HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09191989 - IO.7 0:• Board of Supervisors - -�� I.0. 7
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE - - g
as
�y, 4
DATE: September 1.1, 1.989
srA-coil»`►`;
SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON ESTABLISHING PUBLIC POLICY WITH REGARD TO
VIDEO DISPLAY TERMINAL SAFETY
Specific Request(s) or Recommendations(s) & Background & Justification
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Request the Director of Personnel to reconstitute the Video Display Terminal (VDT)Advisory Committee and
include on it a subcommittee representing the Advisory Committee on the Employment and Economic Status
of Women.
2. Request the VDT Advisory Committee to review,update and revise the County's guidelines on VDT safety to
address the issue of pregnant workers and to provide for consultation with affected workers when a worksite is
originally designed or modernized to insure that issues of VDT safety are addressed.
3. Request County Counsel to review and rewrite the attached model VDT safety ordinance to address the concerns
expressed in County Counsel's memo on this subject dated September 5, 1989 and to make the proposed
ordinance as legally defensible as possible and return a redrafted proposed ordinance to our Committee on
November 27, 1989.
4. Request the Director of Personnel, Risk Manager and Public Health Director, in conjunction with the
reconstituted VDT Advisory Committee to consider a strategy on how a proposed VDT safety ordinance should
be implemented in the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County, determine the steps that should be taken
to approach the cities, chambers of commerce, Contra Costa Council and industrial associations to make the
ordinance applicable throughout Contra Costa County and return to the Internal Operations Committee on
November 27, 1989 with their recommendations.
5. Leave this item on referral to our Committee.
Continued on attachment: YES Signature:
Reepmmen tion County Ad 'nistrator Recommendation of Board Committee
A roe Other:
"ignature( ). TO PO ERS SUNNE WRIGHT MC PEAK
Action of B and on: September 19, 1989 fApproved as Recommended x Other
Vote of Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
x Unanimous (Absent — ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE
Ayes: Noes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN.
Absent: Abstain: ,r
cc: County Administrator Attested A!",4,t.✓ /7, /9f 9
County counsel
Director of Personnel Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board
Risk Manager of Supervisors and County Administrator
Health Services Director
Public Health ,ACEESW r
Lee Finne ByQ �D•�� , Deputy Clerk
clvm:eh(io-7bo)'Chair,
BACKGROUND:
On May 9, 1989 the Board of Supervisors referred to our Committee a letter from the Advisory Committee on the
Employment and Economic Status of Women recommending that the Board of Supervisors adopt a model ordinance
on VDT safety similar to the ordinance recently adopted inNew York State. Such an ordinance would be intended
to apply to all employers in the unincorporated area of the County.
On September 11, 1989 our Committee met with representatives from the Advisory Committee on the Employment
and Economic Status of Women; Dr. James Cone from the University of California at San Francisco (Chief,
Occupational Health Clinic, San Francisco General Hospital); Linda Delp, Western Regional Health & Safety
Coordinator, SEIU; Betty Szudy, U. C. Berkeley; Margaret Butz, President, Central Labor Council; Harry
Cisterman,Director of Personnel;Wendel Brunner,M.D.,Public Health Director;Joseph J.Tonda,Risk Manager;
Mary Ann McNett,Deputy County Counsel and other interested individuals. Our Committee heard presentations
from Dr.Cone,Ms.Delp,Ms.Szudy,Ms.Butz,Ms.Lee Finney on behalf of the Advisory Committee and reviewed
the attached reports from County Counsel and County staff, which are incorporated herein by reference.
There appears to be general agreement among all of the experts that extended VDT operation without adequate
furniture, lighting and other related environmental factors can result in vision problems and musculoskeletal
problems. While there is no solid evidence that extended VDT operation can be hazardous to an unborn baby there
continue to be concerns raised in this area on which additional research is needed.
Contra Costa County has had a proactive VDT safety program since 1982 when guidelines were adopted for County
employees. While the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration has the responsibility to regulate
and promote workplace safety, they have recently rejected VDT specific standards.
Our Committee believes that the Board of Supervisors has and should continue to take the lead in insuring VDT
worker safety. We also believe that a cooperative effort should be made with the cities and private sector employers
to insure that all workers in Contra Costa County who make extended use of VDT's are protected from the known
or suspected hazards of using VDT's. While County Counsel correctly cautions that there are some legal problems
which must be worked through in order to enforce VDT safety on the private sector,we believe that a cooperative
effort with the private sector can overcome those problems.
As a first step in the enactment of VDT worker safety in Contra Costa County we are asking that the Director of
Personnel reconstitute the VDT Advisory Committee,ask the Advisory Committee to review,update and revise the
guidelines which were adopted in 1982 as they apply to County employees and develop a strategy for implementing
VDT worker safety throughout Contra Costa County and return to our Committee in November with the steps which
need to betaken to make this a reality. At the same time we are asking County Counsel to rewrite the model ordinance
in order to address the concerns raised in their memo of September 5, 1989 and return a redrafted proposed ordinance
to our Committee in November which will be as defensible legally as is possible.
-2-
t.; G,i /'
��.6 f'. �•v�i 4t \e o i.i 1.11
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE '�E _W~D
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA S EP - 5 1989
s�zr - x
Date: September 5, 1989
To: Internal Operations Committee
Attn: Claude Van Marter
From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel —
By. Mary Ann McNett, Deputy County Counsel
Re: Ordinance to Regulate Use of Video Display Terminals
SUMMARY: In response to your memorandum of May 12, 1989, we
advise:
1 . Under the police power, the Board of Supervisors may be
able to enact an ordinance regulating the direct use of video
display terminals in private agencies. However, indirect
regulations pertaining to an employer's provision of leaves of
absence, training programs, etc. , may present legal problems .
2. Such an ordinance would only apply to entities in the
unincorporated areas of the County.
