OSH Advisory Council Dec.

3, 2004 Minutes
Members: Eric Ajax Melanie Isabell Allen Carol Bufton Eugene Harmer Pat McGovern Scott Metcalf Ed Raine Daryl Tindle Members excused: Visitors: Harvey Burski Michael Hawthorne Scott Richter Kerry Berbetti, Progress Casting Group Therese Berkenski, Wyornot Consultants Lois Klobuchar, Consultant Tim Knoll, International Paper Tim Kobernat, Federal OSHA Roxanne Pawielski, Ainsworth, Bemidji Pamela Smith, Ainsworth, Bemidji, OSB Gary Thaden, MMCA/NECA Bill Weiss, International Paper Dawn M. Westin, Unisys Staff members: Debbie Caswell Clayton Handt Ken Hickey Alden Hoffman James Krueger Ed LaFavor Patricia Todd Roslyn Wade Nancy Zentgraf

The meeting was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by chairperson Carol Bufton. Members and guests introduced themselves. II. Announcements Assistant Commissioner Roslyn Wade asked for approval of the minutes from the June 25 and Sept. 10, 2004, meetings. Eric Ajax made a motion to approve both sets of minutes. Scott Metcalf seconded the motion. Discussion occurred and Wade noted the sound system was not working properly during these two meetings, so the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) staff members did their best to produce a summary. She asked that members direct any corrections to Deb Caswell. All voted in favor of the motion. The agenda was approved as presented. Wade pointed out information packets about the Art McCauley award in the members' meeting packets. It is time to solicit input to recognize a safety professional.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-2-

December 3, 2004

The nomination forms are due by March 1, 2005. Wade noted that outstanding individuals had been recognized for their contributions to safety and health in the past three or four years; she would like to see that continue. She invited members and visitors to take an information packet and asked them to take the time to think of safety professionals who have made significant contributions, to give DLI the opportunity to consider someone to be recognized at the Minnesota Safety Council conference, which will be in May 2005. She asked that everyone pass the nomination forms out within their organizations and get as many nominations to the department as soon as possible. Wade reported about recent activities at the agency. They are preparing for the coming legislative session, which will begin shortly after the new year. She said it will be an exciting year and noted this is a budget year, so she expected the entire session to be dominated by budget discussions. The state is projecting an even greater deficit than was originally anticipated in the forecast that was released a couple of days ago. Wade did not know what the full implications would be for DLI, but she did not expect it to have a direct impact on the MNOSHA program, because its funding does not come out of the general fund. DLI has positioned itself well, in anticipation of a deficit; however, the projected deficit is greater than what was anticipated. In the Workplace Services Division, the Code Administration and Inspection Services and Labor Standards units may be affected, because they receive a general fund appropriation. Wade will inform the OSH Advisory Council (OAC) as she gets more specific details about the budget. Wade expected the legislative agenda to be lean this year because it is a budget year. Any proposals would be exactly as proposed last year. Some of those proposals did get discussion, but none were approved last year. The only item that was directly related to the MNOSHA program is the agency proposal to amend the statute to recognize NAICS instead of SIC codes. A revisor's copy of that statute was distributed. This bill has been approved. Eugene Harmer referred to the notes from the most recent meeting about the two temporary employees hired by MNOSHA to help catch up. He asked if the budget would allow for extra help in the coming year. Patricia Todd said the temporary employees helped with redacted files requested through Freedom of Information Act requests. These temporary employees redacted 197 of the 212 files that needed to be redacted. MNOSHA maintains a list of projects for interns, either paid or unpaid. MNOSHA continually monitors its budget and, if dollars are available and they have projects where they can hire a temporary person, they will pursue that. She hopes to continue using interns because this has been successful for MNOSHA. VI. Federal OSHA update Tim Kobernat, the federal area director for the Eau Claire Area OSHA office gave a federal OSHA update. He said they are in between action in Washington, D.C., and his report would be short.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-3-

December 3, 2004

Kobernat reported that the federal OSHA fiscal-year ended Sept. 30. It exceeded its goal of 37,700 inspections, but that was about 650 inspections fewer than in fiscalyear 2003. He said serious violations were up 3 percent; willful violations were up 14 percent. He attributed this to better targeting. Kobernat noted he has been with federal OSHA for 33 years and it seems to get better each year about targeting the "bad actors," or the places it should be inspecting. OSHA does that with several different programs. Site specific targeting (SST) is used for companies that are having higher accident rates than normal. OSHA also does that with local emphasis programs (LEPs), where an industry that is having a really high accident-rate is focused on. For example, in Wisconsin there is the concrete industry, the canning industry, several other industries and construction is always in the mix. Kobernat reported the fatality rate continues to go down, but the actual number was up slightly last year: there were 5,559 fatalities. That sounds like a lot, but when OSHA first started, there were 12,000 to 13,000 fatalities. It is better, but it is far from being ideal. He said last year was the first year the Hispanic fatality rate went down. They have had a major emphasis within federal OSHA to focus on the Hispanic population, because the accident rates and fatality rates, especially for Hispanics, were much higher than the general population. They have been putting a lot of effort into that in outreach, etc., so it was nice to see this went down a little bit last year as well. Kobernat reported the federal OSHA budget was passed. They are waiting for a signature from President Bush. In fiscal-year 2004, they had $458 million. They requested a slight increase of $461 and got $468 million for fiscal-year 2005 – higher than they asked for. That is a 2.6 percent increase from fiscal-year 2004. Kobernat's region has been on a hiring freeze for quite some time and they have quite a few vacancies in Eau Claire and also Minneapolis. That is the bad news. The rest of the bad new is it is official that as of Dec. 1, the Minneapolis federal OSHA office will close. All state-plan monitoring and federal activity in Minnesota will come out of the Eau Claire office now. It is quite expensive to maintain the office in Minneapolis and they are down to one person there, so the regional office could not justify maintaining both offices. Kobernat did not anticipate any drop in service to the state of Minnesota. They will continue to do what they have been doing lately. They work closely with MNOSHA and Kobernat said he does not even consider it to be a monitoring activity any more. It is more of a partnership and he did not think there would be a problem. Kobernat said he read that the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are seeking comments regarding policies, training and other issues for violence in the workplace. They are going to send about 40,000 surveys. The reason for that is the fatality rate has been decreasing, but the actual homicide rate has been increasing, so there is more violence in the workplace. NIOSH and BLS want to see why that is happening and what the good companies are doing to prevent violence. He noted MNOSHA has been doing quite a bit in this area and they had Vikki Sanders from the Workplace Safety Consultation unit speak to Kobernat's group and help them out in other areas.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-4-

