3.8
3.2
3.1
5.
Cut/punctured leg
3.8
1.6
1.4
6.
Cut/punctured finger
3.0
1.3
1.3
7.
Bruised knee
2.9
1.6
1.6
8.
Punctured foot
2.7
0.9
1.1
9.
Bruised leg
2.0
1.2
0.9
10.
Cut/punctured arm
2.0
0.7
1.0
Total
6,538
50,527
$2,659,412
Back strains werebyfar the most common injury, with the other top nine injuries
less than a third as frequent. In addition, back strains resulted in nearly a
third of the total days lost and more than a fourth of the total direct costs.
Back strains occur not only when the injured sol id waste employee is hand!ing con-
tainers or waste but also when the employee loses his footing (e.g., slips and
falls). Although it is the most common injury in the solid waste industry, not
enough is understood in isolating specific preventative measures for it. In the
past, IRIS reports have analyzed the tasks the employees were performing at the
time of the injury to isolate training needs, and in an upcoming IRIS special
report the effects of age and experience on its frequency will be explored.
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse in
this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Implementa-
tion of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evaluation by
each user and at each user's discretion.
IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information System
--*>¦*, rc\ division o? W$A IAc. .11772 Sorrento Vallev ftoad
Z*— San CA 9JT21 (714) 755-P359 i *52-1010
-------
Ten Most Costly Injuries
No. Inj.
Cost/Inj.
1. Amputated leg
3
$ 21,304
2. Amputated arm
2
6,877
3. Inflamed shoulder
2
5,768
4. Fractured leg
10
4,795
5. Amputated toe
2
4,492
6. Fractured arm
6
3,450
7. Amputated finger
6
2,896
8. Dislocated knee
3
2,736
9. Chemical burn to abdomen
3
2,602
10. Dislocated shoulder
8
2,385
Total
45
$219,306
These ten injury types resulted in 8.2% of the total direct costs for the report-
ing period, although they only constituted 0.7% of the OSHA recordable injuries.
-------
PUBLICATION 12
Vol, 2
No. 5
May 1978
Overexertions by Type of Shift and Size of Crew
IRIS recently analyzed the overexertion injury rates by two crew type factors,
type of shift (e.g., task or incentive) and crew size, to determine whether these
factors may have affected the high overexertion injury rates.
The following two figures indicate that two-man task crews have the highest in-
cidence, severity and direct cost rates for overexertions and that three-man
hourly collection crews have the lowest incidence rates. Overal1, two-man crews,
which are more frequently found in the west coast, have higher injury rates for
overexertions. This may be due to the fact that two-man crews tend to collect
up to one and a half times as many tons per man per day as three-man crews.
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
FOR OVEREXERTIONS BY TYPE OF SHIFT AND CREW SIZE
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
TWO-MAN
dWw
THREE-?1
AN CREW
TASK
HOURLY
TASK
HOURLY
1. OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
22
32
10
9
2. OSHA LOST WORKOAY CASES RATE
18
12
8
7
3. OSHA SEVERITY RATE
255
93
97
120
4. AVERAGE COST PER OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURY
$558
$276
$352
$792
5. DIRECT COST PER MAN-YEAR
$123
$ 89
$ 36
$ 69
6. MAN-HOURS OF EXPOSURE
2,131,670
579,540
5,165,900
2,033,540
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse in
this reqard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Implementa-
tion of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evaluation by
each user and at each user's discretion.
IRIS - Injury Reporting and Information System
~ ^jyvsion of WSA 5nc..l!?7J Sorrunio /alley
-------
Second Annual Injury Rates
The data for the second year that IRIS has been generating quarterly reports is
available now (the first three quarters of 1977 in which the U.S. EPA fully funded
IRIS). The following figures detail the injury, frequency and direct cost rates
for the three quarters of 1977, and IRIS users can refer to them to compare their
ranking with other users and with the averages for all users.
FIGURE 1 compares the two years of IRIS user data with that of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics* for all private industries. As can be seen, the solid waste industry
compares poorly. The OSHA incidence rate for the solid waste industry at 38 was
nearly four times higher, while the highest private industry rate was in anthra-
cite mining (22.3). This figure means that more than one out of three employees
of the IRIS participants last year had sustained non-first aid injuries.
The lost workday cases rate of 23 was about seven times higher, and the private
industry with the highest severity rate was the 1 umber and wood products industry
at 9.0. This rate indicates that in the first three quarters of 1977 one out of
every four employees sustained a lost time injury,not just thosewhowere injured.
The OSHA severity rate (lost workdays) of 244 was also much higher than that of
private industry (54.6) by five times. The water transportation industry had the
highest OSHA severity rate (266.9) for the privateindustry sector. The severity
rate of 244 indicates that for every sanitation employee on IRIS, .2.44 days were
lost due to on-the-job injuries.
The average workdays lost per lost workday case of 10.85 was the only rate lower
than that of private industry. However, this is not actually a positive trend
when considering that the solid waste industry has seven times more lost time
cases.
IRIS participant data reveals that the average direct costs per OSHA recordable
injury was $340, the average direct costs per lost workday case was $549 and the
average direct cost per man-year was $131.
*News, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, USDL-75-647
(If/13/75).
-------
List of Figures
FIGURE 1 Comparison of IRIS Participant Data with Bureau of Labor Statistics
Data
FIGURE 2 Summary of Accident Factors for Selected Accident Characteristics
with Highest Percent of OSHA Recordable Injuries, Workdays Lost and
Direct Costs
FIGURE 3 Number of Injuries Reported by Type of Severity Comparison of IRIS
Users
FIGURE 4 Average Injury Rates by IRIS Users Ranked from Highest to Lowest
FIGURE 5 Average Workdays Lost per Lost Workday Case by IRIS Users Ranked from
Highest to Lowest
FIGURE 6 Direct Costs by IRIS Users Ranked from Highest to Lowest
FIGURE 7 Direct Costs for Lost Day Cases by IRIS Users Ranked from Highest to
Lowest
FIGURES 8- Activities Ranked from Highest to Lowest Percent of OSHA Recordable
10 Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct Costs
FIGURES 11- Accident Types Ranked from Highest to Lowest Percent of OSHA Record-
13 able Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct Costs
FIGURES 14- Accident Sites Ranked from Highest to Lowest Percent of OSHA Record-
16 able Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct Costs
FIGURES 17- Injury Types Ranked from Highest to Lowest Percent of OSHA Record-
19 able Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct Costs
FIGURE 20 Parts of Body Injured Ranked from Highest to Lowest Percent of OSHA
Recordable Injuries, Workdays Lost and Direct Costs
-------
FIGURE 1
COMPARISON OF IRIS PARTICIPANT DATA WITH BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS DATA
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
LOST WORKDAY CASES RATE
OSHA LOST WORKDAYS RATE (SEVERITY)
AVG. WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY
CASE
AVG. DIRECT COSTS PER OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURY
AVG. DIRECT COSTS PER LOST WORKDAY
CASE
AVG. DIRECT COSTS PER MAN YEAR
IRIS PARTICIPANT DATA BLS (1974) PRIVATE
(12/75-12/76) (1/77-9/77) INDUSTRY SECTOR
41 38 10.4
24 23 3.5
327 244 54.6
13.39 10.85 16
$415 $340
$638 $549
$169 $131
-------
FIGURE 2
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT FACTORS FOR SELECTED ACCIDENT
CHARACTERISTICS WITH HIGHEST PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
OSHA DAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
January - September 1977
Type of
Factors with the:
Cliardcteristic
Highest t of OSHA Recordable Injuries
Highest % of OSHA Days Lost
Highest 2 of Direct Costs
Activity
Lifting or dumping container - 381
Getting off equipment - 82
Standing or walking - 72
Lifting or dumping container - 34%
Getting off equipment - 102
Carrying container - 82
Lifting or dumping container - 332
Getting off equipment - 102
Carrying container - 82
Accident Type
Overexertion involving container - 192
Fall on same level - 61
Slip on same level - 52
Overexertion involving container - 25%
Fall on same level - 102
Fall to a different level - 7%
Overexertion involving container - 232
Fall on same level - 92
Fall to a different level - 82
Accident Site
On collection route at back of truck - 332
On collection route at curb - 162
On collection route in customer's yard - 122
On collection route at back of truck - 292
On collection route at curb - 182
On collection route in customer's yard - 112
On collection route at back of truck - 20%
On collection route at curb - 192
On collection route in customer's yard - 102
Mature of Injury
Sprain or strain - 422
Bruise - 19Z
Cut or puncture - 182
Sprain or strain - 542
Bruise - 162
Fracture - 92
Sprain or strain - 522
Bruise - 152
Fracture - 92
Part of Body
Back - 202
Leg - 8»
Eyes - 72
Back - 302
Ankle - 72
Shoulder - 62
Back - 302
Leg - 102
Knee - 62
-------
FIGURE 3
page: i
NUMBER OF INJURIES REPORTED BY TYPE OFr SEVERITY
COMPARISON OF 'IRIS' USERS
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
INSTRUCTIONS: THE PERCENTAGES ARE A FRACTION OF THE TOTAL CASES
REPORTED, THEY TOTAL. TO APPROXIMATELY 100% IF READ HORIZONTALLY.
COMPARE YOUR ORGANIZATION'S PERCENTAGES WITH THE AVERAGE AND WITH
OTHER IRIS USERS. HIGHER THAN AVERAGE PERCENTAGES IN THE LOWER
SEVERITY GROUPS t I.E.* TOWARD THE LEFT * ARE DESIREDi AS ARE LOWER
THAN AVERAGE PERCENTAGES TOWARD THE RIGHT.
IRIS
TOTAL
FIRS
T
NON-F
ATAL
LOST
UKDY
PERM
FATALITY
USER
CASES
AID
W/0 LST
WKDAY
CAS
ES
DI
SAB
NO.
RPT'D
NO.
7.
NO.
7.
NO.
7.
NO.
y.
NO.
%
AVG
4 y 573
776
17
1 f 562
34 2
y 228
49
6
0.13
1
o
~
o
to
101
80
1
1
60
75
19
24
0
0.00
0
0.00
103
89
7
30
34
51
57
1
1.12
0
0.00
10?
161
61
38
9
6
91
57
0
0.00
0
0.00
Ill
181
30
21
51
28
92
51
0
0.00
0
0.00
113
n
0
0
1
50
1
50
0
0.00
0
0.00
115
44
21
48
4
9
19
43
0
0.00
0
0.00
125
195
7
4
30
15
158
81
0
0.00
0
0.00
133
19
1
5
7
37
11
58
0
0.00
0
0.00
146
71
15
21
34
48
21
30
1
1.41
0
0.00
148
14
0
0
6
43
8
57
0
0.00
0
0.00
149
41
0
0
18
44
23
56
0
0.00
0
0.00
152
33
5
15
13
39
15
45
0
0.00
0
0.00
157
23
0
0
12
52
11
48
0
0.00
0
0.00
161
28
13
46
9
32
6
21
0
0.00
0
0.00
170
505
129
26
98
19
278
55
0
0.0 0
0
0.00
171
137
5
4
29
21
103
75
0
0.00
0
0.00
172
300
9
3
179
58
120
39
0
0.00
0
0.00
170
10
4
40
0
0
6
60
0
0.00
0
0.00
179
99
23
23
25
25
51
52
0
0.00
0
0.00
181
121
39
32
13
1.1
69
57
0
0.00
0
0.00
102
44
1
2
10
23
33
75
0
0.00
0
0.00
183
143
15
10
48
34
78
55
1
0.70
1
0.70
186
49
10
20
15
31
24
49
0
0.00
0
0.00
191
74
0
0
18
24
56
76
0
0.00
0
0.00
197
10
')
11
0
0
16
89
0
0.00
0
0.00
201
31
n
6
21
68
8
26
0
0.00
0
0.00
204
3
0
0
3
100
0
0
0
0.00
0
0.00
207
60
0
0
34
50
34
50
0
0.00
0
0.00
2.10
0
0
0
1
12
7
87
0
0.00
0
0.00
211
35
9
26
12
34
14
40
0
0.00
0
o.oo
2.17
486
39
8
374
77
73
15
0
0.00
0
o.oo
221
145
40
28
1
1
103
71
1
0.69
0
o.o o
226
0
¦"*
ncj
3
37
3
37
0
0.00
0
o.oo
235
27
0
0
n
7
**\«r
wJ
93
0
0.00
0
o.oo
236
49
0
0
31
63
18
37
0
0.00
0
o.oo
-------
IRIS
USER
NO.
237
244
2 60
265
979
275
283
286
999
296
29?
316
313
323
324
325
326
323
329
330
331
333
336
337
338
33?
340
341
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
358
361
362
363
PAGE 2
TOTAL
FIRST
NON-
FATAL
LOST
WKDY
PERM
FATALITY
CAGES
AID
W/0 LST UKDAY
CASES
DISAB
RPT'D
NO.
"/.
NO.
%
NO.
%
NO.
%
NO.
57
24
42
16
28
17
30
0
0.00
o'
0.00
16
0
0
4
9e:
V.'
12
75
0
0.00
0
0.00
27
0
0
10
37
17
63
0
0.00
0
0.00
14.1.
33
23
32
23
76
54
0
0.00
0
0.00
13
4
99
5
28
9
50
0
0.00
0
0.00
9
3
33
9
o?
