bls_1139_1953.pdf

Injuries and Accident Causes in the Manufacture ofPAPERBOARD CONTAINERS

A Detailed Analysis of Hazards and of Injury Rates for 1950 by Region, Plant Size, and Operating Departments

Bulletin No. 1 1 3 9

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Martin R Durkin, Secretary

BUREAU O F L A B O R STATISTICS Ewan Clague, Commissioner

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Inj uries and Accident Causes

in the Manufacture of

PAPERBOARD CO N TA IN ERS

Bulletin No. 1139

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Martin R Durkin, Secretary

BUREAU O F L A B O R STATISTICS Ewan Clague, Commissioner

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 35 centsDigitized for FRASER

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

United States Departm ent of L abor,Bureau of L abor Statistics ,

W ashington, D. C ., A pril 1, 1953.

The S ecretary of L abor:

I have the honor to transm it herew ith a report on the occu rren ce and causes o f w ork in juries in the m anufacture o f paperboard con ta iners.

This rep ort, a portion of which appeared in the D ecem ber 1951 Monthly L abor R eview , constitutes a part o f the B ureau s regu lar p rogram of com piling w ork -in ju ry in fo r m ation fo r use in a cciden t-preven tion w ork . The statistica l analysis and the preparation of the report w ere p erform ed in the B ureau s Branch of Industrial H azards by G eorge R. M cC orm ack . The sp ec ific a cciden t-preven tion suggestions w ere prepared by Sheldon W. Homan of the Safety Standards D ivision of the Bureau of L abor Standards.

EWAN CLAGUE, C om m ission er.

HON. MARTIN P. DURKIN,S ecretary of L abor.


CONTENTS

A b s tr a c t .......................................................................................................................................................

The industry r e c o r d .................................................................................................................................... *

An estim ate o f in jury lo sse s and co s ts , 195 1 .................................................... 1

Scope and m ethod o f su rv ey ..................................................................................................................... 2Injury r a te s ............................................................................................................................................ 3

In jury -frequ en cy ra te ......................................................................................... 3A verage tim e charge per in ju r y ......................................................................................... 3In ju ry -sev er ity ra te .................................................................................................................. 3

A ccid en t-ca u se a n a ly s is ................................................................................................................. 4A gency of in ju ry .......................................................................................... 4A ccident ty p e ............................................................................................................................... 4H azardous working con d it ion ............................................................................................... 4A gency of a cc id en t.................................................................................................................... 4Unsafe a c t ............................................................ . .................................................................. 5

The industry and its h a z a r d s .................................................................................................................. 5C orru gatin g ............................................................................................................................................ 5P rin tin g ................................................................................................................................................... 5Cutting and c r e a s in g ......................................................................................................................... 6Stripping.................................................................................................................. 7Gluing, staying, stitching and taping.......................................................................................... 7C overing and w ra p p in g .................................................................................................................... 8

F actors in the in jury r e c o r d .............................................................................................................. 8P roduct c o m p a r is o n s ................................................................................................................... 8R egional and State c o m p a r is o n s ................................................................................................. 10

C orrugated and f ib e r -b o x p lan ts........................................................................................ 10F ib e r -ca n , -tube, and -drum plants ............................................................................... 11F o ld ed -b ox p lan ts................................................................................ 11Setup box p la n ts ........................................................................................................................ 11

P la n t-s ize co m p a r iso n s .................................................................................................................. 11

Departm ental in jury r a te s ....................................................................................................................... 13P roduction o p e ra t io n s ..................................................................................... 13S erv ice o p e ra t io n s ........................................................................................................................... 13

Kinds o f in ju ries e x p e r ie n ce d ........................................................................................................... 14F a ta lit ie s ............................................................................................................................................ 14P erm anent-partia l d isa b ilit ie s .............................................................................................. 14T em p ora ry -to ta l d is a b il i t ie s ....................................................................................................... 15

A ccident a n a ly s is ....................................................................................................................... 15A gencies of in ju r y ..................................................................................................... 16A ccident t y p e s ..................................................................................................... 18

Page

iii


Page

A ccident c a u s e s ....................................................................................................................................... 20Hazardous w orking con d ition s.................................................................................................. 21

Hazardous w orking p r o c e d u r e s ...................................................................................... 21Inadequately guarded a g e n c ie s ....................................................................................... 23D efects of a g e n c ie s ............................................................................................................... 23H azardous a rra n g e m e n ts .................................................................................................. 23P oor housekeeping .............................................................................................. 24M isce lla n eou s .......................................................................................................................... 24

Unsafe a c t s ..................................................................................................................................... 24Using equipm ent unsafely, or using hands instead o f equipm ent.................... 24A ssum ing unsafe positions or p o s tu re s ............................ ....... ...v .............. . .......... 25Inattention to surroundings............................................................................................... 26Unsafe loading, p lacing, m ixing , and com bin in g ...................................... 26Other unsafe a c t s .................................................................................................................. 26

A ccid en t-p rev en tion su g g e stio n s ..................................................................................................... 27

C ase d escrip tion s and recom m en dation s...................................................................................... 27

A p p en d ix --S ta tistica l t a b le s ...............................................................................................................

Table 1 . - -W ork -in ju ry rates in the paperboardcontainer industry, by plantproduct and plant s iz e , 1 9 5 0 ................................................................................ 34

Table 2 .--D is tr ib u tion o f w ork -in ju ry frequency rates in the p a p erb oa rd -con tainer industry, by s ize o f plant, 1950 .............................................................. 34

Table 3 . - -In ju ry -freq u en cy rates in the paperboardcontainer industry, bytype o f plant, geographic area , and State, 1950.............. . .......................... 35

Table 4 . - -D istribu tion of estab lishm ents, em p loyees , in ju ries , and days lost in the p a p erb oa rd -con ta in er industry, by in ju ry -freq u en cy ra tes,1 9 5 0 ............. 36

Table 5 . - -W ork -in ju ry rates in the paperboard-container industry, by o p e ra tion , 1950.................................................................... 37

Table 6 . - -D isab ling in juries in the paperboard-container industry, by natureof in jury, part o f body, and type of plant, 1950 .......................................... 38

Table 7 . - -D isab ling in ju ries in the paperboard-container industry, by natureof in jury and part of body in jured , 1950 ........................... 39

Table 8 . --D isa b lin g in juries in the paperboard-conta iner industry, by natureof in jury and agency o f in jury, 1950 ................................................................ 40

Table 9 .--D isa b lin g in ju ries in the paperboard-container industry, by part o fbody in jured and agency of in jury, 1950 ........................................................... 42

Table 10 .- -W o rk accidents in the paperboard-container industry, by agency ofin jury and accident type, 1950.......................................................................... 44

Table 11 .- -W o rk accidents in the paperboard-container industry, by nature o fin jury and accident type, 1950 ........................................................................ 46

Table 12 .- -W o rk accidents in the pap erboard -con ta in er industry, by part o fbody in jured and accident type, 1950 ........................................................... 48

Table 13 W ork accidents in the paperboardcontainer industry, by type o fplant and accident type, 1950 ........................................................................... 50

Table 14 .- -W o r k accidents in the paperboard-container industry, by accidentand activ ity o f in jured , 1950 ...................................................................... 51

Table 15 .--W o rk accidents in the p ap erboard -con ta in er industry, by hazardousw orking condition and accident type, 1950 ................................................. 52

Table 1 6 . - -W ork accidents in the paperboard-container industry, by agency ofaccident and hazardous w orking condition , 1950 .................................... 54

Table 17 .--W o rk accidents in the * p a p erboard -con ta in er industry by type o fplant and hazardous w orking condition , 1950 ...................... ............. . 56

iv


Page

Table 1 8 .- -W ork accidents in the paperboard-container industry, by accidenttype and unsafe act, 1950 ............................................*..................................... 57

Table 19.- -W o rk accidents in the pap erboard -con ta in er industry, by type ofplant and unsafe act, 1950 ................................................................................. 58

Table 2 0 .--W o rk accidents in the p a p erb oa rd -con ta in er industry, by s ize of plant, accident type, hazardous w orking condition , and unsafe act, 1950 .................................................................................................................... 59

CHARTS

1. In jury -frequ en cy rates in the p ap erboard -con ta in er industry, by type o f plant,1950............................................................................................................................................. 9

2. In jury -frequ en cy rates in the pap erboard -con ta in er industry, by s ize o f plant,1950............................................................................................................................................. 12

3. M ajor agencies of in jury in the pap erboard -con ta in er in d u stry .............................. 174. M ajor types of accidents in the pap erboard -con ta in er in d u stry .............................. 195. M ajor types of hazardous w orking conditions in the pap erboard -con ta in er

in du stry ..................................................................................................................................... 226. M ajor types of unsafe acts in the pap erboard -con ta in er in du stry .......................... 25

V


ABSTRACT

The in juryfrequency rate fo r plants m anufacturing paperboard con tainers has been consisten tly unfavorable com pared to the a llm anufacturing industry average. In 1951, the in ju ry -frequ en cy rate fo r the p a p erb oa rd -con ta in er industry was 18.1, about 17 percen t grea ter than the a ll-m anufacturing average, 15.5. H ow ever, this rep resen ts a reduction o f m ore than 22 percent from the peak 1944 rate, 23.3 , which was 21 percen t higher than the a ll-m anufacturing rate, 18.4.

A pproxim ately 5,000 workm en w ere disabled as a resu lt of industrial in ju ries during 1951. The econ om ic lo s s , including d ire ct and indirect co s ts , of these in ju ries is estim ated at nearly 10 m illion d o lla rs .