December 3, 2004

Kobernat reported whistleblower complaints are up. He noted the paper recently had an article about the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which is the whistleblower law for corporate and criminal fraud accountability. That has gone up from a handful to about 180 last year. They have had a few of them in the Eau Claire office. Some of them are quite substantial. To give a historical perspective, Kobernat noted OSHA, at one time, basically did 11C, which is people complaining about safety in the workplace, which Todd's unit still does, and 405s, which are surface transportation and truck drivers complaining about unsafe vehicles. That is what they started out with. Now they have 14 acts they are working under, including the Nuclear Regulatory Act and the SarbanesOxley Act, and some of those that do not really seem to fit in with OSHA, but they have them. Pat McGovern asked about the survey of work-related violence, whether the survey was of employers and whether it was for all industries. Kobernat said it was. He thinks they are trying to get a compilation of best practices and training to try to get that out to more companies so we can pass on the best practices. McGovern asked for contact information for the person who was in charge of this project. Kobernat agreed to give her the information after the meeting. McGovern noted there is a lot of research going on here, at the School of Public Health, about work-related violence. McGovern noted there was some discussion during the most recent legislative session about possibly criminalizing when workplace homicides happen. She thought it was Sen. Corzine, N.J. She asked Kobernat what the status of this issue was and whether he thought it would come up again about toughening the penalties. Kobernat said that because there was no standard for workplace violence with federal OSHA, it has to be cited under the general duty clause, 5A1, that makes it very difficult to get a criminal sanction. He said it is a lot easier to get it for a specific standard, but 5A1 criminals are very difficult to prosecute. It is still possible, if that happens. As far as a legislative change, he has not heard any "buzz" about that at all. Melanie Allen noted Kobernat said the federal activity was more focused on "bad actors," or outliers, in terms of outcomes. She asked if they have found any underreporting or whether they have any activities in place to counteract underreporting because it might reveal "bad actors." Kobernat said that was a good question. They are very vigorous in citing underreporting when they find it and they issue high penalties. They just had one that is going through the court system in Ohio. A large auto manufacturer was issued some fairly substantial citations on a definition of MSDs for ergonomics cases. The company said those cases were really not work-related and OSHA said they were. OSHA issued willful violations of approximately $150,000 on those cases. When they find underreporting, they are very vigorous. The other thing they have is a nonreporting inspection. They sent a survey and the companies are supposed to send back their results. If they do not send it back, OSHA actually goes out to the facility to find out why they did not send it in. They do some activity in that area, but it is tough. Ajax asked about the Hispanic employees having a higher rate of fatalities and whether there was a reason for that. Kobernat said there was not a specific study, but they

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-5-

December 3, 2004

have found a lot of the fatalities are happening in the south and a lot of them are new immigrants from Mexico and South America, willing to take riskier jobs. Several of them, lately, have been trenching fatalities and different occupations that are a higher risk than normal. Kobernat thought that was part of the reason they have identified that. They have even tried to do outreach for day laborers in nontraditional occupations to try to reach those groups. He said most of the publications are in Spanish and they have done a lot of partnerships with Hispanic groups and associations. Ed Raine said in construction they are finding there are some companies that work in the southern states with Hispanics and one of their big problems is communication and getting the idea of safety through to them. Ryan Construction is very strict and they solved this problem by making sure there is an interpreter on every job where there are Spanish-speaking workers. The only thing you can do right now is educate them about safety, because they come from a different culture, so they educate them about the importance of safety. They found one of the big things is you have to get their family involved. The Hispanics do not really think about themselves, but if you tell them what will happen to their family if they are injured or killed, that is how you start to get through to them. With those kinds of programs, they have been able to really cut the injuries down considerably. He recommended facilitating communication and getting them educated. Kobernat commented about education. He met with NAFTA last year in Mexico City about a construction safety activity. One interesting thing he found was that Mexico spends about 1/100th per employee of what we spend on safety education and outreach, etc. They are improving. Many things we take for granted in the states are just not there. As Raine said, the safety culture is just not there in other countries. McGovern offered to send Wade information about a seminar that will be at the university in February about reaching the hard-to-reach populations, such as minority groups where communication issues are problematic. Dr. Rosemary Sorus, who is an occupational and environmental physician at the University of Illinois and has done a lot of work with groups in the Chicago area, suggested the information be communicated to OAC members by e-mail. Dawn Weston commented that at the national level, the American Society of Safety Engineers also has a focus on a section mainly for Hispanic employees and employers. That might be another resource. They are a very dedicated group with extensive resources. VII. Staff reports Compliance Patricia Todd gave a MNOSHA Compliance update. She pointed out the annual report for 2004 was in the members' folders and went through some important highlights. In fiscal-year 2004, MNOSHA visited 2,662 establishments and identified more than 4,800 hazards. They have developed and signed a new partnership with the