Am Ah
4
44
0
0.00
0
0.00
8
3
37
9
aL
25
3
37
0
0.00
0
0.00
3
9
67
1
33
0
0
0
0*00
0
0.00
65
35
54
19
29
11
17
0
0.00
0
0.00
4
0
0
1
9C;
A* w
3
75
0
0.00
0
0.00
66
9
Am
3
43
65
21
32
0
0.00
0
0.00
286
100
35
61
21
125
44
0
0.00
0
0.00
33
13
39
9
27
11
33
0
0.00
0
0.00
13
6
46
4
31
3
23
0
0.00
0
0.00
4
1
25
1
25
2
50
0
0.00
0
0.00
35
1
3
6
17
28
80
0
0.00
0
0.00
6
9
33
1
17
1
17
2
33.33
0
0.00
4
0
0
9
Am
50
9
Am
50
0
0.00
0
0.00
4
0
0
4
100
0
0
0
0.00
0
0.00
11
1
9
3
27
7
64
0
0.00
0
0.00
3
0
0
3
100
0
0
0
0.00
0
0.00
8
3
37
5
62
0
0
0
0.00
0
0.00
6
1
17
3
50
2
33
0
0.00
0
0.00
25
0
0
9
4w
8
23
92
0
0.00
0
0.00
16
0
0
1
6
15
94
0
0.00
0
0.00
43
0
0
8
19
35
81
0
0.00
0
0.00
45
19
42
15
33
11
24
0
0.00
0
0.00
32
9
6
7
99
A* Am
23
72
0
0.00
0
0.00
12
3
25
5
42
4
33
0
0.00
0
0.00
21
0
0
0
0
21
100
0
0.00
0
0.00
14
0
0
5
36
9
64
0
0.00
0
0.00
16
0
0
9
56
7
44
0
0.00
0
0.00
22
2
9
8
36
12
55
0
0.00
0
0.00
21
0
0
<9
10
19
90
0
0.00
0
0.00
17
1
6
10
59
6
35
0
0.00
0
0.00
23
5
22
6
26
12
so
W A..
0
0.00
0
0.00
6
1
17
3
50
9
Am
33
0
0.00
0
0.00
14
0
0
12
86
2
14
0
0.00
0
0.00
1
0
0
0
0
1
100
0
0.00
0
0.00
9
0
0
8
89
1
11
0
0.00
0
0.00
13
0
0
7
54
6
46
0
0.00
0
0.00
3
0
0
1
33
*?
Am
67
0
0*00
0
0.00
1
0
0
1
100
0
0
0
0.00
0
0.00
20
1
5
6
30
13
65
0
0.00
0
0.00
23
10
43
8
35
5
j»2
0
0.00
0
0.00
-------
FIGURE 4
PAGE 1
AVERAGE INJURY RATES BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST-
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY -- SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: AVERAGE RATIO = RATE / AVERAGE FOR THE RATE.
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE = (NUMBER OF OSHA RECORDABLE CASES /
MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE ) X 200*000.
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF CASES PER 100 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES
PER YEAR. DOES NOT INCLUDE FIRST AID INJURIES. DOES INCLUDE MEDICAL
TREATMENTr LOST TIME * PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
SEVERITY RATE = (NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST / MAN-HOURS EXPOSURE) X 200»000*
ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO THE NUMBER OF WORKDAYS LOST PER 100 FULL TIME
EMPLOYEES PER YEAR.
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
OSHA
INCIDENCE
RATE
INC
IDENCE
RATE
- LWC
SEVERITY
IRIS
MAN-HOURS
NO.
RATE
AVG
IRI
S NO.
RATE
AVG
IRI
S
RAT
USER'
EXPOSURE
INJ
RATIO
USE
R INJ
RATIO
USE
R
NO.
NO.
NO.
103
103
664
82
158
4..14
103
52
100
4.46
341
1
»458
352
A.. «_
412
14
125
3.27
?':> 1
A* J,
104
81
3.58
103
1
*165
149
65
754
41
125
3.26
341
23
79
3.49
244
1
y 134
346
27
179
16
118
3.08
149
23
70
3.11
<391
ti*. Am J.
1
y 009
341
58
555
30
102
2.68
344
21
69
3.07
350
855
354
19
708
9
91
2.38
348
19
61
2.71
326
841
351
11
787
5
85
O , ¦91>
325
28
59
2.63
344
771
A*
258
091
105
81
2.13
191
56
55
2.43
149
748
260
67
802
27
80
2.08
244
12
54
2.39
260
714
265
299
Oil
108
72
1.89
346
7
52
2.29
348
702
191
204
905
74
¦j n
.1.89
265
76
51
2.26
316
598
325
94
528
34
72
1.88
260
17
50
2.23
352
589
244
44
589
16
72
1.88
210
7
45
2.00
349
531
207
192
Oil
68
71
1.85
235
25
43
1.90
115
516
343
25
609
9
70
1.84
350
12
41
1.80
265
498
344
60
711
21
69
1.81
.1.83
80
40
1.80
197
456
340
62
375
21
67
1.76
171
103
40
1. 76
318
431
193
395
606
128
65
1.69
111
92
37
1 .62
235
425
299
197
878
64
65
1.69
207
34
35
1.57
111
396
349
50
851
1.6
63
1.65
339
35
35
1.54
152
38 4
211.
83
365
26
62
1 .63
351
o
34
1.51
207
382
350
59
183
IB
61.
1.59
211
14
34
1 .49
328
353
152
94
872
28
59
1 .54
316
125
33
1 .45
191
340
\ ?">
1»018
050
299
59
1 ,54
197
16
32
1 .43
325
324
1 >'>1
51
590
15
50
1.52
1.52
15
32
1.40
161
318
lit
503
322
143
57
1 .49
18.1.
69
32
1.40
179
317
328
14
7 21
4
54
1.42
.1.70
278
31
1.39
324
303
Ave
rat*
5*?7
4 ~ 7^
4.^5
3.5°
3,4 L
3.if
o, A*1
*- 9 .
2**\
2'J?
2>°4
*1\
,4^
,3°
-------
PAGE 2
OS HA
INCIDENCE
RATE
INCIDENCE
RATE
- LWC
SEVERITY
RATE
IRIS>
MAN-HOURS
NO.
RATE
AVG
IRIS
NO.
RATE
AVG
IRIS
RATE
AVG
USER
EXPOSURE
INJ
RATIO
USER
INJ
RATIO
USER
RATIO
NO.
NO*
NO.
210
31
057
8
52
1.35
343
4
31
1.39
339
298
1.22
171
521
367
132
51
1.32
345
9
29
1.30
172
297
1.22
217
If 769
986
447
51
1.32
328
•9
27
1.21
237
291
1.19
316
763
466
186
49
1.27
115
19
27
1.18
171
280
1.15
157
95
167
23
48
1.26
347
12
26
1.17
362
269
1.10
235
116
730
27
46
1.21
337
23
25
1.09
181
263
1.08
236
•912
619
49
46
1.21
349
6
24
1.05
330
260
1.07
345
61
312
14
46
1.19
172
120
24
1.05
337
257
1.05
347
90
983
20
44
1.15
318
11
23
1.04
133
247
1.01
237
150
611
33
44
1.15
161
6
0~K
A. w
1.03
AVG
244
1.00
318
93
747
20
43
1*12
157
11
23
1.03
170
241
0.99
339
202
509
43
42
1.11
237
17
23
1.00
125
237
0.97
170
1» 774
072
376
42
1*11
AVG 2*
235
23
1.00
211
223
0.91
201
150
985
29
38
1.00
299
21
21
0 ~ 94
346
213
0.87
AUG
19 * 856
560
3797
38
1.00
125
158
21
0.92
351
204
0.83
181
437
339
82
37
0.98
338
15
18
0.82
201
201
0.82
226
34
641
6
35
0.91
353
1
18
0.81
323
200
0.82
115
142
601.
23
32
0.84
358
•9
Ai
18
0.81
353
200
0.82
197
99
513
16
32
0.84
352
2
18
0.79
236
194
0.79
358
22
013
3
27
0.71
226
3
17
0.77
183
193
0.79
333
37
376
5
27
0.70
362
13
17
0.77
226
191
0.78
337
187
407
25
27
0.70
236
18
17
0.75
299
189
0.77
362
150
659
19
25
0.66
109
91
17
0.74
109
187
0.77
125
1 »521
583
188
25
0.65
326
3
16
0*71
275
187
0.77
363
105
296
13
25
0.65
179
51
16
0.69
347
187
0.77
283
41
499
5
24
0.63
324
1
16
0.69
210
174
0.7.1
204
25
414
3
24
0.62
330
7
15
0.69
146
165
0.68
324
25
734
3
23
0.61
283
3
14
0.64
340
146
0.60
179
652
418
76
23
0.61
133
11
14
0.62
338
1 o
J* Aw Am
0.50
146
487
327
56
23
0.60
275
4
13
0.58
343
117
0.48
133
157
631
18
23
0.60
07".>
A» / A,
9
11
0,49
355
115
0.47
355
114
716
13
23
0.59
201
8
11
0.47
345
114
0.47
330
90
626
10
oo
0.58
186
24
11
0.47
113
112
0.46
326
37
576
4
21
0.56
355
6
10
0.46
363
97
0.40
329
37
870
4
21
0.55
182
33
10
0.46
157
97
0.40
101
782
675
79
20
0.53
354
1
10
0.45
296
87
0.36
275
60
990
6
20
0.51
363
CT
3
9
0.42
182
83
0.34
330
163
378
16
20
0.51
146
oo
Am
9
0.40
292
74
0.30
340
280
268
26
19
0.49
296
3
9
0.39
358
73
0.30
10?
L >093
630
100
18
0.48
217
73
8
0.37
186
65
0.27
353
.10
994
1
.18
0.48
340
11
8
0.35
272
65
0.27
323
80
880
7
17
0.45
323
3
7
0.33
178
65
0.26
106
453
919
39
17
0.45
336
*>
5
0.23
148
61
0.25
272
163
242
14
17
0.45
101
19
5
0.22
354
51
0.21
331
41
053
3
15
0.38
113
1
5
0.21
101
48
0.20
102
6 3 6
0 3 4
43
14
0.35
148
8
4
0.20
217
39
0.16
336
70
408
5
3 3
0.33
292
11
4
0.19
283
34
0.14
206
16
492
1
12
0.32
178
6
4
0.19
336
13
0.05
296
6 9
206
4
.1 2
0.30
361
0
0
0.00
361
0
0.00
-------
PAGE: 3
OSHA INCIDENCE
RATE
INCIDENCE
RATE •
- LWC
SEVERITY
RATE
IRIS
MAN-HOURS
NO,
RATE
AVG
IRIS
NO.
RATE
AVG
IRIS
RATE
USER
EXPOSURE
IN J
RATIO
USER
IN J
RATIO
USER
rati0
NO ~
NO.
NO.
292
521 >-440
30
12
0.30
333
0
0
0.00
333
0
0.00
361
18 f254
1
11
0.29
331
0
0
0.00
331
0
0.00
113
421977
2
9
0.24
329
0
0
0.00
329
0
o.oo
148
361f722
14
8
0.20
286
0
0
0.00
286
0
o .00
178
287 * 797
6
4
0.11
242
0
0
0.00
242
0
O.OO
242
81t254
0
0
0.00
215
0
0
0.00
215
0
0.00
215
79i123
0
0
0*00
204
0
0
0.00
204
0
0.00
-------
FIGURE 5
PAGE 1
AVERAGE:" WORKDAYS LOST PER LOST WORKDAY CASE
BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN *50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
RANK
IRIS
NO. LOST
OSHA DAYS
AVG OSHA
AVG RATIO
USER NO.
WKDY CASES
LOST
DAYS LOST
(DAYS / AVG)
HIGHEST
326
3
158
52.67
4.85
n
352
66
33.00
3.04
i
323
3
81
27.00
2.49
4
1.13
1
24
24.00
2.21
5
349
6
135
22.50
2.07
6
350
.12
253
21.08
1.94
7
244
12
253
21.08
1.94
8
324
2
39
19.50
1.80
9
115
19
368
19.37
1.78
10
201
8
152
19.00
1.75
11
340
11
204
18.55
1.71
12
318
11
202
18.36
1.69
13
146
22
403
18.32
1.69
14
316
125
2*281
18.25
1.68
15
133
11
195
17.73
1.63
16
292
11
194
17.64
1.63
17
330
7
118
16.86
1.55
18
362
13
203
15.62
1.44
19
178
6
93
15.50
1.43
20
179
72
1 *035
14.37
1.32
21
275
4
57
14.25
1.31
22
260
17
<£. "T Am
14.24
1.31
23
197
16
227
14.19
1.31
24
148
8
110
13.75
1.27
25
161
6
82
13.67
1.26
26
328
2
26
13.00
1.20
27
237
17
219
12.88
,1.19
28
172
120
1 r 513
12.61
1.16
29
341.
34
427
12.56
1.16
30
221
104
1 f 303
12.53
1.15
3 3.
152
15
182
12.13
1.12
32
103
52
604
11.62
1.07
33
3-18
19
219
11.53
1.06
34
236
18
206
11.44
1.05
35
125
150
1 * 800
11.39
1.05
3/>
109
91
1 *023
11.24
1.04
37
344
21
234
11.14
1.03
-------
RANK
IRIS
NO <¦ LOST
OSHA DAYS
AUG 08! 1A
AUG rat:
USER NO.
WKOY CASES
LOST
DAYS LOST
(DAYS / A<
38
355
6
66
11,00
1.01
39
353
1
11
11.00
1.01
40
226
3
33
X 1.00
1.01
AVG
2 1234
24 * 243
10.85
1.00
41
111
92
996
10.83
1.00
42
207
34
367
10, 79
0.99
43
14?
23
246
10.70
0.99
44
337
23
241
10.48
0.97
45
363
5
51
10.20
0.94
46
296
3
30
10.00
0.92
47
101
19
189
9.95
0.92
48
235
25
248
9.92
0.91
4?
