Immediate Vault Immediate Access

Using Ergonomics to Ease Employees’ Return to the Office

Strategies for returning employees to offices continue to evolve due to the emergence of new COVID-19 variants and changes in government regulations. While some workers may feel excitement and a renewed sense of focus, there is also notable hesitancy to be physically working side-by-side and accepting changes in the physical workspaces to which employees are returning. Many employees may be coming back to the office from less-than-ideal workstation setups at home, which could have been a source of pain and discomfort. On the other hand, new workstations or office layout changes can also create physical problems if these spaces are modified solely for COVID-related safety without considering healthy ergonomic conditions as well.

Employers may benefit from being proactive and planning for flexibility in the work space design to accommodate sudden changes. When designing and managing the new work environment and planning for flexibility to change layout and design as the pandemic continues to evolve, a concerted effort on ergonomics can help ease employees’ reintegration back into the office. This can help maintain a high level of work productivity and may even help with employee retention by creating positive workplace experiences and demonstrating care for workers.

Managing the new work environment

In recent months, the layout of many office spaces has likely changed to increase safety measures. Some companies are now moving to an open work model—commonly known as space sharing—where employees no longer have an assigned desk that can be customized to their needs. Other companies may be opting for layouts with greater separation between work desks, which can result in new ergonomic challenges such as reduction in the size of work area, increased reaching and awkward postures.

Feedback is important. Employers need to listen to how employees are feeling, what concerns they have, and what they physically need in the office to be set up for success. Ongoing, frequent communication is necessary to maintain trust and help employees feel at ease with changes in their work conditions. To proactively address any concerns, business leaders can utilize tools such as employee surveys and returning-to-office packages. Surveys are vital to gauge a sense of employee readiness and hesitations while also showing employees that their managers are listening to their concerns. Capturing employee feedback also helps employers prepare for potential setbacks.

Ergonomics training programs and self-help checklists can be successful tools to ease the return to office and help employees experience less physical discomfort as well as improve employee productivity, profitability and, ultimately, even job satisfaction. Ergonomics training should be customized to address the concerns employees may face upon return to the office environment. The training and checklists should provide guidance on solutions and adjustments that employees can implement in their workspaces to achieve maximum comfort and avoid the risk of injury.

Retaining employees

In November 2021, a record 4.5 million workers quit their jobs, and the Great Resignation has showed little signs of stopping in 2022, with January resignations falling just shy of that record at 4.3 million. It is clear that stress related to the COVID-19 pandemic has been one of the key factors contributing to the labor shortage. Business leaders have found that a portion of the workforce may not feel safe or find it necessary to return to the office. There are many facets of such sentiments that employers must consider, and while ergonomics are not necessarily the driving concern for workers, employers can help move the needle by improving conditions for employees in as many ways as possible. Ergonomics initiatives and investing in the office environment offer ways to help improve employee morale and reduce discomfort and physical stressors that lead to injuries.

Implementing wellness routines can also help keep employees physically and mentally healthy. Business leaders should encourage workers to maintain healthy lifestyles, take regular breaks, and take days off to spend time with friends and family. Lastly, early intervention is key when addressing problems in the workplace. Leaders must provide clear resources for employees who have concerns. If employees have no direction on what to do when they have concerns, they are more likely to become dissatisfied and leave the workplace.  

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced businesses to alter operations, and as the landscape continues to change, employee retention and workplace concerns could become even more at risk. When bringing employees back to the office, companies may experience more success if they implement and sustain their ergonomics programs, maintain ongoing communication, and create a workplace where employees’ well-being is clearly valued.

What Employers Need to Know About Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

In an effort to combat the COVID-19 virus and its subsequent variants, the Biden administration has instituted three important mandates that employers should be aware of as they may impact their business. First, the Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS), issued by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA), requires that all employers with 100+ employees mandate vaccination or weekly testing. The second mandate involves federal workers and contractors and requires them to obtain a vaccination without any option for weekly testing. The final mandate was issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and requires vaccination of all healthcare workers at CMS-covered facilities.

OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard

The mandate that has the most wide-ranging impact is Occupational Health and Safety Administration’s (OSHA) Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) that calls for employers with 100 or more employees to either require employees to obtain a COVID-19 vaccination or to prove compliance with a weekly-testing program. This ETS is expected to affect over 80 million employees. 

On December 17, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the stay placed on OSHA’s ETS issued by the Fifth Circuit in November. The court held that OSHA does have statutory authority to mandate national vaccines and/or testing for employers with more than 100 employees. Specifically, it outlined that because COVID-19 is a virus that causes bodily harm, OSHA was well within its administrative authority to regulate the health and safety of employees. 

Since the Sixth Circuit’s decision to dissolve the stay, OSHA announced that it will not be issuing citations for noncompliance with the ETS requirements until January 10 and the testing requirements will not be enforced until February 9 with the caveat that the employer must make good faith efforts to come into compliance as soon as possible.