P lants m anufacturing corru gated or fiber boxes generally had the highest in ju ry -frequ en cy rates, averaging 23.0 fo r 1950. Setup-box plants had the best ra tes , averaging 12.9. F o ld ed -b ox plants had an average frequency rate o f 16.7 and fib e rcan ,-tu be , and-drum plants had a rate of 16.5.

P la n t-s ize appears to be c lo se ly related to the o ccu rren ce of in juries in the p ap erboard -con ta in er industry. G enerally , the very sm all plants (with few er than 50 em ployees each) and the large plants (with 500 or m ore em ployees) had the low est in ju ry -frequ en cy ra tes . P lants em p loy ing 100 to 249 w ork ers had the highest average in ju ry -freq u en cy rate.

P roduction operations as a group had a som ewhat higher in ju ry- frequency rate than the serv ice -d ep artm en t group, but the in ju ries experien ced by se rv ice w ork ers tended to be m ore sev ere . Am ong the production departm ents, in juries w ere m ost frequent in the corrugating , printing, and cutting operations. Storage operations ranked as the m ost hazardous of the p la n t-se rv ice a ctiv ities .

About a fourth of a ll in ju ries resu lted from contact with m ach ines; paper and its products produced 18 percen t; v eh ic le s , 11 percent; working su r fa ces , 9 percent; and skids, 6 percen t.

M ore than 80 percen t of all re co rd ed accidents fe ll into four general ca teg ories . These w ere accidents in which w orkm en w ere caught in, on, or between m oving ob jects ; w ere struck by m oving ob je cts ; struck against or bumped into ob jects ; or strained them selves while handling m ateria ls or equipment.

H azardous w orking p roced u res , p articu larly lifting or m oving heavy loads without adequate a ss istan ce , was the m ost com m on ph ysica l cause of acciden ts. Other hazardous working conditions in clu d ed : inadequate guarding; defects o f a g en cies , esp ecia lly slippery and uneven f lo o r s ; im p rop erly p laced ob jects ; and p oor housekeeping.

Outstanding among the unsafe acts which resu lted in accidents w ere: Using equipment unsafely or hands instead of equipment; assum ing unsafe positions or p ostu res ; inattention to surroundings; and unsafe loading, p lacing, m ixing, or combining.*

A ccident prevention suggestions, prepared by the D ivision of Safety Standards o f the Bureau of L abor Standards, indicate that m ost accidents in the industry could be prevented through the application of very sim ple precau tion s.

Vi


INJURIES AND ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE MANUFACTURE OF PAPERBOARD CONTAINERS

The pap erboard -con ta in er industry, as defined fo r this study, includes all plants engaged in the m anufacture of paperboard b ox es , fiber cans, tubes, drum s, and s im ila r paperboard products. A ctually , m ore than nine-tenths of the plants m anufacture p a p erboard boxes.

P aperboard boxes are c la ss ifie d as c o r rugated, fib e r , setup, and folded. C orrugated and fiber b ox es , used a lm ost ex clu s iv e ly fo r packing and shipping, are made from fiber or corrugated stock . Some o f this stock is purchased , but generally is fabricated in the box plants from paperboard purchased from paper m ills . F olded and setup b ox es , on the other hand, are used p r im a rily fo r packaging and are m anufactured d irectly from pap erboard stock .

Only a few of the la rg er container plants m anufacture their own p a p erb oa rd .1 M ost plants purchase the raw stock and p e r fo rm only the fabricating and printing operations. In general, each pap erboard -box plant p e r fo rm s som e or all o f the follow ing o p era tions: corrugating, printing, creasin g ,cutting, stripping, staying, gluing, and wrapping.

THE INDUSTRY RECORD

The in ju ry -frequ en cy rate fo r p a p erboard -con ta in er m anufacturing turned upward in 1950 follow ing a 3 -y ea r d e c lin e .2 The 1951 rate, 18. 1, how ever, was only slightly h igher than the 1950 average, 17 .9 .3 * Com pared with the a ll-m anufacturing industry average, the re co rd of the pap erboard - container industry has been consistently unfavorable.

For a discussion of the hazards in the manufacture of paperboard, see Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin No. 1036, Injuries and Accident Causes in the Manufacture ofPulp and Paper.

2 For definition, see section on Scope and Method of Survey.

3 Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin No. 1137, Work Injuries in the United States During 1951.

In 1938, p r io r to w artim e in flu en ces, the in ju ry -frequ en cy rates fo r the pap erboard - container industry and fo r a ll m anufacturing w ere p ra ctica lly identica l, 15.2 and 15.1 re sp ectiv e ly . During the next few y ea rs , a variety of c ir cu m s ta n ce s --ch ie fly shortages of trained w ork ers , new equipm ent, and repa ir p arts , and p ressu re fo r in crea sed production to m eet w artim e n e e d s --ca u s e d a r ise in the in jury rates fo r m ost m anufacturing in du stries. By 1941 the in jury rate fo r the pap erboard -con ta in er industry had advanced nearly 50 percen t to 22.4, and in 1944 it reached apeak of 23.3. It held c lo se ly to this lev e l through 1946 and then declined steadily to 16.9 in 1949, from which it turned upward again in 1950.

The average in jury rate for a ll manufacturing fo llow ed a sim ila r cou rse during these y e a rs , but at its peak in 1943 (20.0), it was only about 32 percen t higher than in 1938 in con trast to the 53 percen t r ise in the p ap erboard -con ta in er rate record ed in 1944. In the postw ar re cov ery p eriod the all-m anufacturing rate dropped to 14.5 in 1949, about 4 percen t below the 1938 average. At this point the p ap erboard - container industry rate was 17 percen t higher than the a ll-m anufacturing average. In 1950 the all-m anufacturing rate a lso turned upward, but its r ise was m uch le s s pronounced than the pap erboard -con ta in er in crea se . In con trast, h ow ev er , the in crea se in the a ll-m anufacturing rate during 1951 (14.7 to 15.5) was m uch g rea ter than the in crea se in the rate fo r the pap erboard - container industry.

AN ESTIMATE OF INJURY LOSSES AND COSTS, 1951

A pproxim ately 5,000 w ork ers in the pap erboard -con ta in er industry experien ced disabling in ju ries during 1951. This r e p r e sents 1 disabling in jury fo r every 27 em ployees in the industry.

An estim ated 5 o f these in jured w ork ers died as a resu lt of their in ju ries and 265 others w ere perm anently d isab led in som e

1


degree by the lo s s , or lo ss of use, of som e body part or function. The other 4,730 w ork ers w ere m ore fortunate in that they su ffered no perm anent ill e ffe c ts , but each was in jured seriou sly enough to requ ire at least one full day fo r re co v e ry .

The actual tim e lost by the industry s in jured w ork ers during 1951 is estim ated at about 75,000 m an-days of w ork. Based on the average earnings o f production w ork ers in the industry during the y ea r , ($60.65 per w e e k ) / the im m ediate wage lo ss would approxim ate $650,000. Tim e lost within the y ear, h ow ever, does not m easu re adequately the rea l w ork lo s s resulting from these in ju ries . Many of the p erm a nently d isab led w ork ers w ill have their earning ability reduced fo r the rest of their l iv e s . F or the fatally in jured w ork ers , the lo ss is equivalent to their total expected earnings throughout the y ears in which they would have w orked had their ca re e rs not been cut short. If allow ance w ere made fo r future lo s s e s resu lting from in juries e x p erien ced in 1951, the econ om ic tim e lo ss would be about 320,000 m an-days. The total wage lo s s attributable to these in ju ries , based on 1951 wage le v e ls , th ere fore , would be about $2 ,750 ,000. In part, this lo ss is c o v ered by w ork m en s com pensation pay m ents financed by the em p loy ers . But b e cause these paym ents are never equivalent to fu ll w ages, the in jured w ork ers and their dependents m ust bear a con siderab le portion o f this lo s s .

In addition to wage lo s s e s , paym ents fo r m ed ica l and hospital ca re as w ell as many in d irect costs contribute to the total co st o f in ju ry-p rodu cing acciden ts. Am ong the latter are dam age to equipment and m ater ia ls ; the cost o f training rep lacem ent w ork ers ; tim e lost by other w ork ers who stopped to o ffer a ssistan ce at the tim e of accident; and su p erv isory tim e spent caring fo r the in jured, investigating the accident, and reorgan izing operations a fter the a c c i dent. Unfortunately, the in d irect costs are se ldom re co rd ed , and as a resu lt, cannot be determ ined accu rate ly . H ow ever, a study by M r. H. W. H einrich , T ra v e le rs Insurance Com pany, indicates that fo r m anufacturing genera lly the in d irect costs arisin g from in ju ry-p rodu cing acciden ts average about four tim es the com bined amounts of com pensation , h o s p i t a l , and m ed ica l

4 Monthly Labor Review, November 1952.

paym ents.5 A ssum ing this ratio to be approx im ately c o r r e c t fo r the p ap erboard - container industry, the estim ated in d irect co s t of in ju ry -p rodu cin g accidents in 1951 amounted to $6 ,500 ,000 , and the total co st , including m ed ica l expen ses, amounted to nearly $10,000,000.

SCOPE AND METHOD OF SURVEY

The United States Bureau of L abor Stat istics has com piled annual in jury rates in the p ap erboard -con ta in er industry since 1936. In recen t y ea rs these surveys have included about 40 percen t of the industry s em ployees .