265
76
744
9.79
0.90
50
29?
21
187
8.90
0.82
51
339
35
302
8.63
0.80
52
181
69
575
8.33
0.77
53
182
33
263
7.97
0.73
54
170
278
2* 137
7.69
0.71
55
347
12
85
7.08
0.65
56
171
103
729
7.08
0.65
57
338
15
100
6.67
0.61
58
211
14
93
6.64
0.61
59
191
56
348
6.21
0.57
60
186
24
148
6. .1.7
0.57
61
351
9
An
12
6.00
0.55
62
97?
9
53
5.89
0.54
63
325
28
153
5.46
0.50
64
103
79
381
4.82
0.44
65
217
73
347
4.75
0.44
66
157
11
46
4.18
0.39
67
346
7
29
4.14
0.38
63
358
T>
8
4.00
0.37
69
345
9
35
3,89
0.36
70
210
7
27
3.86
0.36
71
343
4
15
3.75
0.35
72
336
2
5
2.50
0.23
73
283
3
7
2 ~ 33
0.22
LOWEST
354
4
5
1.25
0.12
-------
FIGURE 6
PAGE 1
DIRECT COSTS BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
reporting period: January - September 1977
definitions: direct costs include medical expenses*
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITSr AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS PER MAN-YEAR IS THE COST PER FULL-TIME SANITATION
EMPLOYEE PER YEAR BASED ON 2*000 HOURS PER YEAR.
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANK'S WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
A GOOD STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF LESS THAN .50.
A POOR STANDING IS AN AVERAGE RATIO OF GREATER THAN 1.25.
avg direct cos
T/OSHA
RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT
COST
PER MAN
YEAR
IRIS
NO. OSHA
AVG
AVG RATIO
IRIS
MAN-HRS
COSTS
AVG RATIO
USER
RECORD
COST
(AVG COST/AVG)
USER
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
(COSTS/AVG
NO.
IN J
NO.
326
4
0 * 745
25.69
326
37
576
11862
14.26
244
16
1,149
3.38
103
103
664
11020
7.81
341
30
899
2.64
341
58
555
922
7.06
337
25
873
2.57
244
44
589
825
6.32
362
19
742
2.18
221
258
091
508
3.89
115
23
734
2.16
149
65
754
433
3.32
109
100
723
2.13
350
59
183
356
2.73
316
186
653
1.92
325
94
528
352
2.69
113
643
1.89
344
60
711
329
2.52
103
82
642
1.89
352
oo
412
321
2.46
133
10
631
1.85
316
763
466
319
2.44
ool
1^, A—
105
623
1.83
348
62
375
296
2.27
235
27
507
1.73
235
116
730
272
2.08
350
IS
585
1.72
111
503
"too
w jL.
267
2.04
339
43
579
1.70
115
142
601
248
1.90
170
6
538
1.58
339
202
509
246
1.88
146
56
532
1.56
236
212
619
242
1.85
236
A V
525
1.54
337
187
407
233
1.79
237
33
524
1 .54
237
150
611
230
1.76
340
26
500
1 .47
152
94
872
228
1.74
197
16
492
1 .45
349
50
051
226
1.73
325
3-1
489
1.44
260
67
802
206
1.58
344
21
476
1.40
265
299
Oil
187
1.43
111
.143
469
1 .38
362
150
659
187
1.43
296
4
451
1.32
3.18
93
747
179
1.37
340
21
440
1 .29
197
99
513
158
1 .21
330
16
4 32
1 .27
210
31
057
147
1.13
330
10
420
1 .26
161
51
590
146
1 .12
179
76
426
1 .25
133
157
631
144
1.10
318
20
410
1.23
172
1>018
050
144
1.10
-------
PAGE 2
AUG DIRECT CGST/OSMA RECORDABLE INJ
DIRECT COST PER MAN YEAR
IRIS
NO~ OSMA
AUG
AUG RATIO
IRIS
MAN MRS
COSTS
AUG RATIO
USER
RECORD
COST
< AUG COST/AVG)
USER
EXPOSURE
PER M-Y
(COSTS/AUG
NO.
IN J
NO.
324
3
400
1. IS
351
11
787
143
1.09
152
28
384
1 . 13
181
437
339
141
1.08
323
7
380
1 ~ 12
109
11 093
680
137
1.05
181
82
375
1 . 10
211
83
365
131
1.00
349
16
358
1.05
AVG
1.9»856
560
131
1.00
125
188
352
1.04
171
521
367
125
0.96
149
41
347
1 .02
146
487
327
122
0.94
AUG
3.797
340
1 .00
207
192
Oil
121
0.93
275
6
312
0.92
191
204
905
103
0.79
355
13
308
0.91
170
1 v 774
072
101
0.77
148
14
301
0.89
179
652
418
99
0.76
210
8
285
0.84
324
25
734
97
0.74
265
108
259
0.76
183
395
606
97
0.74
260
27
258
0. 76
328
14
721
96
0.74
352
14
256
0.75
330
90
626
94
0.72
353
1
ncrn
4^ w a-
0.74
340
280
268
93
0.71
161
15
251
0. 74
125
1 y 521
583
87
0.67
171
132
247
0.73
338
163
378
85
0.65
172
299
244
0.72
346
27
179
81
0.62
170
376
238
0.70
354
19
788
80
0.61
182
43
227
0.67
345
61
312
76
0.59
•JQ9
30
215
0.63
226
34
641
74
0.56
226
6
212
0.62
355
114
716
70
0.53
211
26
209
0.62
299
197
873
68
0.52
272
14
192
0.57
323
80
880
66
0.51
323
4
177
0.52
157
95
167
63
0.48
207
63
171
0.50
347
90
983
63
0.48
363
13
170
0.50
275
60
990
61
0.47
351
5
168
0.49
113
42
977
60
0.46
358
3
167
0.49
201
150
935
58
0.44
345
14
167
0.49
343
25
609
53
0.40
186
39
154
0.45
296
69
206
52
0.40
201
29
149
0.44
353
10
994
46
0.35
183
120
149
0.44
358
t>2
013
46
0.35
191.
7 4
142
0.42
363
105
296
42
0.32
347
20
1 12
0.42
217
11-769
986
41
0.32
101
79
130
0.38
272
163
242
33
0.25
157
23
130
0.38
182
636
834
31
0.24
204
3
116
0.34
204
25
414
28
0.21
299
64
105
0.3.1
186
453
919
27
0.20
283
5
94
0. 28
101
782
675
26
0.20
354
9
88
0 . 26
292
521
448
25
0.19
n -j y
447
8.1.
0. 24
148
361
722
r>-jf
0.18
343
9
74
0.22
283
41.
499
23
0.17
346
16
68
0.20
178
287
797
»•)/->
4U.
0.17
329
4
35
0. 10
333
37
376
(J
0.06
331
3
30
0.09
329
37
870
7
0.06
-------
PAGE 3
AUG DIRECT COST/OSHA RECORDABLE INJ ! DIRECT COST PER MAN YEAR
IRIS NO. OOllA AUG AUG RATIO ! IRIS MAN-MRS COSTS AVG RATIO
ll<3ER RECORD COST (AVG COST/AVG) ! USER EXPOSURE PER M-Y (COSTS/AVG)
MO. INJ ! NO.
I
333 5 28 0.08 ! 331 41*053 4 0.03
361 1 20 0.06 ! 336 78*403 3 0.02
336 5 20 0.06 ! 286 16»492 2 0.02
og6 1 20 0.06 ! 361 18,254 2 0.02
-------
FIGURE 7
PAGE 1
DIRECT COSTS FOR LOST DAY CASES
BY 'IRIS' USERS
RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES*
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS* AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
(E.G. INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
INSTRUCTIONS: FIND YOUR ORGANIZATION'S USER NUMBER AND COMPARE
HOW IT RANKS WITH THE AVERAGE AND OTHER IRIS USERS.
IRIS USER
NO.
NO. LOST
CASES
DAY
TOTAL COST
AVG COST/
LOST DAY CASE
326
3
34 * 976
11*659
352
o
3*179
1 *590
244
12
13*260
1 *522
236
18
24*168
1 *343
146
n
A. Km
27*896
1 *268
113
1
1*235
1*235
340
11
12*586
1 * 144
341
')-/
A* W
26*164
1*138
362
13
13*983
1 * 076
133
11
11*218
1 *020
103
52
51*769
996
237
17
16*381
964
316
125
120*378
963
337
23
21*807
948
349
6
5*304
884
115
19
16 * 605
874
323
3
2*581
860
350
12
10*267
856
109
9.1.
70*860
779
310
11
8*040
731
339
35
24 * 704
706
111
92
64*407
700
152
15
9*943
663
235
25
15 * 8 1.9
633
221
104
65*439
629
179
51
31*059
609
330
7
4*222
603
296
3
1 * 800
600
1.49
23
13*728
597
161
6
3*545
591
324
.1. * 181
591
325
28
16*274
501
355
6
3* 445
574
AUG
2*234
1 * 227 * 419
549
1 7
120
64 * 398
541
170
6
3*233
539
•-> O 1
V. / A-
11
5*688
517
-------
r> u:
NO.
148
197
34?)
34 4
330
201
275
181
123
101
226
351
260
363
354
21.1.
265
210
207
170
171
217
182
328
272
353
358
345
299
186
157
183
347
191
346
283
343
336
PAGE 2
NO* LOST DAY TOTAL COST
CASES
8
4
077
16
7
883
19
9
156
21
9
997
15
6
900
8
3
568
4
1
779
69
30
328
158
64
158
19
7
665
3
1
188
n
785
17
6
617
5
1
912
1
362
14
5
028
76
26
059
7
o
255
34
10
619
278
86
771
103
31
661
73
21
624
33
9
573
¦9
Am
579
9
2
541
1
252
2
495
9
o
A—
182
21
4
993
24
5
481
11
2
443
79
17
318
12
2
353
56
10
273
7
3
850
323
4
281
9
40
AUG COST/
LOST DAY CASE
510
493
482
476
460
446
445
440
406
403
396
393
389
382
362
359
343
322
312
312
307
296
290
290
282
252
248
242
238
228
ooo
*«• A m Am
219
196
183
121
108
70
20
-------
FIGURE 8
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSI-IA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL.. CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS) * LOST WORKDAY*
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURIES
ACTIVITY
NO.
%
LIFTING CONTAINER
576
15.17
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
487
12.83
DUMPING CONTAINER-
394
10.38
GETTING OFF EQUIP
311
8.19
STANDING OR WALKING
283
7.45
CARRYING CONTAINER
253
6.66
RIDING ON EQUIP
193
5.08
GETTING ON EQUIP
14.1
3.71
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
130
3.42
DRIVING EQUIP
121
3.19
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
107
2.82
LIFTING WASTE
78
2.05
DUMPING WASTE
62
1.63
OPERATING CONTROLS
5 6
1.47
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
46
1.21
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
42
1.11
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
40
1.05
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
38
1.00
OPENING EQUIP PT
36
0.95
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
36
0.95
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
26
0.68
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
25
0.66
DOING UNK ACTIVITY
25
0.66
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
24
0.63
CLOSING EQUIP PT
23
0.61
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
18
0.47
DIRECTING VEH
15
0.40
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
14
0.37
RUNNING
14
0 ~ 37
CARRYING WASTE
13
0.34
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
13
0.34
EMPTYING VEH
13
0.34
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH
12
0.32
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
11
0.29
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIP
11
0.29
LIFTING VEH PART
10
0.26
LIFTING OBJECT
10
0.26
WASHING EQUIP
10
0. 26
-------
PAGE 2
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACTIVITY
SHAKING to dump cont
arranging load
trimming shrubbery
CATCHING CONT
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
UNLOADING WASTE
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
CATCHING WASTE
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
CARRYING OBJECT
REPAIRING CONT W HANDTOOI
DOING OFFICE WORK
DOING JANITORIAL WORK-
PUTTING our FIRE
RIDING ON CONT
WASHING CONT
doing horseplay
MOWING
total
no*
9
0,24
9
0 ~ 24
7
0*18
6
0.16
6
0..1.6
6
0.16
5
0.13
5
0.13
5
0.13
4
0.11
3
0*08
3
0.08
3
0.08
3
0.08
2
0.05
1
A»
0.05
1
0.03
1
0.03
3 t 797
100.00
-------
FIGURE 9
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACTIVITY
NO.
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
LIFTING CONTAINER
4 >033
16.64
10.50
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
21 775
11.45
9.88
GETTING OFF EQUIP
2 > 436
10.05
12.24
CARRYING CONTAINER
11990
8.21
11.06
STANDING OR WALKING
1 >800
7.42
11.11
DUMPING CONTAINER
1 >713
7.07
8.48
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
1 1-236
5.10
14.54
RIDING ON EQUIP
1 r 195
4.93
10.48
DRIVING EQUIP
1*054
4.35
15.06
GETTING ON EQUIP
986
4.07
11.88
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
545
2.25
18.79
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
466
1.92
8.63
LIFTING WASTE
414
1.71
8.28
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK
303
1.25
9.77
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
265
1.09
12.62
OPERATING CONTROLS
244
1.01
9.04
OPENING EQUIP PT
225
0.93
14.06
CLOSING EQUIP PI-
220
0.91
14.67
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
215
0.89
17.92
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
192
0.79
11.29
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
152
0.63
6.33
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
.149
0.61
11.46
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
130
0.54
18.57
PUSHING OR PULLING VEH PT
125
0.52
20.03
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
118
0.49
29.50
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
109
0.45
9.91
CARRYING WASTE
104
0.43
14.86
DOING I.JNK ACTIVITY
101
0.42
9.18
DUMPING WASTE
96
0.40
5.33
WASHING EQUIP
(37
0.36
21 .75
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
03
0.34
6.92
LIFTING OBJECT
82
0.34
20.50
CATCHING WASTE
73
0.30
36.50
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIP
70
0.29
10.00
RUNNING
70
0.29
8.75
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
51
0.21
7.29
DOING OFFICE WORK
40
0.16
40.00
LIFTING VEH CART
39
0.16
7.80
-------
PAGE 2
0
ACTIVITY
DIRECTING VE'H
SHAKING TO DUMP CQNT
DISLODGING WASTE' FROM VEH
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT
ARRANGING LOAD
UNLOADING WASTE
CARRYING OBJECT
CATCHING CONT
REPAIRING CONT W HANDTOOL
trimming SHRUBBERY
COMPACTING WASTE IN CONT
WASHING CONT
EMPTYING UEH
tiOUIING
RIDING ON CONT
doing JANITORIAL WORK
total
HA DAYS LOST
NO. "/.
