|
Article Excerpt
The disappointing level of unemployment among people with disabilities is a well known fact among vocational rehabilitation (VR) professionals. The National Health Interview Survey conducted from 1994 to 1995 revealed that 63% of people with disabilities were unemployed. When asked why, over half of the respondents stated that there were no appropriate jobs available (Loprest & Maag, 2001). One thing that has helped to spur the employment of people with disabilities is the use of computer based technology in the workplace (Anon, 1990; Lazzaro, 1986; Warren, 1984; Whitehouse, 1994). Today there are scores of assistive technology (AT) devices to help accommodate a variety of functional limitations related to computer access. As more and more companies find themselves with a computer on every desk, opportunities for employment of people with disabilities begin to increase.
Recent decades have witnessed a similar trend toward the use of computer-based equipment in manufacturing. Automated manufacturing technology (AMT), such as computer numeric controlled (CNC) machine systems, use computer-generated parameters to control the motion of tools in machining or assembly processes (Spear, 2001; Sun, 2000). Many AMT machines, such as the MasterCAM[R] compatible systems by CNC Software, Inc. (l) operate using a standard Windows[R] PC-based operating system (MacDonald, 2004).
This move towards automation allows more opportunities for people with disabilities to seek employment in manufacturing because of the potential for reducing the physical requirements of machining and assembly operations. People employed in the manufacturing field are now required to have a different set of skills than they once were; technical and computer skills are becoming more important (Barnet, 1993). Furthermore, the National Association of Manufacturers is predicting a manufacturing labor shortage of as many as 10 million skilled workers by the year 2010, due to the aging population coupled with limited success in demonstrating the benefits of a manufacturing vocation to the next generation of workers (Eisen, 2003).
Even though computer based technologies used with AMT may be similar in nature to those used in office environments, the tasks performed by the equipment operators and the environments in which they work are very different from the office environment. The potential for injury among production workers is significantly higher than the potential for injury among office or clerical workers. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that in 2003 the incidence rate (2) for non-fatal injuries and illnesses was more than five times greater for manufacturing employees (6.8) than for employees of professional, scientific, and technical services (1.3) (USDoL-Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004b). The total number of fatalities for manufacturing employees (420) was more than four times that of employees of professional, scientific, and technical services (97) (USDoL-Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004a).
Risks in manufacturing environments exist in spite of the federal government's efforts to make workplaces safer through the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) of 1970. This act states that it is the responsibility of the employer to ensure a safe working environment for their employees. Gaining employment in a manufacturing environment therefore, provides challenges to people with disabilities over and above just having the ability to operate the necessary equipment or perform the necessary production tasks. The worker must be able to perform his or her job while protecting the safety of co-workers, as well as their own safety.
Furthermore, studies have shown that there is potential for discrimination against applicants with disabilities due to barriers in the employer's selection processes and due to negative stereotypes and myths about the abilities of people with functional limitations (Stone & Williams, 1997). Building on these findings, Harcourt et al., discovered that facilities with higher worker's compensation insurance rates tended to be more likely to discriminate against applicants with disabilities in their selection process (Harcourt, Lam, & Harcourt, 2005).
Because safety is such a significant aspect of employment in a manufacturing environment, VR professionals must be prepared to address the safety concerns of prospective manufacturing employers. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to consider the federal safety regulations from the perspective of employing people with disabilities in manufacturing. The paper will describe the regulatory organization established by the OSH Act and will also describe resources available to help all parties comply with stated regulations and standards. The discussion section will highlight the potential impact of these safety regulations on employment of people with disabilities in manufacturing and will provide suggested actions to be taken by the VR professional or the consumer to improve employment potential.
Methodology
Information for this paper has been drawn largely from literature and resources made available through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Much of the content is available on line at www.osha.gov. Additional information has been gathered from conversations with knowledgeable OSHA employees and staff members working in support of OSHA's free consultation services. Industry based literature, relating to employment of people with disabilities and the use of AMT was located through online searches of databases such as Compendex, EBSCO, and Lexis Nexus using keywords relating to manufacturing, disability, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and OSHA. Searches for court cases cross referencing OSHA and ADA were limited to U.S. Supreme Court cases.
Results
A comprehensive review of all OSHA standards and regulations is beyond the scope of a single article. Therefore, this paper only provides an overview with respect to four distinct aspects of federally enforced safety regulations: the origin and structure of OSHA; enforcement procedures and penalties; recognized standards; and OSHA training, outreach, and education resources.
Origin and Structure of OSHA
In the late 1960's, work-related deaths and injuries were on a rise (Fleming, 2001). In order to help protect America's work force, the OSH Act was signed into legislation in 1970. Section 5(a)(1) of this act explains that it is the employer's responsibility to provide an environment that is "free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees" ("OSH Act", 1970). The OSH Act established three...
|