F or the 1950 survey, the scope o f the rep ort was en larged and cooperatin g em p loy ers w ere asked in form ation on each type o f operation ca rr ie d on in the plant. This data perm itted m ore sp e c ific and detailed analysis. Usable rep orts w ere re ce iv ed from 851 plants with approxim ately73.000 w ork ers , or nearly 60 percen t of the em ploym ent in the industry. The reporting group included 424 setup -box plants, 189 fo ld ed -b ox plants, 172 corru g a ted - and fib e r -b o x plants, and 35 f ib e r -ca n , -tube, and -dru m plants. R eports fro m the other 31 plants fa iled to indicate the particu lar type of container m anufactured.

In addition to the sum m ary rep orts , the orig in a l accident re co rd s o f 185 cooperating plants w ere m ade available fo r deta iled inspection and analysis. A represen ta tive of the Bureau v is ited each o f these plants and tran scribed fro m their re co rd s the follow ing item s, w here available : (a) p lace o f accident; (b) occupation and age of in jured w ork er; (c) nature o f in jury and part of body in jured ; (d) ob ject or substance producing the in jury; (e) type of accident; (f) unsafe condition a n d /o r unsafe act leading to the accident.

This group of plants, em ploying about34.000 w ork ers , had a com bined in ju ry - frequ en cy rate of 22.3. Although this rate was som ewhat higher than the industry average, there was no indication that their hazards d iffered greatly from those o f other plants in the industry. M uch of the variation is due to the exclu s ion of plants with z e ro frequency r a t e s - - i .e . , plants w hich had no in ju ries fo r a n a ly s is - - fr o m this part o f the study. Individual ca se re co rd s w ere c o l lected in this part o f the survey fo r 1,505

5 Industrial Accident Prevention, by H. W. Heinrich, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Third Edition, 1950.

2


disabling in ju ries . These included 2 fa ta lities , 80 perm anent-partia l d isa b ilities , and 1,423 tem p orary -to ta l d isab ilities .

Injury Rates

The in ju ry -ra te com parison s presented in this report are based p rim a rily upon the in ju ry -frequ en cy and severity rates c o m piled under the defin itions and p roced u res sp ecified in the A m erican Standard M ethod o f C om piling Industrial Injury R ates, as approved by the A m erican Standards A s s o ciation in 1945. These standard rates have been supplem ented by an additional m easure o f in jury severity designated as the average tim e charge per d isabling in jury.

The defin ition s6 of these severa l d isa b ility c la ss ifica tion s as applied in this survey are as fo llow s:

(1) F a ta lity .--A death resulting fro m an industrial in jury is c la ss ifie d as an industria l fatality reg a rd less o f the tim e in tervening between injury and death.

(2) P erm an en t-T ota l D isa b ility .--A n in ju ry other than death which perm anently and totally incapacitates an em ployee from follow ing any gainful occupation is c la ss ified as perm anent-tota l d isab ility . The lo s s , or com plete lo s s of use, of any o f the follow ing in one accident is con sidered perm anent- total d isab ility :

(a) Both eyes; (b) one eye and one hand, o r arm , or leg , or foot; (c) any two of the follow ing not on the sam e lim b: hand, arm , foot, or leg.

(3) P erm an en t-P artia l D isa b ility .--T h e com plete lo ss in one accident o f any m em ber o r part o f a m em ber of the body, or any perm anent im pairm ent o f functions of the body or part thereof to any degree le s s than perm anent-tota l d isab ility is c la ss ifie d as perm anent-partia l d isab ility , reg a rd less of any p re -ex is t in g d isab ility of the in jured m em ber or im paired body function. The follow ing in juries are not c la ss ifie d as perm anent-partia l d isa b ilit ie s , but are c la ss ifie d as tem p ora ry -to ta l, tem p orary - partia l d isa b ilitie s , or m ed ica l treatm ent ca se s , depending upon the degree of d is ability during the healing period : (a) hernia , if it can be repa ired ; (b) lo ss o f fingernails or toenails ; (c) lo ss o f teeth; (d) d is fig u re m ent; (e) strains or sprains not causing

6 See American Standard Method of Compiling Industrial Injury Rates, approved by the American Standards Association, October 11, 1945.

perm anent lim itation of m otion ; (f) fra ctu res healing com plete ly without d e form ities or d isp la cem en ts .

(4) T em p ora ry - Total D isab ility . - - Anyinjury not resulting in death or perm anent im pairm ent is c la ss ifie d as a tem p ora ry - total d isab ility if the in jured person , because of his in jury, is unable to p er fo rm a regu la r ly estab lished jo b , open and available to h im , during the entire tim e in terval c o r r e sponding to the hours o f his regu lar shift on any one or m ore days (including Sundays, days o ff, or plant shutdowns) subsequent to the date of in jury.

In jury -F requ en cy R ate .- -T h e in ju r y -fr e quency rate represen ts the average num ber o f disabling w ork in juries o ccu rr in g in each m illion em p loy ee -h ou rs w orked. It is c o m puted a ccord in g to the follow ing form ula : Frequency rate equals

Num ber of disabling in ju ries x 1,000,000 Number of em p loyee-h ou rs w orked

A verage T im e Charge per In jury. - - The relative sev erity of a tem porary in jury is m easured by the num ber of calendar days during which the in jured person is unable to w ork at any regu larly established job open and available to him , excluding the day of in jury and the day on which he returns to w ork. The re la tive severity o f death and perm anent im pairm ent ca ses is determ ined by re feren ce to a table of econom ic tim e charges included in the A m erican Standard Method o f C om piling Industrial Injury Rates. These tim e ch arges , based upon an average w ork in g -life expectancy of 20 y ea rs fo r the entire w orking population, represen t the average percentage of working ability lost as the resu lt o f sp ecified im pairm ents, exp ressed in unproductive days. The a v e r age tim e charge per disabling in jury is com puted by adding the days lo s t fo r each tem porary in jury and the days charged accord in g to the standard table fo r each death and perm anent im pairm ent and d ividing the total by the num ber of disabling in ju ries .

In jury -S everity R ate. - - The in ju ry -s e v e r ity rate weights each disabling in jury with its correspon d in g tim e lo ss or tim e charge and ex p resses the aggregate in term s of the average num ber of days lost or charged per1,000 em p loyee-h ou rs w orked. It is c o m puted a ccord in g to the follow ing form ula:

260182 0 - 5 3 - 2 3


Severity rate equals

Total days lost or charged x 1,000 N um ber of em p loyee -h ou rs w orked

Accident-Cause Analysis

The acc id en t-ca u se analysis p roced u re used in this study d iffe rs in som e resp ects fro m the p roced u res sp ecified in the A m e rican Standard M ethod of C om piling Industria l A ccident Causes* The deviations from the Standard include the introduction of an additional analysis fa c to r , term ed the agency of in ju ry and the m odification of the standard defin itions o f som e o f the other factors* These changes perm it m ore a ccu rate c r o s s c lassifica tion s*

A gency o f In jury* --T h e standard c la s s i fica tion p rov id es fo r the se lection o f but one agen cy in the analysis of each a c c i dent* By defin ition , this agency may be either (a) the ob ject or substance which was unsafe and thereby contributed to the o c c u r ren ce o f the acciden t, or (b) in the absence o f such an ob ject or substance, the ob ject or substance m ost c lo se ly related to the in jury. Under this defin ition , th ere fore , a tabulation o f a g en c ie s fo r a group o f a c c i dents includes ob jects or substances which m ay have been inherently safe and unrelated to the occu rren ce o f the accidents, as w ell as those which led to the o ccu rre n ce o f accidents because o f their condition, lo c a tion, structure, or m ethod o f use. The developm ent o f the c la ss ifica tion agency o f in ju ry represen ts an attempt to separate and c la ss ify separately these two agency con cepts.

As used in this study, the agency o f in ju ry is the ob ject , substance, o r bodily reaction which actually produced the in jury, se lected without reg ard to its safety ch a ra c te r is t ic s o r its in fluence upon the chain o f events constituting the accident.

A cciden t Type* --A s used in this study, the a cciden t-type c la ss ifica tion assigned to each accident is purely d escrip tiv e of the o ccu rre n ce resu lting in an injury and is related sp ec ifica lly to the agency o f in jury. It indicates how the in jured person cam e into contact with o r was affected by the prev iou sly se lected agency of in jury, as fo r exam ple, fa ll fro m one leve l to another. The defin ition represen ts a change fro m the standard p roced u re in two re sp ects : F ir s t ,

the acciden t-type c la ss ifica tion is s p e c if i ca lly re lated to the p rev iou sly se lected agency o f in jury; second , the sequence o f se lectin g this fa cto r is sp ecified .

H azardous W orking C ondition. - - Under the standard defin ition , the hazardous w orking condition indicated in the analysis is defined as the unsafe m echanical or physica l condition o f the se lected agency which could have been guarded or c o r r e c te d . An e x am ple of such a hazard is the lack of a guard fo r a p re s s . This im p lies the p r io r se lection of the agen cy but does not prov ide fo r recogn ition o f any relationsh ip between the hazardous condition and a c c i dent type c la ss ifica tio n s . Nor does the standard prov ide fo r any definite re la tion ship between the agen cy and the a c c i dent-type c la ss ifica tion s .