After this ruling by the Sixth Circuit, eight groups challenged the OSHA vaccine mandate and filed emergency applications with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to stay the mandate again until the case can be heard in the highest court. On December 20, the Supreme Court requested a response from the federal government by December 30. And, on December 22, in an almost unprecedented move, the Supreme Court ordered oral argument on these emergency applications, which will take place on January 7.

Despite the fact that the validity of the ETS is now squarely before the Supreme Court, employers should still operate as if the ETS will go into immediate effect. OSHA has implemented new deadlines to reflect the current status of the ETS.

By January 10, employers should:

  • Track employee vaccination status
  • Create a database detailing vaccination information for each employee
  • Require unvaccinated employees to wear a mask
  • Provide paid time off for employees to get vaccinated and recover

As of February 9, 2022, employers must also require unvaccinated employees must start testing for COVID weekly. Self-administered or self-read tests would not comply. Employers must observe or use a proctor and have employees tested on site, or at a recognized testing facility.

The Mandate for Federal Employees and Contractors

The second mandate stems from President Biden’s executive order that requires most federal employees or contractors to get vaccinated. This mandate does not have a testing option.

On December 7, the U.S. District Court for the Southern Section of Georgia granted a preliminary injunction to temporarily halt the enforcement of the Biden’s administration’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors.The court found that the administration had overstepped the bounds of it authority under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act 40 U.S.C. 101 et. seq. The injunction effectively prohibits enforcement of the federal contractor vaccine mandate in all 50 states and any territory of the United States. However, on December 17, the Eleventh Circuit, denied the government’s motion to stay. This effectively upheld the injunction. The court found that the government had failed to show that it “would be irreparably harmed absent a stay.”

The CMS Mandate

The third mandate is an interim file rule of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which requires vaccination of all healthcare workers at CMS-covered facilities throughout the United States. The CMS mandate is currently enjoined by court order in 25 states and continues in full effect in 25 other states. After the ruling by the Fifth Circuit in November, however, CMS suspended implementation and enforcement of the mandate pending resolution of the challenges before the Supreme Court.

Tornadoes Devastate Midwest and Southern States

Last week, a series of tornadoes ripped across the Midwest and Southern United States, killing dozens and crippling infrastructure in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio and Tennessee. While Karen Clark & Company has estimated that the insured loss from the tornado outbreak will be about $3 billion, and credit rating agency Fitch predicted that losses would total $5 billion, Dr. Joel N. Myers, AccuWeather founder and CEO, estimated that the tornadoes are expected to cost about $18 billion in total damage and economic loss. Mark Friedlander, director of corporate communications at The Insurance Information Institute, said, “Based on preliminary assessments of the extensive property damage we are seeing across multiple states, this weekend’s tornado outbreak has the potential to be the costliest on record in the U.S.”

As of Monday, 88 deaths across the region had been confirmed, but over 100 people are also missing, which means the death count may be higher. The cyclones killed more than 70 people in Kentucky, the hardest-hit state, leaving thousands homeless and knocking out power for more than 25,000 in the western region of the state. Additionally, 10,000 Kentucky homes and businesses reported being without water, and another 17,000 were under boil-water advisories, according to the Kentucky Division of Emergency Management.

Across the entire affected region, 750,000 customers were left without electricity. These outages have complicated search and rescue efforts, as rescue workers excavated destroyed buildings, searching for people who are still missing. In Mayfield, Kentucky, for example, the city’s main fire station and multiple police stations were inoperable, and the city was scrambling to find new ways to field emergency calls.

Also in Mayfield, at least eight people died at a Mayfield Consumer Products scented candle factory after workers reportedly pleaded with supervisors to let them leave the building after warning sirens sounded and an initial twister had passed with little damage, only to be threatened with firing if they did not continue working. Over 100 workers were trapped inside the building after the next tornado leveled it. Several survivors have already filed a lawsuit against the company, citing “flagrant indifference” to worker safety, and that the company “knew or should have known about the expected tornado and the danger of serious bodily injuries and death to its employees if its employees were required to remain at its place of business during the pendency of the expected tornado.”

Another tornado struck an Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville, Illinois, killing six people and injuring another. Amazon claims that it took all necessary precautions, but family members of victims have alleged that the company prioritized productivity over worker safety by not heeding tornado warnings and not adequately preparing employees for emergency weather safety responses. Amazon pledged to help workers and their families affected by the tragedy by donating $1 million to the Edwardsville Community Foundation, a charitable trust that benefits regional communities. OSHA is reportedly investigating the Amazon warehouse, and Kentucky state regulators are investigating the Mayfield Consumer Products event.

