<![CDATA[Kelley Integrity Safety Solutions, LLC

<![CDATA[Kelley Integrity Safety Solutions, LLC - Blog]]>Sat, 14 Feb 2026 07:54:41 -0700Weebly<![CDATA[OSHA: Employers must Post Their OSHA 300A Summary]]>Sat, 26 Jan 2019 16:59:32 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/osha-employers-must-post-their-osha-300a-summary

The Occupational Safety & Health Act of 1970 provides all workers in the United Sates with certain rights and protections regarding their personal safety and health while on the job. One of the basic rights granted to workers is the right to know about the serious injuries and illnesses that are occurring in their workplace. Employers with more than 10 employees are required to keep and maintain a log of the serious injuries and illnesses that occur in their workplaces.

Injured Worker with Opioids

Let’s look at some basics of what is referred to as the OSHA 300 Log:

Employers only enter “Recordable” incidents. There are many criteria for determining whether or not an injury or illness is a “Recordable,” however the fundamental requirement is if the employee required more than basic “first aid” treatment. A Recordable incidents also includes all fatalities, days away from work, job transfers, as well as any treatment that goes beyond first aid. The key is understanding OSHA’s definition of “First Aid.”
Must maintain 5 years of OSHA 300 logs on file (OSHA would likely request these records if completing a comprehensive enforcement inspection and can issue fines for failure to have them.)
Post a Summary of the OSHA 300 Log annually in a conspicuous location where for all employees to review it. This posting must be maintained between February 1st thru April 30th of each year.

First Aid Kit

The idea is pretty simple. By making employees aware of where the serious injuries and illnesses are occurring, within their workplace, employees can better prepare themselves for the potential hazards they’ll face when entering or working in those areas.

OSHA notes that employers with 10 or fewer employees or who work in certain low-hazard industries are not required to post the summary. So, if your workplace has more than 10 employees, look around and find the OSHA 300A – Summary and review it. If you don’t find it, ask your supervisor or site safety professional for its location.

]]><![CDATA[10 Christmas Holiday Safety Tips]]>Sat, 01 Dec 2018 07:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/10-christmas-holiday-safety-tips

Well, the holidays are here again. And with the arrival of the season, come the tendencies to want to decorate. As you're sprucing up your home this Holiday Season, keep an eye out for some of these common mistakes, which can create fire hazards, and other safety shortfalls. Here's 10 important tips on how to keep your home and your family safe from fire and injury this Holiday Season.

#1. Carefully inspect holiday lighting each year and discard any light strands with frayed cords, cracked lamp holders, or loose connections. When replacing bulbs, unplug the entire light string and be sure to match the voltage and the wattage to the original bulb.

#2. Always turn off the holiday lights when you leave the house unattended or when going to bed.

#3. Use an outdoor timer certified by CSA International to switch your lights on and off. Lights should only be turned on after 7 p.m. to avoid the electricity rush hour

#4. Purchase a freshly cut tree, as they are more resistant to ignition

#5. If you have a live Christmas Tree, keep it watered and away from open fireplaces and candles

#6. Never connect more than one extension cord together; instead use a single cord that is long enough to reach the outlet without stretching, but not so long that it can get easily tangled.

#7. Always use a GFCI (ground-fault circuit interrupter) plugged in at the source.

#8. When hanging outdoor lights, keep electrical connectors off the ground and away from metal rain gutters. Use insulated tape or plastic clips instead of metal nails or tacks to hold them in place.

#9. Using a ladder when you put up lights? Choose the correct type of ladder for the job and double check for it for proper certification and rating. Inspect ladders thoroughly before each use. And make certain to use fall protection when working at heights.

#10. Test your smoke alarms monthly to make sure they work and be sure to install smoke and carbon monoxide (CO) alarms on every level of your home -- especially near sleeping areas

With just a little bit of planning and a little attention to common household Christmas hazards can help ensure that this Christmas Season goes off without any hick-ups. All of us at Kelley Integrity Safety Solutions hope this year's Holiday Season is truly one to remember.

]]><![CDATA[Thanksgiving Safety Tips]]>Mon, 05 Nov 2018 17:04:45 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/thanksgiving-safety-tips The countdown to Thanksgiving, along with all the turkey, stuffing and pumpkin pie has begun. This particular holiday is all about giving thanks and spending a day with friends, family and loved ones.

But cooking the festive Thanksgiving meal can lead to some very unwelcome consequences, if one is not careful. Thanksgiving Day is the pinnacle for home-cooking fires, accounting for about three tims as many fires as any other day of the year. And fires can lead to injuries, deaths, or property loss, so make sure to follow some safety suggestions for this holiday.

Each year between 2011 and 2013, Thanksgiving Day produced an average of 2,100 residential building fires, resulting in $28 million in property damage, 50 injuries, and 10 deaths, according to the U.S National Fire Protection Association.

What causes most Thanksgiving fires? More than 71 percent of fires were attributed to cooking, and the highest percentage of fires (24.6 percent) occurred between noon and 3 p.m., the report said.

Leaving food unattended while it was cooking was the leading cause of Thanksgiving cooking fires, according to the NFPA. You’ll want to visit with your guests during this holiday, but it’s far more important to pay attention to what’s in the oven or on the stovetop so that you don’t become a statistic.

Also, assign guests items to bring for the meal. Having a potluck-style Thanksgiving dinner will prevent you from doing all the cooking, so you won’t be trying to cook multiple dishes at once. Giving your undivided attention to one dish at a time will help to keep food from burning and starting fires.

And when you want to chat with your guests while you’re cooking, call them into the kitchen with you. Leaving the room while food is in the oven or on the burners is a risky move that makes your home insurance provider sweat.

Don't Wear LOOSE clothing!!! Let’s set the scene: You’re wearing a baggy sweater while sauteing vegetables in oil, and you divert your attention to talk to a family member. A fire ignites, and, in a panic, you attempt to move the pan to the sink to run water over it. When you move the pan, your loose sleeve connects with the flames and, in a flash, your entire arm is on fire.