33
0. 14
32
0.13
29
0. 12
25
0.10
25
0.10
23
0.09
oo
Aw Am
0.09
16
0.07
13
0.05
11
0.05
8
0.03
7
0.03
6
0.02
A
0.02
o
0.01
1
0.00
24i.243
100.00
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
4.71
8.00
4.83
5.00
4.17
7.67
5.50
5.33
6.50
11.00
2.67
3.50
3.00
4.00
2.00
1.00
10.85
-------
FIGURE 10
page: 1
ALL USERS
ACTIVITIES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS), AND LOST
WORKDAY•/ PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES, WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS
AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G.* INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT
COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
ACTIVITY AMT. % AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
LIFTING CONTAINER
205 ,209
15.88
356
LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER
140 ,123
10.84
288
GETTING OFF EQUIP
127,983
9.90
412
CARRYING CONTAINER
107,281
8.30
424
STANDING OR WALKING
92,200
7.13
326
DUMPING CONTAINER
861790
6.71
220
PUSHING OR PULLING CONTAINER
66,357
5.13
510
RIDING ON EOtJIT-
59,957
4.64
311
DRIVING EQUIP
50,234
3.89
415
CLEARING WASTE W HANDTOOL
49,389
3.82
1 ,235
GETTING ON EQUIP
45,774
3.54
325
PUSHING OR PULLING VEII PT
29,129
2.25
2,648
LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE
24,371
1.89
228
LIFTING WASTE
20,526
1.59
263
OPERATING CONTROLS
18,918
1.46
338
OPENING EQUIP PT
14,662
1.13
407
DOING REPETITIOUS WORK-
14,402
1.11
31.3
CLOSING EQUIP PT
13,469
1.04
586
DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY
11 ,0.16
0.85
262
PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE
10,561
0.82
587
REFUELING VEH OR ROUTINE MAINT
9,180
0.71
242
DUMPING WASTE
7,893
0.6.1
127
PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE
7,805
0.60
217
CHECKING EQUIP MALFNCTN
7,028
0.54
270
PUSHING OR PULLING OBJECT
5,975
0.46
460
WASHING EQUIP
5,417
0.42
542
DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY
5,304
0.4.1
212
CARRYING WASTE
5,244
0.41
403
DOING IINK ACTIVITY
5,121.
0.40
205
COMPACTING WASTE IN VEH
4,792
0.37
799
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONT
4,303
0.33
307
CATCH.INC3 WASTE
4,169
0.32
834
RUNNING
3,479
0.27
249
LIFTING OBJECT
3,251
0.25
325
REPAIRING EQUIP W HANDTOOL
3,174
0.25
132
HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIP
2,0535
0.22
262
-------
PAGE 2
DIRECT COSTS
activity
AMT. % MG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
LIFTING VEH PART
DIRECTING VEM 2*360 0.18 -?36
DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEH 2,095 0.16 ^40
SHAKING TO DUMP CONT 1>950 0.15 i63
DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONT lr935 0.15
-------
FIGURE 11
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS' OSIIA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS)v LOST WORKDAY*
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE
NO.
7.
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
717
18.88
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
211
5.56
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
203
5.35
STRUCK BY WASTE
194
5.11
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
150
3.95
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
.1.45
3.82
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
141
3.71
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
135
3.56
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
135
3.56
INSECT BITE
128
3.37
BODILY REACTION
120
3.16
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
115
3.03
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
111
2.92
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
94
2.48
ANIMAL BITE
91
2.40
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
89
2.34
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
87
2.29
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
78
2.05
STRUCK BY VEH PART
S':>
V.J A..
1.37
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
52
1.37
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
52
1.37
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
50
1.32
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
46
1.21
PARTICLES IN EYE
45
1.19
STRUCK BY OBJ
44
1.16
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
38
1 .00
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
35
0.92
OVEREXERTION
34
0.90
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
29
0. 76
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
28
0.74
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
25
0.66
0vEREXERTI ON INV0!... VING 0D J
25
0.66
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE-
25
0.66
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
22
0.50
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
21
0.55
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
19
0.50
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TO::.IC WASTE
16
0. 42
STEPPED ON SI !ARP OBJ
16
0. 42
STRUCK SELF WITH "Ell PT BEING HANDLE!;
15
0.40
CONTACT 1) ITH MOT SUBSTANCE
.1 1
0.37
-------
PAGE 2
OSHA RECORDABLE
: INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE
NO.
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
14
0.37
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
13
0.34
hurt BY HANDLING veii PART
13
0.34
exposure to weather extremes
13
0.34
other accident type:
12
0.32
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
11
0.29
pr^LL. AGAINST CDNT
9
0.24
RESULT OF" AGGRESS IVE ACT
9
0.24
CONTACT WITH HOT MEII PART
S
0.21
hurt BY HANDLING OBJ
6
0.16
pall AGAINST OBJ
6
0.16
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CQNT
6
0.16
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
6
0.16
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
5
0.13
FALL against waste
3
0.08
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
3
0.08
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
o
0.05
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
A—
0.05
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEII
2
0.05
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING CONT
0.05
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
0.05
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEII
1
0.03
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ
1
0.03
1
0.03
TOTAL.
3i-797
100,00
-------
FIGURE 11
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF" OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS J OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS)s> LOST WORKDAY?
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURIES
ACCIDENT TYPE
NO .
7.
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
717
18.88
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
21.1.
5 ~ 56
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
203
5.35
STRUCK BY WASTE
194
5.11
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
150
3.95
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
145
3.82
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
141
3.71
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
135
3.56
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
135
3.56
INSECT BITE
128
3.37
BODILY REACTION
120
3.16
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
115
3.03
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
111
2.92
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
94
2.48
ANIMAL BITE
91
2.40
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
89
2.34
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
87
2.29
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
78
2.05
STRUCK BY VEH PART
52
1.37
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
52
1.37
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
52
1.37
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
50
1.32
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
46
1.21
PARTICLES IN EYE
45
1.19
STRUCK BY OBJ
4 4
1.16
HURT BY HAND!.. I NO WASTE
38
1.00
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
35
0.92
OVEREXERTION
34
0.90
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
29
0.76
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
28
0.74
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEII PART
25
0.66
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
25
0.66
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
25
0.66
bodily REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
22
0.50
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
21
0.55
STRUCK SFI.r WITH OBJ I/EING HANDLED
19
0.50
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
16
0. 42
STEPPED Of? SI!ARP ODJ
16
0.42
STRUCK SELF UITII VEII P T DEI NO HANDLE)?
15
0.40
CONTACT UT HI MOT SUBSTANCE
1 1
0. .5 /
-------
PAGE 2
ACCIDENT
OS HA
TYPE
RECORDABLE INJURIE
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
struck AGAINST WASTE
hurt by handling veh part
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
FALL. AGAINST CONT
RESULT OF" AGGRESSIVE ACT-
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ
FALL AGAINST OBJ
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
FALL AGAINST WASTE
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING CONT
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING WASTE
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEH
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ
ES
NO*
x
14
0.37
13
0.34
13
0.34
13
0.34
12
0.32
11
0.29
9
0.24
9
0.24
S
0.21
6
0.16
6
0*16
6
0.16
6
0.16
5
0.13
3
0.08
3
0.00
o
0.05
*—
0.05
o
0.05
o
-------
FIGURE 12
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSIIA DAYS LOST
REPORTION PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: A LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT~
GSMA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE NO, % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
5,967
24*61
11.22
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
2*338
9 ~ 64
14.80
FALL. TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL-
1 »782
7,35
17.47
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL-
1 r 770
7.33
12.10
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
1 *473
6.08
15.03
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
1 v 2 81
5.28
14.90
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
1*112
4.59
15. 66
BODILY REACTION
965
3.98
11.49
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
837
3.45
14.43
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
616
2.54
8.00
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING
HANDLED
500
2.06
6.10
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
429
1 .77
11.92
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
416
.1.. 72
26.00
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH
PART
413
1.70
7.65
STRUCK BY OBJ
336
1.39
18.67
STRUCK BY VEH PART
W Am
1.33
11.50
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
307
1.27
17.06
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
293
1 .21
6.37
STRUCK BY WASTE
289
1 .19
4.33
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME-
21.4
0.88
12.59
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
168
0.69
5.60
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
160
0.66
5.00
STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT
155
0.64
5.74
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
154
0.64
10.27
OVEREXERTION
151
0.62
6.86
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING
HANDLED
147
0.61
5.65
IJNKN0WN ACCIDENT T Y PE
1.43
0 . 59
17 * 87
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
138
0,57
7.67
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
13 3
0.55
8.87
FALL AGAINST CONT
109
0.45
12.11
INSECT BITE
.103
0.42
2.57
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING
CONT
97
0.40
6.47
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING
WASTE
94
0.39
47.00
WASTE PARTICLE'S IN EYE
81
0.33
2.89
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
71
0.29
0.87
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
56
0,23
7.00
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
55
0.23
5.50
PARTICLES TN EYE
49
0.20
3.27
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING HANDLED
40
0.16
8.00
FALL AGAINST OBJ
39
0.16
9.75
ANIMAL BITE-
39
0.16
2.05
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST ODJ
3G
0.16
9.50
-------
page: 2
OSHA DAYS LOST
ACCIDENT TYPE NO. V.
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
37
0.15
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
35
0.14
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
32
0.13
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
30
0.12
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
25
0.10
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING OBJ
?>=:
* *. W
0.10
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING CONT
^cr
W
0.10
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
25
0.10
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE
24
0.10
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
16
0.07
CONTACT WITH HOT VEII PART
16
0.07
FALL AGAINST WASTE
12
0.05
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
11
0.05
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
1.1
0.05
CONTACT WITH HOT OBJ
10
0.04
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEH
8
0.03
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
6
0.02
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
5
0.02
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
o
0.01
total
24 1243
100.00
AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
7.40
3 ~ 89
8.00
4.29
12.50
8.33
12.50
4.17
2.18
1.78
3.20
6 * 00
2.20
3.67
5.00
8.00
6.00
5.00
1.00
10.85
-------
FIGURE 13
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD? JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS),- AND LOST WORKDAY*
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES ? WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND
WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G.* INJURY LEAVE) ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS
ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT TYPE AMOUNT "/. AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONT
290
149
23.07
416
FALL ON SAME LEVEL
114
76?
8.88
544
FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
98
947
7.66
660
VEHICLE ACCIDENT
98
258
7.60
728
SLIP ON SAME LEVEL
91
513
7.08
451
CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS
64
639
5.00
446
VEH MOVEMENT INVOLVED ACCIDENT
45
339
3.51
408
STRUCK BY OBJ
43
260
3.35
983
BODILY REACTION
40
898
3.16
341
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING WASTE
38
563
2.98
494
STRUCK SELF WITH CONT BEING HANDLED
29
324
2.27
208
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING OBJ
27
160
2.10
1 »086
STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
27
037
2.09
200
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST VEH PART
20
503
1.59
230
SLIP TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
19
201
1.49
417
STRUCK BY WASTE
18
880
1.46
97
HURT BY HANDLING CONT
17
482
1.35
152
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING VEH PART
16
785
1 .30
671
STRUCK BY VEH PART
16
602
1 .28
319
UNKNOWN ACCIDENT TYPE
11
266
0.87
805
DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME
11
108
0.86
397
STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE
S
999
0. 70
103
OVEREXERTION
8
618
0.67
253
STRUCK BY CONTAINER
8
250
0.64
159
STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE BEING HANDLED
8
029
0.62
154
INSECT BITE
8
026
0.62
63
STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER
7
994
0.62
381
FALL AGAINST VEH PART
7
634
0.59
263
FALL AGAINST CONT
7
347
0.57
816
HURT BY HANDLING WASTE
7
268
0.56
191
struck against OBJECT
6
624
0.5.1.