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-6-

December 3, 2004

Minnesota Machine Guarding Program that has to do with metal-fabricating industries. They hope to get some additional employers involved. The average number of days from the opening conference to a citation issue for safety is about 25 in MNOSHA's program versus the national average of about 46. Within the health area, it is approximately 55 days in Minnesota compared to a national average of 61 days. When someone contests a citation, it takes MNOSHA 135 days, versus the federal average of about 184 days, to resolve those issues. Todd pointed out a couple of appendices in the annual report. Appendix B explains some of the outreach presentations they have done. Jim Krueger's unit and the entire group have worked diligently on outreach programs and have done 42 presentations during 2001 through 2003, with an average attendance rate of 41 participants. She noted Appendix D explains a work-skill analysis they performed to look at what the training needs were for MNOSHA staff members. They identified those needs and will be working on identifying core training for some of those requirements this year. Todd reported the management team continues to strive to improve. Appendix F contains information about what MNOSHA staff members would like management to do regarding communication. A summary of that input is attached, as well as a management performance survey that was conducted to see areas where managers could continue to improve. Todd pointed out the GRASSROOTS Workplace Protection publication in members’ packets. This publication is done in conjunction with federal OSHA and OSHSPA, an organization of state-plan states, of which Minnesota is a member. This explains areas where state-funded programs are different from federal OSHA. It is a great resource to see the new and innovative things that are being done in other states, compared to Minnesota and federal OSHA. Todd noted one of the true advantages of a state plan is the ability to be able to implement change more easily. She announced DLI would be assuming responsibly for the GRASSROOTS publication, starting with federalfiscal-year 2005 and into 2006. Wade pointed out that the GRASSROOTS publication is the only document that actually gives a comparative analysis of the state-plan states. When new opportunities are explored or come to the attention of MNOSHA, this is the document she often uses as a resource guide to get a glance at how other state-plan states are responding to issues. There is not much information out there that compares the states. There is a clear comparison between federal-plan states and state-plan states in a collective sense, but this document details state-specific statutes, or standards in other states, so this can be a very good resource tool for your organization, constituents or customers, or corporate headquarters in other states. Wade said she constantly reviews past editions when MNOSHA is challenged. She urged OAC members to get familiar with the document.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-7-

December 3, 2004

Todd gave an update about MNOSHA staff members and introduced two recently hired supervisors. Nancy Zentgraf is the metro general industry supervisor. She has a bachelor's of science degree, with a major in industrial safety and a minor in fire science. She has worked with MNOSHA for more than 11 years and has conducted at least 400 informal and 150 on-site inspections. Prior to that, she worked for five years in the insurance industry, specializing in ergonomics. Clayton Handt is the metro health supervisor. He has a bachelor’s of art degree in applied science and a master’s degree in industrial safety. He worked as a compliance coordinator for two years at an Iowa Community College and for worked for 10 years at the University of Minnesota as an environmental health specialist and supervisor. Todd said they reviewed the Washington state computer system. Because MNOSHA receives 50 percent of its funding from federal OSHA, it needs to provide its information directly to federal OSHA through its computer system, called IMIS. It is an outdated system and they are looking for other options. Washington decided to develop its own computer system, rather than waiting for federal OSHA's computer system. Todd hopes to be able to put together a proposal for a computer system for DLI's Cabinet to evaluate to, perhaps, get something more up-to-date than the current outdated system. Todd reminded everyone the Construction Breakfast sessions are posted online. They had 102 participants at the most recent one, in November. She also noted Safety Lines is available online and encouraged people to read it. MNOSHA also has various surveys available online. Todd said they are continuing to work on their federal-fiscal-year 2005 plan. The performance plan for 2005 is available online and they are starting to identify key areas within that plan. Harmer referred to the annual report and complimented Todd about the favorable results, generally, from last year to this year and compared to national data goals. Harmer referred to the fourth item on page 19. He said that was the only place he saw where the results were not as favorable and asked Todd to comment about the percent of employee complaints completed within 90 days. Todd said one thing they noticed within the discrimination area, which Kobernat also mentioned, is that typically, if the economy gets a little bit worse, they tend to have an increase in the number of discrimination complaints they have. They also had an entire turnover in their discrimination staff. Therefore, they have been working for the past two years to improve their performance with regard to responding to discrimination complaints. It has been transferred to Jim Krueger's unit. They now have three investigators involved in the discrimination process to help improve the timeliness. They plan to do an analysis about the process this year to be able to determine if there are ways they can continue to improve. They are working with a new computer system called Perfect Law to simplify the process. This is a key area that has needed to be improved upon in the past three years. They plan to continue working on that area this year.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-8-