There are several things wrong with this scenario. The first is that you should avoid wearing loose-fitting clothes while cooking, as it puts you at an increased risk to catch fire and get injured. Secondly, never move a pot that’s on fire, or try to put out a grease or oil fire with water. It’s best to put a lid on top of the pot to smother the fire, leave the pot where it is, and turn the heat off when the fire has been tamed.

Keep fire hazards away from the stove. Just like ill-fitting clothing is a hazard that can easily ignite, so are things like potholders, wooden utensils, towels, and flowers. Keep these items away from burners and the oven to reduce the chances of having a kitchen fire.

It’s also important to keep pets out of the kitchen. Say you just turned off the burner, but Fido comes sniffing around, puts his paws up on the counter, and accidentally slides a towel on top of the still-hot burner without you noticing, causing it to be engulfed in flames. Avoid this type of scenario by keeping the dog in a gated room and by keeping other hazards at bay.

Know the biggest risks.

Frying puts you at the greatest risk for home fires. So if you’re deep-frying the turkey this year, take extra precautions.

Keep the fryer away from the house and on even ground. The fryer should be set up more than 10 feet away from the home, and on level ground to keep the oil even.
Completely thaw and dry the turkey first. Only fry a turkey after it has been fully thawed and dried off to reduce the possibility of splattering grease, which can ignite fires.
Keep children and pets away, and have a fire extinguisher nearby. The last thing you want on Thanksgiving Day is for a child or pet to knock over the fryer and get injured.

If you experience a Thanksgiving Day fire

The majority of non-fatal Thanksgiving Day fire injuries occurred when people tried to fight the fires themselves. If your home catches fire when you’re preparing Thanksgiving dinner, and you don’t have a fire extinguisher on hand, just get everyone out of the house.
Keep yourself, your family, and your guests safe. You can call 911 when everyone has evacuated.

The good news is that property damage and liability coverage for incidents involving fires are typically eligible for coverage under standard home insurance policy That’s something to be thankful for.

]]><![CDATA[OSHA National Emphasis Program]]>Wed, 03 Oct 2018 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/osha-national-emphasis-program

Due to a recent spike in trenching fatalities, OSHA has updated the NEP program on preventing trenching and excavation collapses. The Department of Labor, on October 1st, issued an update to its National Emphasis Program (NEP) on Trenching & Excavation Safety. Excavation work is one of the most dangerous construction activities.

OSHA's NEP will increase education and enforcement efforts while its inspectors will record trenching and excavation inspections in a national reporting system, and each OSHA Area Office will develop outreach programs.

"Removing workers from and helping workers identify trenching hazards is critical," said Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Loren Sweatt. "OSHA will concentrate the full force of enforcement and compliance assistance resources to help ensure that employers are addressing these serious hazards."

This emphasis program began October 1, 2018, with a three-month period of education and prevention outreach. During this period, OSHA will continue to respond to complaints, referrals, hospitalizations, and fatalities. Enforcement activities will begin after the outreach period and remain in effect until canceled. OSHA-approved State Plans are expected to have enforcement procedures that are at least as effective as those in this instruction.

OSHA has developed a series of compliance assistance resources to help keep workers safe from trenching and excavation hazards. The trenching and excavation webpage at (https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/trenchingexcavation/index.html) provides information on trenching hazards and solutions.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA's role is to help ensure these conditions for America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance.

]]><![CDATA[The Americans with disabilities act]]>Mon, 03 Sep 2018 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/americans-with-disabilities-act

As many are aware, it is illegal under both federal and state laws to discriminate against an employee based on his or her medical condition regarding employment decisions. These decisions include hiring, firing, promoting, demoting, training and job assignments based on an applicant’s medical conditions.

It makes sense that employees would not even want their employers and/or coworkers having knowledge of their private medical conditions. And there are laws in place which prevent employers from even asking questions related to an applicant’s medical conditions. In my opinion, when it comes to safety sensitive positions and/or safety sensitive tasks, this policy can cause some serious problems for employees and employers alike.

This statistic alone should be reason enough to add certain items to first aid kits which would allow employers to be better prepared to accommodate employees with diabetes, during a diabetic emergency.

But what about Epilepsy? Epilepsy is a neurological disorder
marked by sudden recurrent episodes of sensory disturbance,

loss of consciousness, and/or convulsions, associated with abnormal electrical activity in the brain.

Seizures, abnormal movements or behavior due to unusual electrical activity in the brain, are a symptom of epilepsy. But not all people who appear to have seizures have epilepsy, a group of related disorders characterized by a tendency for recurrent seizures.

Employers are now at a serious disadvantage in protecting themselves, and their employees when they are unable to ask basic medical questions of an employee and/or applicant. It’s not about discriminating against employees with medical conditions. It’s about employers being prepared in the event of a medical emergency.

Well, what about an employee who suffers from occasional seizures? Well, if employers are unaware of the condition, then supervisors may feel comfortable asking this employee to work at heights, or even operate certain machines and equipment, that can cause serious injury or death to an employee.

I am in no way advocating for a change in the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), but I do encourage employees to be forthcoming if they have medical conditions that could potentially

impact their own safety or the safety of those working around them. Employers should be afforded the opportunity to proactively protect their workers from harm. After all, once any serious injury or fatality has occurred, it’s the employer who is solely held accountable.

]]><![CDATA[What Is Continuous Learning?]]>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/what-is-continuous-learning

As a professional safety training provider, we spend a lot of time discussing options in course content development techniques, processes, content delivery methods and measurable objectives. One concept in workplace safety training is what is referred to as “continuous training” and it’s a concept companies should be familiar with.

Continuous learning, also known as constant learning, is the concept of always expanding your knowledge to gain new skills, ideas and expertise. For businesses, continuous learning is about encouraging their employees to constantly learn by providing them with the tools that facilitate the learning.

Stimulating the brain with the continual learning of new information not only enhances the cognitive ability of the individual, including increased problem-solving ability and memory, it also benefits the company. Most companies may qualify for a reduction in workers compensation rates or credits anytime qualified training is conducted. So, don’t ever forget to forward any of your employee training records to your insurance provider’s risk management department.

