Developing an in-depth understanding of adverse events is “part of our collaborative approach” in striving for improvement in both safety and operational excellence. It is important to analyze why adverse incidents occurred.Laboratory Director Paul Alivisatos, left, has introduced a set of incident analysis principles that focus on understanding not just the direct cause of an incident, but also the context in which decisions were made; underlying organizational strengths and weaknesses; and lessons learned. These principles were recently incorporated into PUB 5519-2 and should be applied when evaluating safety related incidents and other adverse events. Learn more about the Incident Analyses Principles and the Causal Analysis Program Manual (PUB 5519-2).
Walk into an office at Berkeley Lab today, and chances are you’ll see some employees sitting or standing in front of desks they can raise or lower by the push of a button. Adjustable, back-friendly office chairs are commonplace. On computer screens that were carefully positioned with the help of an ergonomics consultant, it’s possible to call up charts that show a steady and gratifying decline in repetitive stress injuries.A great deal of the credit for this goes to ergonomists Mike White, Melanie Alexandre, and Ira Janowitz, who have been tireless advocates for aggressive measures to make the Lab a safer place to work. At the end of this month, Janowitz will retire from Berkeley Lab, where he has served as Ergonomics Program Manager since 2007, capping a long career at the University of California and in private practice as an expert in the analysis of work and the modifications needed, including equipment and training, to make workplaces safer and more productive.
Janowitz was an undergraduate mechanical engineering student at New York Polytechnic Institute in Brooklyn when he redirected his focus toward design of machines that were safer and more comfortable to use. So rare were courses on these topics that he had to transfer to another school, the State University of New York at Buffalo. When Ira graduated, he could not find a job doing ergonomics work. “In 1969,” he recalls, “nobody would hire a kid with a major in ‘Ergonomics.’”
He went back to school, earned two more degrees, and then spent 15 years as a physical therapist, gaining a hands-on understanding of musculoskeletal problems. Still, he wanted to find ways to prevent them in the first place. “Ergonomics tries to answer ‘how much is too much’ for any given activity,” he explains, “and that information is not only good for the person doing the job, but also for the manager assigning tasks and having responsibility for safety.”
In the 1960’s, repetitive stress injuries (RSIs) among office workers were seldom discussed —mechanical typewriters not only limited the speed of typing compared with a computer, but provided built-in mini-breaks with every line and new sheet of paper. Flat-screen heights, ergonomic keyboard adjustments, and mouse positioning were not issues, because none of this technology existed. The focus for heavy lifting was on physical strength and oversimplified formulae: “always bend your knees” rather than better design of shelves, handles, and mechanical aids. The concept of lifting with the spine tilted, but not bent, was out of the mainstream.
To the extent the workplace was harming workers, the focus was on treating damaged muscles and nerves. “It’s much better for the individual and the organization, for many reasons, to get in there before Jane Doe needs surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome,” says Janowitz. “But many employers had their heads in the sand or were dismissive. They thought that people raising ergonomics concerns were just trying to get out of work.”
In fact, the mounting incidence and costs of workplace injuries were running institutions afoul of occupational health regulators. In 1991, Janowitz was hired as a senior ergonomics consultant for the UCSF/UC Berkeley Ergonomics Program to apply his skills to consulting, research, and teaching. He stayed in that job for 15 years, based at the Program’s laboratory at the Richmond Field Station — the site of Berkeley Lab’s proposed Richmond Bay Campus.
Janowitz started working along with Mike White at Berkeley Lab 7 years ago. At the suggestion of their supervisor, Richard DeBusk, they set up a system of “Ergo Advocates” in every division to work closely with employees. White and Janowitz also pushed hard for more adjustable equipment, like the sit/stand desks. The team effort has paid off. Awareness of ergonomic issues has been woven into the effort to promote a safety culture at Berkeley Lab, and ergo-related recorded injury rates have fallen 50 percent since FY2007. Lower medical costs and lost time have more than offset the costs of ergonomic equipment. “We’ve run the numbers: the Ergonomics Program is saving the Lab approximately $1 million a year,” Janowitz says.
Janowitz is retiring at a time of tight budgets, and he worries that if his own position is not filled, the gains could be lost. “We don’t want to go back to 30-40 ergonomics-related injuries per year,’’ he says. Although he will be leaving Berkeley Lab, he expects to continue to work in ergonomics, but on a part-time basis. “I plan to be a half-time ergonomics consultant, half-time Grandpa,” he promises.