December 3, 2004

Raine asked for information about where the CHASE program is standing. Todd reported the CHASE program is an exemption partnership they presently have with AGC, similar to what they have with the Minnesota machine program. At present, they have eight companies that have received the white level of exemption. It is a red, white and blue program. It has been very successful in their eyes and AGC has been a great member in this partnership. Todd noted Doug Swanson won the Art McCauley award last year, partly due to his dedication and effort with the overall CHASE program. They will do an annual review of it in February. They will continue to work with AGC to improve some nuances that have occurred. Raine noted there is no blue level at this time, but he understood Ryan was about to start a random drug-testing program, which is the one thing holding them up from being blue level. He said that should happen very early next year; they will probably be the first blue-level company. Todd stated that after they receive a blue-level award, the company becomes exempt from programmed inspections, so the requirements to get to the blue level are high. She confirmed no one has reached the blue level at this time, but there are other white-level participants that are also working toward that level. Ajax commented he was impressed with the number of outreach presentations the MNOSHA Compliance unit continues to do. That was his first introduction to MNOSHA Workplace Safety Consultation more than 15 years ago. He thinks it is a powerful tool and it has worked well for his company. Ajax asked about the Minnesota Machine Guarding Program with Dr. David Parker. He said we clearly need some help with that and he applauded efforts to partner. He noted one their challenges has been a lack of participation by metal forming companies, such as his company. They are clearly one of those industries Kobernat is talking about that is a high-hazard industry and has its share of amputations and serious injuries. Ajax asked, because Compliance is partnering, whether businesses would get a "get out of jail free" card if they were able to identify some challenges in their workplace and make corrections and then not be fined. Krueger was instrumental in implementing this program, along with Dr. David Parker, and Todd asked him to come forward to respond. Krueger said that in going through the partnership it is obviously a high-hazard industry and that was the incentive for MNOSHA to partner. As part of the incentive, it is similar to MNOSHA offering exemptions if the company can get to that level. He stressed that the bar is high. The beginning level requirements are a lot less than that and that is the incentive for us to partner with them to get those types of industries on board and get them moving in the right direction. That is what they really want to do. Examples of things they are trying to help with the partnership are: when they do citations, as part of their settlement agreements, they are having discussions with them to see if they can get them into this partnership. They work cooperatively with them to get them headed in the right direction through different sources, such as outreach. Ajax said that sounds very positive and that is great. Krueger added they continue to hope that they will see more involvement. That is a long process, but they are hearing more and more conversation. Kobernat asked whether everyone knows where to get the GRASSROOTS publication. There is a link on federal OSHA’s Web site at www.osha.gov/fso/osp/oshspa/annualreport.html.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-9-

December 3, 2004

Workplace Safety Consultation Ken Hickey gave an update about the Workplace Safety Consultation (WSC) unit in Jim Collins' absence. He noted WSC met or exceeded most of its goals last year. Its first goal was to reduce occupational hazards through direct intervention. The overall goal of the unit was to conduct 1,240 visits in various industries. They conducted 1,636 visits, which was 132 percent of the projected goal. Hickey reported the second goal was to promote a safety and health culture through consultation assistance, cooperative programs and sharing leadership. It projected 415 training and assistance visits and interventions. It conducted 748, which was 180 percent of the projected goal. Hickey said WSC has a five-year goal to certify 20 new MNSHARP participants. In the first of the five years, five new companies have been certified into the program. It currently has 13 MNSHARP certified participants. He noted the goal for the MNSHARP deferral program was to bring in four new participants. Six new deferral participants have been brought in and WSC is currently working with eight MNSHARP deferral participants. Hickey noted WSC’s goal was to sign two new alliance agreements; five alliance agreements were signed during federal-fiscal-year 2004. Hickey announced WSC also met its goals with its special programs. The Safety Grant Program has expanded; they added training tied to equipment and tuition reimbursement. They added these new options for employers for safety grants. While they are doing this, the grant program monies have gone down a little bit, but the options are wider for what they can use the monies for. The LogSafe, Workplace Violence Prevention, Ergonomics and Labor Management Safety Committee programs also all met projected goals. Harmer expressed appreciation for the individuals who sign up to partner for the audits. Greg Rindal from Minnesota Power came to their facility as part of the audit. He brought a special skill-set and did an excellent job. He said that is a good tool WSC is using and he commended them for it. Hickey clarified that Harmer was referring to WSC's Special Government Employees they have with the MNSTAR program. He agreed Rindal was very beneficial on that task and they appreciated his assistance. Ajax referred to the outreach presentations discussed earlier. He said he thought WSC has been doing a terrific job with that as well. About two-and-a-half years ago, Todd Haglin came to speak to his trade association, the Precision Metal Forming Association, about the MNSHARP program. He believed one of the most recent recipients of a MNSHARP award, Morrissey, Bloomington, Minn., was a direct result of WSC’s outreach and they are an important member of their trade organization. He thanked WSC for bringing that message to them. Ajax thought they had two MNSHARP companies in their organization so far.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-10-

December 3, 2004

Harmer asked if Phil Jacobs works for Workplace Safety Consultation and whether they were planning to offer training at individual employer's locations to work with technical staff. Hickey said they would offer training at individual employers and will try to set it up for what is requested. IX. New business Companies using behavioral safety models Assistant Commissioner Wade welcomed representatives from International Paper and the Sartell Mill who were present to give a presentation about behavior safety models used by their companies. Tim Knoll, the hourly safety coordinator at the International Paper and the Sartell Mill provided a PowerPoint presentation. Safety Manager Bill Weihs assisted with the presentation. A handout of the presentation was distributed. Knoll reviewed the mill's history and then talked about behavioral safety. The workers at the mill are represented by the PACE Local Union 7-274. Knoll reported their total incident rate (TIR) was more than 2.8 a few years ago and they decided they wanted to go the next step to drive that rate down. They negotiated with the union about the possibility of bringing in a behavior-based safety process and the union supported that proposal. Knoll coordinated and implemented the behavior-based safety process at the Sartell Mill. Knoll stated they believe behaviors are an observable activity. They trained the entire workforce in about five months. They trained people about the proper etiquette of doing an observation and, more importantly, the importance of observations and what they represent. An observation lasts three to five minutes and may be at the beginning, the end or in the middle of a task. The observers are encouraged to change that up, so they look at anything and everything that is going on out on the floor. If behaviors are an observable activity, then observations become pictures of what safety actually looks like on the floor. Knoll compared the number of observations with the pixels that are used to make up a picture. The more observations they are able to obtain, the clearer that picture becomes of what safety looks like on the floor at the Sartell Mill. Knoll reported 48 of the 530 employees who were trained at Sartell volunteered to do observations. These observers set up an opportunity to come by to do an observation with the employees who are on the floor and ask their permission to do a safety observation at that time. They use a standard checklist with 29 behaviors and a catch-all, or special item, area. If items continue to come up in the special-item category, that becomes a behavior. Knoll said they named their process Safety Through Employee Participation (S.T.E.P.). They have a steering committee that meets twice a month with eight members; five are union members and three are salaried members. The committee must always