Now, the real benefit to continuous learning is not really about the dollars and cents…. the real benefit should appear obvious when we look at long term job performance. It’s no secret that well-informed and properly trained workers make much safer workers who have far fewer injuries.

My theory is that as humans, we’re continuously expanding our knowledge, from cradle to
grave. Even well into adulthood, our minds are continuously acquiring, sorting and storing information for later recall. Some of the information retained may be extremely valuable for a lifetime while other information may be immediately rendered completely useless. Why not step back and just contemplate, “What is it that my employees are actually learning?”

Are they learning valuable knowledge and skills that will increase their overall value to the business? Are they learning that all the company’s safety policies and procedures were implemented in an effort to ensure their safe return home each evening? Or are they learning about the newest shortcut that was recently discovered, negative behaviors, cultures, and slangs.

Implementation of a Continuous Learning Program can help demonstrate your company’s commitment to worker safety while ensuring that the information that employees learn is valuable information that’s also beneficial to your workplace. It's also a great way to counter the negative tendencies to learn that newest shortcut or at-risk behavior. A positive workplace safety culture of continuous improvement is just as contagious as the negative workplace safety culture.

]]><![CDATA[Is safety training really the answer?]]>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/is-safety-training-really-the-answer

“Is safety training really the answer?” It’s a question a potential client recently asked me. And to be honest, it’s a question that’s probably asked more often than most people realize. And probably just as common is the answer, “NO! It’s not.”

Anyway, this employer explained that he recognizes serious safety issues regarding employee safety performance, at his organization. Serious policies and procedures are not being followed.

Required employee safety observations are only completed by approximately 30% of the required workforce. And an astonishing 40% of all new hires will be injured within their first year of service.

I want to start by looking at the first one I mentioned, “Policies and procedures are not being followed.” There are many reasons why workers may not follow their employer’s safety policies and procedures, or standard operating procedures. The first thing that comes to my mind is, “Are workers aware of the policy or procedure?” If they’re not, it’s an easy fix… make them aware of the policies and procedures that relate to their work activities.

If workers are aware of the policies and procedures, yet decide not to follow them, the first thing that comes to mind is, “When the employee became aware of the policies and procedures, was accountability tied to the message?” What I mean is, did we explain that these are the policies and procedures and that we expect them to be followed each and every time, each and every day? Or this is the way this job is done, and we expect it to be done in this manner each and every time. Now, accountability relates to the consequences for not following the policies and procedures as required or performing a task as directed. Tying workplace policies and procedures to the consequences of not following them is one of the ‘MOST IMPORTANT’ principles of a successful safety management system (SMS).

Another important aspect is, “Do managers and supervisors follow the policies and procedures that they ask employees to follow?” If the supervisor walks into a PPE-required area without the required PPE, what message does it send to their workers? It sends a message that the PPE must not really be that important.

Managers and supervisors should lead by example and follow the same policies and procedures that they’re asking employees to follow. That alone makes an important, yet unspoken statement.

Now. With regards to “Required employee safety observations or safety audits are not being performed.” Once again, there are many reasons why this may happen. Are workers aware of the requirement to complete the audit? Are supervisors providing workers the needed time to complete the audits? Are managers and supervisors encouraging their workers to complete the audits? And this is going to sound redundant, but is there accountability for not completing them? If the answer to any of these questions is “No,” then that’s a great place to start.

Finally, I believe that the statistics provided by this employer, “40% of all new hires will be injured in their first year of service” is a direct result of the first two we just discussed. See, policies and procedures are in place for a purpose. And ‘employee safety’ is the reason why the workplace safety policies and procedures are required under federal law. So, when they’re not being followed, it’s no coincidence that injuries continue to occur.

What it boils down to is that safety training is not always the answer. In fact, more times than not… that’s the case. The problem is usually a systematic failure within the management structure. And until each member of management understands their responsibility under federal workplace safety statutes, to provide a workplace free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause serious injury or death, the organization will struggle to correct this. That is…. until a worker is seriously injured or killed. At that point, the government will step in and help initiate the needed changes while proposing severe civil or criminal penalties.

]]><![CDATA[Measuring Objectives with virtual reality]]>Fri, 01 Jun 2018 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/measuring-objectives-with-virtual-reality

With the emergence of virtual reality over the past few years, immersive gaming is well on its way to becoming mainstream. With the reduction in the cost for required hardware and software, more and more people now have the opportunity to experience VR in a game setting. However, gaming is just the tip of the iceberg when we talk about the potential applications for virtual reality.

I'm going to explain why we’re so excited about VR and how we’re utilizing it to make courses more engaging, more interactive, and more effective.

As a professional safety training provider, it’s our job to understand how to develop, design and implement safety training programs. After all, it’s what we do. At Kelley Integrity Safety Solutions, we use every stage of the ADDIE model in the development of all our safety training programs. ADDIE is the acronym for:

A = Analysis (is training the answer?)
D = Develop (develop measurable objectives/what do we want them to learn?)
D = Design (design content that will achieve the objectives)
I = Implement (Train the workers)
E – Evaluate (Did the training achieve the desired results?)

This final step, “Evaluate,” means to evaluate or measure the effectiveness of the training and has long been accomplished via quizzes, tests, or exams. These measuring strategies are great for verifying knowledge transfer and are often used as documentation to verify compliance with training requirements, as well.

However, the “E” in “ADDIE” is long overdue for an overhaul. And virtual reality provides new tools in measuring the effectiveness of a safety training program. The exam scores are still just as important in verifying knowledge transfer and as documentation that training was conducted, but virtual reality gives us the opportunity to take a participant to a virtual workplace where they can demonstrate an understanding of the concepts learned.

One application that we’re very excited about is in our Online Lockout/Tagout (LOTO) Training Program. Here, we have developed several virtual workplaces where upon successful completion of the video-based course content, participants can step into a virtual workplace and use an actual Energy Control Procedure to safely shutdown, disable, and lock out machines and equipment prior to service or maintenance activities. This allows participant’s the opportunity to safely demonstrate an understanding of the importance of following the sequence of lockout in written Energy Control Procedure, as well as, the very important sequence for the release from lockout.

