1. A CASE STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF REDUCING BELT SPEED IN THE WAREHOUSE OF A IN THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR Reid, Michael J 1, Enns, Jennifer 1, Frazer, Mardon 1, Wells, Richard 1, 1-University of Waterloo Department of Kinesiology Waterloo, ON ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge the funding and active support of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, the Institute for Work and Health (Toronto, Canada). Also many thanks to the participating workplace groups for their hard work and support of this project. REFERENCES: 1. St-Vincent, M., Chicoine, D., & Beaugrand, S. (1998). Validation of a participatory ergonomic process in two plants in the electrical sector. Ergonomics. 21, 11-21. 2. Wells, R., Norman, R., Frazer, M., & Laing, A. (2000). Ergonomics Program Implementation Blueprint. Ergonomics and Safety Consulting Services, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario. 3. Wilson, J.R., & Haines, H.M. (1997). Participatory ergonomics, in G. Salvendy (ed.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2 nd Edn (New York: Wiley), 490-513 Methods During the solution building phase of this process, the ECT determined that slowing down the line speed would allow workers more time to sight and process the appropriate freight for their truck sorts. It was determined that a reduction in speed from 18m/min to 9 m/min would overcome the root causes determined in step 2 of the ergonomic process and performance issues highlighted by internal documentation. The evaluation was done utilizing pre-intervention and post- intervention videos that were then analyzed using a time analysis software (Observer 4.0, Noldus, Netherlands). In addition, one- minute surveys (brief questionnaires) that the ECT utilized as an evaluation process were also examined. The worker activities were group into 4 categories (planning, retrieving/placing, transporting freight, organizing freight) and performance indicators (% line down time, % line without freight, # bins rework) were examined. In addition one-minute surveys were also used to examine the effectiveness of the ergonomic change. Introduction Participatory Ergonomics has been reported to be an effective method for implementing ergonomic interventions [1]. Part of this effectiveness can be contributed to its potential worker “buy-in” and exchange of information created through worker participation [1, 3]. Utilization of participatory ergonomics programs can also produce changes that result in significant reduction of physical loading and improvement in productivity if the program provides an avenue to identify root causes of the problems and opportunities to build solutions. This poster demonstrates the effectiveness of these ergonomic changes in reducing or eliminating the root causes identified during the Ergonomic Change Process. The ECT utilized a participative ergonomics approach to successfully initiate and implement an ergonomic intervention that addressed the root cause of the problems identified for the AM sorter position in the warehouse. The reduction in line speed improved performance by allowing the sorters to sight and remove freight from the line and place it in the appropriate place. Therefore there was less time required to reorganize the loaded freight. The increase in worker effectiveness had a positive effect on the measured AM shift performance indicators. Line stoppages were reduced from 27% down to 0 and rework was reduced from 21 bins per night down to 3 bins per night. Overall, workers and management were very please as their use of the participatory ergonomic process increase worker “buy-in” producing an intervention that decreased physical loading thereby reducing risk of injury, and improved productivity and job satisfaction. Work of the ECT may have applications in other parts of the company providing similar benefits to all mall couriers. Ergonomics Process H+S Management Program 1: Identify Opportunities for Improvement: Health Outcome, Risk Factor Identification and Integration 2: Assess Ergonomic Risk Factors and Priorize Jobs for Improvement 3: Build Solutions 4: Implement Prototype 5: Evaluate Prototype 6: Adopt Solution Reactive Proactive 7b: Employ Ergonomic Design Criteria and Purchasing Guidelines 7a: Use Feed-- back from Previous designs and plants Training and Education Ergonomics Program Management Evaluation Process 0: Start Up: a) Establish Support b) Team Formation c) Initial Training (Medical Management) Documentation + + (Compliance Assurance) Participation and Consultation Management Support of Ergonomics and Resources Corporate Ergonomics Policy Ergonomic Tools, Techniques and Skills Abstract Members of an Ergonomic Change Team (ECT) of a courier company utilized a participatory ergonomic approach to address several identified problems associated with their AM sort. The intervention was a reduction in main conveyor belt speed from 18 m/min to 9 m/min. The impacts of this change included improved shift performance where the amount of time the line was stopped decreased by 27%, and the number of pieces of “rework” was reduced by 85%. These improvements were a result of increased time spent during planning tasks (25%) and a reduction in time spent organizing freight (24%) by the worker. Overall, the ECT introduced an ergonomic change that eliminated root causes of the identified problems thereby increasing worker effectiveness and improving productivity and job satisfaction, which had a positive impact on the shift’s performance. An Ergonomics Change Team (ECT) consisting of management, workers and union from a courier company were assembled and trained by researchers on the University of Waterloo’s Ergonomic Change Blueprint [2] in basic ergonomic principles and various ergonomic assessment tools. This group then followed the 6 steps of the ergonomic change blueprint and made interventions as they determined appropriate. One of the researchers acted as a facilitator for the group for 18 months to ensure understanding of the process and that appropriate tools were being utilized. Results and Discussion 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Transporting Boxes Placing/RetrievingPlanning Organizing Average Duration (s/task) 18 m/minute 9 m/minute 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Transporting Boxes Placing/Retrieving PlanningOrganizing Total Duration (% of observed time) 18 m/minute 9 m/minute