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-11-

December 3, 2004

consist of more employees than managers for the employees to maintain ownership of the process. Knoll conducts monthly observer meetings to maintain the vitally important contact with all of the observers to communicate any changes coming up and, most importantly, to receive the observers' feedback about how everything is going on the floor and what can be changed to make it more user-friendly for the employees. Knoll also reports quarterly to the joint leadership team consisting of their middle manager and all of the department managers, as well as reporting at the union leadership team monthly meeting. Knoll noted Sartell generates charts using NuDatum software, which was developed for recording and tracking safety observations. He said it does a very good job of initiating a lot of reports and allowing you to proactively manage safety. He updates the "Quick S.T.E.P." statistics weekly, which are on an Excel spreadsheet. The reason they are called "Quick S.T.E.P." is because you can take a look at the statistics quickly and understand where your department is and determine whether you need to focus more on observations or if you are on target. These statistics are provided to the steering committee and all the mill departments with the NuDatum statistics and the “Quick S.T.E.P.” statistics every Monday morning. Knoll said they have been able to successfully record and track the observation process. After you have the "picture," you have to make sure you track it and use it for your benefit. They find if they are doing an observation of their mill workers, they are 99.5 percent safe, which is great. During this process of implementing a behavior-based safety process, there is a time where you have to gain the trust of the employees and make them very comfortable with the process. You have to continue to make sure the employees are aware that you are not gathering any data that could be used to make things difficult for the employee later. It is a nonpunitive process, so it does take a while to get your entire workforce warmed up to that process and to make them feel comfortable. Knoll speculated their employees are 75 percent to 85 percent comfortable with that. He said you will always have a certain percentage of employees who will never be comfortable with the process, but you cannot focus on them. You need to focus on the ones who are aware that safety matters. Knoll said they believe the S.T.E.P. process has contributed to establishing their current TIR of 1.13 percent. If everything continues as it has been, by the end of the year they will end up with a TIR of close to 1.0, which he said was "world class." The process got them off a plateau and helped them drive down the TIR. They have implemented other things into their safety format, but they believe doing observations makes a big difference. Knoll noted they would refresh the safety training for employees and management. Knoll distributed a copy of a chart generated by their NuDatum software. They refer to it as the "Visine Chart," because the objective is to "get the red out." The less red that shows on that report, the safer you have been working. They are expecting their employees to revert back to some old habits and they will proactively manage and educate the employees about what is taking place. Knoll also distributed a sample copy of

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-12-

December 3, 2004

the Quick S.T.E.P. statistics. They were developed on an Excel spreadsheet; he sends the report to the line managers to show them where their departments are among the totals for the month and the total number of observations. Hickey introduced Pamela Smith from Ainsworth Bemidji OSB. He noted International Paper is a union company and Ainsworth is not a union company, so you get two slightly different perspectives. Smith gave a PowerPoint presentation about the company's behavioral safety model. She noted Ainsworth bought out Potlatch in September and she reviewed the company's history and background. They employ 240 employees and produce 1 million to 1.2 million board feet a day. They have two lines, running with four shifts, that rotate on 12-hour shifts. Smith said they have had behavioral safety since 1995 and are well into it. They have seen lots of ups and downs, and that is the information she covered in her presentation. They chose the program Bapp Track for their database. It stresses it is employee-driven and is the main key for their behavioral safety process. They developed their observation sheet based on their prior incidents. They took a three-year sample and looked at every single thing about the root cause: what happened, whether it was behavior and how to get it divided down to record on their observation sheet. Their original sheet had about 20 different behaviors; they went deeper and more in-depth and have close to 30 now. They also developed advice statements, such as “when you are blowing down, wear your respirator to avoid inhalation of dust,” so people know what to recommend at the end of the observation. They also give clear definitions; those are very difficult to come up with, because they do not want to be safety cops. That is not what an observation is and they do not want to point fingers at everybody. They want to encourage people and train people of how to work safely. Smith reported their process is known as the WISE process, which stands for "Workers Investing in a Safety Environment." They use their ABC analysis to look at the antecedent. It is the trigger and is why they do the behavior. For example, if the telephone rings, our behavior is the actual behavior being analyzed: you answer the phone. The consequences are what could happen if we do that behavior, such as: talk to the caller or, perhaps, they hang up every time you answer the phone. What it points out is your consequence is going to affect your behavior. If the person hangs up every time, you probably are not going to pick up that phone again. Smith outlined the categories they use to figure out which behavior an action goes under and noted they added ergonomics about three years ago, which has been really good for them. Besides noticing behavior, they ask why the employee did it that way, so they can find out what the barriers to safety are. After you get rid of the barriers, people can work safely. They found they have had seven of them, including training and habits, that are high ones. When people come on and somebody trains them, it might not be the safest way to do it, which gets carried on throughout the next time they train somebody, and all of a sudden everybody is doing it. Other barriers include rewards, equipment – where the machine itself is the main problem, and a disagreement of safe practices, which they do not see that much anymore. That is when somebody says they know it is probably

