Home Treatment for Repetitive Stress Injury

With many of my friends and colleagues suffering from computer-related pain over the years, I’ve often asked myself why there is no governmental regulations about ergonomics in the office.

The reason is of course, purely political. In 2001, union groups proposed a labor regulation that would have required businesses to establish programs to prevent carpal tunnel, back sprains and other problems. The potential cost was at least $100 billion, and businesses balked, arguing the costs would far outweigh benefits. With a Republican Congress, under the waning Clinton administration, businesses overturned the proposal and the controversial regulations were never passed.

Today’s financial crises however, are pushing many Americans toward a more liberal view. If Senator Obama wins the election, he has promised to support increased oversight and regulations for ergonomic programs.

Ironically in today’s economic crises, it’s a time when business may be least able to afford the increased costs of protecting their workers’ safety. Additionally, the issue of instituting a program gets tricky in the details. Says TheHill.com:

Much of the intense back-and-forth on ergonomics between industry and unions is on how to define a work-related injury. For example, unions point out that many nursing home workers hurt their backs trying to lift and assist their patients. Industry groups say back ailments are common and it is not the government’s role to assess whether such an injury happened on the job or during recreational activities.

While I agree with industry groups, saying it’s not up to the government to decide whether injuries happen at home or work, that is not the real issue. In clinics world wide, it’s up to medical doctors and nurses questioning their patients, to find the cause of the injury. The government doesn’t really play a role there.

Still, should patients be treated for injuries that are partly caused by home and work problems? Many ergonomics issues arise because of overuse, or because of problems that stem from both home and work situations. It is a tricky question because even when it’s clear that a chronic injury develops at work, it is often because of repeated improper work techniques, poor overall health, lack of exercise, or other reason causing the person to become weak and prone to injury, along with the unsafe work conditions.

Should this really indemnify the business, that is, release them of the liability? My answer is no– businesses and government are still responsible for regulating safety for workers. People shouldn’t have to put their home lifestyles on hold in order to do their jobs. I believe that businesses are responsible for training their workers and making sure they follow safety procedures. Injuries will still happen, and businesses need to accept the risk and responsibility of putting their workers in risky situations, and provide the health and training programs that enable their workers to do their jobs safely.

Related posts:

1. Case Studies: Corporate Approaches to Ergonomics
2. Bush’s Secret Rule Blocks New Workers’ Safety Regulations