To prov ide continuity and to estab lish d ire ct relationsh ips among the various analysis fa cto rs to perm it c r o s s c la s s i f ic a tion, the standard defin ition was m odified fo r this study to read: The hazardous w orking condition is the hazardous condition which perm itted or o cca s ion ed the o c c u r rence of the se lected accident ty p e . The h azardou s-con d ition c la ss ifica tion , th ere fo re , was se lected after the determ ination o f the accident type c la ss ifica tion . It r e p re sents the physica l or m echan ica l reason fo r the occu rren ce o f that particu lar accident without regard to the feasib ility o f guarding or co rre c t in g the condition.

E lim ination of the condition which could have been guarded or c o r r e c te d is based upon the p rem ise that statistica l analysis should indicate the existence o f hazards, but should not attempt to sp ecify the fe a s ib ility o f c o r re c t iv e m easu res .

A gency of A ccid en t. - - F o r the purpose of this study, the agency of accident was d e fined as the ob ject , substance, or p rem ises in or about which the hazardous condition e x is te d , as, fo r exam ple, the p re s s which was unguarded. Its se lection , th ere fore , is d ire ct ly assoc ia ted with the hazardous c o n dition leading to the o ccu rren ce o f the accident and not with the o ccu rren ce o f the in jury. In many instances the agency of in jury and the agency of accident w ere identica l. The double agency c la ss ifica tion , h ow ever, avoids any possib ility o f am biguity in the interpretation of the agen cy tabulations.

4


Unsafe A ct*--T h e unsafe act definition used in this survey is identical with the standard defin ition , i. e ., that v iolation of a com m only accepted safe p roced u re which resu lted in the se lected accident type.

THE INDUSTRY AND ITS HAZARDS

Corrugating

In corrugating operation s, three layers of heavy paper are glued together to produce an e lastic paperboard fo r corru gated boxes. The m iddle layer of the paper is fluted or form ed into alternate ridges and g roov es , and glued to the two outside la y ers which are ca lled lin ers .

Heavy ro lls o f paper, weighing as m uch as 2,000 pounds, are d e livered to the corrugating m achine by cran e , lift truck, or dolly . A m etal shaft is p laced through the co re of each ro ll and secu red . The ro ll is then lifted onto the corrugating m achine by hoist or other m echan ica l d ev ice . A fter the wrappings on the ro ll have been rem oved , the paper is threaded through the m achine.

During the actual m achine operation , the inner or corrugated la yer f ir s t p a sses over a steam show er. The m oistu re and heat thus absorbed by the paper a ss is ts in setting** or im parting rigid ity to the corrugations as the paper passes through the next step --th e corrugating r o lls . On these r o lls , which have teeth that m esh together in a g ea r -lik e operation , the ridges and g rooves are form ed in the paper. F rom the corrugating r o l ls , the sheet p a sses ov er a gluing ro ll and then to p ressu re ro lls where the lin ers and the corru gated sheet are p ressed to gether. B e fore entering the p ressu re ro lls the lin ers have been preheated to assu re good adhesion. F rom the p ressu re r o lls , the board p a sses ov er a heated su rface which sets the glue, adds r ig id ity , and d ries the board . It is then trim m ed by a s l i t t e r - -a shaft equipped with a slitting h ead --an d cut in the length d es ired . The cutter is usually a rotary ty p e --a knife set on the outside of a revolv ing drum . The m anufacture of fiberboard is s im ila r to that o f corrugated board , the only d iffe ren ce being that the m iddle layer is not corru gated .

Although corrugating is p r im a rily a m a chine operation , many o f the hazards o f the corrugating departm ent are connected with manual handling. There are many p o s s ib ilities o f strains fro m ov erexertion or o f crushed feet or toes fro m dropped ob je cts .

P ow ered equipment is genera lly used fo r m oving the heavy r o lls of paper but f r e quently the paper is ro lled or m oved m anually. Shafts m ust be in serted through the c o re s of the r o lls o f paper by hand. These shafts are quite heavy, long, and awkward to handle. M oreov er , the corru gated board is generally rem oved fro m the m achine by hand.

Loading paper onto corrugating m achines in volves a num ber o f hazards. W orkm en s fin gers m ay be crushed between the shafts and ro lls o f paper during the shafting** operation or between the shafts and the ro ll stands while guiding the ro lls o f paper onto m ach ines. Other seriou s crushing hazards include unguarded gears and unguarded m achine r o lls .

Sodium s ilica te , used as an adhesive, is another p oss ib le sou rce of in ju ries . Spilled on the f lo o r , it is a slipping hazard. D ried , it m ay chip o ff the corrugated board during m achine operations and strike w orkm en s ey es , or the dried p ie ces along the edge of the board m ay be a cutting hazard.

Unguarded s litter and cutter heads may resu lt in sev ere cuts, la cera tion s , or even am putations. M inor la cera tion s a lso may resu lt fro m rubbing the edges o f paper. Knives gen era lly are used to rem ove w rappings fro m the ro lls of paper, and extrem e caution m ust be ex e rc ise d in that w ork to prevent knife cuts.

Scraps o f paperboard frequently co lle c t around the corrugating m achine. The danger o f slips and fa lls , th ere fore , is quite com m on. H azards connected with the o p e r ation o f hoists and veh ic les are a lso im portant in the corrugating operations.

Printing

Three types o f printing p re s s e s are used in boxboard printing operation s: cy lin d er, ro tary , and platen. The m ain features o f the cy lin der p re s s and the rotary p ress are a m oving table and a revolv in g cy lin der. In the cy linder p re s s , the cy lin der c a r r ie s the boxboard into contact with the printing plate which is locked into the m ovable table. In the rotary p r e s s , the printing plate is lock ed into the cy lin der and the boxboard is ca rr ie d through the operation on the table. In each m achine the table m oves back and forth under the revolv ing cy lin der. During the actual printing operation , the two are in contact, synchron ized so that they are m oving in the sam e d irection at the sam e

5


speed. The boxboard m ay be fed into these two m achines m echan ica lly or by hand. In the latter ca se , the operator m ere ly keeps the feeding table supplied with boxboard.

The platen p ress is e sp ecia lly adaptable fo r sm all printing o rd e rs w here the p ress m ust be started and stopped frequently. In this p re s s , the printing plate is locked in a v ertica l position . The boxboard is p laced , one sheet at a tim e, on a m ovable platen which is hinged at the bottom . F or the im p ress ion , the platen swings upward into contact with the plate. When it returns to its orig in a l position , the operator rem oves the printed boxboard and rep laces it with another unprinted board.

M ateria l handling is an im portant sou rce o f hazards encountered in the printing departm ent. B oxboard is generally p laced on, and rem oved fro m , the printing m achine by hand. Buckets o f ink m ust be lifted to fill the ink fountains. Heavy printing plates m ust be lifted and lock ed into p la ce and em pty skids fro m which boxboard has been rem oved are usually tra n sferred by hand fro m the entry end o f the m achine to the d e livery end. In a ll these operation s, the chance o f strains is v ery great.

Handling operations a lso resu lt in other types of in ju ries . Hands or fin gers m ay be la cera ted in rubbing against the edges o f the paperboard or in com ing into contact with sharp p a rtic le s o f s ilica te on c o r r u gated board . Splintered or rough boards on skids m ay cause punctured fin gers or hands during the handling or m oving of that equipm ent. In addition, the skids are frequently p laced upright against the printing m achine o r som e other support until needed. U nless great care is e x e rc ise d in thus placing the sk ids, they may fa ll o r topple ov er , and strik e workm en. Then, too, workm en m ay drop the skids on their feet or toes.

There are many p o ss ib ilit ie s of fa lls in printing operation s. The operator o f the p re s s frequently m ust w ork fro m a ra ised p la tform . W orkm en often stand on the p re s s e s o r on other elevated su rfaces to adjust or lubricate the equipm ent. In either o f these operations the workm en are e x posed to the danger o f fa lls to low er le v e ls . Spilled ink, and spots o f o il dropped during the lu brica tion o f equipm ent, m ay cause slips or fa lls .

P ap erboard and other supplies are usually d e livered to the printing m achine by hand truck. V eh icu lar hazards a re , th ere fore , com m on in printing w ork . Other hazards,

notew orthy because o f the danger o f p e rm a nent and seriou s d isab ility , include unguarded g ea rs , b e lts , r o l ls , and other m oving parts o f printing m ach ines.

Cutting and Creasing

In cutting and crea sin g operation s, the boxboard is trim m ed or cut to s ize and m arked (crea sed ) to indicate the fo lds which are n e ce ssa ry in assem blin g the boxboard into a box. Two types o f cutting and c r e a s ing operations predom inate in the industry. In many ca se s , the cutting and crea sin g edges are mounted on shafts of m ach ines. As the boxboard p a sses under the rotating shafts, the cutting knives cut the boxboard to the d es ired s ize and the creasin g edges, which are s im ila r to the cutting knives except that their edges are rounded, make im p ress ion s indicating w here the boxboard is to be fo lded . This type o f operation is com m on in the m anufacture o f corru gated box es .

An alternative p roced u re , used ch ie fly in the m an u factu re 'o f fo lded and set-up b ox es , m akes use o f m ach ines s im ila r to printing p r e s s e s . The crea sin g and cutting edges are m etal strips which are p laced in d ies s im ila r to the printing p lates. The action of the m achine is s im ila r to that o f the cy lin der or rotary printing p re s s .

Several other sp ec ia lized types o f cutting are p erform ed in the industry. U sually, the nam e o f the operation indicates the kind of cut m ade. F or exam ple, co rn er cutting involves cutting co rn e rs fro m sco red blanks so that the boxboard m ay be folded to fo rm the box. The co rn er -cu tt in g m achine is b a s ica lly a cutting d ie , shaped into a 90- degree angle. The operation is s im ila r to that of a punch p r e s s - -th e die m oves v ertica lly and cuts the boxboard when the board is p la ced under it. In som e instances, the die is activated by a foot pedal. In oth ers, it m oves continuously and the o p e r ator m ust tim e his m ovem ents in p lacing the boxboard to the m otion o f the d ie .