3. If enacted, the draft VDT Safety Bill proposed by the
VDT Coalition/ACEESW would be difficult and expensive to enforce,
and may conflict with many employers' existing personnel policies
and, to the extent it addresses pregnancy leave, with state law.
The ordinance may be subject to challenge on the grounds of
vagueness and pre-emption.
BACKGROUND: The Advisory Committee on the Employment and
Economic Status of Women (ACEESW) has proposed that the Board of
Supervisors adopt a model ordinance regulating the use of video
display terminals (VDTs) . The ordinance would apply to public
agencies and private businesses in the County. The model
ordinance regulates the type and location of VDTs, peripheral
equipment and lighting and requires the provision of certain
employee benefits including vision care, pregnancy leave, and
training regarding health hazards . The model ordinance is based
on a measure recently adopted by Suffolk County, New York.
QUESTION #l: To what extent does the Board of Supervisors
have the authority to enact an ordinance regulating the use of
Claude Van Marter -2- September 5, 1989
video display terminals by private businesses in the County?
DISCUSSION: In general, the County has only those powers
that are granted to it by law, expressly or by necessary
implication. (Gov. Code, § 23003; 25207; Byers v. Board of
Supervisors ( 1968 ) 262 Cal .App. 2d 148, 157 . ) We know of no
statute expressly authorizing the County to regulate the use of
video display terminals (VDTs) . However, the Board of
Supervisors may be able to regulate the use of VDTs through the
County's "police power. " The California Constitution grants that
power as follows :
"A county or city may make and enforce within
its limits all local, police, sanitary, and
other ordinances . and regulations not in
conflict with the general laws . " (Cal .
Const. Art. XI §7 . )
A. Conflict With General Law
A county's authority to enact police ordinances for public
health purposes is broad, except that county ordinances must not
conflict with the Constitution or with general laws . Conflicts
exist if the ordinance duplicates, contradicts, or enters an area
fully occupied by general law, either expressly or by legislative
implication. (See People Ex Rel. Deukmejian v. County of
Mendocino (1984) 36 Cal. 3d 476, 484. )
First, we must consider whether an ordinance regulating VDTs
would conflict with general laws (State statutes, etc. ) . The
Risk Management Department has informed us that neither Federal
nor California OSHA has adopted regulations for the use of VDTs .
However, both agencies are considering the adoption of ergonomic
standards to prevent repetitive strain injuries . Such standards
would be applicable to all workers, including those who use VDTs .
In addition, AB 955 currently pending before the Senate
Appropriations Committee would require that all VDTs and
peripheral equipment used in any place of employment conform to
the applicable design and ergonomic standards of the American
National Standards Institute. The bill would also establish a
committee to produce guidelines for employers in addressing the
use of VDTs by pregnant employees . If OSHA adopts ergonomic
standards or AB 955 is enacted, it would be necessary to
reconsider whether an ordinance regulating VDTs would conflict
with the general law and thus be an improper exercise of the
police power.
To the extent that an ordinance regulating VDT use also
requires the provision of particular employee benefits by private
employers, it is possible that the provisions concerning benefits
Claude Van Marter -3- September 5, 1989
would be preempted by the National Labor Relations Act and state
law. We do not discuss federal preemption of an ordinance
regulating VDT use. If the Board formulates a draft ordinance
which would require the provision of employee benefits, it would
be necessary to consider the possibility that the ordinance would
conflict with the NLRA and state law as to the benefit
provisions .
B. Propriety of Exercise of Police Power
In your memo of May 12, 1989, you noted that the proposed
ordinance "addresses the alleged safety hazards involved in the
prolonged use of a video display terminal. " Municipal police
power extends to objectives in furtherance of the public peace,
safety, morals, health and welfare. It is not a circumscribed
prerogative but rather is elastic. (Loska v. Superior Court
( 1986 ) 188 Cal.App. 3d 569, 575 citing Fisher v. City of Berkeley
(1984 ) 37 Cal. 3d 644, 676 . ) Promotion and protection of public
health and safety is a legitimate reason for exercise of the
police power. (45 Cal .Jur. 3d, Municipalities, S 146 . )
1 . Regulation of Maintenance and Operation of
Business Premises .
Pursuant to the police power, the County may regulate
private businesses in order to promote public health and safety.
In Antonello v. City of San Diego (1971) 16 Cal.App. 3d 161, the
Court of Appeal upheld a city ordinance which regulated the
operation of peep shows and specified the light level, width of
aisles and number of aisles and exits in peep show booths . The
Court held:
"It is elementary, under the police
power a municipality may impose regulations
upon the construction and maintenance of
business premises reasonably necessary to
protect the health, safety and general
welfare of the patrons of the business and
other members of the public. " (Antonello v.
City of San Diego, supra, 16 Cal. 3d at 167 . )
(See People v. B&I News, Inc. (1984) 164 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 8 . )
Similarly, when upholding a zoning ordinance limiting the
number of video games allowed in a business establishment in a
particular zoning district, the Court of Appeals stated:
"A municipality may impose reasonable
regulations upon the conduct of an economic
enterprise. " (Burton v. Municipal Court
r
Claude Van Marter -4- September 5, 1989
( 1968) 68 Cal. 2d 684, 689 . ) "The
reasonableness of such a restrictive
ordinance is dependent upon the nature of
the business being regulated and the degree
of threat that the operation of such business
presents to the tranquility, good order, and
well-being of the community at large. So
long as a "patent relationship between the
regulation and the protection of the public
health, safety, morals, or general welfare"
exists, the regulations will be considered
reasonable. ., " (Amusing Sandwich, Inc. v.
City of Palm Springs (1985) 165 Cal.App. 3d
1116, 1126 . citing People v. Glaze (1980 ) 27
Cal. 3d 841, 845 . )
2. Regulation of Employer-Employee Relationships .
To promote public health and safety, a municipality may also
regulate some aspects of the employer-employee relationship.
