PPE – choice or chance? Published March 9, 2006 By Carolyn Morgan 60th AMW Safety TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. -- We use personal protective equipment every day without even thinking about it. When we get in our cars, we put on our safety belts. We use an oven mitt or potholders to remove a casserole from the oven. Gloves are donned when we are clearing debris from the yard or pruning the roses. Most of us don’t think of these actions as using PPE, because we do them naturally, as a means of protecting ourselves. We know, however, that not all workers have the same natural instinct to use PPE on the job. Unfortunately, there are many job tasks that we do in the Air Force where the hazards cannot be engineered out, guarded against or isolated, and PPE must be used. The Bureau of Labor Statistics show that about 40 percent of workers with eye injuries wore eye protection equipment and only 1 percent of approximately 770 workers suffering face injuries wore face protection. A majority of these workers were injured while performing their normal jobs at regular worksites. We acknowledge the problem; but we cannot accurately treat what we do not accurately diagnose. There is more than one answer to the question of why workers fail to protect themselves from injury on the job. In some cases, it may not yet have become habit on the individual’s part. A new worker, for example, has not yet performed a task long enough for this pattern to become ingrained into their thinking. This is where thorough job safety training, adequate supervision and continual feedback to/from the employee are so important. PPE use must become an integral step in the performance of the task the worker carries out. Another scenario that we encounter is the older worker who is accustomed to not using PPE because “he or she has been doing it this way for years.” Possibly, they do not feel the need for it because they have been fortunate to not have suffered an injury thus far. Some younger supervisors of older employees may be reluctant to enforce the use of PPE on their older, more experienced workers out of respect or even intimidation. This reasoning is particularly dangerous because new workers are frequently supervised by the older; more experienced one and will pick up their bad habits and shortcuts. It is crucial that the supervisor of this individual stress the importance of setting the example for others. Often the older worker will have more influence over others than the supervisor because they spend more time with the 3- or 5-level worker training and coaching them on how to perform their tasks. Experienced workers must lead by example in order for good habits to be developed in others. Training is often lacking whenever there is a compliance problem with PPE use. If an employee is not properly trained on all the personal protective equipment that is required for them to perform their duties, they will be unaware of the potential life altering consequences that may result if they are not protected from the hazard. An employee, who is not trained on what could happen, will look at PPE use as a compliance issue only, and not understand the true threat to their safety. The employer has a legal and moral obligation to: ensure all personnel know what the hazards are that require PPE; train employees how to protect themselves from those hazards; provide the necessary and appropriate PPE for each employee; ensure employees are using the equipment; train employees on how to inspect and care for PPE; ensure equipment is maintained in a sanitary and serviceable condition; and continually review the work processes to ensure that PPE purchased adequately protects the worker, and is comfortable to encourage it’s use. Ignorance of compliance with the PPE standard is no excuse. Supervisors must ensure that safety standards are used for training affected employees. Other standards and technical orders cover specific PPE for job tasks, such as welding operations, working at heights or electrical work; and those requirements must also be incorporated into the job safety-training plan in accordance with AFI 91-301. Material safety data sheets must be consulted whenever chemical use is involved. A job safety analysis will allow the supervisor to identify hazards and PPE required for a particular work operation. A JSA conducted with assistance from ground safety and bioenvironmental staffs for unusual and non-routine tasks may help avert an undesirable outcome. (See AFI 91-301 Attachment 2, Job Safety Analysis Guide.) Comfort may be another factor in the use of PPE. Supervisors, unit safety representatives, ground safety and bioenvironmental staffs must continually monitor the effectiveness of the PPE program. Encourage feedback from workers on how well their equipment is working for them. There are so many options available for purchase, for instance, in protective eyewear these days that no worker should have to wear an ill-fitting pair of safety glasses. Human beings are not designed for “one size fits all,” and we should not require our employees to be uncomfortable when there are so many products available to choose from. Encourage supervisors to research vendors and allow employees to find what works for them, whenever possible. An employee who has buy-in to the purchase of his or her equipment will have a favorable attitude towards it’s use; while the employee who is forced to use whatever is provided, whether comfortable or not, has a tendency to resist it’s use. Let’s lead and empower our employees to work safely, by giving them the best we can provide. That is what we would want for our family and ourselves; our workers deserve no less.