In the slitting operation paperboard is cut into narrow str ip s , and the p roced u re is s im ila r to the cutting operation d escr ib ed above. Scoring is s im ila r to the crea sin g operation , except that the su rface o f the boxboard is actually cut by a knife edge.

Slotting is the p ro c e s s o f cutting slots in p ie ces o f boxboard to fo rm partition s. Specia lly designed slotting m achines are generally used fo r this purpose but o c c a

6


sionally c ircu la r saws are used. Thumb- holing, as the name im p lies , is the operation in which thum bholes are cut into the box - board ,

Many of the hazards in the cutting and crea sin g departm ents are s im ila r to those in the printing and corrugating departm ents. Many hazards are involved in the handling o f m ateria ls and equipm ent. B oxboard , ro lls of paper, shafts, and d ies involve m uch lifting . The danger o f strained m u scles from over exertion is great. In addition, the handling o f those ob jects m ay lead to bru ised or fractu red toes and feet unless co n s id e r able ca re is ex e rc ise d in grasping and holding ob jects secu re ly . Cuts or la c e r a tions may resu lt fro m contact with the edges o f the paperboard; fro m contact with the m etal cutting edges which are inserted in the d ies ; or from contact with the knives which are frequently used to trim the cork or rubber in serts in the d ies. W ood used in the fram ew ork o f d ies and in skids m ay have rough or s liv ered edges which can puncture hands o r fin gers .

Unguarded ro lls and other m oving parts o f m achines, such as g ea rs , belts, and pulleys may cause seriou s d isa b ilities . Inadequately guarded c ircu la r saw blades are esp ecia lly hazardous because o f the p oss ib ility o f fin ger am putations.

Two other hazards which the cutting and crea sin g departm ents have in com m on with the corrugating departm ents are the s ilica te p a rtic les which m ay be thrown from c o r r u gated boxboard during m achine operations and the scrap s o f boxboard lying on the flo o r which m ay cause slipping.

StrippingG enerally , the die does not cut entirely

through the boxboard blank during the cutting operation . As a resu lt the waste rem ains attached to the boxboard until it is rem oved in a separate operation ca lled stripping. Manually operated stripping ham m ers are gen era lly used in this w ork. H ow ever, a pow ered hand stripper has been developed and is being used in som e plants. E ssen tially , the pow ered stripper is a notched d isc attached to a flex ib le , pow ered shaft. In the stripping operation , the flat boxboard blanks are p iled on top o f each other to a height o f severa l feet. The waste edgings are rem oved by striking them with a stripping ham m er or by d irectin g the d isc o f a pow ered stripper against the edges o f the boxboards.

F or stripping, the boxboard may be left on skids which are used to transport the boxboard fro m the cutting and crea sin g departm ent. In m ost in sta n ces , h ow ever, the boxboard is tra n sferred to stripping tables. L ifting heavy bundles o f boxboard to and fro m w ork tables is , th ere fore , one o f the m ore com m on hazards in stripping. Another handling operation involving a substantial hazard is that o f m oving the empty skids. This may resu lt in strained backs due to ov erexertion , bru ised or fractu red toes and feet if the skids are dropped, and punctured hands or fin gers , if the skids are rough.

Handtool operations in stripping are p o tential m a jor p rod u cers of in jury. The s tr ip ping ham m er may slip from a w orkm an s hand or may be d eflected from the p ile of stock against the w orkm an s body unless the ham m er is secu re ly held. In addition, the repeated m otion in the use of these ham m ers m ay produce sprained w rists .

Another hazard com m on to m uch w ork in the industry, but esp ecia lly im portant in stripping operation s, is that due to d is carded boxboard scra p s . In spite o f frequent cleanups in the stripping departm ent, the general p ra ctice o f perm itting scrap s o f boxboard to fa ll to the working f lo o r presen ts a seriou s tripping and slipping hazard.

Gluing, Staying, Stitching, and Taping

In the gluing, staying, stitching, and taping operation s, the box is form ed or fo lded into shape and fastened. Folded boxes are usually glued. The gluing m achine fo lds the boxboard along the cre a se d lin es , glues the board where n ece ssa ry , and d e livers the fin ished folded box to the sh ippers o r p a ck ers .

The assem blin g operation in setu p -box plants is ca lled staying. The boxboard is bent as indicated by the crea sin g operation and p laced under a plunger in a staying m achine. When the plunger d escen ds, it p re s se s a p ie ce o f m oistened , gum m ed, kraft paper over the co rn e r o f the box. Some staying m achines are designed to fasten one co rn er o f a box fo r each op era tion o f the plunger w hereas others fasten two or four co rn e rs in a single operation . In som e ca se s , the boxboard is fo lded by hand and p laced under the plunger which is operated by a foot pedal w hereas in others the m achines are fu lly autom atic. The autom atic quadruple staying m achine is m ost frequently used.

C orrugated boxes are either stitched

7


(actually stapled) o r taped* In the stitching operation , the operator fo lds the boxboard by hand and p la ces it under the stapling head o f the stitching m achine, which is con tro lled by a foot pedal. M ost corru gated boxes, h ow ever, are taped. In that operation , the opera tor folds the boxboard and feeds it to the taping m achine w here m oistened , gum m ed paper is p re sse d over the seam . P re ss u re belts convey the box to the d e liv ery end of the taping m achine and assu re that the tape has been firm ly secu red to the box .

Unguarded equipm ent is the outstanding hazard in these operation s. In m ost in stan ces , the boxboard stock is fed to the m achines m anually. The operator m ust be ex trem ely ca re fu l, th ere fore , to keep his hands a safe distance fro m the point of operation . This hazard is esp ecia lly im portant on m achines which are operated by foot pedals. In such ca se s , the operator m ust coord inate the m ovem ents o f his hands and feet. Unguarded foot pedals a lso may be d ep ressed acciden ta lly , activating m achines without warning. Open ro lls , b e lts , g ears , and pulleys are other in ju ry-produ cing p o ss ib ilit ie s . P ap erb oard , conveyed by r o lls o r b e lts , frequently b ecom es jam m ed in m ach ines. In that ca se , it is com m on p r a c tice to rem ove the paperboard without stopping the m achine. This extrem e h azard ous p roced u re presen ts many chances fo r em ployees to be caught in the unguarded be lts or r o lls .

Although not so im portant as in som e other operation s, a lifting hazard a lso exists in this w ork . Stacks o f boxboard m ust be lifted to, and rem oved from , many of the m a ch in es . Skids a lso m ust be shifted when the stock has been rem oved and glue is generally ca rr ie d to the gluing m achine in buckets.

The possib ility o f a slip or fa ll is not uncom m on in these operations. D rops of g lue, sp illed while the glue is being poured, p r e sent a slipping hazard near the gluing m a chine. B oxboard which had been jam m ed in the m achines is frequently thrown on the flo o r a fter it has been rem oved . The d is carded boxboard , th ere fore , becom es a slipping and tripping hazard. In addition, som e m achines are so designed that o p e ra tors m ust w ork from p la tform s. As these w orking su rfaces are only slightly above flo o r lev e l, guard ra ils are generally c o n sid ered un n ecessary . H ow ever, fa lls from any elevation m ay be quite se r io u s .

Covering and Wrapping

Setup boxes are usually wrapped or cov ered to im prove their appearance. M ost boxes are m achine wrapped but either m ach ine- or hand-w rapping m ethods may be em ployed. In m achine wrapping, the paper which has been slit and cut to s ize passes through a gluing ro ll, w here one su rface is coated with adhesive. It is then conveyed , by belt, to the op era tor who cen ters a box o r lid on the w rapper. Then, by foot pedal, he re lea ses a plunger which pushes the box between brushes which, in turn, p ress the w rapper on the box.

On deep b ox es , the w rapper is usually applied by hand. The em ployee m ere ly pulls a strip o f wrapping paper over a glue ro ll and then w orks it onto the box.

M achine hazards predom inate in these operation s. Unguarded g e a r s , p u lley s , b e lt s , and ro lls m ay catch em ployees or their clothing, pulling them into the m oving parts o f m ach ines. B ecause the operator m ust p lace the box and wrapping paper under the plunger by hand, the w ork is exceptionally hazardous. The op era tor m ust coordinate his m ovem ents so that the plunger does not descend until his fin gers and hands are in the c lea r . Unguarded foot pedals m ay be p ressed unintentionally and thus cause the plunger to descend prem atu rely .

FACTORS IN THE INJURY RECORD

The injury re co rd of any plant or o f any group of plants is a com posite of a great many fa c to rs : the kinds of m ateria l p r o c essed ; the types of p ro cess in g p erform ed ; the safety regulations of the States in which the plants are loca ted , and the extent to which those regulations are en forced ; the kind of p erson n el em ployed; the size of the plants; and the extent o f the safety p rog ra m s ca rr ie d on in the plants. In particu lar instances the influence o f these fa cto rs m ay o ffse t each other, but in com parison s based upon la rge groups of operations their e ffects frequently can be dem onstrated, as in the follow ing breakdowns o f the 1950 experien ce o f the pap erboard -con ta in er industry.