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-13-

December 3, 2004

the safer way, but will not do it that way. Personal factors and personal choice also are discussed with the worker. Smith noted that when they started, Bapp Track told them to just do a volunteer system and do as many people who want to be trained as possible. They had 60 percent of people wanting to do it. Of that 60 percent, Bapp Tracks suggested they only have 10 percent active each quarter. That way, they can get out there and people know who is doing observations and they can get to know them. They rotate off, so they do not get burned out. They changed that and now train all employees, so they know the observation process and are not scared. The observation time is a risk-free time zone and there are no names on their documents; everybody has a number and Smith is the only person who knows which numbers go to which names. She said you have a choice to be observed, but that is a bit misleading. The employee can always say they do not want to be observed right now and they will not observe that person. They do not have to ask to do an observation; you can just start an observation, but if that person turns around and says they do not want to be observed right now, they will not observe that person. They found out, through years of experience, if they always come up to somebody and say, "I want to observe you," that person will change their behavior immediately and you do not see the true picture. If somebody just comes by and stands next to you for a couple of minutes, you might not notice them or see the clipboard right away and the observer will get a real picture of what is happening right then and there. Smith noted participation is not mandatory and they do not make people do observations. This is a change and they are on a downslide with their behavioral process. At the very beginning, they saw the observations were great and the incident rate was going down. Everybody was working safer. They thought if they had everybody do an observation, then their numbers would go down even more and everybody would be totally safe. It did not work that way. People were kicking and screaming and said, "you cannot make me do this." Those are some of the problems they have had. Smith said they have a WISE steering team with representation from all of the crews and departments, so they can bring forth any ideas or problems they have had. They meet monthly and ask the members of the team to always be active observers who are always there and willing to help employees with questions about training somebody about observations or coaching them if they have not done them in awhile. Smith said they put out monthly reports very similar to what Sartell does. They used to do weekly reports, but their numbers of observations have gone down and it was not feasible to report every week any more. They also do yearly reviews and monitor the behaviors through incidents, about what they are affecting and the cause. They look at all of the behaviors and observations. They use Decision Matrix to pick out what they need to set for their goals for next year. They always work with management. Above all, you need good communication and teamwork. The steering team members are each responsible for a bulletin board on the floor, where they update all of the data regularly. They are there for all pre-shift meetings, so they can speak up about anything. If something came during the weekend, they can let everybody else know about it.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-14-

December 3, 2004

Smith reviewed their WISE data-flow chart and noted they were currently having some difficulties. They had some management leave during the past year. They also had the union come in and they did not succeed at their mill. She said a lot of people at that time, even with their buy out, "have blinders on" right now and tell themselves they are just going to do their job and cannot think beyond that box right now. They need to overcome that and let the employees know that the work is going to be there, you can do observations and just look at the brighter picture here. Discussion followed the presentations, members and visitors asked questions about both companies. A visitor asked what sort of items land in the "other" or special category. Smith responded that things such as long hair not being put up in the hardhat. Knoll said their other category was where they catch their work orders. If you take a look at the behaviors the observers are putting in there, they typically fit into one of the other 29 behaviors. The work order can be important, such as lighting. You have to try to isolate the behavior-based safety process from being a fix-it shop, but every once in a while something will come up and you need to address it; it adds credibility to the behaviorbased safety process by addressing it, especially if it is an important issue, such as lighting, that affects every employee. They take advantage of those opportunities to add to the credibility of the process. Lois Klobuchar asked Knoll if they worked with the union first to get them to buy in. Knoll said, "absolutely." Management and union sat down with the joint leadership team and began to implant the idea of coming on board with a behavior-based safety process. Weihs noted they actually started in 1990 with the union, early in the process, to try to get the union to warm up to the idea that they were going to do observations. It was difficult at first. Klobuchar asked if that was difficult and Weihs said it was. They tried many times during the years and during any contract negotiations, they were finally successful this last time around. He stressed that trust has to be there before you ever get into this with the union. Discipline was an issue; Smith mentioned no names or clock numbers are associated with anything, because there is no discipline during an observation. That was the biggest fear the union had. They thought that if he watches during an observation and sees someone doing something wrong, he would turn them in and they will get disciplined for it. Weihs stated they have not had one discipline case at Sartell; Smith said they never have either. Weihs said they figured they would fail right away if there was even one case of discipline and they would never get the program back. Allen asked whether Sartell has been able to reap the benefits of increased trust between labor and management as a result of the integrity of the behavior-based process. Knoll said they have always had a very good level of trust between management and labor at his mill. He noted they went through a difficult time in the ‘90s, with a contract and arbitration, and it took some time to heal after that. The joint leadership team does that and they get together on a monthly basis; there is a very good trust factor between those two parties that definitely helps. He speculated the behavior-based process has probably, if anything, enhanced that. Allen asked if they were at the point of predicting

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-15-

December 3, 2004

an accident. She said, in her previous experience, they found that after collecting some history of behavior-based observations, if they saw a dip in the number of observations, they could predict an accident was coming. She asked if they were at that point and whether it had been their experience. Knoll said they are aware of that and they are also aware of the fact that 97 percent has typically been the benchmark on that. Anything below that point, you start setting yourself up for some serious incidents. So far, they have not had anyone get below that 97 percent safe. They are not gathering as much data as they would like and they need to gather more data so that becomes more definitive. Smith reported their data has shown they have hit a low point this year and have had an increase in injuries. McGovern gave both companies a lot of credit and said these looked like sophisticated, well-thought-out programs that have taken a lot of time to develop and implement. She asked about some literature about injury epidemiology. There is a tendency to think that if a company is too focused on a training program, management would not consider engineering solutions. There is a tendency to keep saying “if you would only do your job better, then the injuries would go away.” She asked if they see any tendency for people to take the focus off of fixing the process or machines or that kind of thing. Smith said they did and they had to do more training about that, because instead of asking why, a lot of people will say, "I just did it that way." You need to ask why they do that. People were not asking enough "whys" to figure out that the machinery is the main problem and is why the person does things a certain way. A lot of people said it was personal choice and it was getting back that they needed to retrain their observers to know what to ask and how to put down the right barrier, so they knew what it was. Roxanne Pawielski noted she has only been at Ainsworth for 30 days. She added she has been doing observations herself and talking to people, and what the big problem with the system right now is that almost all root causes are people problems and behavior problems. They have really gotten away from just looking at safety as a system, instead of looking at it just as behavior based. She thinks they need to get back to a safety system with communication, controls, management support, etc. There are many parts of the system and they all need to be there. Behavior is just one of those. Knoll said Sartell is a MNSTAR site; they tell everyone in their training that they have engineered the safeguards into their process as much as possible. If there are one or two they missed, they can be brought to their attention and they will address them. If they were to make it any safer, the only other option would be to hit the kill switch and walk away from it and that is not an option, because they need to make paper. You have to consider that 93.7 percent of all injuries that take place in the workforce are behavior related, so behavior becomes a very instrumental part of the safety process on the floor. You need to pay attention to what you are doing and how you approach each task. Sometimes the wrong decisions are made. It might be because of a lack of education, because the employee panicked or because the employee was not trained correctly. During the observation process, they are able to identify that and come back into the departments to proactively address that. Ajax asked if their companies are sharing any of their workers' compensation savings they are probably seeing as a result of their program, with the rank and file

