It seemed obvious to her. She was working in direct contact with a hazardous substance, and she had the classic symptoms of lead poisoning — abdominal pain, headaches, dizziness, fatigue — meaning her condition was potentially fatal. She reached a logical conclusion that her work on an old tailings site had compromised her nervous system.

As the health and safety manager at the time, I conducted an investigation into the control factors, the potential routes of entry, frequency of exposure, dust levels and the lead concentrations in the tailings. The reality was that there would have had to be a desert-like dust storm in northern Canada for staff to be exposed to anything even close to the occupational exposure limits for lead. The medical examination was also conclusive in revealing that her actual blood lead levels were far below those of a normal person. It turned out she did not have lead poisoning.

Sadly, this conclusion was made only after she had made herself sick with worry. It was a conclusion that should have been reached before work on site had started.

It might be surprising to learn that hazardous chemicals and substances cause the death of anywhere between 600 to 900 workers every year in New Zealand. There are an additional 20,000 to 30,000 new cases of occupational disease in New Zealand reported every year. These numbers are not unique to New Zealand; most developed countries face the same daunting numbers.

Compare the numbers of occupational illness fatalities to the officially reported 75 people who are fatally injured every year in New Zealand as a result of physical hazards at work. This number is easier to count and the hazards are easier to see.

The physical risks of a crushing machine, a sharp blade, mobile equipment, a deep pit or work on a high ledge are obvious to everyone. Furthermore, we intuitively know how to control these hazards with guards and barriers. We understand the importance of documenting this and training workers so everyone knows what they need to do and how they are protected.

Unlike the physical risks, hazardous substances are silent killers; some can seriously hurt you before you see anything, smell anything, or feel anything. Some you don’t even realise have caused damage until years later. The risks associated with hazardous substances (like lead, asbestos, benzene, hydrogen sulphide, arsenic, PCBs, fertilizers, and chlorine) are invisible and mysterious to most people.

“Health” has had a place next to “safety” (occupational health and safety) for years in New Zealand and around the world. But, if we are going to change the statistics and save our workers from chronic illnesses, acute poisons and premature deaths, we need to rethink the meaning and application of health and safety.

The simplest way to make this shift is to start treating the risks associated with hazardous substances in the same way we treat physical hazards. What are you exposed to, and how can we guarantee that you are protected? What information needs to be on a label or package? What training or education needs to be provided?

To address this imbalance, the Independent Taskforce for Health and Safety in New Zealand noted that there was a lack of accessibility to information associated with hazardous substances, and this was confounded by a lack of government accountability.

The taskforce called for serious reform to educate employers, protect employees and others as well as improve our ability to monitor occupational illness and disease. And now, the new regulator WorkSafe New Zealand and the new legislation, the proposed Health and Safety at Work Act, are poised to enact major changes based on these recommendations.

The new regulations will fully embrace the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals — the single internationally agreed system of chemical classification and hazard communication through labelling and Safety Data Sheets.

Compliance with this new legislation will result in sweeping changes. It is hoped that these changes will help avoid situations like that of the Australian hairdressing employees who suffered from skin irritations and respiratory illnesses as a result of what they thought was keratin hair straightening products. In this case, the product labels were written in Arabic. Once interpreted, it was discovered that the products were actually fabric softener containing carcinogenic formaldehyde.

As part of this shift, we all need to consider our individual responsibilities in the supply chain or lifecycle of hazardous substances. Under the new act, Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking (PCBU) will replace the term “employer,” reminding us that there are often multiple employers and stakeholders that need to work together to manage the health of workers.

Everyone has a role to play — from the manufacturer of a substance to the designer of the vessel, and from the transporter of the material to the PCBU whose workers are using, handling, or storing a hazardous substance or chemical. What do you know about a substance that needs to be passed to the next person in the chain to ensure everyone is protected?

And it’s not just those chemicals that come in bottles. There are health risks for people at abandoned mine sites, landfills or dump sites, and for those who work in old abandoned buildings or at sites where there is naturally occurring radiation. Regardless of the form hazardous substances can take, our obligation to review the hazards and controls, communicate the risks to those affected and confirm appropriate mitigation measures, equipment and emergency support is still the same.

Everyone has a right to go home safe and free from acute harm at the end of each day. But everyone also has a right to a long life, free from chronic illness, lung cancer, ischaemic heart disease, nervous system disorders, asbestosis, lead poisoning — and other diseases often caused by encounters with hazardous substances. I am forever thankful for my free lesson in northern Canada. But I often wonder — what if the story had ended differently?

Wendi Croft is the safety, health & environment manager for 91Ӱ��’s New Zealand operations. She has more than 15 years of experience as a safety professional; an environmental scientist; and a leader in business excellence, sustainability and corporate social responsibility. She is an elected member of the WasteMINZ Health and Safety Steering Committee, an appointed member of WorkSafe New Zealand’s Hazardous Substances Guidance Group, chair of the Business Leaders Health and Safety Forum’s Technical Advisory Group and a consultant on the WorkSafe New Zealand Specialist Consultancy Panel.
LinkdIn:

References:

McAllister, S, Derrett, S, Audas, R, Herbison, P, and Paul, C. (2013). ‘Do different types of financial support after illness or injury affect socio-economic outcomes? A natural experiment in New Zealand’. Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 85, pp 93-102.
Pearce, N, Dryson, E, Feyer, A-M, Gander, P, McCracken, S and Wagstaffe, M (2004). The Burden of Occupational Disease and Injury in New Zealand: Report to the Associate Minister of Labour. NOHSAC: Wellington.
Statistics New Zealand (2010).
INDEPENDENT TASKFORCE ON WORKPLACE HEALTH & SAFETY April 2013
Working Safer: A blueprint for health & safety at work, gov’t of NZ, August 2013

The post #SafetyforLife: Rethinking health and hazardous substances on worksites appeared first on Blog.