However, the authority to regulate such relationship is more
limited than the authority to regulate the maintenance and
operation of business premises. Though not addressed herein, we
note that local regulations concerning private employment matters
may be subject to preemption by the federal- NLRA in- addition to
state law. According to 7 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations (3d
ed. 1989 ) section 24 .431, page 523:
"Employer-employee relationships for the most
part are subject to state rather than
municipal regulation. . . . [T]he employer-
employee relationship is one of
constitutional liberty on the part of both
parties and, as such, protected against state
and municipal interference, although it is
subject to reasonable police regulation
relative to wages, hours of employment and
working conditions, particularly insofar as
women and children are concerned, where the
regulation reasonably relates to the
protection and securing of public health,
safety, morals and welfare. "
(See also 13 Cal.Jur. 3d, Constitutional Law, S 155 . )
3. Scope of Authority to Enact Police Power
Legislation.
In general, municipalities have broad discretion in enacting
police power legislation.
Claude Van Marter -5- September 5, 1989
"In the exercise of it police power a
legislative body is vested with a broad
discretion to determine not only what the
public interests require but what measures
are necessary for the protection of such
interest. Every intendment is to be indulged
in by the courts in favor of the validity of
its exercise. (Barenfeld v. City of Los
Angeles (1984 ) 162 Cal.App. 3d 1035, 104
upholding a city ordinance requiring owners
of buildings with unreinforced masonry walls
to either structurally improve or demolish
buildings at owners expense. )
In exercising its police power, a municipality has
discretion to determine what is reasonable in endeavoring to
protect public safety, health, morals, and general welfare.
(Loska v. Superior Court, supra, 188 Cal.App. 3d at 575 upholding
a city ordinance prohibiting sale of tickets to public assemblage
in any public place. )
Absent conflicting or superceding general state or federal
law, under the police power the County has broad authority to
regulate the use of VDTs by private employers in order to promote
public health and safety.
QUESTION 2: Does the County's authority to enact an
ordinance regulating private businesses extend to incorporated
cities?
DISCUSSION 2: County regulation of the use of VDTs would
not apply within the incorporated cities . Ordinances enacted by
the Board of Supervisors in regulatory fields are effective only
in the County's unincorporated territory. (Stirling v. Board of
Supervisors (1975) 48 Cal.App. 3d 184, 187 . )
DISCUSSION 3: Comments on Draft VDT Safety Bill
As currently proposed, the legality of the draft ordinance
provided by the VDT coalition and the Advisory Committee on the
Employment and Economic Status of Women presents some problems .
Section D. "Pregnant Employees" would require employers to grant
a leave of absence upon request to a pregnant VDT operator for
the term of the pregnancy and to guarantee that her former
position will be available upon her return to work. The section
also would require the employer to transfer an employee who is
pregnant or planning to become pregnant to non-VDT related work
upon request. Section D provides broader rights for pregnant
employees than the state law which requires that employers allow
Claude Van Marter -6- September 5, 1989
employees to take a leave on account of pregnancy disability,
which leave shall not exceed four months. (Gov. Code, § 12945. )
Section D could be subject to legal challenge on the ground that
it is pre-empted by the state law. Even if otherwise legal,
section D's requirements may conflict with many employers '
existing personnel policies. Compliance with the provision could
be expensive .for unincorporated area employers, and in the case
of private employers, could conflict with the mandates of the
National Labor-Relations Act.
Section A. "Vision Examinations" which requires the
employer to provide vision examinations on an annual basis for
VDT operators may require some employers to provide employee
benefits in excess of those the employer has contracted to
provide. According to the Suffolk County Attorney's Office,
enforcement of section 3 .A. "Vision Examinations" of the model
VDT ordinance enacted by Suffolk County, New York has been
enjoined, and the provision is currently the subject of
litigation.
Section E. "Employee Education and Training" requires
employers to educate VDT operators about potential health hazards
to which operators may be exposed during employment. This
provision is extremely uncertain and could be subject to legal
challenge on the ground that it is vague. In addition, the
provision will be difficult to enforce because it specifies no
clear standards for compliance.
Section H. "Enforcement" would require the County to
establish an entity to enforce the ordinance. As the ordinance
is drafted, the entity would investigate complaints and, on its
own initiative, inspect employers' premises to determine
compliance with the ordinance, issue orders of compliance in the
event of violation and provide for an internal review of an
initial determination of non-compliance. The entity could also
file a civil action to obtain judicial enforcement of compliance
orders . We think that the Board's creation of an entity with
such enforcement powers would be subject to challenge as an
improper delegation of the Board of Supervisors discretionary
authority. In general, the Board may not delegate its
discretionary powers absent specific statutory authorization.
(Gov. Code, § 23005; House v. Los Angeles County (1894 ) 104 Cal .
73; see generally County Counsel Opinions 73-133; 74-85; 84-27;
86-80; 86-94 . ) We know of no statute authorizing the Board to
create such an entity with the broad range of powers specified in
the draft ordinance. Moreover, the power to prosecute ordinance
violations rests by law with the District Attorney. (Gov. Code,
§ 25132. ) The creation of a separate enforcement entity is
unnecessary.
Claude Van Marter -7- September 5, 1989
Section H would also establish a $10,000 . 00 fine which a
court could impose on a non-compliant employer. We question the
County's ability to authorize courts to impose such a fine. (See
McHugh v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board_ (August 22, 1989) 89
D.J. D.A.R. 10519 . ) Violation of a county ordinance is a
misdemeanor unless by ordinance it is made an infraction. A
violation may be prosecuted by county authorities in the name of
the people of the state or may be redressed by civil action.