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-16-

December 3, 2004

employees. Bill Weiss from Sartell Mill said they had a 12.0 TIR in 1990. Today they are at a 1.0 TIR. They had six reportable injuries this year and their workers' compensation budget has been cut by 300 percent. He said behavior-based safety is not a "silver bullet," but they have definitely seen a savings in workers' compensation costs. He shares the information with employees about the costs of workers' compensation at the crew meetings and the safety meetings. They are not providing a cash safety bonus to the employees. An OAC member noted the company remains competitive, is a stable employer and the employee shares in those benefits indirectly, as opposed to receiving a check. Smith and Pawielski said they do not deal with workers' compensation and could not answer that question. Metcalf noted Smith said their management was not willing to meet with her, or put her off to the side, and asked if it was like that before they were taken over or whether that was just recently with the new management. Smith said that is something they have been battling for quite a few years where, for example, a line went down and people have to go out there and the meeting does not happen because everybody is gone. They understand the lines should be kept running, but many times there are excuses such as "I am too busy" or "something else came up," even though they give plenty of advance notice of a meeting time. Metcalf said they had a problem at their facility with the same thing about four or five years ago. They started with the union, and labor and management and found out that the more labor and management work together, the more they showed management how they could save money and increase their profits, when you do not have people out. He said the sick leave average was about 20 hours a week and they are now down to about eight hours a week or fewer. Sick leave, overtime and workers' compensation are all down. There have been no complaints in two years. Wade and Todd have attended some of their meetings. According to studies they have done, if management does not get on board, it is a failing process. He did not know how they could change that. Pawielski said the new management is on board at her company and that is why she was hired. That was their first step. Management has attended the safety committee meetings she has been at. They have conducted crew meetings with the mill manager, herself and the shift coordinator. It is mandatory they are at all crew meetings. She is working hard at getting leadership on board with some of her thoughts about where they need help. She thinks they are on the right track now and thinks the problem was the previous management. Daryl Tindle said one of the things he found very useful was just common sense. Get away from the workplace to neutral territory for negotiations or safety meetings and have everybody shut off their cell phones. You can get a meeting in instead of running out to fix the line. Ed LaFavor noted that both of the organizations are international corporations with various plants around the world. He asked if their programs were site specific or whether their programs existed throughout the whole organization. Knoll said their programs were site specific. He said they chose to do it in-house and it is more successful with the process if you train to your culture at the mill. They gathered some information from other IP facilities, as well as other facilities outside of IP. When it came down to the

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-17-

December 3, 2004

"nuts and bolts of the process," they put something together specifically for their mill, so they could train to the culture they feel they have in their mill. Smith said their program was site specific, although the company encourages behavior processes throughout all of its mills. Each site was able to do what they wanted to do. Discussion items for 2005 meetings Bufton reminded OAC members of the meeting dates for next year. They are March 4, June 24, Sept. 9 and Dec. 2. There was a handout for visitors as well. She announced they want to focus on a specific topic at each meeting in 2005, as well as doing the OAC's administrative business, and asked for ideas about the topics OAC members would like to see covered at those meetings. Bufton mentioned they talked earlier this year about what the OAC and visitors would like to do to help MNOSHA to become stronger and to continue the very positive strides they have made in helping everyone control injuries on the job in the past. They are looking at those topics that will help MNOSHA move ahead and help them as an advisory council to do their jobs better. She asked for ideas. Wade noted that at the June 25, 2004 meeting, the OAC came up with about 20 areas to consider or recommendations that were made to the agency. DLI consolidated a few of those recommendations. It is the intent of Wade, Todd and Collins to work through those recommendations. They intend to provide specific feedback about how the agency has addressed the recommendations that have been made. Two of those recommendations have not been explored with the OAC: the use of surveys and "building your own brand." Wade questioned whether the surveys were getting to the heart of the matter. Currently, they have employee and employer surveys online. Wade said they have not received the participation they would like. They prefer to stay with an electronic survey. With shrinking resources available, it is easier to track the data, compile it and analyze it, and they are moving toward using electronic technology. They are not interested in going back to a paper product; the results are not comparable. They would like to dedicate a portion of the meeting time in the first of two meetings to talk about whether the surveys are "getting to the heart of the matter." She asked OAC members and the visitors to take that back to their constituents and encourage employers and employees to use that to provide feedback to MNOSHA. Wade noted "building your own brand" was a recommendation that came from Bufton and she agreed to lead that discussion. Wade did not know whether the survey topic is going to take the full discussion time; therefore, there is additional room on the next agenda for an open discussion item. She asked OAC members to advance any additional discussion items they would like this group to explore today or think about it and, as we complete our current list, be prepared to continue to provide feedback about items that come up that they think warrant a detailed discussion by the OAC.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-18-