This application is just one of the many potential uses of virtual or augmented reality. See, Unity Engine and Unreal Engine, both possess what is referred to as a, “Physics Engine.” This makes it possible to have realistic locomotion, gravity, inertia, or kinetic energies just to name a few. This very complicated physics engine is what makes it possible to create realistic scenarios where users can interact with objects in the scene. However, this impressive technology is just one of the many benefits to implementing VR in safety training programs.

Virtual reality scenes can also be opened without leaving learning management systems (LMS) and can also utilize Learning Record Stores (LRS) to generate and store records generated within the virtual workplace. Brief statements generated in the virtual reality scene may read like, “Participant (name) successfully closed and locked out valve number 212 successfully.” These series of statements can create a record for each participant that helps verify, as well as document their understanding of the course content. When these records are generated and stored in conjunction with traditional test/exam scores, it creates a much more comprehensive overview of the learner’s understanding.

And finally, it’s highly accepted industry-wide, that if learners do not practice the knowledge and/or skills learned, within 30 days of a training, much of the knowledge and skills acquired are lost forever. Virtual reality provides the ability to practice skills in a safe environment and in a manner that utilizes a participant’s motor skills, which ensures better knowledge and skill retention.

]]><![CDATA[Don't Forget to check Your Smoke Alarm Batteries]]>Wed, 01 Nov 2017 19:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/dont-forget-to-check-your-smoke-alarm-batteries

Remember on November 5th, when you set your clock back an hour, test your smoke alarm batteries, also. See, according to the NFPA, or the National Fire Protection Association, between 2009-2013, smoke alarms sounded in more than half (53%) of the home fires reported to U.S. fire departments. Three out of every five home fire deaths resulted from fires in homes with no smoke alarm (38%) or no working smoke alarm (21%).

House Fire

Research shows that 30 years ago, you had about 17 minutes to escape a house fire. Today it’s down to three to four minutes. Sometimes you may have as little as two minutes to get out. The reason: newer homes and the furniture inside them actually burn faster. And a lot faster.

In case you've never heard, there's also an old saying, "Close Before you Doze." Closing bedroom doors before going to bed can also help keep extremely toxic smoke from entering the room as you sleep. And may increases the time you have to escape.

Having a fire escape plan is another critical element to help protect yourself and your family during a house fire. But simply having a fire escape plan and knowing how to implement it are two separate things. So, once you’ve developed a fire escape plan for your home, it’s important for everyone to practice it. And for children, it can actually be fun to practice and can instill in them the importance of fire safety planning at a young age. Something they may take into adulthood with them.

American Red Cross

The American Red Cross has an easy worksheet to help you create your family’s very own fire escape plan. Simply download and print it below and start yours today. Use the graph to draw your home’s floor plan, and plot your home fire escape routes.

American Red Cross Home Fire Escape Plan.pdf
File Size:	199 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

Tips for Creating and Practicing Your Escape Plan:
• Everyone in your household should know two
ways to escape from each room in your home.
• Decide where to meet once you get outside.
• If a fire starts, you may have just two minutes
to get to safety. So time your fire drills and
find out: what’s your escape time?
• Smoke is dangerous. Practice low crawling.
• Teach household members what to do if their
clothes catch fire: stop, drop and roll

]]><![CDATA[OSHA Issues Enforcement Guidance for respirable crystaline silica]]>Fri, 20 Oct 2017 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/osha-issues-enforcement-guidance-for-respirable-crystaline-silicaIssued October 19, 2017

MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS

THROUGH: THOMAS GALASSI - Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary

FROM: PATRICK J. KAPUST, Acting Director - Directorate of Enforcement Programs

SUBJECT
Interim Enforcement Guidance for the Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard, 29 CFR 1926.1153
This memorandum provides interim enforcement guidance to Compliance Safety and Health Officers (CSHOs) for enforcing 29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica. The Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction standard establishes a new 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 µg/m3, and an action level (AL) of 25 µg/m3.
As you know, OSHA has been enforcing the Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction standard since September 23, 2017. However, for the first 30 days, OSHA offered compliance assistance in lieu of enforcement for those employers who were making good faith efforts to comply with the new construction standard. Effective October 23, 2017, OSHA will fully enforce all appropriate provisions of the Silica in Construction standard. This memorandum will serve as interim enforcement guidance while the standard's companion compliance directive is proceeding through the review process. It will expire when the compliance directive becomes effective and available to the field.
This memorandum highlights some of the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.1153, but does not provide guidance on all of the standard's provisions. The attachments provide inspection and citation guidance; as well as flow charts to assist with evaluating employers' control methods. Please consult the Office of Health Enforcement when you need further information or guidance on 29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica.
Further, due to the new requirements in 29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica, OSHA has revoked CPL 03-00-007, National Emphasis Program - Crystalline Silica. However, the inspection procedures for both General Industry and Maritime will remain unchanged until the compliance date for these industries begins on June 23, 2018.

Overview
The final rule on Occupational Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica, published on March 25, 2016, established a new PEL of 50 µg/m3 for all covered industries. It also required other employee protections, such as performing exposure assessments, using exposure control methods, using respiratory protection, offering medical surveillance, developing hazard communication information, and keeping silica-related records. The rule included two standards: one for Construction - 29 CFR 1926.1153; and one for General Industry and Maritime - 29 CFR 1910.1053, both of which became effective on June 23, 2016.
Under the construction standard, all obligations were to commence on June 23, 2017, except for requirements for sample analysis in 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(v), which commence on June 23, 2018. The construction standard has a number of unique features, which warranted development of additional guidance materials. As you are aware, OSHA delayed enforcing this standard until September 23, 2017, to provide training to compliance officers and conduct outreach to the regulated community. Additionally, for the first 30 days, OSHA offered compliance assistance in lieu of enforcement for those employers who were making good faith efforts to comply. Outreach to employers and trainings for CSHOs and other field staff has already been conducted, and additional educational materials are currently being developed.
As a reminder, the September 23, 2017, enforcement date applied only to construction, the requirements for General Industry/Maritime are set to commence on June 23, 2018.
If you have any questions, please contact Audrey Profitt or Sven Rundman in the Office of Health Enforcement at 202-693-2190.
Attachments
Attachment A: Enforcement Guidance
General Information