(Gov. Code, S 25132. ) Penal Code section 19 provides that unless
otherwise permitted by state statute misdemeanor violations are
punishable by a maximum fine of $1,000 . (See Ordinance Code
S 14-8 . 004(b) . ) The Government Code specifies that ordinance
violations designated as infractions are punishable only by
certain fines, none of which exceed $500 . (Gov. Code,
S 25132(b) . ) To the extent that section H conflicts with state
law, it is subject to legal challenge.
MAM/jh/tb
cc: Wendel Brunner, M.D. , Director of Public Health
Harry Cisterman, Director of Personnel
Joseph J. Tonda, Risk Manager
OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Administration Building
Martinez, California
Date: September 11, 1989
To: Internal Operations Committee
Supervisor Tom Powers
Supervisor Sunne McPeak
From: Joseph J. Tonda, Risk Manager
Risk Management Division
Harry Cisterman, Director'_1:
Personnel Department /
Wendel Brunner, M.D.
Director of Public Health
Subject: Ordinance to Regulate the Use of Video Display
Terminals in Public and Private Agencies
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On May 9, 1989, the Board of Supervisors referred to -the Internal
Operations Committee a request to establish public policy with
respect to video display terminal (VDT) safety. The Internal
Operations Committee requested Dr. Brunner and Mr. Tonda to report
on studies evaluating health hazards which may be presented by
VDT' s, and Mr. Cisterman to provide information about steps the
County has already taken to protect its employees who use VDT's .
In addition, we were requested to share additional concerns or
cautions we believe the Internal Operations Committee should be
aware of before they meet on the subject.
1. STEPS TAKEN BY COUNTY TO PROTECT EMPLOYEES USING VDT'S.
The County began a proactive VDT safety program in 1982 .
Personnel, Risk Management Division, and Health Services each
addressed VDT related safety issues . (See Attachments A, B, and
C for VDT safety activities of these departments
2. INFORMATION REGARDING STUDIES TO EVALUATE THE HEALTH HAZARDS
WHICH MAY BE PRESENTED BY VDT'S.
While the majority of VDT workers do not experience adverse health
effects, there are some health concerns related to VDT use. The
major health risk to VDT workers is musculoskeletal discomfort and
disorders, including tendonitis and carpal tunnel syndrome.
Visual problems can include difficulty focusing, blurred vision,
eye strain, and headaches, although there is no evidence that VDT's
induce permanent visual damage. These health concerns are also
shared by other workers with physically and visually demanding
jobs . These problems can be reduced by .providing appropriate VDT
equipment, adjustable furniture, proper lighting, and corrective
lenses when indicated, and employee training.
There is no conclusive evidence at present to indicate an
association between VDT's and adverse pregnancy outcomes or birth
defects . Any possible effect which may exist is certainly small;
however, because of its potential significance this question
warrants further monitoring. The State Health Services Department
has been directed to continue to follow this issue. Attachment D
contains a summary of potential safety and health hazards of VDT
workers .
3. ADDITIONAL CONCERNS AND COMMENTS ABOUT REGULATING VDT. USE.
Irrespective of any local public, or corporate VDT policies, the
California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA)
is the governmental agency specifically responsible to regulate and
promote workplace safety. Development of an optimal workplace
standard for VDT workers. will take considerable medical,
ergonometric, and technical support and guidance. This extensive
technical support is most readily available through Cal/OSHA .and
NIOSH (National Institute of Safety and Health) . In addition, OSHA
has staff and resources necessary to enforce a workplace standard.
Cal/OSHA recently rejected VDT specific standards, although several
members of an advisory committee . recommended that they be
considered (see Attachment E) . As can be seen from this memorandum
from the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, the division
recommended that Cal/OSHA develop a new training standard to
address all training issues surrounding all .types of work stations
and to develop a new ergonomic standard, including appropriate
training, to apply to all workers, not just VDT workers . We
believe that Cal/OSHA should be supported in efforts to develop
either a VDT standard or broader ergonomic and training standards .
Many employers in Contra Costa County are voluntarily addressing
the potential health problems of VDT workers through in-house
safety and health programs . Several unions have already been
successful in bargaining for benefits such as eye examinations and
corrective lenses . The County, as an employer, has made
2
considerable progress in protecting the health and safety of VDT
workers . With additional resources for purchase of equipment,
furniture, and training, more could be done. Although considerable
capital outlay would be necessary over several years, the County
could develop a model VDT health and safety program.
If you have additional questions concerning this memorandum, please
do not hesitate to contact one of us .
JJT:HC:WB:rm
Attachments
3
ATTACHMENT A
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT TOWARD
PROTECTING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF EMPLOYEES USING VDT'S
During the past several years the Personnel Department has been responsive to
the concerns and potential problems associated with the operation of video
display terminals (VDT's) . To ensure the health and safety of all video display
terminal operators specific activities were undertaken:
Development of VDT Guidelines
• Establishment of VDT Committee
• Implementation of VDT Vision Program
VDT Guidelines
In May 1982, VDT guidelines were developed and disemminated to County. department
heads by the Personnel Department - Safety Division. The guidelines specifi-
cally addressed the work station design, the VDT screens, lighting and work
breaks.
The purpose of developing the VDT guidelines was to provide specific recommen-
dations on designing VDT work stations that would minimize potential health
risks. In particular, preventive measures were included that would provide for
individual operator control of most all work station equipment including the
keyboard, screen height, brightness and contrast, viewing distance, illumination
levels and chair adjustment. A copy of the Video Display Terminal Guidelines is
attached as Exhibit A.
Video Display Terminal Committee
The VDT Committee, comprised of both labor and management representatives, was
es ablished by the AFSCME Local 2700 Memorandum of Understanding and met monthly
for six months beginning in September 1985.
The primary goal of the VDT Committee was to formulate specific recommendations
that would assist County departments in the use and purchase of VDT and
ancillary equipment. The VDT Committee report was distributed to all department
heads in the spring of 1986 and was redistributed again in May 1988.