December 3, 2004

Bufton noted time at the June 2004 meeting was spent looking at strategic discussion about what the OAC is and how it could be more useful to the agency. She asked whether an annual review of discussion items would be useful to OSHA. Wade said it was too early to tell whether there was a need to exam this on an annual basis, but she did not think they have enough information yet. She said the discussions within this group were maturing and they were getting more specific feedback from the OAC; she also encouraged participation from the audience. She intends to provide the OAC members with very specific feedback about the agency's response to each recommendation. Any recommendations that have been addressed are not necessarily closed items. She will rely on the OAC to consider the agency's feedback. If we would benefit from more discussion about it, there will still be that time. She said OAC members could expect a written response about these recommendations at the next meeting. It was decided the March meeting would be about the use of surveys and how to get more people involved, whether we are asking the right questions and what is the use of the information that is being gathered. Wade said the June 24 meeting would be dedicated to "building out own brand." Harmer asked if the list of recommendations included the recommendations made by the Ergonomics Task-force. Wade said the list does include an ergonomics discussion point. The recommendation from the council was to move ergonomics ahead. There has been a presentation to bring the council up to date about the agency's efforts. It does not include the total recommendations that were made by the Ergonomics Task-force. Those recommendations are being considered. DLI used those recommendations as its motivator to add specific staff members dedicated to ergonomics. Those staff members continue to use the recommendations to guide their work, so that continues to be a work in progress. DLI provided feedback about the department's ergonomics efforts at a past meeting. Allen asked whether the OAC would play a role in the legislative agenda development process and how they should be participating. Wade clarified the OAC is different than the Workers' Compensation Advisory Council. That group has a legislative mandate to vet any proposed legislation before it lands at the capitol. That is not the charge of the OAC, which is to provide direct feedback to the agency. Each OAC member is very carefully chosen, based on their profession, their constituent groups and so forth. It is the OAC's charge to bring concerns to DLI from the industry. It is the OAC member’s choice to participate in the legislative process. The majority of OSHA legislation, as far as standards are concerned, is driven by federal OSHA. So DLI's need for legislation is limited. Most often, the agency is in a more reactive state when there are proposals – for example – to turn the program back to federal OSHA. That was highly unusual. It came at a time when there was misinformation suggesting that by turning the program back, the state of Minnesota would actually save money for purposes of addressing the budget deficit. People were educated and then recognized the value of MNOSHA to Minnesota businesses and then a different decision was made. Wade does not expect that MNOSHA, from that perspective, will get the kind of attention it got in 2003. However, there are

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-19-

December 3, 2004

always bills introduced, whether it is to increase penalties or do something else very specific. Wade said it was up to the OAC members what level they want to participate in the legislative process. Because the OAC only meets on a quarterly basis, the agency does not always have the opportunity to keep the members informed on the day-to-day occurrences. After the session starts, Wade said she probably spends up to 50 percent of her time educating legislators, participating, presenting to different committees and so forth. She told members it was "their call" and noted she did not expect specific legislation. Wade said she knew this group has expressed interest in being more active and they have that right. If there is anything that is on the table that the agency is aware of in March, they can bring it to the OAC members' attention if they need additional input or additional support. They are certainly able to contact members outside the meeting schedule. But as far as just proposing legislation, the standards themselves are generally driven by federal OSHA, so they just do have the same opportunity or need for that to be the focus of this group as they do in some of the other advisory councils. Allen stated that if there comes a point where DLI needs support for – for example – the bill that was handed out earlier or at a hearing, or if testimony is needed, DLI could let OAC members know and maybe they could come in support of what DLI is trying to get pushed through the session. Wade thanked her. Ajax said he would second Allen's suggestion. He thought that was critically important and supported any way this group could affect some public policy for MNOSHA. The OAC would be a very powerful voice with labor and industry, education and meeting with legislators to encourage them to do something or not do something. He would certainly volunteer to support in any way he possibly could. Harmer noted that at one time the OAC had a legislative subcommittee that got to be inactive, to a degree, and it was disbanded for lack of commitment and people not wanting to get involved. He agreed with Wade that meeting on a quarterly basis did not allow the OAC to really interact and influence the development of legislation, as opposed to responding and endorsing something. Wade responded that if it was the pleasure of the group to reactivate that subcommittee, the agency was very open to that. A reactivation of the subcommittee may be a better approach than waiting for the quarterly update to the whole group. Maybe that is a better way to get individuals who want to be more involved. She asked if there was an interest from this group to reactivate the legislative subcommittee. Tindle said labor has always had a strong history of backing not only Minnesota OSHA, but any type of safety involvement. They still have a little bit of legislative encouragement they could "bring to task" if they need to, so he would be interested in participating in something like that. Harmer requested that forming a legislative subcommittee be put on the agenda for the next meeting. He noted they were missing quite a few members and, perhaps, others would have an opinion about this issue.

OSHA Advisory Council Minutes

-20-

December 3, 2004

Bufton suggested that since the OAC does not meet again until March that maybe they could have an electronic discussion, because by March we are halfway through the session. Wade agreed to do that. Bufton asked members to be thinking about topics for the September and December meetings. They would like to get those out early, so that members can begin to prepare, so staff could help them to prepare and so that people who are planning to visit the OAC meetings could get that on their schedule. They will also be talking about where and when we will move one meeting a year outside the metro. Wade suggested September, because that seemed to work well for everyone, so "put your thinking cap on" about where would be a good place to move to. Ajax made a motion to adjourn. McGovern seconded the motion. All voted in favor of the motion. Respectfully submitted, Deb Caswell Executive Secretary dc/s