91Ӱ�� staff donated a fleet of brand new BMX bikes to the school, and we teach cycle skills to the Year 5 and 6 students on an ongoing basis. This programme is the first of its kind in New Zealand and gives children the opportunity to participate in monthly cycling skills and exercise programmes. Given the declining trends in cycling, beginning at an early age to teach children that cycling can be both fun and safe is extremely important — especially the part about safety.

You might remember in 1994 when it became law to wear a bike helmet in New Zealand. The hope was to reduce the number of serious cycling injuries and fatalities. At the time, an average of 21 people every year were dying on our roads.

While the next 10 years after 1994 saw a 50-percent drop in cyclist deaths, New Zealanders also cycled 50 percent less; effectively, fatality rates were unchanged. From this, it’s reasonable to conclude that the helmet law didn’t actually help reduce the risk, but rather only served to discourage the use of bicycles.

Should this be any surprise to those who understand safety factors? Helmets are just Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) after all — the last line of defence in any safety system. Just like a hard hat worn by a construction worker, the only guaranteed way to protect the worker is to eliminate or isolate the worker from the hazard in the first instance.

So what is the solution in the context of cycling? Some people blame cyclists, some blame drivers, some blame roads, and some blame all three! Some might like to argue that the only way to reach zero cyclist fatalities is to have zero cyclists on the road but, interestingly, New York City achieved zero fatalities by doing just the opposite.

In 2013, when New York City had an average of 20 cycling-related fatalities per year, the decision was made to make 6,000 bikes available to New Yorkers at 300 stations around the city. Soon enough, the number of trips taken by cyclists had tripled, and the number of fatality rates had dropped to zero. More cyclists meant everyone had to get used to sharing the road.

New York’s experience is just one of the reasons why cities and countries around the world are encouraging more cycling, not less. A city with a large population of regular cyclists is proving to be , community minded, more , more , more environmentally responsible, and, surprisingly,  for all residents. Personally, I love riding my cycle into work along Auckland’s waterfront on the shared cycle path. Yes, it’s beautiful, and the exercise and freedom are a definite bonus, but it’s the cost I like the best. If I ride my bike, I don’t have to pay for public transport or parking (91Ӱ�� even provides free bike cages, lockers and showers), and I don’t have to find time or money for exercise classes.

Sadly, when I tell people I cycle to work, I get the same response: “You are so brave!” It is a stark reminder that the number one barrier to cycling is safety. But whose responsibility is it to ensure my safety as I cycle on public transport routes alongside other commuters and drivers heading to their jobs?

This is why the Rongomai Cycle Programme is a great way to teach our children the importance of cycle safety, while promoting the benefits of cycling as well. The more awareness that is brought to our future and current cyclists, the more likely we will be accepting of them on our roads.

Set to be in force in late 2015, the Health and Safety Reform Bill is poised to change the face of safety and make the responsibilities far more wide-reaching and all encompassing. Under the proposed act, all Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking (PCBU) will have an obligation for the health and safety of those affected by their activities — including cyclists. This obligation will extend to all New Zealand employers, contractors, designers, manufacturers, importers, construction companies, truck drivers and government agencies.

So what does this mean? Car manufacturers may develop alarm sensors to detect the presence of people on the road. Transport trucks may be fitted with mirror extensions and side guards. And where PCBUs don’t act, it means the regulators can step in. London is already proposing a full ban on all trucks that are not equipped with this basic safety equipment.

Fortunately, we have already started on this journey. Transport agencies, construction companies and integrated infrastructure firms like 91Ӱ�� are already starting to consider people who cycle and provide comprehensive cycling infrastructure, including purpose-built cycleways in their urban-design and transport-planning work.

Auckland’s first urban cycleway is nearly complete and will connect the downtown to the Northwest Cycleway via the newly constructed Grafton Gully Cycleway. Further up the cycleway, the Causeway Alliance (upgrade to Highway 16 in Auckland) has committed to maintaining unimpeded access for cyclists during construction.

Local councils and businesses are exploring options like the bike-share programmes that 91Ӱ�� has sponsored in Christchurch and San Francisco, and many have embraced the role they can play in changing behaviours and connecting communities in our cities, providing education opportunities for the public and businesses.

Efforts such as the Rongomai Cycle Programme help to build the confidence and skills these young cyclists need, and also prepare them to be responsible road users in the future. Recent studies have even shown that students who cycle have better road awareness and success rates when they take their drivers test.

In New Zealand today, only 1 percent of our commuting is done on a bicycle, but 46 percent of standard travel commutes are less than 5 kilometers long — a perfect distance for a bicycle. The number one barrier is safety, but I believe that is poised to change for the better.

Comment below to share your thoughts on the importance of cycle safety. Be sure to use the #SafetyforLife hashtag when you share this post on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook.

Wendi Croft is an 91Ӱ�� safety, health & environment manager based in Auckland, New Zealand. Originally from Canada, Wendi lives in Auckland with her husband and three children. When she isn’t working, she enjoys hiking, camping, kayaking and exploring New Zealand with her family.
LinkedIn:

References:
Predicting Accident Rates for Cyclists and Pedestrians, 2006, NZTA Lorries without cycle safety equipment to be banned from London. 2014. City of Portland – violation study. Harbour Sport Study.

The post #SafetyforLife: Cycling safely into the future appeared first on Blog.