This report serves as. an excellent resource tool in the planning, purchasing and
use of VDT equipment. Ergonomic factors unique to .the County work environment
were carefully analyzed prior to the development of any recommendations.
Committee recommendations on the purchasing of chairs, desks and other furniture
were customized to the needs of VDT operators to enhance the County's ergonomic
environment. A copy of the committee's report is attached as Exhibit B.
VDT Vision Program
In July 1985, as part of the Memorandum of Understanding with AFSCME Local 2700,
a VDT operator vision program was negotiated. This agreement entitles VDT
operators to an annual eye examination and a pair of lenses and frames , if
necessary.
This report serves as an excellent resource tool in the planning, purchasing and
use of VDT equipment. Ergonomic factors unique to the County work environment
were carefully analyzed prior to the development of any recommendations.
Committee recommendations on the purchasing of chairs, desks and other furniture
were customized to the needs of VDT operators to enhance the County's ergonomic
environment. A copy of the committee's report is attached as Exhibit B.
VDT Vision Program
In July 1985, as part of the Memorandum of Understanding with AFSCME Local 2700,
a VDT operator vision program was negotiated. This agreement entitles VDT
operators to an annual eye examination and a pair of lenses and frames, if
necessary.
The VDT vision program includes a comprehensive eye examination including
testing for glaucoma. The primary focus of the exam is the vision testing at
the midpoint range, similar to the viewing distance. experienced when operating a
VDT. During the past twelve months, 450 employees have taken advantage of the
vision program.
The Personnel Department in conjunction with other County departments continues
to be responsive to the needs of VDT operators. While there does not appear to
be any conclusive evidence which confirms specific health hazards associated
with VDT use, the County has adopted a more proactive approach focusing on pre-
ventive rather than curative measures.
HDC:PJ:slt
Attachments
PJ2:VDTREP2,3
Contra
Costa
County
SAFETY OFFICE VIDEO DISPLAY TERMIML GUIDELINES
651 Pine Street - Room 103 _
Martinez, CA 94553 .
(415) 372-2929
Nay 21 , 1982
Video Display Terminals are word processors and computer terminals with tele-
vision type screens that display information. They are also called Cathode .Ray
Tubes or CRTs.
STATION DESIGN 1 . VDT work stations and. devices should be made as
flexible as possible to allow for individualoperator
control of:
a. Key board (should be -detachable)
b. Screen height
c. Screen brightness and contrast
d. Leg room
e . Viewing distance (should be within 400mm-700mm)
f. Ambient work station illumination levels (if .
indirect lighting at the work station is provided. )
g. Chair adjustments (of the seat height, backrest
height, and tension)
SCREENS 2. The VDT screen should be positioned so that the
viewing angle is 10° - 20° below the horizonal plane
..at eye level . The operator .shouldn't have to twist
to look at the screen and copy.
LIGHTING 3. Illumination levels should be within 300 - 700 lux ,
with individual work station lighting provided for
jobs requiring higher levels due to visual demands.
4. Screen glare can be controlled through the use of any
one or all of the following means :
a. Windows should be covered with drapes or blinds.
to limit direct sunlight.
b. VDT's should be positioned properly with respect
to overhead lighting and high-luminance sources
in the work area.
c. Hoods should be installed over screens to shield
from direct or reflected light.
d. A glare shield should be installed on the screen.
e. Recessed lighting and special fixture covers should
be used.
VIDEO DISPLAY TERMINAL GUIDELINES
Page 2
5. Since a microfiche reader screen is very bright
and a video display terminal ' s screen is dark,
avoid having an operator use both machines at the
same time. Otherwise the retina of the eye may
become fatigued.
BREAKS 5. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health suggests that operators under moderate visual
demands take a break after two hours of continuous
VDT work. With lunch this would mean one morning and
one afternoon break. As with any other task, the
need for breaks may vary depending on the work level
and conditions.
KWK:sjm
VOT COMMITTEE REPORT
The VOT Committee established by the AFSCME 2700 Memorandum of
Understanding, Section 29.1, met monthly beginning with July - 1986.
The mission of the committee is clearly described in the MOU section
cited below:
The committee shall develop lists of environmental and
ergonomic considerations in the use of video display
equipment along with recommendations for County departments
to consider on future purchases of - VDT's and - ancillary
equipment. The, results of the committee's work shall be
formulated into a ,report and distributed to all County
departments. The environmental and ergonomic considerations
and recommendations developed shall ' be advisory only to
County departments so as to assist them in the use and
purchase of VOT and ancillary equipment.
The following pages comprise the report along with attachments which
departments should find helpful in their planning, purchasing and use
of VOT equipment.
THE SETTING:
Video display terminals are varied in type, brand, size, and use.
Generally, they include word processors, personal computers,
mini-computers, data entry terminals, and "dumb" terminals. The
environmental and ergonomic considerations discussed in this report
apply generally to all types of VDT :equipment and the ancillary.
equipment .used in conjunction with them.
Several broad ergonomic factors were agreed --to early in the
Committee's work:
1. The adjustability of ancillary equipment--furniture, desks, work
stations, tables, chairs, monitor stands, keyboard height, etc.--
is important to making the use of VDT equipment as ergonomic as
possible. However, the ease of adjustability vari-es in
importance depending on the number of individuals who can be
expected to use a particular piece of equipment. For example, a
PC placed at an individual. employee's .work station might be
ergonomically adjusted for that individual alone . and would not
require much further adjustment while that employee continued to
use it exclusively. However, -the same PC usedby several
employees on a shared basis, or on multiple shifts, might require-
adjustment for ergonomic comfort of individual employees multiple
times during the day--thus, ease of adjustability becomes more
important. Shared equipment may be perfectly ergonomic for a
particular group of individuals depending on _their individual
sizes and shapes', but such a group can change when personnel
r
VDT Committee Page 2 - January 5, 1986
shifts take place. Thus, departments need to be aware of the
general adjustability' criteria and monitor their own work
stations' design and staffing in determining the most appropriate
and cost effective approach to solving potential ergonomic
problems.