29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica applies to all occupational exposures to respirable crystalline silica in construction work, exceptwhere employee exposure will remain below 25 micrograms per cubic meter of air (25 µg/m3) as an 8-hour TWA under any foreseeable conditions.
- The exemption is based on total respirable crystalline silica exposures from all sources and must take into account all conditions that may add or contribute to the employee's overall exposure levels.
29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica establishes an 8-hour TWA PEL of 50 µg/m3 and an AL of 25 µg/m3. The standard also contains a unique, flexible option for employers whose employees are engaged in the construction tasks listed in Table 1 at 29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(1).
If the employer fully and properly implements the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection listed in Table 1, it is not required to conduct exposure assessments or otherwise comply with a PEL for employees engaged in those tasks.
The employer must comply with paragraph (d) (the PEL, exposure assessment, and methods of compliance requirements) for employees who are engaged in tasks not listed on Table 1 or where it has not fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection listed in Table 1 for all employees engaged in listed tasks.

Inspection Guidance - Specified Exposure Control Methods [paragraph (c)] and Alternative Exposure Control Methods [paragraph (d)]
General Information

CSHOs should be prepared to collect personal breathing zone samples on the first day of the inspection.
- When sampling is warranted, CSHOs must perform air monitoring in accordance with the OSHA Technical Manual (OTM), Section II, Chapter 1, and OSHA sampling method ID-142.
- CSHOs may contact the SLTC Laboratory through the regional office if they need guidance on developing a sampling strategy for unusual worksite conditions.
CSHOs must review the employer's written silica Exposure Control Plan (ECP) and other relevant programs (e.g., respiratory protection program, hazard communication program, etc.) as part of the investigation.
If the employer has conducted an exposure assessment, CSHOs should also review the assessment to determine what levels might be expected before entering the work area. As noted above, employers are not required to assess the exposures of employees engaged in Table 1 tasks if the employer has fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection listed in Table 1 for the employees engaged in those tasks.
CSHOs should interview affected employees, including the competent person, as part of the overall assessment of the employer's implementation of its ECP.

For Employers Following Table 1 [paragraph (c)]

Where the construction employer is fully and properly implementing the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protections specified in Table 1 for each employee engaged in listed tasks, there is no requirement for the CSHO to collect personal air samples for those tasks.
- Fully and properly implementing the controls specified in Table 1 includes following the requirements of paragraph (c)(2) relating to means of exhaust, water flow rates, and enclosed cabs.
Where the construction employer: (1) has employees performing a task or using equipment that is not listed in Table 1; or (2) has not fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection listed in Table 1 for all employees engaged in Table 1 tasks, CSHOs must collect personal air samples to measure the 8-hour TWA for the silica operations likely to exceed the PEL.

For Tasks Not Listed in Table 1 or Where the Employer Has Not Fully and Properly Implemented the Engineering Controls, Work Practices, and Respiratory Protection Described in Table 1 for All Employees Engaged in Listed Tasks [paragraph (d)]

These construction employers must comply with paragraph (d) of the standard, including the PEL, exposure assessment, and methods of compliance requirements.
CSHOs must review the employer's air monitoring records, or other data the employer used to assess exposures. See Exposure Assessment options below.
CSHOs must collect personal samples to measure the 8-hour TWA for the silica operations likely to exceed the PEL.

Exposure Assessment Options Under 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)

Employers must assess the exposure of each employee who is or may be potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica at or above the AL using either the performance option or the scheduled monitoring option.
Performance Option
- Provides some flexibility; the burden is on the employer to demonstrate that the data fully complies with the requirements.
- Allows employers to assess the 8-hour TWA exposure for each employee on the basis of any combination of air monitoring data or objectivedata sufficient to accurately characterize employee exposures to respirable crystalline silica.
  - Data must reflect worker exposures on each shift, each classification, and in each work area.
- Objective data means information - such as air monitoring data from industry-wide surveys, or calculations based on the composition of a substance - demonstrating employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica associated with a particular product or material, or a specific process, task, or activity.
  - To qualify as objective, the data must reflect workplace conditions closely resembling, or with a higher exposure potential, than the processes, types of material, control methods, work practices, and environmental conditions present in the employer's current operations.
  - Employers may use historical monitoring data as objective data if it meets these requirements.
- Employers must comply with remaining assessment provisions where applicable (e.g., employee notification of results, observation of monitoring).
  - Note: The requirements for methods of sample analysis in paragraph (d)(2)(v) are the only exception to the September 23, 2017, compliance date. These requirements begin on June 23, 2018.
- Employers may characterize employee exposure within a particular range (e.g., employee exposure is between the AL and the PEL).
Scheduled Monitoring Option
- Requires both initial and periodic monitoring.
  - Employers must perform initial monitoring as soon as work begins to determine exposure levels and where to implement control measures.
  - Employers must conduct periodic monitoring at specified intervals based on most recent monitoring results.
- Monitoring must assess the 8-hour TWA exposure for each employee on the basis of one or more personal breathing zone air samples that reflect the exposures on each shift, each job classification, and work area.
  - Where several employees perform the same tasks on the same shift and in the same work area, the employer may sample a representative group of employees to meet this requirement. Representative sampling must be of the employee(s) who are expected to have the highest exposure to respirable crystalline silica.
- Discontinuing the air monitoring requirements is based on monitoring results. See 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(iii)(B) & (E).

Methods of Compliance [paragraph (d)(3)]

Requires employers to use engineering and work practice controls to reduce and maintain employee exposures to respirable crystalline silica to or below the PEL, unless the employer can demonstrate that such controls are not feasible.
Where controls are not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the PEL, the employer must:
- Use controls to reduce employee exposure to the lowest feasible level and supplement them with the use of respiratory protection.