Product Comparisons

A verage in ju ry -frequ en cy rates fo r the four m a jor groups of plants ranged fro m a high of 23.0 fo r plants m anufacturing c o r -

8


CHART 1. INJURY-FREQUENCY RATES IN THE PAPERBOARD-CONTAINER INDUSTRY,By Type of Plant, 1950

DISABLING INJURIES PER MILLION HOURS WORKED 10 20 30

Corrugated-and Fiber-Box Plants

Folded-Box Plants

Fiber-Can, -Tube, and -Drum Plants

Set-Up-Box Plants

23.0

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

rugated or fib e r boxes to a low o f 12.9 fo r those m anufacturing setup boxes . Between these lim its , the fo ld ed -b ox plants had an average frequency rate o f 16.7 com pared with 16.5 fo r fib e rca n ,-tu b e , and-drum plants. (See appendix, table 1.)

In the corrugated and f ib e r -b o x plants, 1 in every 21 fu ll-t im e w ork ers experien ced a disabling in jury during 1950. Three deaths w ere reported by these plants, averaging 1 fatality fo r each 18 m illion m an-hours w orked. The ratio o f p erm an en t-im p a irment ca se s , how ever, was re la tively low , averaging som ewhat le s s than one in every m illion m an -h ou rs. T em p orary -tota l d is ab ilities o c cu rre d in these plants at the rate o f 22 p er m illion m an -h ou rs, but the average re cov ery tim e fo r these ca ses (14 days each) was com paratively low . As a re flection o f this com bination of a low average tim e lo s s fo r tem p orary -tota l d is ab ilities and a low incidence o f perm anent im pairm ents, the average tim e charge fo r

all d isabling in juries in this group of plants was only 67 days per ca se . This was low er than the average tim e charge fo r any of the other plant groups. The standard severity rate fo r the corru gated and f ib e r -b o x plants, 1.5, was som ewhat higher than the rates fo r the setup and fo ld e d -b o x plants; it was substantially low er than fo r plants m anufacturing fib er cans, tubes, and drum s.

The ov era ll frequency rate o f 16.7 fo r plants m anufacturing folded boxes r e p r e sented an average o f 1 d isabling in jury during the year fo r every 28 w ork ers in that segm ent o f the industry. One fatality o c cu rred in each 21 m illion m an-hours and there was 1 perm anent-im pairm ent case fo r each 1^ m illion m an -h ou rs. R ecov ery tim e fo r the tem p ora ry -to ta l d isab ilities e x p e r ienced in these plants averaged 14 days per ca se . The average tim e charge fo r a ll ca ses was 69 days and the standard severity rate fo r the group was 1.2.

Plants m anufacturing fib er cans, tubes,

9


and drum s, averaged 1 disabling in jury fo r every 29 fu ll-t im e w ork ers . Their re la tively favorab le frequency rate, 16.5, how ever, was o ffset by a very unfavorable re co rd o f in jury severity . No fata lities w ere reported by these plants during 1950, but their re co rd of 5 perm anent im pairm ents in each m illion m an-hours w orked coupled with an average re co v e ry tim e of 21 days per case fo r tem p ora ry -to ta l d isab ilities gave them a severity rate of 4.8 and an average tim e charge of 289 days p er ca se . The p ossib ility of experiencing a seriou s in jury appeared to be m uch greater in these plants than in any other part o f the industry.

The setu p -box plants, with an average frequency rate of 12.9, had the m ost fa v o r able experien ce in the industry. Their r e co rd showed 1 disabling in jury for each 39 fu ll-y e a r w ork ers , only 1 fatality in 40 m illion m an -h ou rs , and only a fraction m ore than 1 perm anent im pairm ent per m illion m an -h ou rs. Their average re cov ery tim e fo r tem p ora ry -to ta l d isa b ilities , 17 days, was re la tive ly high. As a resu lt, their average tim e charge p er case was 76 days, but their sev erity rate o f 1.0 was the low est fo r any of the 4 groups of plants.

Regional and State Comparisons

V ariations in in jury rates among the d ifferen t States and reg ions may re fle ct any one or any com bination of severa l fa c to rs . State safety regulations and the degree to which they are en forced , the age and m aintenance o f plants and equipm ent, and em ploym ent fa ctors such as the experien ce of available w ork ers , all tend to influence the average leve l of in jury rates in any area .

In ju ry -ra te com parison s by region and State m ay be a ffected by the type of product predom inating in the particu lar areas.*7 F or exam ple, the highest national average f r e quency rate was re co rd e d by plants m anufacturing corru gated and fib er box es . Any area in which those p articu lar operations constitute a high prop ortion of the total production , th ere fore , would be expected to have a com paratively high ov era ll average reg a rd le ss o f other fa c to rs which m ight influence the rate. B ecause o f these variab le internal weighting fa c to rs , the sign ificance o f com parison s am ong the States and reg ion s

7 State samples were too small to correlate injury-frequency rates by product and size of establishment.

on the basis of industry-w ide averages m ay be questioned. The m ost re a lis t ic area com p a rison s , th ere fore , are those based upon sp e c ific types o f production rather than upon industry tota ls.

C orrugated and F ib e r -B o x P lants. - - I n - ju ry rates fo r plants m anufacturing c o r r u gated and fib er boxes w ere com puted fo r 15 States. C om pared with the national average o f 23.0 fo r this group of plants, 2 S ta te s -- M assachusetts and Indiana--had v ery high in ju ry -frequ en cy ra tes, 41.7 and 41.1 r e sp ective ly (appendix, table 3). In con trast,2 S ta te s --F lo r id a , with 10.7, and W iscon sin , with 1 1 .4 --had rates le s s than half the national average. Of the rem aining 11 States, 1 had a frequency rate of 13.4 (C aliforn ia ),3 others had rates le s s than 20 (Illin ois , 15.4, T exas, 16.7, and M ichigan, 18.0), 3 had rates between 20 and 25 (New J ersey , 20.0, M issou ri, 21.3, and Ohio, 22.9) and 4 had rates betw een 25 and 30 (New Y ork , 25.2, Pennsylvania, 27.9, T en n essee , 28.4, and W est V irgin ia , 29.8).

F lor id a plants had the best State in ju ry - severity re co rd , in addition to having the best average frequency ra te . None of the in ju ries reported fo r that group of three plants r e sulted in death or perm anent d isab ility . T h ere fo re , the average tim e lost per d is abling in jury was only 13 days and the s e v e r ity rate was ex trem ely low , 0 .1 . The plants in M ichigan a lso had a r e co rd of no death or perm anent d isab ility . In the 6 plants r e p o r t ing from that State, h ow ever, tem p ora ry - total d isab ilities w ere quite s e v e r e , r e q u ir ing an average of 33 days fo r recu peration . Serious d isab ilities w ere infrequent in M assachusetts (1 in 87), Ohio (1 in 129), and Tennessee (1 in 50). As a resu lt, the average tim e lost per in jury in those States was c o m paratively lo w --1 9 , 20, and 25 days r e s p e c tively . Other States with average tim e charges below the national average w ere M issou ri, 25 days, T exas, 29 days, W iscon sin, 44 days, and C a liforn ia , 55 days.

U nfavorable sev erity re co rd s w ere r e ported by Illin o is , 151 days lost per in jury; W est V irgin ia , 121 days; Indiana, 108 days; and New Y ork , 106 days. These adverse s e verity re co rd s w ere due ch ie fly to a high r a tio o f perm anent d isa b ilit ie s . Twelve of the 107 reported in juries in 21 cooperating I l l i nois plants and 3 of the 31 in ju ries in 5 W est V irgin ia plants w ere perm anent d isa b ilit ie s . F ive Indiana plants rep orted 1 fatality and 4 perm anent d isab ilities am ong 116 in ju ries ,

10


and the 102 in ju ries in 1 7 New Y ork plants in cluded 1 fatality and 3 perm anent d isa b ilities .

F ib er -C a n , -T u be , and -D rum P lan ts. - - A verage injury rates fo r f ib e r -ca n ,tube, anddrum plants could be com puted for only 3 States# In Ohio, 4 plants ach ieved a frequency rate of only 8 .4 - -about half the national average , 16.5. In addition, they had favorab le in ju ry -sev er ity re co rd s . None o f the nine reported in juries resu lted in s e r i - ous d isab ility . Consequently, the average tim e lost per in jury was only 15 days and the severity rate was only 0.1.

F avorable averages w ere a lso reported by 7 plants in Pennsylvania. F or that group o f plants the in ju ry -frequ en cy rate was 10.6, the average tim e lost per in jury was25 days, and the severity rate was 0.3.

In con trast, 6 New Jersey plants reported26 disabling in ju ries per m illion hours w orked and many of these w ere perm anent d isa b ilities . The severity re co rd , th ere fore , was a lso un favorable, 724 days charged per in jury and 18.8 days charged p er thousand hours w orked.

F o ld ed -B ox P la n ts .--S ta te averages fo r plants producing folded boxes w ere ava ilable fo r 14 States. C om pared with the national average o f 16.7, the State in jury - frequency rates ranged fro m 9.3 in Illin ois to 24.4 in T exas. Six States had averages between 10 and 15 (W isconsin , 10.3; M is sou ri, 11.6; Ohio, 12.3; M ichigan, 12.6; Indiana 14.1; and C aliforn ia , 14.7); 4 had rates between 15 and 20 (New Jersey , 16.5; M aryland, 18.0; New Y ork , 19.6; and P ennsylvania, 19.8); and 3 had rates between 20 and 25 (M assachusetts, 23.1; Connecticut, 23.9; and Texas 24.4).

