Developing and implementing an ergonomic audit for manufacturingDeveloping and Implementing an
Ergonomic Audit for Manufacturing
By: Gary S.Louie firstname.lastname@example.org
For: QAS 515-41 Human Factors
Jim Clauson, Summer03
CSUDH MSQA Program
July 28, 2003
Table of Contents
Proactive and Reactive II
Costs as it relates to III
Example of Injury IV
Work Experiences, Ergonomic Concerns 12
Example of Ergonomic Audit Checklist
(see enclosed MS Excel spreadsheet for
four pages plus back page of audit form)
Useful Equations and Guidelines
2The purpose of this paper is to develop and implement an ergonomic audit for use in a manufacturing environment.With the emergence of ergonomic-related disorders such as Cumulative Trauma Disorders (CTD) that include Carpel Tunnel Syndrome (CTS), Tendonitis, and Tension Neck Syndrome, appearing as a result of work activities, it is necessary for companies to consider any number of different methods to assist in preventing these disorders from occurring.1 One method to help a company in reaching this goal is to develop and implement an audit specifically focused on ergonomic issues in the workplace.An audit is defined by the American Society for Quality (ASQ) organization as a planned, independent, and documented assessment to determine whether agreed-upon requirements are being met. 2 Put simply, it is a method for double-checking whether a company or its departments are following the procedures correctly.It is but one tool that a company can use to check for effectiveness in this case, ergonomics within the workplace.A number of other tools exist for purposes related to ergonomic analysis and are listed in Appendix I.Suffice to say, an organization can help their workforce and also positively impact their bottom line by implementing any combination of these tools within their ergonomics program.
Concerning the topic of costs, an audit makes an impact in this fashion it can be viewed as preventative in nature and with the time and effort spent early in the process, it can help identify problems while promoting problem assessment before they become severe.
As seen in Appendix II, the dollars saved by investing in preventative activities such as education, audits, and exercises can be enormous in terms of reducing if not eliminating ergonomic injuries.As one recent report by the State of California indicated, the impact of ergonomic injuries to workers in California was conservatively estimated at $4 billion dollars and covering a third of all workplace injuries.
3 Where does one begin in establishing an audit for ergonomics? Especially for a company that does not have an established program for ergonomics, the minimum that a company can start is by reviewing existing injuries from the workplace.Either the OSHA log or any documented record that a company has on injuries will suffice no injury should be dismissed as even near-miss accidents could be caused by an ergonomics-related situation.For a manufacturing company, the next item would be to separate the injuries into categories: office versus manufacturing floor, light work (inspection) versus heavy work (material handling), departments, body parts.
Whichever category or categories are used to differentiate the injuries is acceptable as long as the company realizes it must be useful and meaningful.See Appendix III for one example of how this categorization is done.In this example, the Pareto Principle was applied (ie-
1 Kroemer, Karl H.E.(1997).Ergonomic Design of Material Handling Systems.
Boca Raton: CRC Press
LLC Lewis Publishers.Table 2-2, pg.15-17 and Table 2-3, pg.23-24.
Cumulative Trauma Disorders in the Workplace Bibliography, Sep, 1995, retrieved on June 28, 2003,
from , section on Management of Upper Extremity Cumulative
Trauma Disorders, Table 1, pg.119.
2 Russell, J.P.
editor (2000).The Quality Audit Handbook: Principles, Implementation, and Use (2nd ed).
Milwaukee: ASQ Quality Press, pg.
3 Ergonomic Injuries in California report dated March 31, 2001, retrieved on July 21, 2003, , pg.i.
3prioritizing the highest incidence of injuries) to determine where the company should focus their attention.In this case, strains were the major problem area since they comprised over 66% of the total injuries incurred at the workplace.
In addition, attaching a dollar figure is meaningful to determine if the largest incidence of injuries also happens to be the costliest.In some situations, this may not happen so it is helpful to apply cost figures to check this correlation.For another example using the Pareto Principle, there is a report generated by the University of Maryland on OSHA statistics indicating the breakdown by injury condition and the associated insurance cost in reference to CTDs.4 Here are a number of different work environments that the author has been exposed to over the years: extrusion and casting plant, a microelectronics facility, a mechanical and electrical assembly operation, packaging for a specialty clothing manufacturer, and screen printing operations.In each of these facilities, there were situations that exposed the employee to ergonomic-related problems (see Appendix IV)
.Here is a breakdown of common work areas within any manufacturing environment: 1) Office Administration/Computer Workstations 2) Quality Assurance Laboratory 3) Manufacturing/Production Floor 4) Inventory/Material Handling 5) Facilities/Maintenance Here are groupings of areas that are common within a manufacturing facility and that have potential ergonomic impact to the employee: 5 1) Workstation design affected by such factors as reach, sitting, standing 2) Material Handling concerns such as lifti