132
WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE
6
624
0.51
70
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING CONT
263
0. 41
239
BODILY REACTION IN /VOIDINC WASTE
cr
-.J
.1.51
0 . 40
2 f 576
ANIMAL BITE
4
235
0.33
47
PARTICLES IN EYE
~r
930
0.30
37
-------
page: 2
ACCIDENT TYPE
DIRECT
COSTS
AMOUNT
STRUCK SELF WITH OBJ BEING HANDLED
EXPOSURE TO WEATHER EXTREMES
HURT BY HANDLING VEH PART
STRUCK SELF WITH VEH PT BEING
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC
OTHER ACCIDENT TYPE
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC WASTE
RESULT OF AGGRESSIVE ACT
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJ
FALL AGAINST OBJ
CONTACT WITH CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE
CONTACT WITH HOT SUBSTANCE
STEPPED ON SHARP OBJ
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING VEH
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING'OBJ
BODILY REACTION IN AVOIDING GONT
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST CONT
STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
CONTACT WITH HOT VEH PART
CONTACT WITH HOT fJBJ
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING VEH
FALL AGAINST WASTE
CONTACT WITH ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE
SLIP AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING WASTE
HURT BY HANDLING OBJ
BODILY REACTION IN CATCHING OBJ
TOTAL
HANDLED
SUBSTANCE
AVG COSTS/
OS IIA REC IN J
3*214
0 ~ 25
16?
3*212
0.25
247
2*961
0.23
228
2*695
0.2.1
ISO
2*440
0.19
98
2*304
0.18
192
2*197
0.17
63
1 *940
0.15
216
1 *923
0.15
175
1*857
0.14
310
1 *653
0.13
104
1*611
0.12
115
1 *533
0.12
96
1 *517
0.12
759
1 ?287
0.10
257
1 *191
0.09
596
1 *008
0.08
168
938
0.0 7
72
789
0.06
99
458
0.04
153
441
0.03
441
403
0.03
134
356
0.03
59
296
0.02
143
294
0.02
147
t> t> •=;
Am h. \J
0.02
38
64
0.00
64
20
0.00
20
1» 292*515
100.00
340
-------
FIGURE 14
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT SITES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TC) LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
(I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS)? LOST WORKDAYr
PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATAL CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT SITE NO. 7.
ON COLLECTION ROUTE
IN STREET AT BACK OF TRUCK 899 23.68
IN ST AT CURB 442 11.64
IN CUSTOMER'S YD 437 1.1. .51
IN ALLEY AT BACK OF TRUCK 363 9.56
ON STEP OF VEH 220 5.79
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 167 4.40
IN ALLEY AT CURB 162 4.27
ON RUNNING BOARD 123 3.24
IN CUSTOMER'S DRIVEWAY 105 2.77
IN MIDALLEY 50 1.32
ON SIDEWALK 50 1.32
IN MIDSTREET 49 1.29
IN ST AT FRONT OF TRUCK 30 0.79
ON VEHICLE 26 0.68
IN ALLEY AT FRONT OF TRUCK 18 0.47
ON TRUCK BED 14 0.37
IN CUSTOMER'S RESIDENCE 9 0.24
SUBTOTAL 3*308 87.12
ENROUTE BETWEEN SITES
INSIDE CAB 28 0.74
ON STEP OF VEH 2 0.05
ON VEHICLE 1 0.03
ON TRUCK BED 1 0.03
SUBTOTAL 33 0.87
AT LANDFILL
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMP SITE 53 1.40
AT DUMP SITE 23 0.61
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 19 0.50
IN YARD 16 0.42
NEXT TO VEH 10 0.26
ON VEHICLE 6 0.16
IN SHOP/DARAGE 6 0.16
ON TRUCK BED 5 0.13
ON RUNNING BOARD 3 0.00
INSIDE CAB ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE 3 0.08
ON STEP OF VEH 2 0.05
-------
PAGE 2
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT SITE
NO.
7.
INSIDE CAB AT DUMP SITE
0
0.05
ON STEP AT DUMP SITE
1
0.03
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMP SITE
1
0.03
ON TRUCK BED AT DUMP SITE
1
0.03
SUBTOTAL
171
4.50
AT INCINERATOR
IN SHOP/GARAGE 10 0.26
IN PLANT 10 Q.26
IN YARD 5 0*13
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMPING FLOOR 4 0.11
NEXT TO VEH 3 0.08
AT DUMPING FLOOR 3 0,08
ON VEHICLE 2 0.05
ON STEP OF VEH 2 0.05
ON TRUCK BED 0.05
ON VEHICLE AT DUMPING FLOOR 2 0.05
INSIDE CAB AT DUMPING FLOOR 2 0.05
SIJBTOTAL 49 lt$?
AT TRANSFER STATION
NEXT TO VEHICLE 11 o.29
IN YARD 7 o*18
ON TRUCK BED 4 o.ll
ON VEHICLE 2 0.05
ON RUNNING BOARD 2 0.05
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 1 0.03
SUBTOTAL 36 0.95
At RECYCLING STATION
IN YARD 1 o.03
IN PLANT 1 o.03
SUBTOTAL 2 0.05
HEADQUARTERS
IN SHOP/GARAGE lt71
IN YARD PARKING LOT 53 1.40
IN OFFICE 12 0.32
ON VEHICLE 9 0.2-4
flT WASHRACK 7 0.13
REFUELING STATION 6 o.lA
NEXT TO VEH 5 0.13
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 3 0.00
(IN RUNNING BOARD 3 0.O8
IN TRUCK BED 1 o.03
SUBTOTAL 169 4.45
ROADWAY/FIELD
SUBTOTAL
11
0.29
-------
PAGE 3
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIES
ACCIDENT SITE NO. %
AT OTHER SITE
AT UNKNOWN SITE 14 0,37
SUBTOTAL 18 0.47
TOTAL
3 r 797
1.00*00
-------
FIGURE 15
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
ACCIDENT SITES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OFr OSHA DAYS LOST
reporting period: January - September 1977
definitions: a lost days case is one in which the employee incurred
workdays lost and/or light duty days due to the accident.
OSHA DAYS
ACCIDENT SITE-
ON COLLECTION ROUTE
IN STREET AT BACK OF TRUCK
IN ST AT CURB
IN CUSTOMER'S YD
IN ALLEY AT BACK OF TRUCK
ON STEP OF VEH
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
IN CUSTOMER'S DRIVEWAY
ON RUNNING BOARD
IN ALLEY AT CURB
ON SIDEWALK
IN MIDSTREET
ON TRUCK BED
IN MIDALLEY
IN ST AT FRONT OF TRUCK
ON VEHICLE
IN ALLEY AT FRONT OF TRUCK-
IN CUSTOMER'S RESIDENCE
SUBTOTAL
ENROUTE BETWEEN SITES
INSIDE CAB
ON VEHICLE
ON STEP OF VEH
SUBTOTAL
LOST
NO. % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
5 y 485
22.63
9.81
3*637
15.00
11.92
2*615
10.79
8.75
1*503
6.20
10.97
1 * 437
5.93
9.98
If 177
4.86
11.43
913
3.77
13.83
787
3.25
11.57
666
2.75
10.57
580
2.39
16.57
534
2.20
13.69
256
1.06
21.33
188
0.78
7.83
175
0.72
14.58
137
0.57
11.42
67
0.28
8.37
34
0.14
4.86
20* 90S
86.24
10.61
363
1.50
21.35
Am
0.01
2.00
1
0.00
1.00
367
1.51
18.35
rtT LANDFILL..
NEXT TO VEII AT DUMP SITE
296
1.22
11.38
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
109
0.45
8.38
NEXT TO VEH
73
0.30
14.60
INSIDE CAB ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
51
0.21
17.00
AT DUMP SITE
30
0. 16
4.75
IN YARD
25
0.10
3.57
ON VEHICLE
21
0.09
4.20
IN SHOP/OARAGE
21
0.09
7.00
ON TRUCK BED AT DUMP SITE
0
0.03
0.00
ON TRUCK BED
6
0.02
6.00
ON STEP AT DUMP SITE
3
0.01
3.00
SUBTOTAL..
712
2.94
8.48
INCINERATOR
IN PLANT
92
0.38
11 .50
-------
PAGE 2
OSHA DAYS LOST-
ACCIDENT SITE NO. % AVG DAYS LOST/
LOST DAYS CASE
ON TRUCK BED 87 0.36 43.50
IN SHOP/GARAGE 62 0.26 10.33
ON VEHICLE AT DUMPING FLOOR 55 0.23 55.00
IN YARD 32 0.13 8.00
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMPING FLOOR 22 0.09 7.33
ON STEP OF VEH 12 0.05 12.00
AT DUMPING FLOOR 12 0.05 6.00
INSIDE CAB AT DUMPING FLOOR 10 0.04 10.00
ON VEHICLE 5 0.02 5.00
NEXT TO VEH 1 0.00 1.00
SUBTOTAL 394 1.63 12.31
AT TRANSFER STATION
NEXT TO VEHICLE 94 0.39 18.80
ON TRUCK BED 23 0.09 7.67
ON RUNNING BOARD 19 0.08 9.50
IN YARD 14 0.06 7.00
ON VEHICLE 7 0.03 7.00
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 1 0.00 1.00
SUBTOTAL 167 0.69 9.82
AT RECYCLING STATION
IN YARD 9 0.04 9.00
SUBTOTAL 9 0.04 9.00
AT HEADQUARTERS
IN YARD PARKING LOT 744 3.07 22.55
IN SHOP/GARAGE 552 2.28 16.24
ON VEHICLE 107 0.44 15.29
IN OFFICE 59 0.24 14.75
ON RUNNING BOARD 34 0.14 17.00
NEXT TO VEH 29 0.12 7.25
AT WASHRACK 24 0.10 6.00
AT REFUELING STATION 22 0.09 5.50
INSIDE CAB OF VEH 20 0.08 10.00
IN TRUCK BED 3 0.01 3.00
SUBTOTAL 1*604 6.62 16.54
IN ROADWAY/FIELD
SUBTOTAL 10 0.04 3.33
AT OTHER SITE
AT UNKNOWN SITE 57 0.24 8.14
SUBTOTAL 72 0.30 7.20
TOTAL 24»243 100.00 10.85
-------
FIGURE 16
PAGE 1
ALL. USERS
ACCIDENT SITES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
reporting period: January - September 1.977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS)* AND LOST
WORKDAY- PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES* WORKER'S COMPENSATION
BENEFITS AND WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G.* INJURY LEAVE)
ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.
INSTRUCTIONS: DETERMINE YOUR ORGANIZATION'S PROBLEM AREAS BY
IDENTIFYING THE AREAS WITH THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGES.
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT SITE
AMOUNT % AVG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
ON COLLECTION ROUTE
IN STREET AT BACK OF TRUCK
IN ST AT CURB
IN CUSTOMER'S YD
IN ALLEY AT BACK OF TRUCK
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
ON STEP OF VEH
CUSTOMER'S DRIVEWAY
RUNNING BOARD
ALLEY AT CURB
SIDEWALK
MIDSTREET
MIDALLEY
TRUCK BED
VEHICLE
IN
ON
IN
ON
IN
IN
ON
ON
IN
IN
IN
ST AT
ALLEY
FRONT OF
AT FRONT
TRUCK
OF TRUCK
CUSTOMER'S
SUBTOTAL
RESIDENCE
299 *762
202*457
128*064
84*033
65*975
62*559
53*012
43*524
36*830
32*492
21*967
14*034
11*799
9*431
8*640
2*535
1*768
1 * 114*991
23.19
15.66
9.91
6.50
5.10
4.84
4.10
3.37
2.85
2.51
1.70
1.09
0.91
0.73
0.67
0.20
0.14
86.27
333
458
293
231
395
284
504
353
227
649
448
280
842
362
288
140
196
337
ENRQIJTE BETWEEN SITES
INSIDE CAB
ON STEP OF VEII
ON VEHICLE
ON TRUCK BED
SUBTO TAI .
13*696
142
111
92
14*4.1.9
1 .06
0.01
0.01
0.01
1 .12
489
71
111
92
437
fi'T LANDFILL
MEXr ro VEH AT DUMP SITE
INSIDE CAD OF VEH
NEXT TO MEM
INSIDE CAD ENROUTE TO DUMP SITE
AT DUMP SITE
20*059
7*497
3*397
2*902
1 *838
1 .55
0.58
0.26
0.22
0.14
378
394
339
967
79
-------
PAGE 2
DIRECT COSTS
ACCIDENT SITE
IN
ON
IN
ON
ON
ON STEP AT DUMP SITE
ON TRUCK BED AT DUMP SITE
INSIDE CAB AT DUMP SITE
ON STEP OF VEH
ON RUNNING BOARD AT DUMP SITE
SUBTOTAL
YARD
VEHICLE
SHOP/GARAGE
TRUCK BED
RUNNING BOARD
STEP AT DUMP
AMOUNT
1*776
965
818
552
152
118
108
85
63
52
43 * 713
0»14
0.07
0.06
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
3.38
AUG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
111
160
136
110
50
118
108
42
31
52
256
AT INCINERATOR
IN PLANT
IN SHOP/GARAGE
ON TRUCK BED
ON VEHICLE AT DUMPING FLOOR
IN YARD
NEXT TO VEH AT DUMPING FLOOR"
AT DUMPING FLOOR-
ON STEP OF VEH
INSIDE CAB AT DUMPING FLOOR
ON VEHICLE
NEXT TO VEH
SUBTOTAL
AT TRANSFER STATION
NEXT TO VEHICLE
ON TRUCK BED
IN YARD
ON RUNNING BOARD
ON VEHICLE
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
SUBTOTAL
AT RECYCLING STATION
IN YARD
IN PLANT
SUBTOTAL
AT HEADQUARTERS
IN YARD PARKING LOT
IN SHOP/GARAGE
ON VEHICLE
ON RUNNING BOARD
AT REFUELING STATION
IN OFFICE
AT WASHRACK
INSIDE CAB OF VEH
NEXT TO VEH
IN TRUCK BED
7*714
0.60
771
4»741
0.37
474
31 368
0.26
1
» 684
2 * 326
0.18
1
* 163
1 x .1. 95
0.09
239
1*108
0.09
277
860
0.07
286
436
0.03
218
305
0.02
152
282
0.02
141
119
0.01
39
22»801
1.76
465
4 * 054
0.31
368
1 r 257
0.10
314
798
0.06
114
727
0.06
363
432
0.03
216
67
0.01
67
7*961
0.62
?'?1
Aw Am »lk
358
0.03
358
20
0.00
20
378
0.03
189
42t639
3.30
804
25*151
1 .95
386
6» 414
0.50
712
1 * 6 1 5
0.12
538
1 *424
0.11
237
1 *402
0.11
116
1 * 1 6 0
0.09
165
873
0.07
291
4 78
0.04
95
284
0.02
204
-------
PAGE 3
ACCIDENT SITE
SUBTOTAL
IN ROADWAY/FIELD
SUBTOTAL
AT OTHER SITE
at UNKNOWN SITE
SUBTOTAL
DIRECT COSTS
AMOUNT %
82r802 6>41
829 0.06
3 y 546 0.27
4,621 0.36
AUG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
490
75
253
TOTAL
1» 292»515
100.00
340
-------
FIGURE 17
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
INJURY TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSIIA RECORDABLE INJURIES
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS 5 OSI IA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES
-------
FIGURE 18
PAGE 1
ALL USERS
INJURY TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF OSHA DAYS LOST
REPORTING PERIOD: JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: a LOST DAYS CASE IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE INCURRED
WORKDAYS LOST AND/OR LIGHT DUTY DAYS DUE TO THE ACCIDENT.