The Texas plants balanced their adverse frequency rate by a favorab le severity re co rd . None of the rep orted in juries fo r the four cooperating plants in that State resu lted in death or perm anent d isab ility . Coupled with the re la tive ly slight tem p orary -to ta l d isa b ilit ie s , this held the average tim e lost to 5 days per d isab ling in jury and 0.1 days per thousand hours w orked. F avorable s e verity averages w ere a lso reported by plants in Pennsylvania (14 days lost per in jury), M aryland (18 days p er in jury) and Indiana (24 days p er in jury).

In con trast, 3 of 20 in ju ries reported by 7 M issou ri plants resu lted in perm anent d isab ility , giving that State a very high average tim e lo ss per in jury, 240 days.

S im ilarly , 14 Connecticut plants reported 2 fata lities and 5 perm anent partia l d is abilities among 91 in ju ries . As a resu lt, the average tim e lost per in jury was 201 days and the severity rate was 4 .8 , the h ighest record ed fo r any State group of fo ld ed -b ox plants. Two other groups of plants averaged m ore than 100 days lost tim e per in jury, C a liforn ia , 182 days, and Illin o is , 140 days.

SetupBox P lan ts .- -A v e r a g e s for setup - box plants w ere com puted fo r 10 States. State in ju ry -freq u en cy rates ranged from7.1 in Illin ois to 16.9 in C a liforn ia , the average fo r a ll se tu p -b ox plants being 12.9. In addition to Illin o is , one other State had a rate le s s than 1 0 --M isso u r i, with 8.5. F ive of the 10 States had averages between 10 and 15--N ew Y ork , 11.7; New J ersey , 11.8; N orth C arolina, 12.9; M assachusetts, 14.1; and W isconsin , 14.1. P enn sylvania and C onnecticut plants averaged 15.3 d isabling in ju ries per m illion hours o f w ork.

Injury sev erity , how ever, fo llow ed a som ewhat d ifferen t pattern. The adverse frequency rate in C aliforn ia was o ffse t by a favorable sev erity re co rd , 33 days lost per in jury, the low est fo r any State group of setup -box plants. S im ilarly , the favorable frequency rate o f Illinois plants was counterbalanced by an unfavorable severity r e co rd , 212 days lo s t per in jury, the highest re co rd ed fo r any group. H ow ever, with the exception o f the Illin ois plants, a ll State groups held their averages to le ss than 75 days lost tim e per disabling in jury.

Plant-Size Comparisons

P la n t-s ize appears to be c lo s e ly related to the o ccu rren ce o f in ju ries in the p a p er- b oard -con ta in er industry. G enerally , the v ery sm all plants (with few er than 50 em ployees each) and the large plants (with 500 or m ore em ployees) had the low est in ju ry -frequ en cy ra tes. Plants em ploying 100 to 249 w ork ers had the highest average in ju ry -frequ en cy rate.

F or the group of plants em ploying few er than 20 w ork ers a p iece , the average f r e quency rate was 11.6. In each of the next 3 size groups, the average m oved p r o g r e s sively h igher: 13.6 fo r plants with 20 to 49 em ployees; 19.1 fo r plants with 50 to 99 em ployees; and 20.5 fo r those with 100 to 249 em ployees. The average rate then

260182 0 - 5 3 - 3 11


CHART 2. INJURY-FREQUENCY RATES IN THE PAPERBOARD-CONTAINER INDUSTRY,By Size of Plant,1950

1 to 19 Employees

20 to 49 Employees

50 to 99

Employees

100 to 249 Employees

250 to 499

Employees

500 Employees

and Over

DISABLING INJURIES PER MILLION HOURS WORKED 10 20 30

12Q-51

33T"---------------- ------- 1&r:u r n

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LAROR BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

dropped slightly to 19.0 fo r plants having 250 to 499 em ployees apiece* In the final group, made up o f plants having 500 or m ore em ployees each, the average dropped sharply to 13.8 (appendix, table 1).

This pattern of in ju ry -frequ en cy rate variations in relation to plant size is s im ila r to patterns found in other Bureau industry surveys* The indications are that the owner is frequently the su p erv isor in sm all shops. He has person a l financial in terest in keeping the accident volum e at a m inim um , and is generally able to keep all operations under c lo s e observation . T h ere fo re , he can see unsafe conditions and p ra ctice s as they develop , and can take im m ediate action to elim inate hazards b e fo re they cause accid en ts .

The high volum e o f production in large shops m akes it financia lly p oss ib le to give sp ecia l attention to safety. These plants usually can a fford to em ploy safety engineers to ca rry on scien tific acciden t-

prevention p rog ra m s, and can prov ide all guards and safety equipment known to be available . L arge plants a lso can m aintain som e fo rm of m ed ica l or trained f ir s t - aid se rv ice on the p re m ise s . They have the advantage of p ro fe ss ion a lly engineered plant layout and w ork p r o c e s s e s , and are genera lly in a position to u tilize m echan ica l equipm ent m ore extensively than are the sm a ller plants. Mate ria l-handling op e ra tions u tilizing m echanical con v ey ors , h o ists , and pow er trucks can do m uch to avoid many o f the in ju ries a ssocia ted with the manual p erform a n ce o f such operations.

The p rob lem of safety in m ed iu m -size plants is com p lica ted because the resp on sib le head seldom can devote m uch tim e to observ in g shop operation s, and, th ere fore , m ust delegate m uch o f the resp on sib ility fo r safety to oth ers. Unfortunately, these safety re sp on sib ilit ie s frequently are a s signed to forem en or su p erv isors with little o r . no safety training and who frequently

12


p lace greater im portance on production than on safety.

The group av erages , h ow ever, tend to con cea l the* wide d iffe ren ces in the in ju ry - frequency rates of the individual plants within the various s ize groups. A ctually , n early 44 percen t o f the plants included in the survey operated throughout the .year without a single d isabling in jury (appendix, tables 2 and 4). M ost o f these w ere sm all plants, but the lis t included 10 with over 100 w ork ers , 2 of which em ployed nearly 250 w ork ers ap iece . Although no plant with over 250 em ployees ach ieved a z e ro f r e quency rate, 1 em ploying 600 w ork ers fin ished the year with a rate o f only 3.7.

At the other extrem e, 8 plants with few er than 100 em ployees reported rates o f m ore than 100. Another group of 56 plants, all with few er than 500 em p loy ees , reported rates o f over 50. Together, these 64 plants em ployed le ss than 6 percen t o f the w ork ers cov ered in the survey but they accounted fo r nearly 20 percen t o f the disabling in ju ries and 17 percen t o f the tim e lost fro m in ju ries . No plant with 500 or m ore em ployees had a rate exceeding 30.

DEPARTMENTAL INJURY RATES

N early a ll the surveyed plants reported on som e of their operations in su fficien t detail to p erm it the inclusion of such data in typical departm ental groups. (Many plants w ere unable to furn ish com plete breakdow ns o f their operations a ccord in g to a standard ized pattern because o f d ifferen ces in internal organ ization .) Thus, separate in jury re co rd s w ere com piled fo r 18 p rod u ction departm ents and 5 p la n t-se rv ice d e partm ents.

Production Operations

P rodu ction operations as a group had a som ewhat higher in ju ry -freq u en cy rate, 18.2, than the serv ice -d ep a rtm en t group, 14.6, but the in ju ries experien ced by s e r v ice w ork ers tended to be m ore sev ere (appendix, table 5).

The greatest concentration o f in ju ries o ccu rre d in the corrugating departm ents. The average frequency rate fo r these op era tions was 42 .5 , represen tin g approxim ately 1 disabling in jury in the cou rse o f the year fo r every 11 fu ll-t im e w ork ers . A re la tive ly high prop ortion of these in juries w ere ser iou s . As a resu lt, the corrugating d e

partm ents a lso had the highest average tim e charge per ca se (91 days) and the highest severity rate (3.9) among the entire group o f production departm ents.

Only two other production departm ents had frequency rates above 2 0 - -the printing and cutting departm ents. Each o f these operations had a com paratively high p r o portion of perm an en t-partia l d isa b ilities and ranked re la tive ly high in the in jury - sev erity com p a rison s .

At the other ex trem e, two production departm ents had frequency rates of le s s than 1 0 --the hand cov erin g , topping, and turning operation , and the labeling o p e ra tion. The average re co v e ry tim e fo r tem p o ra ry -to ta l d isab ilities was high in both departm ents, but the low incidence o f p e r manent im pairm ents gave them re la tive ly low in ju ry -s e v e r ity ra tes .

In the m iddle range 13 production dep artm ents had frequency rates ranging fro m 12.9 fo r gluing operations to 19. S fo r s titch ing operation s. The tying and bundling d e partm ent, with a frequency rate o f 14.1, had the best sev erity r e co rd among all the production departm ents. In this operation no fatality or perm anent im pairm ent o c cu rre d , and the re co v e ry time fo r tem p ora ry -to ta l d isab ilities averaged only 10 days. Am ong the operations with le ss fa v o r able re co rd s w ere co rn er cutting and integrated cutting and creasin g .

Service Operations

Storage op era tion s , with 1 d isabling in jury fo r every 13 fu ll-t im e w ork ers , ranked as the m ost hazardous of the p la n t-se rv ice a ctiv ities . A long with a high in ju ry - frequency rate o f 35.8, these operations had a high in ju ry -se v e r ity rate (4.6) and a high average tim e charge p er in jury (128 days).