Facility 11Cold Storage WarehouseAudit ChecklistScientific Certification Systems2000 Powell StreetSuite 600, Emeryville, CA 94608Phone: 510-452-8000Fax: 510-452-68862/M00; 00; 00;/M00; 00; 00;Auditor NameRebecca AndersonAuditor's contact phone number(510) 504-0810Auditor's email OfficeScientific Certification Systems dba NutriCleanCorporate Facility Address
(City, State/Province, Area/Region, Postal Code, Country)2000 Powell Street, Suite 600, Emeryville, CA 94608Phone Number510-452-8000Fax Number510-452-8001Audited Facility NameWestside ProduceAudited Facility Address
(City, State/Province, Area/Region, Postal Code, Country)Contact PersonGarrett PatricioPhone Numbercell (415) 518-9183, office (559) 659-3025Fax Number(559) 659-0169Email other type of audit has been conducted at this facility (e.g., Organic, SQF, FPA, BRC)Size of Facility40,000 sq ft.Property Size11 AcresNeighboring Land UseFarmsBuilding Material, Exterior WallsMetalBuilding Material, Interior WallsMetal/InsulationBuilding Material, FloorsConcreteBuilding Material, Exterior RoofMetalBuilding Material, Interior CeilingInsulationAreas of the Facility Excluded from the AuditNoneDate of Audit Exit Meeting7/20/2011Length of Audit8:15 AM - 2:30 PMFacility PersonnelGarrett PatricioDate of Last Audit7/29/2010Product(s) HandledCantaloupes/HoneydewsFood Safety Total Score (H9](98.53%RatingSUPERIORFood Security Total Score ( Improvement Unsatisfactory Not ApplicableAutomatic Failure
Visitor and Contractor Access ControlFacility Inspection/Food Safety Program ReviewPest Control Program and ProceduresGeneral Operational Practices and ProgramForeign Material Control
Place a Checkmark In-house Water TestGroundsBuilding Size, Construction & DesignToilet FacilitiesBuilding Size, Construction and DesignEnvironmental ControlTraining and EducationTraining and EducationSECTION A:
GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURESSub CategoryIceManagement Commitment & ReviewManagement Commitment & ReviewEmployee PracticesEmployee PracticesSanitary FacilitiesBuilding Structures/FixturesPlumbingWater Source TestHand Washing FacilitiesWaterGroundsPest Control Program and ProceduresHold and Release ProgramPackaging MaterialsIncoming Products3/M00; 00; 00;/M00; 00; 00;Satisfactory
Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory Not ApplicableAutomatic Failure
GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES
DOCUMENT CONTROLSub CategoryDocument ControlPreventive Maintenance ProgramReceiving: In-bound InspectionStorageProduct Description(s), Process-Flow Diagram(s), Hazard
Analysis Worksheet(s)HACCP Plan(s) and CCPsTraining and EducationAllergensCorrective ActionsSECTION B:
HACCP PLAN AND PROCESS PRACTICESTransportation and DistributionCleaning Equipment and ChemicalsRecord KeepingVerification ProceduresSub CategoryManagement Commitment and ReviewHACCP/Hazard Prevention ProgramMonitoring ProceduresPreventive MaintenanceReceiving, Storage and DistributionCleaning Equipment and ChemicalsCleaning, Sanitation and HousekeepingValidation ProceduresCleaning, Sanitation and Housekeeping3Audit SummaryPoints scoredPoints PossiblePercent (%)Points scoredPoints PossiblePercent (%) Storage Facility PracticesTitleCold Storage Facility PracticesFDA Registration NumberYesTOTAL SCORE144144100.00%Food Security Final SummaryPoints ScoredPoints Possible% PercentageTOTAL SectionFood Safety SectionPreventive Maintenance ProgramPoints ScoredPoints Possible% PercentageTraining and EducationReceiving, Storage, and DistributionSub CategoryManagement Commitment and ReviewTOTAL SCOREAllergensPest Control Program and ProceduresEmployee PracticesTraining and EducationSanitary FacilitiesWaterGroundsFood Safety (GMP) Final SummaryGMP FOOD SAFETY ASSESSMENT DETAILED REPORT AND
FOOD SAFETY AND FOOD SECURITY FINAL SUMMARY SCOREGeneral Operational Practices and ProceduresCleaning Equipment and ChemicalsManagement Commitment and ReviewBuilding Size, Construction and DesignHACCP/Hazard Prevention ProgramDocument ControlCOLD STORAGE FACILITY PRACTICESFood Safety SectionOther SectionSECTION A: GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURESSub CategorySECTION C: DOCUMENT CONTROLCleaning, Sanitation and HousekeepingSECTION B: HACCP PLAN AND PROCESS COMPLIANCE10 pts7 pts4 ptsAUTOAutomatic Unsatisfactory (Refer to Next ApplicableThe particular question doesn't apply to the facility in question or are not controlled at the facility.UnsatisfactoryAUDIT SCORING SYSTEM SCOREThe particular question doesn't apply to the facility in question or are not controlled at the facility.Not ApplicableCritical food safety hazards, which compromise the safety of the product, are observed.A) No written Food Safety Program in place.
B) Records Review: No records available.Needs ImprovementMajor food safety hazards, which may not immediately compromise the safety of the product, are observed.Partial improvements in operational practices and procedures are needed to avoid food safety hazards.A) Written Food Safety Program in place and/or needs major improvement.
B) Records Review: Some records may be unavailable and/or current.Needs ImprovementSerious food safety hazards, which may eventually compromise the safety of the product, are observed.Significant improvements in operational practices and procedures are needed to avoid food safety hazards.Needs ImprovementNeeds ImprovementA) Written Food Safety Program in place and/or needs serious improvement.
B) Records Review: Very few records may be available and/or current.Minor food safety hazards, which may not immediately compromise the safety of the product, are observed.Minimum improvements in operational practices and procedures are needed to avoid food safety hazards.Needs ImprovementA) Written Food Safety Program in place and/or needs minor improvement.
B) Records Review: Very few records may be unavailable and/or not current.Needs ImprovementA