2. Some other factors to consider in the -ancillary equipment
arena include lighting, noise, dark/dull surfaces, glare
filters and the equipment itself.
3. Decisions made on rental and lease VDT equipment need the
same .attention to ergonomic considerations as that provided
to purchased equipment. Additionally, furniture, , work
station design and adjustability need to be considered when
the VDT equipment is being ordered so that reasonably
accommodative work stations are available when the VDT
equipment is installed in the office location.
The County's commitment to open architecture and office landscaping as
general approaches to the office setting where most VDT equipment is
used were considered givens by the Committee. Additionally, it was
recognized that the County is financially unable to .replace major
portions of its office furniture with "better" equipment. With these
factors in mind the committee concentrated its efforts on making
ergonomics a consideration in whatever limited purchases of new
equipment .can be made, while "aides" to ergonomics are included to
assist departments in making present furniture and equipment more
ergonomic at a reasonably low cost.
CHAIRS:
The Committee recommends that any chairs. purchased by the County have
the following features:
1. Five-leg star pedestal base.
2. .Easy, seat height adjustability by piston action
controlled by a handle accessible from the chair by the
user.
3. Easy back support adjustability, both up and down and in
and out, preferably by a handle accessible from the
chair by the user.
4. Easy lumbar support adjustability.
5. Arm support should be included for those users who feel
it would be helpful .
6. Chair back height should be selected based on user
preference.
VDT Committee Page 3 January 5, 1986
7. Unless specific individual needs are overriding, chair
arms of plastic or wood are more easily cleaned than
-- fabric and thus, should be selected.
8. Seats should have "waterfall" design fronts (with no
front seams or piping) to allow better leg circulation.
9. Seat covering should be texturized fabric for
breathability, warmth in winter and coolness in summer,
providing better user comfort.
Overall , the Committee -agreed that chair adjustability was
increasingly important if the chair user is a heavy VDT user or if
the VDT equipment and chairs are .used by more than one person on a
regular basis.
Copies of brochures on some of the currently available chairs that
fulfill these requirements were obtained from Purchasing and are
attached to this report as Appendix A. Since new products are
continually becoming available, departments should check with
Purchasing about new products before deciding on the purchase of
specific chairs.
DESKS AND OTHER FURNITURE:
As a general principle, considering the County's financial posture and
the cost of new desks with both sufficient work surface and storage
along with lowered area for the keyboard and some other computer
components (mostly major brands such as Steelcase), the Committee
recommends that departments attempt -to keep employees' current desks,
refurbishing them as necessary by repainting and resurfacing them, and
purchasing VOT and printer stands for VOT equipment. This requires a
somewhat larger work station space-for the employee, but ,under most
circumstances,. more space is less of a problem than a large
out-of-pocket expense. In purchasing new workstation tables, .stands
or desks, the following factors should-be considered.-
1.
onsidered:1. Work height of the keyboard, .monitor and printer in
relation to the user -and the equipment itself.
2. Work station surfaces should have sufficient .room for
the equipment, papers and other equipment, including a
4" to 6" clearance at the back of the VOT equipment. .
3. Work station surface should be medium to. dark in color
with a dull surface to cut down on the glare reflecting
up at the user.
VOT Committee Page 4 January 5, 1586
Again, the Committee recommends that maximum adjustability in work
stations be provided in those situations where multiple users sit at
the work station at various times.
KEYBOARDS:
The adjustability of keyboards is considered to be of major importance
by the Committee. The following are factors to be considered in this
area:
i
1. Keyboard angle adjustment should be integral to the keyboard.
2. Sufficient cord length where the keyboard attaches to the
computer is necessary. The keyboard should be movable to the .
user's lap cation, possibly as much as four feet away from
the monitor table or -stand.
3. There should be a matte finish on the keys and other keyboard
surfaces. This provides less slippery surfaces and less
glare.
4. The keys themselves should have a light touch, requiring
little force to type/keyboard with them. Ideally, the
keyboard should provide an on-off key feedback mechanism.
Additionally, the home keys should be slightly more indented
so that home row can be identified by touch.
Additionally, consideration should be given to the following items,
their importance depending on the work assignment of the individual
user:
1. Caps lock light or other identifier.
2. Number lock light or other identifier.
3. Order of numbers on the key pad. . .ten-key order or
other. _
4., Key stops for keys which are not supposed to be used in
some applications.
MONITORS:
The major considerations in the purchase of monitors are size,
resolution, and color of the display. The specific recommendations of
the Committee are as follows:
1. Standard PC monitor size is adequate for most
VDT Committee Page 5 January 5, 1986
applications, but some particular applications may be
performed more efficiently with larger displays (forms
development, some spreadsheet applications, etc. ).
2. The. resolution -should be 640x200 or higher to be adequate for
ongoing -use. Higher resolution is preferable when available
at a reasonable cost.
3. Monochrome monitors generally have better resolution than
color monitors and are easier on the user's eyes in heavy use
and ward processing applications. .Co.lor. monitors usually are
superior-only in situations requiring use of .graphics.
4. In choosing the color of a monochrome monitor. . .green, amber,
or white phosphors...green is usually better and less subject
to "fade" - in situations with high light; amber is usually
better in low light environments; if possible, one should
look at similarly colored monitors in the proposed work
location in order to determine the best choice for the
situation. If the monitor is apt to be moved from one
location to another, the choice of a green phosphor is
probably most appropriate.
.5. A matte finish on the monitor case, knobs, and screen for
less glare is most desirable.