Note: The respirable crystalline silica standards do not prohibit employers from rotating employees to different jobs to achieve compliance with the PEL.
Other Silica Construction Standard Provisions
Respiratory Protection [paragraph (e)]

For tasks not listed in Table 1 or where the employer has not fully and properly implemented the Table 1 controls, respiratory protection is required where exposures exceed the PEL.
Fully and properly implementing the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection listed in Table 1 for an employee engaged in a listed task includes ensuring that employees are using respiratory protection as specified in Table 1.
- If Table 1 requires respiratory protection when the anticipated task duration exceeds four hours, employees engaged in the task must wear the respirator during the entire period of time they are performing the task, not just the period of time that exceeds four hours.
- For the purpose of determining task duration, the duration begins when the employee first puts the tool or equipment into operation, and continues until the tool/equipment is no longer in use. For tasks conducted on an intermittent basis during a shift separated by extended intervals, do not include the time interval between Table 1 tasks in the task duration.
Where the standard requires the use of respiratory protection, employers must institute a respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134.

Housekeeping Practices [paragraph (f)]

The paragraph prohibits dry sweeping and dry brushing where such activities could contribute to employee exposures to respirable crystalline silica, unless wet sweeping, HEPA-filtered vacuuming, or other methods that minimize the likelihood of exposure are not feasible (i.e., the other cleaning methods would not be effective, would cause damage, or would create a hazard in the workplace). The employer bears the burden of showing that the alternative methods are not feasible.
Using sweeping compounds (e.g., non-grit, oil- or waxed-based) is an acceptable dust suppression housekeeping method.
The use of compressed air for cleaning is allowed where the compressed air is used in conjunction with a ventilation system that effectively captures the dust cloud created by the compressed air, or where no alternative method is feasible.
The employer's exposure control plan must include the description of the housekeeping measures.

Written Exposure Control Plan (Competent person) [paragraph (g)]

Employers must establish and implement a written exposure control plan (ECP) that contains certain specified elements.
The employer must designate a competent person to make frequent and regular inspections of job sites, materials, and equipment to implement the written ECP.
The competent person must:
- Be capable of identifying existing and foreseeable respirable crystalline silica hazards in the workplace;
- Have authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate or minimize identified hazards; and
- Have the knowledge and ability necessary to fulfill his or her responsibilities.
While the standard does not require employers to list the name of the competent person in the written ECP (because it could change daily), construction employees must be able to identify the designated competent person.

Medical Surveillance [paragraph (h)]

Employers must make medical examinations available to employees who will be required to wear a respirator for 30 or more days a year according to 29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica. The 30-day trigger applies per employer (exposures with previous employers do not count toward the 30-day total).
- Any partial day of respirator use (even if for only one hour or less) is considered one day of respirator use for the purposes of medical surveillance requirements.
The employer must make the initial (baseline) medical examination available within 30 days after initial assignment (unless the employee has received a medical examination in accordance with the standard within the past three years).
The medical opinion provided to the employer must contain only the date of the exam, a statement from the physician or other licensed health care professional (PLHCP) that the exam met the requirements of the standard, and any limitations on the employee's use of respirators.
If the employee has provided the PLHCP with written authorization, then the written medical opinion for the employer must also contain the following: (1) any recommended limitations on the employee's continued exposure to silica; and (2) any PLHCP recommendation that the employee should be referred to a specialist.

Communication of Hazards [paragraph (i)]

Required for all employees who are or could foreseeably be exposed to respirable crystalline silica at or above the AL of 25 µg/m3 as an 8-hour TWA.
Requires employers to include respirable crystalline silica in their hazard communication program; ensure that employees have access to labels on containers of crystalline silica and related safety data sheets; and train their employees as specified in the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS), 29 CFR 1910.1200, and paragraph (i)(2) of 29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica.
29 CFR 1910.1200 (HCS) applies and CSHOs should cite employers for hazard communication deficiencies where employees are exposed or potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica at levels below the AL.

Citation Guidance
Tasks Listed in Table 1

Where the employer has fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protections specified in Table 1, the CSHO will not cite the employer for any PEL or exposure assessment violation.
Where the employer has not fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protections specified in Table 1 and the employer has not conducted an exposure assessment under 29 CFR 1926.1153(d), the CSHO will cite 29 CFR 1926.1153(c) and (d)(2) as a grouped violation, along with citing any other noted deficiencies (e.g., respiratory protection, hazard communication) as separate violations.
- The CSHO will cite deficiencies in the employer's assessment under paragraph (d)(2) as a grouped violation with 29 CFR 1926.1153(c), along with citing any other noted deficiencies (e.g., respiratory protection, hazard communication).
Where the employer has not fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protections specified in Table 1, and sampling shows exposure over the PEL, the CSHO will cite 29 CFR 1926.1153(c) and (d)(1) as a grouped violation.
Where the employer has not fully and properly implemented the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protections specified in Table 1 but the employer has conducted an exposure assessment under 29 CFR 1926.1153(d):
- If CSHO sampling shows an overexposure and the employer has not instituted all feasible engineering and work practice controls or adequately protected employees via an effective respiratory protection program, the CSHO will cite the overexposure as a violation of 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(1) and (d)(3) grouped with 29 CFR 1926.1153(c).
- If, in the CSHO's opinion, the employer's exposure data may not be representative (e.g., new or different operations are occurring in the workplace that do not closely resemble the operations represented in the employer's exposure data), the CSHO should also cite 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2), as appropriate, and group with 29 CFR 1926.1153(c). Where appropriate, cite any other deficiencies.
- If CSHO sampling shows an over exposure and the employer has instituted all feasible engineering and work practice controls and employees are adequately protected via an effective respiratory protection program, then the CSHO will not cite the employer for a PEL violation.

Tasks Not Listed In Table 1

If CSHO sampling shows an overexposure and the employer has not instituted all feasible engineering and work practice controls or adequately protected employees via an effective respiratory protection program, the CSHO will cite the overexposure as a violation of 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(1).
- Deficiencies in any of the requirements for engineering and work practice controls and respiratory protection must follow the citation procedures for combining and grouping violations in CPL 02-00-160, Field Operations Manual (FOM).
- The CSHO should cite 29 CFR 1926.1153(e)(1)(ii)(C) when the employer did not provide necessary respiratory protection where engineering and work practice controls were not sufficient to reduce exposures to or below the PEL.
If, in the CSHO's opinion, the employer's exposure data may not be representative (e.g., new or different operations are occurring in the workplace that do not closely resemble the operations represented in the employer's exposure data), the CSHO should cite 29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2).