The shipping departm ents a lso had a high frequency rate o f 30.8. In juries in these departm ents, h ow ever, tended to be le ss seriou s than those o ccu rr in g in storage operation s, giving them a better than a v e r age severity ranking.

M aintenance operations ranked third among the se rv ice departm ents in in jury frequency and second in re sp ect to in jury sev erity . The frequ en cy rate o f 24.8, how ev er , was h igher than that o f any production departm ent except corru gatin g .

The adm in istrative and c le r ic a l dep artm ents had a p a rticu larly good r e co rd . T heir

13


in ju ry -frequ en cy rate of 1.7 com pared favorably with the rates fo r s im ila r a c tiv ities in other industries recently surveyed by the Bureau of L abor Statistics . In the c la y -con stru ction products industry, fo r exam ple, the frequency rate for c le r ica l and adm inistrative w ork in 1948 was 3.0, and in the fe r t i liz e r industry the rate fo r s im ila r w ork was 2.8 in 1946. In the pulp and paper industry, surveyed in 1948, the c le r ic a l and adm inistrative rate was som e what low er , 1.4.

KINDS OF INJURIES EXPERIENCED

Fatalities

Individual ca se re co rd s o f 1,505 in ju ries w ere co lle cted fo r deta iled analysis by Bureau rep resen ta tiv es . Only 2 o f these in ju ries resu lted in death. In one ca se , a c lea n er craw led under a cutting and crea sin g p re s s to clean the f lo o r . W hile he was engaged in this w ork , the op era tor , not knowing the clean er was under the m ach ine, started the p r e s s . The traveling bed of the p re s s cru sh ed the c lea n er , k illing him .

In the second fatal accident, a ba ler opera tor was k illed when the top platen of the b a ler fe ll on him .

Permanent-Partial Disabilities

The 80 perm an en t-p artia l d isab ilities included 51 am putations and 29 cuts, f r a c tu res , b ru ises , and strains which resu lted in the perm anent lo s s o f use o f a body part o r function. A ll but one of the am putations involved fin gers or thumbs. In that ca se , a workm an lost two m in or toes when his foot was caught between an e levator cage and a floor*

Eight w orkm en lo st two or m ore fin g ers . In two ca ses the accidents o ccu rre d as w orkm en w ere adjusting m oving m ach ines. One involved a s litter operator who had four fin gers amputated when his hand was caught between a belt and a pulley. The oth er, a lam inating m achine op era tor , lo s t two fin gers . Full deta ils o f his accident are not available but the in jury resu lted when his w rench slipped fro m a nut. F ive w ork ers each lo s t two fin gers w hile o p e r ating m ach ines. Two corn er-cu tt in g m a ch ines , a band saw, a c ircu la r saw with a dado blade, and a partition slo tter w ere involved in those a cciden ts. Maintenance w ork a lso accounted fo r a tw o-fin ger ca se .

In that accident, a m ach in ist was in jured when his fin gers w ere caught in the sp rock et o f a co rru g a tor .

A ll of the 42 single-thum b and finger amputations involved m oving equipm ent. Seventeen d ifferent kinds of m achines w ere included, the m ost com m on being printing p re s se s , 8 acciden ts; cutters a n d cre a s e rs , 5 acciden ts; staying m ach in es, 5 a cciden ts; co rn er cu tters , 3 accidents; pow ered saw s, 3 acciden ts; and punch p r e s s e s , 3 a cciden ts. In 25 of these a ccid en ts , the w orkm an had his finger or thumb amputated at the p o in t-o f- operation of the m achine; in 6 c a s e s , belts or pulleys w ere resp on sib le ; and in 6 ca ses autom atic feeding dev ices w ere involved .

The 29 lo s s -o f -u s e d isab lem ents included 17 fin ger, 4 hand, 2 arm , 2 leg , 2 foot, and 2 back in ju ries . F ourteen finger in ju r ie s , 3 hand in ju r ies , and an arm in jury resu lted fr o m m achine opera tion s. P rinting m achines accounted fo r 6 o f the 18 in ju ries . In four ca ses (two fin gers , a hand, and an arm in jury) the w orkm en w ere caught in the ro lls o f m ach in es; in the fifth (a fin ger in jury) the em ployee was caught betw een a belt and a pu lley; and in the sixth ca se a pro jectin g set screw on the m otor shaft caught a ring on a w orkm an s fin ger. C ir cu lar saws la cera ted the fin gers o f three w orkm en and the cutting d ies or knives o f a s litte r , a corn er cu tter, and a die p re s s accounted fo r two m ore fin ger in ju ries and a hand in jury. B elts on a b o x -co v e r in g m ach ine, a fold ing and gluing m ach ine, and a corru ga tor w ere resp on sib le fo r a hand and two fin ger in ju ries . Two m ore finger in ju ries w ere a scr ib e d to the wooden plunger o f a quad m achine and the b lock o f a wrapping m achine. The other fin ger in jury in this group o ccu rre d when a workm an was caught between the str ip p er arm and the fra m e of a m achine.

Handling operations w ere resp on sib le fo r a back, a leg , and two fin ger in ju ries . One w orkm an su ffered a herniated d isc when he attem pted to lift a co il o f w ire . The second accident o ccu rre d as a m aintenance crew was rem oving a gear fro m a d ie -cu ttin g m achine. When the w orkm en dropped the gear, it struck a s litte r o p e ra to r , fractu rin g h is leg . Another m aintenance accident o c cu rred during the m oving of a p r e s s . In this ca se , a m aintenance man was hurt when an 8 -in ch by 8 -in ch plank dropped on his fin ger. In the other accident o f this group, a t in -p re ss opera tor la cera ted his finger on a sheet o f tin plate as he was

14


placing it in the m achine. Infection d e v e loped and the perm anent d isab ility resu lted .

Two perm anent foot in ju ries , a hand, an arm , and a back injury resu lted fro m fa lls . Two o f these (an arm and a foot in jury) w ere fa lls on steps. In one instance, the steps led to the working p la tform of a printing m achine. The second foot in jury was due to a fa ll fro m a ladder and the back injury resu lted from a fa ll o ff a sca ffo ld . The hand injury o c cu rre d when a workm an who was rep lacing a tag on a ro ll of paper, fe ll fro m the second tier o f 50 -inch r o lls of paper.

F alling ob jects w ere resp on sib le fo r the rem aining two lo s s -o f -u s e in ju ries . In one ca se , a ro ll o f paper fe ll on a m oisten ing- m achine op era tor , in flicting a perm anent finger in jury. The second injury a ffected a leg . In that accident, a p r in tin g -p ress operator was in jured when a second w ork man pushed a cy linder head fro m the prin ter .

Temporary-Total Disabilities

N early 32 percen t o f the tem p ora ry - total d isab ilities w ere b ru ises or contusion s. Another 29 percen t w ere strains or sprains and 21 percen t w ere cuts or la c e r a tions. F ra ctu res ranked next in frequency, accounting fo r 11 percen t o f the total, and hernias and fo re ign bodies in eyes each amounted to 2 percen t of the total.

In general, hern ias and fra ctu res w ere the m ost sev ere tem p ora ry -to ta l d isa b ilitie s , averaging, resp ectiv e ly , 50 and 25 days o f lo st tim e p er ca se . Only 7 ca ses of occupational d isease w ere reported among the 1,423 tem p orary -to ta l d isa b ilities , but the average tim e lo s s fo r these ca se s , 22 days, was com paratively high. Strains and sprains averaged 15 days per in jury and burns and sca lds 14 days. M iscellaneous fore ign bodies (eye in ju ries) w ere the least sev ere o f all tem p ora ry -to ta l d isab ilities , averaging 3 days per in jury.

N early th ree-fou rth s o f the bru ises and contusions a ffected the lim bs of the body. F eet, leg s , and fin gers w ere m ost frequently in jured. Handling operations w ere resp on sib le fo r m ost o f these in ju ries which o ccu rre d when ob jects w ere dropped.

Strains and sprains w ere m ostly trunk in ju ries ; back in ju ries predom inated . Ankle and w rist in ju ries w ere frequent, h ow ever. R eflecting the amount o f manual handling w ork in the industry, the num ber of back

strains indicates that there is a great need fo r m ore training in the safe m ethods o f handling and lifting ob jects and m ateria ls . Many of the sprained w rists w ere a lso due to lifting operation s, w hereas sprained ankles w ere p r in cip a lly the resu lt of m is steps by w ork ers .

M ore than half the cuts and la cera tion s w ere finger or thumb in ju ries and another fifth involved hands. M ore extensive use of g loves m ight have prevented many of these in ju ries , but their use is n e cessa rily lim ited by the fact that m uch of the w ork is on m oving m ach inery w here g loves would c r e ate an additional hazard.

M ost of the fra ctu res a lso o ccu rre d during manual handling activ ities . Over half o f these in juries involved feet or toes ; m ost of the latter could have been prevented by the use o f s tee l-toed safety shoes. About a fourth of the fra ctu res w ere finger o r thumb in ju ries .

ACCIDENT ANALYSIS

A ccident rep orts frequently do not show the sp ec ific reason fo r the o ccu rre n ce of the particu lar events culm inating in an in jury. In m ost in stan ces, the only available in fo r m ation com es fro m the in jured p erson h im self, o r fro m w itnesses present at the tim e who m ay lack either the sk ill or the opportunity to investigate the event fully to determ ine the actual accident cause. In the analysis o f a large num ber o f accident rep orts , th ere fore , it is com m on to find a la rge prop ortion deficien t in the one item m ost im portant to the safety engineer. D espite these lim ita tion s, h ow ever, the analyst c