While an Amazon spokesperson noted that the company’s warehouse was up to code, Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker also promised an investigation into whether building codes needed to be updated, “given serious change in climate that we are seeing across the country.” Scientists say that climate change may have changed normal weather patterns and led to these tornadoes’ increased intensity and reach, with record warm temperatures across the region potentially exacerbating the disaster.

Businesses and risk professionals should prepare now for more frequent and intense weather events. The following recent Risk Management articles may help:

5 Best Practices for Effective Claims Reviews

With the cost of insurance for businesses rising across many types of coverage, staying on top of trends in the claims portfolio is more important than ever. Spotting problem areas and opportunities sooner makes it easier to develop and implement steps to reduce risk pre-loss and better control costs post-loss. For this reason, many insurers and TPAs promise to conduct claims reviews with their business customers on a regular basis, but the rigor can vary greatly. Practices that have been common historically often lack the nuance and precision that can unlock the maximum benefit for each customer’s unique situation.

Here are five best practices for a wide variety of customers across a range of industries:

1. Assemble the right team

Typically, only the person overseeing claims at the business attends the claims review with key claims staff from the carrier. However, this small team limits the potential for brainstorming solutions and getting full buy-in to implement them. In addition to claims experts, it may also be helpful for the carrier’s loss control team to attend, as well as agent/broker staff.

buy isofair online metabolicleader.com/p7pmm/img/jpg/isofair.html no prescription pharmacy

From the business customer side, it is helpful to include all key personnel who can facilitate immediate decisions that will impact the ultimate resolution of the claim in an efficient and timely manner or provide other insightful information. This often includes the risk manager, and may also encompass employees from legal, human resources, safety, operations and even the CFO, in some cases.

2. Develop a clear understanding of the customer to set the claims review objective

Broadly speaking, the goal is always to minimize loss costs to help manage the price and coverage of the overall insurance program. However, each business and claims portfolio is unique. One company may be most concerned with how claims reserves are affecting budgets. Another company may have an unusually high experience modification rate that they want to bring down by reducing the frequency of worker injuries. Yet another company may be changing part of their operation and want to monitor claims activity associated with it more closely than business-as-usual activities. The policyholder’s unique objectives should drive decisions about how often to conduct the claims reviews, what types of claims to include and where to dive into the greatest detail.

3. Fully understand and account for the impact of claims on the insurance program

In the initial design of the insurance program, certain coverages may have been limited due to a problematic claims record. For instance, frequent third-party claims for premises liability may have led to restrictions on Med Pay coverage or a higher deductible to give the customer a bigger stake in safety measures.

buy wellbutrin online metabolicleader.com/p7pmm/img/jpg/wellbutrin.html no prescription pharmacy

Or perhaps the customer hoped for a loss-sensitive program but could only secure a guaranteed cost program due to lack of an internal pre- and post-loss management platform. The claims review should be designed to account for how frequency and severity may affect underwriting decisions so that the policyholder can move toward its coverage objective

4. Choose claims for review according to objectives, not simply dollar value

The default choice for what claims to review is often based on dollar value—e.g., all open claims with incurred losses of $25,000 or more. This approach may miss underlying trends that could lead to severe loss, however. For instance, perhaps a restaurant chain experiences a high frequency of slip-and-fall claims from workers in its kitchens. While these may all have been minor, but it may only be a matter of time until a severe injury occurs.

buy zyprexa online metabolicleader.com/p7pmm/img/jpg/zyprexa.html no prescription pharmacy

With the objective to reduce frequency and the risk of serious injury, the claims review should examine all slip-and-fall claims using data and analytics to uncover causal factors such as food and liquid dropped on floors or seasonal workers with little safety training.

5. Track reserving on a micro level relative to all factors that can affect open claims

Typically, reserving is only tracked from a macro perspective, but this can overlook a variety of factors that could help better manage reserves and ultimate outcomes. For example, are the latest technologies being consistently used to manage costs? Advances in artificial intelligence and data and analytics now allow us to identify treatment providers associated with the best outcomes for injured workers, but how well are companies taking advantage of the recommendations? Early resolution techniques for auto and general liability claims may lower the ultimate cost of claims but cause a short-term bump in claims payments that needs to be accounted for in the customer’s budgeting process.

Potential Benefits

Claims reviews based on these best practices can yield significant benefits, especially when used as part of a holistic approach to managing risk and reducing losses. For example, an early claims review for a new manufacturing customer identified sprain and strain injuries as a problem area. The loss control team then surveyed the manufacturer’s operations and uncovered increased risk due to various manual lifting tasks, such as loading 8-foot-tall plastic silos with heavy equipment in a confined space. Based on that finding, the insurer’s team conducted onsite job hazard analysis supervisory training that included a safe lifting program, online courses and ergonomic risk assessments on a variety of tasks. As a result, within about two years, the program cut the manufacturer’s workers compensation loss ratio roughly in half.