OSHA DAYJ
TYPE OF INJURY
SPRAl'N OR STRAIN
BRUISE
FRACTURE
CUT/PUNCTURE
UNKNOWN TYPE OF INJURY
HERNIA
AMPUTATION
MULTIPLE INJURIES
OTHER TYPE OF INJURY
DISLOCATION
INFLAMMATION OF THE JOINTS
abrasions
IRRITATION
STING
BURN FROM HEAT
INFECTION
TORN CARTILAGE
FROSTBITE OR OTHER LOW TEMP EFFECT
HEART ATTACK
CHEMICAL BURN
POISONING OR ALLERGIC REACTION
DERMATITIS
CONCUSSION
CONTAG10US DISEASE
ASPHYXIATION OR DROWNING
HE A T STR0KE , EXH A t.JSTI ON 0R CRAMPS
total
LOST
NO . -/. AVG DAYS LOS
LOST DAYS CA
131099
54.03
11.40
3 >866
15.95
8.83
2t 120
8.74
30.29
1 »694
6.99
6.47
883
3.64
12.99
409
1.69
37.18
381
1.57
63.50
338
1 .39
16.90
266
1.10
24.18
250
1.03
41.67
192
0.79
32.00
127
0.52
4.88
126
0.52
2.68
99
0.41
2.61
74
0.31
4.62
61
0.25
6.10
53
0.22
17.67
C! **)
w a1.
0.21
8.67
40
0.16
40.00
34
0.14
2.27
33
0.14
4.71
27
0.11
3.00
6
0.02
3.00
5
0.02
5.00
4
0.02
1.00
4
0.02
2.00
24 * 243
100.00
10.85
-------
FIGURE 19
PAGE- .1
ALL USERS
INJURY TYPES RANKED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST
PERCENT OF DIRECT COSTS
REPORTING PERIOD? JANUARY - SEPTEMBER 1977
DEFINITIONS: OSHA RECORDABLE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS)> AND LOST
WORKDAY 7 PERMANENT DISABILITY AND FATALITY CASES.
FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
DIRECT COSTS INCLUDE MEDICAL EXPENSES * WORKER'S COMPENSATION
BENEFITS AMD WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G.* INJURY LEAVE)
ONLY. INDIRECT COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED~
DIRECT COSTS
TYPE OF INJURY AMT. % AUG COSTS/
OSHA REC INJ
SPRAIN OR STRAIN
666
864
51 .59
422
BRUISE
189
332
14.65
259
FRACTURE
111
219
8.60
1 *408
CUT/PUNCTURE
93
642
7.24
138
AMPUTATION
69
068
5.34
11>511
UNKNOWN TYPE OF INJURY
35
930
2.78
339
HERNIA
20
762
1 .61
1 r 887
OTHER TYPE OF INJURY
16
684
1.29
695
MULTIPLE INJURIES
16
.1.54
1.25
702
INFLAMMATION OF THE JOINTS
13
389
1 .04
If 67 A
IRRITATION
11
427
0.88
66
DISLOCATION
10
582
0.82
1 i 323
STING
7
4.1.5
0.57
61
ABRASIONS
6
575
0.51
73
INFECTION
3
725
0.29
219
BURN FROM HEAT
3
453
0.27
119
TORN CARTILAGE
3
159
0.24
1 t 053
CHEMICAL BURN
3
117
0.24
104
FROSTBITE OR OTHER LOU TEMP EFFECT
2
616
0.20
327
DERMATITIS
402
0.19
62
P01S0N T NG OR A1...LERGIC REACT10N
1. y
974
0.15
76
HEART ATTACK
720
0.06
720
DENTAL INJURY
649
0.05
93
111:. A T S 7 R G K1. : v E XI IA U G TIG N 0 R C R A M P 3
594
0.05
119
CONCUSSION
508
0.04
127
ASPHYXIATION OR DROWNING
290
0.02
72
CONTAGIOUS !i I SIT A SE
245
0.02
245
BLINDNESS 1 DOTH EYES
20
0.00
20
TOTAL
1 2?2 r
515
100.00
340
-------
IK -i;fn
FIGURE 20
PARE
ALL USERS
I'ARTS or BODY INJURED RANKED KROH HIGHEST TO LOWEST PERCENT OF
OSHA RECORDABLE INJURIESf WORKDAYS LOST AND DIRECT COSTS
km-iiki imi? period: January - September i?77
I if T I MI 11OMS: O'UIA RFCCIRDABIE CASES INCLUDE MEDICAL TREATMENT CASES (I.E. NON-FATAL CASES WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS) , LOST WORKDAY.
ITRMAUf'Nr PISABII ITY Atlli FATALITY CASES. FIRST AID INJURIES ARE NOT INCLUDED.
IHIvfCT COSIS IN( I UnF MF.IUr.Al EXPENSFS, WORKFR'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND WADE CONTINUATION BENEFITS (E.G., INJURY LEAVE> ONLY.
impirfct conrs are not included.
OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURIES
OSIIA
DAYS LOST
DIRECT CO
STS
PART or BODY
OSHA
REC INJ
PART OF BOPY
DAYS
LOST
AVG/LOST
PART OF BODY
DIRECT
COSTS
AVG COSTS
NO.
X
NO.
X
DAYS CASE
AMT.
7.
OSHA REC
PACK
748
19.70
BACK
7,343
30.2?
12.68
BACK
382,980
29.63
512
1 TO
31?
8.40
ANKLE
1,650
6.81
10.86
LEG
133,554
10.33
419
LYI S
25?
6.82
SHOULDER
1,490
6.15
10.35
KNEE
83,505
6.46
371
SHOULDER
230
6.06
KNEE
1,465
6.04
10.17
SHOULDER
79,278
6.13
345
l\ N[ r
225
5.93
LEG
1,455
6.00
8. ?3
ANKLE
70,810
5.48
323
FINGERS
111
5.85
HAND
1,180
4.87
10.44
FINGERS
59,687
4.62
269
rtMKI E
21?
5.77
MULTIPLE BODY PARTS
1,163
4.80
16.61
FOOT
57,912
4.48
267
ronr
217
5.72
FINGERS
1,155
4.76
10.?0
MULTIPLE BODY PARTS
51,415
3.9B
463
IIAMD
201
5.29
FOOT
1,121
4.62
8.83
WRIST
48,409
3.75
414
rtr
-------
AVERAGE INJURY RATES
FOR OVEREXERTIONS BY TYPE OF SHIFT AND CREW SIZE
REPORTING PERIOD: OCTOBER 1976 - JUNE 1977
TWO-MAN
CREW
THREE-MAN CREW
TASK
HOURLY
TASK
HOURLY
1.
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
22
32
10
9
2.
OSHA LOST WORKDAY CASES RATE
18
12
8
7
3.
OSHA SEVERITY RATE
255
93
97
120
4.
AVERAGE COST PER OSHA RECORDABLE
INJURY
$558
$276
$352
$792
5.
DIRECT COST PER MAN-YEAR
$123
$ 89
$ 36
$ 69
6.
MAN-HOURS OF EXPOSURE
2,131,670
579,540
5,165,900
2,033,540
-------
PUBLICATION 13
Vol. 2
No, 6
June 1978
The Effect of Height and Weight on Overexertions from Handling Containers
This topic was recently suggested by a solid waste safety professional inter-
ested in whether employee selection criteria could be established for this in-
dustry. He wondered whether the IRIS data would identify individuals of a cer-
tain height and weight as being prone to back strains.
IRIS cross tabulated the two employee characteristics of height and weight for
the injuries of back strains from overexertions while handling containers. The
reporting period analyzed was December 1975 to September 1977. The height
groups were analyzed in increments of two inches and the weight groups in ten
pounds.
Only the cross tabulations that contained over 100,000 man-hours of exposure
were considered (roughly equivalent to 50 full-time employees that worked a
year). The man-hours of exposure indicated that 40% of the collection divi-
sion's employees fell in the categories of 5'7"-6' and 150 lbs.-189 lbs.
Three injury rates were computed: the OSHA incidence rate, the OSHA severity
rate, and the direct cost per man-year rate. They are shown in the following
three figures which only present the categories with over 100,000 man-hours of
exposure.
There were no overall injury trends that were consistent for either factor
(e.g., tall overweight employees had more back strains) or consistent from in-
jury rate to injury rate. However, several points had consistently high in-
jury rates. Each injury rate figure is discussed separately.
OSHA incidence rate. Several high points occurred in this figure when com-
paring the incidence rates against each otherand against the average of 9 (or
one outof ten employees sustained a back strain a year). Three categories had
at least 15 for an OSHA incidence rate: 5'9"-5'10" and 140-149 lbs., 6'l"-6'2"
and 160-159 lbs., and 6'1"-612" and 220-229 lbs. Only one of the categories
could be considered "overweight." The OSHA incidence rates appeartobe higher
for the employees above six feet tall.
The purpose of this and other IRIS publicationsis to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse
in this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Imple-
mentation of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evalua-
tion by each user and at each user's discretion.
jv -jj Division of WSA ;nc..!' 772 Sorrentc Valley ?oad
a „• J —.a, sat 3i
-------
WEIGHT VS HEIGHT
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONTAINER
COLLECTION DIVISION
OSHA INCIDENCE RATE
Reporting Period: December 1975-June 1977
5'3-5*4
5*5-5'6
5* 7-5"8
5' 9-5* 10
5'11-6'
6*1-6*2
6*3-6*4
Total
130-139
lbs.
6
9
11
11
9
140-149
lbs.
6
8
10
15
7
9
150-159
lbs.
9
6
8
10
12
9
9
160-169
lbs.
12
8
9
9
11
16
10
170-179
1 bs.
9
11
8
13
13
11
180-189
lbs.
8
9
8
10
U
11
9
190-199
lbs.
7
11
7
10
10
9
9
200-209
lbs.
11
12
9
11
9
210-219
lbs.
9
7
7
11
6
220-229
lbs.
7
8
16
10
230-239
lbs.
7
10
240-249
lbs.
6
7
>249
lbs.
10
5
7
Total
8
8
10
9
10
11
11
9
OSHA severity rate. The severity rates were significantly higher for two height
columns, 6'1 -6'2" and 5'3"-5'4", and the lowest for the employees of 5'5"-516"
height. The severity rate represents the days lost per 100 employees per year,
and several categories were losing two and three days per employee per year:
5' 3"-514" and 160-169 lbs., 6' 1 "-6' 2" and 190-199 lbs., and eT^" and 200-
209 lbs. There does not appear to be a trend concerning the weights of the
employees.
WEIGHT VS HEIGHT
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONTAINER
COLLECTION DIVISION
SEVERITY RATE
Reporting Period: December 1975-June 1977
5*3-5*4
5*5-5*6
5*7-5*8
5*9-5*10
5*11-6'
6*1-6*2
6* 3-6'4
Total
130-139
lbs.
158
79
93
119
97
140-149
lbs.
41
98
92
106
143
95
150-159
lbs.
99
39
89
118
71
21
79
160-169
Ihs.
371
65
83
100
67
94
91
170-179
lbs.
78
145
99
138
80
114
100-109
lbs.
151
83
84
108
42
52
59
190-199
Ihs.
12
87
59
119
266
26
103
200-209
lbs.
103
60
89
202
86
210-219
lbs.
110
124
49
157
104
270-229
11)-..
60
44
87
72
230-239
Ihs.
36
102
240-249
lbs.
15
92
>249
lbs.
32
39
40
Total
128
71
97
92
91
123
103
98
Direct cost per man-year. The above three categories were again high for this
injury rate and two other categories were high, also: 5'7"-5'8" and 170-179
lbs. and 5'11"-6' and 140-149 lbs. The same height columns were high and low
-------
in direct costs per man-year as for severity rate, except that the shorter em-
ployees (5'3"-5'4") were 50% higher for the column's injury rate than for em-
ployees over 6' tail. The category of 5' and 160-169 lbs. was extremely
high in direct cost per man-year, three times higher than any other point on
the figure.
WEIGHT VS HEIGHT
OVEREXERTION INVOLVING CONTAINER
COLLECTION DIVISION
COST PER MAN-YEAR
Reporting Period: December 1975-June 1977
5'3-5'4
5* 5-5*6
5' 7-5 *8
519-5'10
5'11-6'
6'1-6*2
6* 3-6*4
Total
130-139
lbs.
