I came across an interesting job posting; it got me to thinking about excess in government... Link
One of the listed job requirements is:
Must be able to lift 75 lbs. on a continuous basis
Contrary to popular belief, there is no specified, defined, or absolute weight limit for a “one-man lift” in current Federal code or OSHA standards. Link
On the other hand, OSHA/NIOSH specifies a formula for lifting. From what I understand, as a practical matter, it is impossible to exceed 45 lbs. as the upper limit for a “one-man lift” without violating guidelines. At least, 45 lbs. is what is universally taught when taking approved HAZMAT or HAZWOMPER (OSHA 1910.120/40 Hour) certification classes
NIOSH has come up with a formula to calculate the recommended weight limit.
RWL=LC x HM x VM x DM x AM x FM X CM
LC is the load constant or the fixed weight to be lifted. HM is the horizontal multiplier or the distance the weight will be moved from left to right. VM is the vertical multiplier or the height the weight will be lifted. DM is the distance multiplier and is taken from a table provided by NIOSH. AM is asymmetric multiplier and is based on how close the load is to the center of the body. It is also taken from a table supplied by NIOSH. FM is the frequency multiplier and based on the number of times the lift is performed per minute and the length of time the lift takes and is also taken from a NIOSH table. CM is the coupling multiplier and is based on the type of grip the person doing the lifting can get on the package and is taken from a NIOSH table.
Isn’t this another case of silly government regulation with no fixed standards and no fixed penalty that needs to be stricken from the books? OSHA mandates teaching a fixed weight for “one-man lift” when there is no such standard, then publishes an inadequate and incomplete standard for which there is an unspecified penalty for violating. Several thought come to mind.
· The formula fails to address critical environmental and physical factors:
o Are the muscles warmed and limber when performing the lift?
o Is the floor level, dry, and solid with adequate friction to prevent slippage?
o Is protective/restrictive gear involved which impacts overall lifting performance? Coated, impermeable HAZMAT suits with gloves are inherently slippery and unreliable—even more on the inside after perspiration accumulation.
o I could add several other common-sense thoughts, but why bother? OK, I can’t resist inserting a basic inquiry pertaining to structural integrity and brittleness of bones, which changes with age and health—why not factor that into the equation as well?
· Some jobs will never qualify as “safe”. During my Navy time we were routinely required to participate in ammo reloads wherein we manually passed live ammunition between persons in a human conveyor belt. The bullets were quite heavy (>50 lbs.), which did not factor the equally heavy explosive charge or the shell casing. Making things worse, we were on a wet, moving deck. (Duh! Navy=ships at sea, the ship moves though the water, the water has waves…) Isn’t this hazardous in several senses of the term? I guess we need forego bullets and load sponges in those guns to satisfy OSHA weight limits. Maybe we could add environmentally safe, non-toxic watercolors to get the satisfaction of simulating a blast area and “seeing” what we could have destroyed if we used real ammo?
· Does this formula contain inherent sexual bias? There is no factor distinguishing male/female structural differences. Similarly, there are no distinguishing size differentials accounting for male and female genders. If we gender-adjust physical training norms to permit females to compete with males, why not adjust this formula to permit females to proportionately compete with males while performing less actual work?
· Finally: How many mothers are unknowingly violating workplace laws when, in the course of their daily interaction with children, they pick up and hug youngsters? Is this something we need to investigate as an indication of spousal abuse forced on the female by the dominant, absent husband who perpetuates the “Lord and Master” myth of home economics? When will we recognize that the home is a workplace, that stay-at-home mothers are underpaid, and grant these economic slaves benefits and protection commensurate with full employment?
When will the government learn that they need to stay out of things not authorized in the Constitution, to which they have no answers and no standards, and in which they have no business meddling?
H/To RL