If the employer violates any other provision of 29 CFR 1926.1153, Respirable Crystalline Silica, the CSHO must issue the citation(s) in accordance with the FOM.
Exposure Variability

If a CSHO obtains a sample showing exposures above the PEL, but has reason to think, based on the employer's air monitoring data, that the results may be due to unpreventable exposure variability, then the Area Director may consider whether to conduct a follow-up inspection in lieu of issuing a citation.
The CSHO will compare the employer's exposure data with CSHO sampling results to determine whether the employer's data are representative. To be representative, the employer's samples must have been obtained under conditions that closely resemble or have a higher exposure potential than CSHO samples.
The CSHO should confer with the Area Director regarding whether re-sampling is appropriate.
The burden is on the employer to demonstrate that the CSHO's samples are not representative of normal exposure levels.

CSHO Protection
CSHOs must use appropriate PPE for potential hazard exposures. They must not enter a respirable crystalline silica-regulated area, or other area where exposures are likely to exceed the PEL, unless it is absolutely necessary and then only if using appropriate PPE. For inspection and air sampling activities, CSHOs should use remote operations when practical. CSHOs should be conservative about time spent in areas where high concentrations of silica exist or are suspected.
Attachment B: Flow Charts for Evaluating Construction Employer Methods of Controlling Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica
Flowchart A: Specified Exposure Controls for Table 1 Tasks
If employees are performing Table 1 tasks, and the employer has not implemented controls, and has not conducted an exposure assessment, then the employer is in violation of paragraphs (c) and (d). For each employee with occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS), CSHOs should consider the following questions.

Is any employee performing a task listed in Table 1? If Yes, go to Q2. If No, evaluate compliance with 29 CFR 1926.1153(d) - see Flowchart B.
Are the engineering controls and work practices listed for that Table 1 task in use? If Yes, go to Q3. If No, evaluate compliance with 29 CFR 1926.1153(d) - see Flowchart B.
Are the engineering controls fully and properly implemented? If Yes, go to Q4. If No, evaluate compliance with 29 CFR 1926.1153(d) - see Flowchart B.
Is the employee wearing the required level of respiratory protection? If Yes, employer is in compliance with Table 1. If No, evaluate compliance with 29 CFR 1926.1153(d) - see Flowchart B.

Note 1: CSHOs should repeat Flowchart A for each employee engaged in a Table 1 task.
Note 2: To determine whether the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified in Table 1 are fully and properlyimplemented, CSHOs should consult 29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(2), which contains additional requirements for tasks performed indoors or in an enclosed area, and for control measures involving wet methods or an enclosed cab or booth.

Are workers performing tasks with foreseeable exposure to RCS at or above the action level? (Note that the use of engineering controls to maintain exposure to below the AL indicates that the standard covers the operation.) If Yes, go to Q2. If No, the standard does not apply to exposures below the AL.
Has the employer conducted an exposure assessment for each employee who may be exposed at or above the AL? If Yes, go to Q3. If No, the employer is not in compliance with paragraph (d)(2). Conduct exposure monitoring.
Is the exposure assessment representative of current conditions? If Yes, go to Q4. If No, the employer is not in compliance with paragraph (d)(2). Conduct exposure monitoring.
Does the employer's exposure assessment show that employees are exposed at or below the PEL? If Yes, there is no need to conduct exposure monitoring. If No, conduct exposure monitoring and go to Q5.
Does the CSHO's exposure monitoring show employee exposure at or below the PEL? If Yes, the employer is in compliance with paragraph (d)(1). If No, go to Q6.
Has the employer implemented all feasible controls to reduce RCS exposure to at or below the PEL? If Yes, go to Q7. If No, the employer is not in compliance with paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(3).
If respiratory protection is required, are workers wearing the required level of respiratory protection? If Yes, the employer is in compliance with paragraph (d)(3). If No, the employer is not in compliance with paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(3), and (e).

]]><![CDATA[It's all about the 'WHY'- not the 'Y'- in safety!]]>Wed, 13 Sep 2017 18:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/its-all-about-the-why-not-the-y-in-safety If you’ve been in the safety profession or in supervision, for any length of time, you’re familiar with the difficulties associated with getting employees on board when it comes to following safety policies or procedures. Many of you have probably even had trouble in simply getting workers to follow a simple order of operation when performing routine tasks. In this post, I will share one of my experiences that really helped me understand why this is and share some tips on ways to effectively get the results you seek.

First, we must understand that our workforce is comprised of people, each of whom are a creature of habit, a culmination of life experiences. Having spent the first decade of my career as a field-level employee, I sometimes wonder why it took me as long as it did to figure this out.
Second, safety professionals today are not the safety police we were accustomed to back in the 1980’s and 1990’s. Amid the oil boom in the Bakken Oilfield, I worked for a well-established oilfield services provider. On my first day and during a site audit I witnessed none of the welders or pipefitters utilizing the guards on their handheld angle grinders. I made a note on the site audit form and approached each of the welders and pipefitters to share my personal experience about the importance of grinder guards. In 1996, while employed at a papermill in Courtland, Alabama a young woman was fatally injured when a metabo disk violently exploded.