$73.07
$27.63
$22.51
$54.58
$36.18
140-149
lbs.
17.31
57.75
39.11
59.14
$99.53
50.44
150-159
lbs.
36.83
13.66
45.56
44.13
19.46
$11.94
32.19
160-169
lbs.
291.08
34.98
42.07
49.71
52.70
42.63
51.84
170-179
lbs.
41.19
88.19
52.43
53.36
31.30
57.22
180-189
lbs.
53.25
32.61
45.86
60.98
27.92
$33.19
45.20
190-199
lbs.
5.63
41.14
51.26
39.76
92.03
19.08
47.16
200-209
lbs.
45.78
32.99
35.58
93.67
38.31
210-219
lbs.
41.13
45.76
19.83
76.57
44.28
220-229
lbs.
9.05
19.14
49.74
30.51
230-239
lbs.
13.29
32.96
240-249
lbs.
8.48
39.01
>249
lbs.
14.72
7.67
19.32
Total
75.86
33.40
47.57
46.54
42.73
50.48
50.24
43.84
The conclusion that might be drawn from this analysis is that the height of the
employee is probably more of a determining factor than the weight and that em-
ployees over six feet tall may have slightly more back strains. In addition,
those employees that were 5'5"-5l6" had the lowest injury rates.
The process of collecting waste requires the collector to bend continuously
during the work period, to pick up containers, to set back containers, and to
dump containers. This places stress on the lower back muscles where back strains
tend to occur. Therefore, how far the employee has to bend depends on the height
of the employee, the height of the container, and the heightof the hopper sill.
-------
PUBLICATION 14
Vehicle Accidents by Task/Hourly for the Collection Division
Recently, an IRIS user asked for a special analysis of vehicle accidents. The
city was conducting a study of their vehicle accidents and suspected that the
type of shift of the employees may have been a contributing factor. Their col-
lection employees worked on a task, or incentive, system and had a high number
of vehicle accidents, with and without injury.
The IRIS data appears to confirm their hypothesis, as the task system collec-
tion employees had higher injury rates for vehicle accidents that fixed-hour
system employees. The data period analyzed was from October 1976 through June
1977, and the vehicle accident types examined were:
• Vehicle was hit by another vehicle
• Vehicle hit another vehicle
• Vehicle collided with object
• Vehicle hit curbing
• Vehicle overturned
t Employee was caught between moving vehicle and object
• Vehicle became out of control
For this time period, these accidents resulted in 116 OSHA recordable injuries,
1,799 days lost, and $92,460 in direct costs.
The purpose of this and other IRIS publ ications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse
in this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Imple-
mentation of "IRIS News" suggestions shouldbedone only after careful evalua-
tion by each user and at each user's discretion.
4of rfSA Inc. ,11772
-SlU wwSdfi CA Jwltl '£)S"'?3-59 4 vt*
-------
The injury rates for the two types of shifts showed much higher severity and
direct cost rates for the task system collection employees:
Task Hourly
1.
OSHA incidence rate
1.8
1.4
2.
OSHA severity rate
35.1
5.6
3.
Direct cost per man-year
$17.47
$4.09
4.
Man-hours of exposure
9,553,200
4,418,620
The OSHA severity rate was 6 times higher forthetask system and 4 times higher
for the direct cost per man-year.
Employees Falling Off Moving Vehicles
An analysis was performed on another aspect of vehicle accidents and vehicle
movement accidents in which they caused the rideronthe rear step to fall off
the vehicle. This accident, as frequently discussed in IRIS reports, can be
controlled with more foresight on the part of the driverwhen driving over holes
in the pavement and making stops and starts.
Sixty-six of these accidents occurred during this reporting period (December
1975 to September 1977) resulting in 857 days lost and $30,979 in direct costs.
The following table summarizes the vehicle's movement at the time of the rider
falling off the vehicle. Fortunately there were no serious injuries in this
group.
No. Inj. Days Lost Direct Costs.
VEH WENT OVER BUMP OR DEPRESSION
35%
38%
39%
VEH MADE SUDDEN STOP
24
33
26
VEH MADE SUDDEN TURN
14
9
11
VEH WENT OVER ROUGH TERRAIN
5
<1
1
VEH WAS HIT BY ANOTHER VEH
5
5
8
VEH HIT CURBING
5
1
2
VEH MADE SUDDEN START
8
2
2
VEH COLLIDED WITH OBJ
3
6
8
CAUGHT BETWEEN MOVING VEH AND OBJ
2
3
2
VEH JERKED SUDDENLY
2
0
<1
TOTAL
100%
100%
Ml
o
o
V3.
-------
PUBLICATION 15
Vol. 2
No, 8
August 1978
At What Point During Their Shift Are Collection Employees More Prone to Injury?
An analysis of what time during their shift employees are injured, or how many
hours passed prior to the injury, can be useful in answering several safety
questions:
• whether fatigue was a factor
• whether haste was a factor
• whether more injuries occurred after breaks (e.g., lunch)
Therefore, IRIS developed a new computer printout on the percentage of the OSHA
recordable injuries that occurred versus the number of hours worked prior to
the accident. The period analyzed was from 10/76 to 9/77. The hours worked
prior categories are by half-hours and indicate how long the employee had been
at work the day of the accident. It was originally analyzed by the hour, which
proved less revealing.
The following table presents the findings. The second column is the percent-
age of OSHA recordable cases, and the third column presents the actual numbers.
The purpose of this and other IRIS publications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse
in this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Imple-
mentation of "IRIS News" suggestions shouldbedone only after careful evalua-
tion by each user and at each user's discretion.
V*-»» Division of WSA Inc.,U?72 Sorrento V*U«y Roa4
San :iego. CA 92121 <7T4) 755-93S9 * 4S2-?0I0
-------
Hours Worked Prior
% OSHA
Inj.
# OSHA
0.1- 0.5
3.92
212
0.6- 1.0
6.59
356
1.1- 1.5
7.42
401
1.6- 2.0
9.19
497
2.1- 2.5
7.57
409
2.6- 3.0
9.10
492
3.1- 3.5
6.14
332
3.6- 4.0
6.83
369
4.1- 4.5
4.42
239
4.6- 5.0
5.40
292
5.1- 5.5
3.22
174
5.6- 6.0
4.46
241
6.1- 6.5
2.92
158
6.6- 7.0
3.27
177
7.1- 7.5
1.87
101
7.6- 8.0
2.05
111
8.1- 8.5
0.63
34
8.6- 9.0
0.83
45
9.1- 9.5
0.52
28
9.6-10.0
0.52
28
10.1-10.5
0.07
4
10.6-11.0
0.04
2
11.1-11.5
0.06
3
11.6-12.0
0.06
3
TOTALS
100.00
5406
As the table indicates, there is a rise in the OSHA recordable injuries after
one hour on the job which does not decrease until after three hours. These re-
sults can be examined for the above questions:
• Fatigue, The influence of fatigue would be indicated by an increase in
injuries before lunch and before the end of the shift. Although this may
explain the increase in injuries during the first half of the shift, it
does not explain the steady decrease in the second half. To a certain de-
gree, the numbers may be masked by the influence of the two types of shift,
task or incentive and fixed hour. The task shift usually complete their
routes by six to six-and-a-half hours while the fixed hour employees work
the full eight-hour shift. The differences in hours for these two types
of shift may cause misinterpretation of what times during the shift fatigue
would influence. Therefore, separate computer analyses of the injury rates
by hours worked prior for the two types of shift is needed for further
clarification.
• Haste. Again, haste is also dependent upon the type of shift since the
incentive system encourages the employees to perform their routes faster.
The large difference in injuries for the morning as opposed to the after-
noon maybe the result of haste. The employees (task) are making sure that
they are on schedule in their collecting, if not lhead of schedule, in the
-------
morning. Therefore, they can take a leisurely lunch break and be home
after six hours while being paid for eight hours of work. However, this
phenomenon would be better illustrated by comparing the injuries by the
two types of shift.
• Breaks. There has been speculation that injuries, especially back strains,
are more likely to occur aftera break and in the morning when muscles are
"stiff" from inactivity. Observing the overall injuries on the table, this
does not appear so for the morning, since the trend seems to be the oppo-
site (higher injuries at the end of the morning rather than in the begin-
ning). However, the trend for the afternoon injuries may support this.
There were more injuries in the beginning of the afternoon than towards
the end.
-------
A Comparison of When Injuries Occur During Their Work Shift for Task Vs. Fixed
Hour Employees
As discussed in the August issue of the IRIS News, the influence of factors
such as fatigue, haste, and breaks from work may best be shown by an analysis
of the incidence of injuries throughout their work shift, or the number of hours
worked prior to the injury. (As IRIS users know, the number of hours worked
prior to the injury is one of the questions asked for every injury.) However,
just analyzing the hours worked prior for all collection workers proved inde-
cisive. In addition, an important influence on solid waste workers' shifts,
the type of shift {e.g., task or fixed hour), was not analyzed. Therefore, the
computer program was modified to total the injuries by hours worked prior for
the task and the fixed hour shift workers.
The following table presents the findings. The number of OSHA recordable in-
juries and OSHA incidence rates for the task versus the fixed hour workers are
given:
The purpose of this and other IRIS pub! ications is to disseminate new ideas and
alternative methods in the solid waste field. IRIS serves as a clearinghouse
in this regard, but does not promote or endorse any method or product. Imple-
mentation of "IRIS News" suggestions should be done only after careful evalua-
tion by *ach user and at. each user's discretion.
"S3 Division of WSA Inc. ,11772 Sorrento Valley Road
ic Hi r Un Otego, CA «V21 (714) 7S5-93SS & 4S2-WO
-------
Task Fixed Hour
OSHA
OSHA
OSHA
OSHA
Hours
Recordable
Incidence
Recordable
Incidence
Worked Prior
Injuries
Rate
Injuries
Rate
0.1- 0.5
78
1.4
134
2.8
0.6- 1.0
120
2.1
235
4.8
1.1- 1.5
120
2.1
280
5.7
1.6- 2.0
119
2.1
377
7.7
2.1- 2.5
113
2.0
296
6.1
2.6- 3.0
149
2.7
342
7.0
3.1- 3.5
114
2.0
218
4.5
3.6- 4.0
98
1.7
270
5.5
4.1- 4.5
73
1.4
166
3.4
4.6- 5.0
89
1.6
203
4.2
5.1- 5.5
54
1.0
120
2.5
5.6- 6.0
91
1.6
150
3.1
6.1- 6.5
65
1.2
93
1.9
6.6- 7.0.
88
88
1.8
7.1- 7.5
57
44
.9
7.6- 8.0
60
51
1.0
8.1- 8.5
23
11
8.6- 9.0
28
17
9.1- 9.5
23
5
9.6-10.0
19
9
10.1-10.5
3
1
10.6-11.0
0
2
11.1-11.5
1
2
11.6-12.0
3
0
12.1-12.5
0
0
>13-<24
17
35
TOTAL
1727
3348
The period analyzed was from 10/76
to 9/77. The
man-hours of exposure used to
derive the OSHA
incidence rates were
11 ,245,166 for task and 9,743,170 for fixed
hour. The rates were computed through 6.5 hours worked for the task employees
because they normally work6 to 6.5 hours a day, and the decrease in man-hours
beyond 6.5 hours worked cannot be estimated accurately. Therefore, the fixed
hour workers' OSHA incidence rates were also not computed beyond 8 hours worked
even though injuries did occur to employees working overtime.
Comparing the OSHA incidence rates for the two types of shift' (plotted on graph)»
the most obvious difference is the fact that the fixed hour workers have more
injuries, nearly two to three times higher in each category. The injury rates
pattern appear similar for the two types of shift in that there are more in"
juries in the morning than in the afternoon. However, the fixed hour curve has
more pronounced high and low periods.
-------
Fatigue as a factor in injury rates presumably would be noticeable at the end
of a shift (near the8hr. mark for fixed hour and near 6 hr. for task) or right
before the lunch break (near4hr. for fixed hour and 3 hr. for task); however,
although the morning shift for the task employees was high before the lunch break
this was not true for the fixed hour employees and both types of shift had no
high injury rate peaks at the end of their shifts. The earlier high injury rate
peaks of the task employees vs. the fixed hour may be attributed to haste and
fatigue, but it should also be recognized that the task employees collect as
many tons of waste per man as the fixed hour employees but in a shorter amount
of time. The up and down zigzag of the graphs for the two types of shift at
hourly intervals may be a factor of when breaks occur in their shifts and there-
fore employees were actually not working the full hour, therefore reducing the
hours of exposure. This was not accounted for in deriving the injury rates since
it often varied from crew to crew.
8.0-
7.0-
6.0-
1.0-
0.0 1—I 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1—
0.1- 0.6- 1.1- 1.6- 2.1- 2.6- 3.1- 3.6- 4.1- 4.6- 5.1- 5.6- 6.1- 6.6- 7.1- 7.6-
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
HOURS WORKED PRIOR
Task
Fixed Hour
-------
IRIS NEWSFLASH
-------
PUBLICATION 17
1. Backing Vehicle
The injured employee was directing the backing of the truck to a loading dock.
He shouted to the driver to stop, but the driver did not hear him because of
a loud noise in the vicinity. The truck, therefore, did not stop in time and
caught the employee's foot between the concrete loading dock and the rear step
of the vehicle. Luckily, the injured employee did not sustain a serious in-
jury; his foot was bruised.