ERGONOMIC AIDS AND OTHER ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT:
A variety of ergonomic aids and equipment is available to assist users
with VDT equipment and make its use tailored to the _individual and the
specific work situation. Listed below are some of the kinds of
equipment available and the purpose for which it is helpful :
1. Monitor Hoods: reduce glare from some lighting sources.
2. Glare Screens: both nylon (Sunflex) and polaroid types are_ .
available and useful to reduce glare in particular lighting-
situations. Users should test the items at their particular
work station to see which, if any, is - helpful to them.
"Grounded" glare screens seem to be the state-of-the-art at _.
present to reduce ionization of the air in the area
surrounding the monitor.
3. Tilt/swivel/platform-on-arm: - provide for adjustment of
monitor positioning..different devices are better for
different situations. Examination of the work station and
its use should be done prior to deciding which device is most
appropriate to assist with the VDT work.
I
VDT Committee Page, 6 January 5, 148E
4. Static electricity mats: reduce static electricity and
"shocks" therefrom. The need for such mats varies with the
floor and floor covering. . .some carpets cause more "shocks"
than others.
5. Document holders: provide a place for work materials at the
level of the monitor so that the user does not have to adjust
their body/head position to read from their work material
while keying. Some document holders provide foot-pedal
operated line-marking adjustment to assist the user in
keeping their place. These are recommended for heavy word
processing users and in some other situations where they may
be helpful .
6. Footrests: provide foot/leg height adjustment in relation to
the other VDT work station elements.
7. Wrist rests: provide wrist support necessary while keying
for some individual users.
ILLUMINATION:
Although illumination in many County offices is not adjustable for
individual work stations, it is generally recognized that lower light
levels are helpful in working with video display terminals. For many
work . situations, this is not possible because other individuals with
other light level needs work in the same work location. Additionally,
many VDT users must read work materials at the same time they are
using their VDT's, resulting in two conflicting needs. Where
individual work station lighting is possible, VDT users may find it
helpful to have lower general light levels and task lighting on their.
reading materials. In those situations where lighting adjustment is
not possible for VDT's, . glare screens and hoods may be helpful .
Additionally, the physical _placement of monitors should be done
considering the location of lights, windows and other sources of
glare, trying to reduce the glare as much as possible.
CONCLUSION:
A variety of factors affect the ergonomics of VOT use. After
consideration of the areas discussed above, the Committee hopes that
departments will be able to make better decisions in relation to
purchasing VOT's and ancillary equipment. A checklist of
considerations prepared by Purchasing, as well as some equipment
information, is appended to this report. Purchasing has also. prepared
several looseleaf books of computer accessories and supplies which is
price updated and regularly available for review at Purchasing. A
sample of the price listing. (without the backup product information
available at Puchasing) is also attached to this report.
ATTACHMENT B
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT DIVISION TOWARDS
PROTECTING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF EMPLOYEES USING VIDEO DISPLAY TERMINALS
The focus of the County's video display terminal (VDT) safety program is on
prevention of injuries. to VDT users. Loss control measures have included eva-
luation of loss data surveys, accident prevention education and mitigation of
injuries through corrective actions, and equipment modification and purchases.
At the request. of Risk Management, an educational program was begun in 1988 with
the assistance of the Occupational Health physician, Dr. Ruth Lowengart, to pro-
vide training: (1) to the safety coordinators in each department, (2) to repre-
sentatives from various departments, who in turn would become their department
"trainer," and (3) to selective departments where injuries have been or could be
a problem. A major part of this program is employees receive instruction on how
to use and adjust their equipment and furniture.
Safety specialists survey work stations and make recommendations on modification
of existing equipment or purchase of new equipment. Suggestions include use of
adjustable tables, chairs, armrests, VDT stands, footstools, glare-reducing
screens, telephone headsets, and rest periods.
In addition to preventative measures, employees not able to perform their jobs
because of work-related injuries have their cases reviewed 'by the vocational
rehabilitation counselor. The counselor works with departments-; physicians, and
physical therapists to evaluate employees ' specific needs and recommends work
station modifications to accommodate employees at their jobs.
ATTACHMENT C
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
TOWARD PROTECTING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF EMPLOYEES USING VDT's
The Health Services Department has responded to numerous
questions and complaints concerning the safety of employees using
VDT' s. Dr. Marion von Buettner the Employee Occupational Health
Program Director and Dr. Ruth Lowengart, the County' s
Occupational Medicine Program Manager have been very interested
in the safety and health of video display terminal (VDT)
operators as well as other office employees. Since, Dr. Lowengart
was hired in September of 1988 she has conducted a number of
. training sessions both from a pro-active, preventive standpoint
as well as in response to requests from departments which have
perceived problems. In addition, other members of the Health
Services Department have responded to complaints regarding VDT' s
in the County. The following is a summary of activities
performed by the health services department toward protecting the
health and safety of employees using VDT' s.
1. Dr. Lowengart conducted two train-the-trainer seminars on
3/22/89 entitled "Health and Safety of VDT Operators" (outline
attached) . Announcements for this seminar were sent to all
department safety coordinators with instructions to select
potential attendees from among interested supervisors and
employees. - Approximately 26 employees attended these sessions.
The purpose of this seminar was to provide the individual with
the techniques to evaluate the health and safety aspects of video
display terminals used in the work place. Individuals were
trained to evaluate work stations and work practices, to
recognize potential health problems related to VDT use, and to
identify solutions to unsafe practices among County employees.
Dr. Lowengart plans to conduct additional seminars in the future
with the assistance of Risk Management.
2 . Dr. Lowengart presented a talk to all department safety
,coordinators on 11/17/88 entitled "Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A
Cumulative Trauma Disorder" One of the main points of this talk
.was to discuss the potential for common office activities, such
as VDT use or typing, to cause or exacerbate this disorder of the
wrist. Recommendations were made for work station design, work
practices, and work-rest breaks to prevent wrist strains and
carpal tunnel syndrome.