The initial site audit was the first of many where I identified our employees were not using guards on their handheld grinders. In fact, I found this at every site audit and each time I tried coaching the employees into using the guards for their own safety, as well as the safety of those working around them. Months went by and the problem didn’t go away.
I addressed the issue in mass safety meetings time and time again. I purchased a copy of ANSI B7 emphasizing the significance of grinder guards for safety sake. Yet there was no change in behavior. I then began asking supervisors to enforce the policy and police their employees to ensure that the guards were being used. Becoming increasingly frustrated I promised to begin reprimanding supervisors for failing to enforce the company’s policy regarding grinder guards.
After many months of exhaustive frustration, I sat down and asked myself, “What is it going to take…a grinder disk exploding and someone being seriously injured?” Not wanting this to happen, I decided to find a way to demonstrate the importance of the safety guards. Grabbing a metabo angle grinder from our fabrication shop, with no guard on it, I calculated the speeds generated by that particular grinder. This particular metabo had a 9” diameter disk and a free load operating speed of 9,700rpm. During our next weekly mass safety meeting, I then demonstrated the importance.
Asking everyone present to take out their cell phones and open their calculator app, I explained that we were going to calculate the speeds generated by handheld angle grinders. We discussed the disk diameter and how to calculate the circumference around that particular disk. Once the circumference was determined [28.27 inches], they were to multiply the circumference by 9,700 [free load RPM’s of the angle grinder], resulting in a total of 274,219 inches per minute; then converting into feet per minute [dividing by 12], equaling 22,851 feet per minute; converting into miles per minute [dividing by 5,280], resulting in 4.32 miles per minute.
Having reached our equation of 4.32 miles per minute, I then asked each employee when the last time was that they drove down the interstate at 4.32 miles per minute? Continuing on we calculated the miles per hour [multiplying by 60], resulting in a staggering 259 miles per hour.
I continued with, “If you think that 259 miles per hour won’t hurt, I challenge each of you to wait until you clock out this evening and find a rural dirt road where you can travel at a speed of only 10 miles per hour. Then roll down your window and hold your arm out steady (but don’t swing) and allow a stationary mailbox to strike your arm. Come back tomorrow and let me know how your arm feels.” Of course, I explained that was just a joke.

I instantly noticed the change in behavior that I, as a safety professional,was struggling to achieve. Each site audit afterward, revealed that the guys had grasped the understanding of ‘WHY’ I asked them to use the grinder guards. During several conversations with employees afterward, they expressed their previous opinion that I was just trying to make their jobs harder and more difficult.
The point is, if we can get employees to understand the ‘WHY’ we’re asking them to use certain protective devices, or ‘WHY’ we have established safety procedures to follow, or even ‘WHY’ we perform a task in an established order of operation, then we’re so much more likely to achieve our desired outcome. It’s not always easy, in fact, rarely is it a simple task. But with a little bit of creativity, and with a focus on effectively communicating the ‘WHY’ the potential of achieving that desired outcome can be greatly enhanced.

]]><![CDATA[The Benefits of a Flu Prevention Strategy]]>Mon, 14 Aug 2017 06:00:00 GMThttps://www.kelleyintegrity.com/safetysenseblog/the-benefits-of-a-flu-prevention-strategy Well, it's that time of year again. That's right, it's fall already. And while many of us may look forward to the changing colors of the leaves, many employers often overlook the importance of planning for the upcoming flu season and the effective strategies that are available to help protect their businesses from the devastating affects of influenza.

According to a Walgreens study from September 2015, influenza was responsible for over 100 million lost workdays during the 2014 - 2015 flu season. In fact, many sources list influenza as a leading cause of employee absence. Some estimates say that 10 - 12% of all employee absences are due to employees contracting the flu virus and each affected employee might miss up to six days of work and need up to two weeks to make a full recovery. That's over $7 billion in lost wages; two-thirds of the missed workdays were employer-paid sick leave, while the flu sliced more than $10.4 billion of company productivity.

Also, imagine the increased potential for workplace accidents as workers attempt to work while self-medicating themselves for symptoms of the flu. Taking medications that may cause drowsiness, delayed reaction times, or just simply poor decision-making. Any such serious accident or injury could damage a company's reputation and could also cause insurance premiums to soar.

Studies have documented that work practices in general are conducive to influenza's spread. Once the flu begins sweeping through a workplace, controlling it becomes very difficult. Developing an effective flu prevention strategy could potentially help soften the blow of this year's flu season.

Below are some tips that are recommended by the CDC, or the Centers for Disease Control, for implementing a Workplace Flu Vaccination Clinic. These are:
Planning

Get senior management buy-in to support a flu vaccination clinic at the workplace
Frame getting employees vaccinated against flu as a business priority and create a goal aligned with this effort
Identify a flu vaccination coordinator and/or team with defined roles and responsibilities
Schedule the flu vaccination clinic to maximize employee participation
Gauge need and demand among employees for flu vaccination. Provide sufficient and accessible flu vaccination in as many business locations as possible
Ask managers and supervisors to allow employees to attend an onsite flu vaccination clinic as part of their workday without having to go "off-the-clock"
Consider offering flu vaccination to employee's families
Set a goal and help show employees how their participation matters

Hosting & Promoting

Use incentives for flu vaccination to increase participation (offering vaccine at no or low cost, providing refreshments at the clinic, or holding a contest for department with highest vaccination rate, etc.)
Promote the vaccination clinic with:

Posters about the importance of flu vaccination
An article in company communications
Promotional posters/flyers to advertise the date and time
Communication from business leadership directly to employees promoting vaccination
Use social media channels for promotion

Logistics

Provide a comfortable and convenient location
Set an example by encouraging managers and business leaders to get vaccinated first

Current Flu Activity 10/14/2017

If your company will not vaccinate its employees, there are still other ways to help prevent flu from spreading in your workplace . These include:

Encouraging employees to get vaccinated on their own
Encouraging good cough/sneeze etiquette
Providing hand-wash stations and encouraging frequent washing with soap
Providing an alcohol-based hand sanitizer for worker use and encourage its use
Encouraging workers to not come to work if they are experiencing flu-like symptoms

Usually, the effectiveness of a Flu-Prevention Campaign correlates directly with the time and effort put into it. Determining a return on investment (ROI) helps create a sound business case for a Worksite Flu Prevention Program. Some objectives to measure include: rates of absenteeism, reduced productivity, direct health savings and employee engagement. Protecting the health and safety of employees, as well as safeguarding the company's bottom line, offer ample reason to invest in a worksite program.

For more information on preventing the flu in your workplace, please visit:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/resource-center/freeresources/print/print-businesses.htm

]]>