This accident illustrates the need for non-verbal communication (i.e., hand
signals) between the driver and his backing guide. A recent set of training
rules for backing the vehicle was developed at an advisory committee meeting
to review the safety manual SAFETY SCIENCES 1s developing for the solid waste
industry, which is funded by the National Science Foundation. It includes a
set of recommended hand signals:
Guiding, Directing the Backing Vehicle
1) The guide must face the driver at all times while signaling.
2} The guide must be in a position where the driver can see him directly
or in either of the rear view mirrors.
3) The guide must be off the truck in a position that gives him an un-
obstructed view of the ground over which the truck is about to be
moved.
4) Wherever possible, the guide should station himself at the point
where the backing maneuver is to end, so that he avoids the hazards
of walking backward over surfaces he does not see.
5) The guide must position himself to observe the most immediate hazard
to the truck. This may require stopping the truck and changing
positions one or more times.
IRIS - Injury Reporting Information System
n Oivslon of VSA Inc..'177i SorrMta v»|!«y no,id
^Sjft C'.ego, CA J (TU)
-------
6) All signals shall be made with the hand away from the head and body
so the driver will see the signaling to the side and/or above the
outline of the guider's head and body.
7) The guide should stand far enough back to see any possible overhead
obstructions to the truck body.
Hand Signals
• STOP--Raise the right hand above the shoulder with the open palm
facing the driver. (An emergency stop may be further indicated
by the quick closing of the hand.)
• BACK--with the right hand raised above the head with the palm of the
hand turned inward, roll the arm and hand in a circular motion counter
clockwise (toward the body).
t GO FORWARD--Raise right hand above the shoulder, and with the index
finger pointing ahead, repeatedly move the hand in a forward motion.
• MOVE TO THE RIGHT--Raise right hand above the shoulder and with the
thumb pointing to the right, make repeated motions to the right.
• MOVE TO THE LEFT--Raise right hand above the shoulder and with the
index finger extended to the left, make repeated motions to the
left with the hand.
• LOW HANGING OBJECTS--Whenever the guide may be endangered by low
hanging or other projections being passed by the moving truck,
the driver will warn him by two short signals of the truck horn.
MOVE LEFT
STOP
MOVE RIGHT
-------
BACK UP
MOVE FORWARD
2. Getting Into a Moving Vehicle
The injured employee was climbing into the cab of the vehicle as it was
moving forward at approximately 2 mph. He slipped and fell under the
front tire of the vehicle, since the running board is located directly
in forward of the front tire on this vehicle, the driver could not stop
in time and both legs of the injured employee were severely cut and
bruised. He lost 79 days so far, and the direct costs of the accident
is already over $3,000.
IRIS must urge its users to bring this accident to their employees'
attention and emphasize to them:
DO NOT GET ON OR OFF MOVING. EQUIPMENT
3. Riding on Running Board
The injured employee was standing on the running board on the driver's
side, hanging onto the door, for reasons unknown. The vehicle was moving
forward at approximately 5 mph when the employee slipped off the running
board, under the front tire. The driver, of course, could not stop in
time. The injured employee fractured both feet. His accident resulted
in 37 days lost and over $2,000 in direct costs.
Riding on the running board is accepted by organizations as an unsafe
practice, but obviously, some employees are disobeying safe work rules.
IRIS suggests that "not riding on the running board" be re-emphasized
with employees.
-------
PUBLICATION 18
Vol. 2
No, 1
March 1978
Mounting/Dismounting From Moving Vehicles
A surprising percentage of the getting on and off equipment accidents involved the
added hazard of the vehicle being in motion at the time. Out of the 735 OSHA re-
cordable injuries, 6,322 days lost and $271,304 in direct costs for getting on and
off equipment accidents, vehicle movement was cited in 9% of the OSHA recordable
injuries, 14% of the days lost and 11% of the direct costs (IRIS reporting period:
4/75-6/77).
Vehicle movement includes whether the vehicle started suddenly, stopped suddenly,
was moving forward or was backing at the time. By far, the majority of the acci-
dents involved the vehicle moving forward (80%). These figures do not reflect
the other types of accidents that occur on moving vehicles, such as the employees
falling off the riding step, striking against the vehicle when it lurches suddenly,
or vehicle accidents.
IRIS encourages employees not to get on or off a moving vehicle, and drivers should
come to a complete, slow stop to allow the rider to get on or off. The driver should
also not pull forward until his rider(s) on the step indicates that he is securely
on.
Struck by Vehicle Accidents
Over a third of the vehicle accidents that
Period of 12/75 through 6/77 were cases in
bya vehicle. These employees were either
Private vehicle.
occurred to IRIS participants over the
which the injured employee was struck
struck by their collection truck or a
IRIS - Injury Reporting Information System
3)v<«1on ofMSA Inc.,11772 Sorrento Valley Rojtt
Stn Diego, CA 92U1 {7)4) 755-5359 4 U2-WQ
-------
The distribution of the more common activities of the injured employees from highest
to lowest frequency is as follows:
No.
Inj. Days Lost Direct Costs
1. Standing or walking
25
12
10
9
8
7
333
435
173
163
100
120
$ 15,452
4. Riding on equipment
5. Getting off equipment
6. Directing vehicle
2. Carrying container
3. Dumping container
18,904
7,174
4,862
3,954
2,462
TOTAL
94
2,006
$112,958
The first two activity categories, "standing or walking" and "carrying container,"
account for 39% of the struck by vehicle accidents, and nearly all of these employees
were struck by private vehicles. These activities indicate that most likely the em-
ployees were collecting from both sides of the street at the time. Because of the
higher risk of being struck by a vehicle, IRIS urges its users to not allow this
activity. In addition, supervisors should observe the adherence to the rule by
employees on the route. Employees should also be provided with high visibility
clothing to deter vehicle accidents (e.g., reflective traffic vests, belts, and
bump caps), particularly if they usually collect during dawn or dusk hours.
The third activity category, "dumping container," occurs sometimes when the truck
the employee is dumping into backs into him, either because the vehicle rolled
back or the driver was attempting to back the vehicle without realizing his co-
worker was behind the truck. The emergency brakes should be applied whenever
the vehicle is stopped or wheel blocks can be utilized. (Note that accidents
also occur when employees are attempting to dump into a vehicle that rolls for-
ward.) In addition, the driver should not back the vehicle without the assis-
tance of his coworker.
The fourth activity category, "riding on equipment," usually occurs when a private
vehicle runs into the truck where the employee is on the riding step. Drivers
should make sure that the rear signal lights and brake lights are functioning
properly as well as free from mud so as to be visible, and use their signals.
Also, the riders on the step should not block the lights.
The fifth activity was "getting off equipment." The most common occurrence is
when the employee dismounts from the cab of a still-moving vehicle, and the wheel
runs over his foot. As stated previously, employees should never mount or dis-
mount from moving vehicles.
The last activity was "directing vehicle," particularly backing vehicles, where
the vehicle backed too fast. Correct backing procedures were outlined in the
last "IRIS Newsflash" (Vol. 1, No. 5, December 1977). The employee directing
the backing vehicle should be visible to the driver at all times during the
maneuver, and if possible stand near the end of the backing maneuver. Never
ride on the rear step while attempting to direct the backing vehicle.
-------
PUBLICATION 19
Vol. 2
No, 2
July 1978
SOLID WASTE FATALITIES
SAFETY SCIENCES obtained nine fatality descriptions on the solid waste industry through
a separate study.* On the job fatalities are rare but of great concern in solid waste
safety, and therefore, the narrative descriptions of the fatalities are presented to
provide a better understanding of their prevention. The major causes of the fatalities
were from the deceased being run over by the backing vehicle or being crushed by the
operating packer blade.
1. Truck was backing. Garbage truck helper was killed when he slipped and fell off
the back of a garbage truck, and it backed over him.
2. Truck was backing. The employee was on the back of the dump truck when he slipped
and fell off. The truck was backing up, and the driver did not see or hear the
employee. The left rear tire crushed his skull.
3. Directing the backing truck. The injured employee was directing a rubbish truck
driven by his partner when he apparently slipped and fell, and the rear wheels
crushed his head while the truck was backing up. At the time they were preparing
to dump the contents of their truck into a pit,
4. Crushed by falling refuse bin. Deceased was standing at the right rear of the gar-
bage truck operating controls while a winch on the truck lifted and emptied a gar-
bage container. Some children around got too close, and he told them to get back.
At this point the container had emptied, and the control was still raising the winch,
pulling the large garbage container high enough so one or both of the pins on the
container and attached to locks on truck came out. The container then swung around
and pinned him to the side of the truck.
^'Evaluation of OSHA's Fatality Notification and Data Collection Procedures" under Con-
tract J-9-F-5-0135 (Task Order #6) for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
August 1977. The fatalities were actually collected by Equifax Inc., a firm of insurance
1nvestigators, that was contracted to collect occupational fatalities during the period
°f August 1, 1976 to December 31, 197&.
Of USA Inc.,11772 Sorrento Va!Uy
a/i?uwuav4.lll' Sin D'ejo, CA JI121 (7:4} 7S5-93S9 1 45>-lG10
-------
5. Crushed behind packer blade. The employee operated this "Hobbs" side loader truck
alone, being driver and loader. There were no witnesses to this incident. As
best as can be reconstructed, the employee activated the packing mechanism on the
truck and then improperly placed himself behind the packing blade during its oper-
ation. The blade packed the garbage, and on its return stroke crushed the employee
to death against the front of the box.
6. Crushed by packer blade. The coroner's investigation shows that he evidently slipped
and fell into the compactor of the truck. He was pinned between the hydraulic slide
and the side of the barrel-style collection truck.
7. Vehicle accident. Before sunrise, the deceased was crushed between the garbage truck
on which he was working and a pickup truck which skidded into the rear of the garbage
truck. The warning lights on the garbage truck had apparently been obscured by the
workers and equipment riding on the rear of the truck.
8. Truck rolled backwards. Witnesses state that truck was parked on incline with dece'
dent at controls alone when it started to roll backwards. He was seen trying to
"pump" the brakes. Vehicle rolled approximately two blocks, hit a pole, and over-
turned. The vehicle had no doors, and the decedent was thrown out and pinned under
the truck when it rolled over onto him.
9. Fell off moving vehicle. The truck was making anJ'S" curve on the way out of the
court. The decedent was on the left rear side step. The truck dipped, and he lost
his grip on the right hand guide. His body swung out and towards the front of the
truck, but his left hand slipped. He fell on his back, and his head hit a curb.
The decedent's gloves were wet. The driver was below safe speed range.
-------
PUBLICATION 20
Vol, 2
No. 3
SEPTEMBER 1978
PROMPT ACTION SAVED A SEVERED
BODY PART
Though severing a body part is not a frequent occurrence (.2%)* in the solid waste industry
it does occur and is extremely traumatizing to the injured employee who loses a body part.
IRIS was alerted to a newspaper article concerning such an occurrence; due to the quick
action of a concerned customer, the injured employee was able to regain the full use of
his hand:
"'1 heard those terrible screams...
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The garbage truck was working a 6 a.m. route along
Gladstone Drive. Betty Herron hadn't yet gotten up to fix breakfast
for her husband and two sons.
Then, she said, 'I heard those terrible screams.'
'I got up and ran to the window and I could see the poor man had his
hand cut off. I called an ambulance and I ran to the refrigerator and
got some 1ce cubes and put them in a plastic bag and ran downstairs.'
In the street was Peter DeMartlni, 20, his left hand severed by mach-
inery in the truck.
'I asked the men on the truck to empty all the garbage out, and they
did, and then I looked for the hand with a broom and I finally found
it,' Herron said.
'Then I put the hand with the ice and put it 1n the refrigerator, and
pretty soon the ambulance was there, and they took him and his hand
to the hospital.'
At San Francisco General Hospital two weeks after the accident, doctors
told DeMartini's family that chances are very good he will recover full
use of the hand. 'We're very pleased with his progress,' hospital of-
ficials said yesterday.
IRIS data, December 1975 to September 1978.
of WSA sorrow y«u«y *>«<
5? San Di«;o, CA 92121 (?J*J /5}-S.3$9 4 452-1Q10
-------
Herron visited DeMartini at the hospital last weekend 'just to see how
he was getting along.'
'He was such a nice young man,' she said. 'The first thing he said to
me was, 'Oh thank you, thank you."'
We polled several hosptials and a fire department to obtain the "correct" method of hand-
ling such an occurrence so that you can alert your foreman and employees on the recommen-
ded method(s) for saving the body part (e.g., finger, hand, arm, etc.). Besides finding
and bringing the body part and injured employee to an emergency care center as soon as
possible, the persons polled recommended several basic procedures for preserving the
severed body part to be in the best condition for recovering its functions:
• Keep the body part moist, not necessarily wet
• Keep the body part cold but not to the point of freezing, because of prevent-
ing damage to the tissue
• Use of a saline solution
The actual recommendations varied widely in specifics and are given in more detail be1°w'
Hospital #1: "Do not let skin touch ice. Any freezing will cause damage to skin tlssu®*
Wrap the hand or foot in a clean cloth, and place it with ice in an ice
bucket but do not allow it to freeze."
Fire "Use the 'Cold Bag' supplied in a first aid kit. Break it open and aPP^ai
Department: directly to the severed body part for immediate freezing - good for seve
hours."
Hospital #2: "Use a saline solution (one teaspoon of salt per gallon of cold water)-
Place the severed body part directly into the water."
Hospital #3: "Keep severed body part directly in ice."
Hospital #4: "If severed body part can be placed in a rubber glove, pour a saline solJJ
tion into the glove. Tie glove closed and place with ice in ice bucket-
IRIS recommends that your establishment also contact several emergency care organization
in your area for their opinions.
------- |