Health -Services, page 2 --
3 . At the request of Chuck Bock, Safety Coordinator for the
County Clerk, the Occupational Health Physician investigated
employee complaints of hand .and- wrist problems in January, 1989.
She interviewed employees and supervisors, examined their work
stations and made recommendations to the County Clerk' s Office
and Risk Management concerning modifications or purchase of
equipment and work practices. In addition, she conducted four
one-hour training sessions for all employees in the Clerk
Recorder' s Office. These training sessions discussed potential
health effects of VDT and other office practices and
recommendations for modifications of VDT work stations and work
practices. Employees were taught how to adjust their chairs and
work stations to reduce strain.
4. A talk similar to that described above .f or the Clerk' s office
was presented to employees in the Assessor' s office at the
request of Julie DiMaggio, the department Safety Coordinator.
5. In September, 1988, Dr. Marion von Buettner, from County
Employee Occupational Health Program conducted an investigation
of employee complaints in the Probation department. She
interviewed employees, examined their work stations, and made
recommendations for improvements in their work stations and work
practices.
6 . In March, 1989 Dr. Lowengart met with Jim Fuerst of the
Purchasing Division of the General Services Department to discuss
her recommendations for appropriate furniture for VDT work
stations. She reviewed the usual recommendations for chairs,
tables, and accessories and found them to be appropriate.
7 . The Environmental Health Division has conducted several
investigations of radiation emissions from VDT' s in response to
complaints from departments. These studies showed no significant
ionizing or non-ionizing radiation emissions from VDT' s.
HEALTH AND SAFETY OF VDT OPERATORS
Presented by Ruth Lowengart, M.D.
I . Potential Health Problems of VDT operators
A. Visual
- eye strain, blurred vision, eye discomfort
B. Musculoskeletal
- neck pain or stiffness
- shoulder pain or stiffness
- back pain
- pain or stiffness in arms and legs
- soreness or numbness in fingers or wrists
- Carpal tunnel syndrome
(A condition caused when there is too much pressure on
the nerve in the wrist. Often associated with
tendinitis . Symptoms include pain in hand and wrist,
numbness, tingling or burning sensation of the fingers,
later weakness of the thumb. )
C. Stress related to job
D. Health problems are not the result of the VDT per se, but of
trying to use this equipment in suboptimal environments or
with inappropriate techniques
II . Causes of VDT Problems
A. Design of the equipment
- inappropriate design, trying to adapt furniture designed
for other purposes
- non-adjustable
B. Inappropriate use of the equipment
static physical position
working intensively for many consecutive hours
high speed, repetitive motions
poor posture
excessive reaches and moves
C. Underlying medical problems
- 600 of adults suffer from back ailments
- inappropriate prescription lenses for medium close work
- Carpal tunnel syndrome may have multiple causes
paqE-
Screen Heght'
vie" Okts�-e
WnSt Reln:ed ?ad
8sdva¢
J
Perpe+dlwlar 5-Aled (=—W
to Floor Fro-r Hs.yar
III . Prevention of VDT Problems
A. Workstation Design.
1 . VDT characteristics :
- County supported IBM PS2 is adequate
- Avoid green displays
- Screen large enough, adjustable angle
2 . Chair characteristics:
- Easily adjustable seat height
- Low back support
- Adjustable back rest height
- Casters on 5-prong base preferred
- All adjustments made while seated
- Seat with soft padding, absorb moisture, textured
surface, front edge sloped
- Arm rests optional to decrease shoulder strain
- Seat tilt, optional (may prefer 5 degree forward
tilt to reduce pressure on back of legs and Lack
- Purchasing recommends Charvoz chair
3 . Table characteristics:
- Adjustable height is ideal, but few are available
- Low or . adjustable keyboard position to keep wrist
parallel to the floor
- Rounded table front edge
- Adequate leg room
- Viewing distance to screen 13-2811
- Top of screen display about eye level
- Can purchase adaptors for existing furniture such as -
- arm attached to table to lower keyboard
- stand for screen to raise height.
- stand for screen with pull-out drawee
page 3
4 . Additional optional equipment
- foot rests (ideal : top inclined 5-15 degrees, non
skid surface, heavy enough to remain stationary,
large enough to accommodate both feet, portable,
adjustable height _.
- arm support (removable arm rests)
- wrist rests optional at operator' s request for
intensive keyboard use
- document holder to keep at same height and angle as
screen
5 . other environmental factors
reduce bright sunlight or reflected glare by
positioning equipment (right angles to window) ,
lights (do not put directly under lights) or adjusting
window shades
- keep shiney objects away from screen
- adjust brightness and contrast of screen for comfort
- keep VDT screen clean to reduce reflection
- provide and use printer. hoods to reduce noise
- anti glare filters available
B. Work practices
1 . Avoid prolonged, repetitious activity in one position:
- Move- -frequently to prevent muscle strain
Take frequent work-rest breaks (every 1-2 hours) to
avoid fatigue; examples are filing, correspondence,
answer phones, etc. May consider job rotation to avoid
one person- typing .for 8 hours per day
- decrease number of repetitions if possible
2 . Adjust furniture to appropriate height and angle
- upright posture with head over pelvis
- back straight, low back curve supported
- feet- flat on ground or use foot rest
- knees bent at ninety degrees
- position document and screen ('see above)
- wrist flat, do not type with wrists bent
3 . Reduce force used to perform activities where possible
- do not pound on keyboard
- roll ink stamps rather than pounding them
- add foam. to gripping area, if needed for small grips
- provide large diameter pens with non-slippery surface
and fine point if frequent writing done.
Press only as hard as necessary
- Reduce number of carbon copies where possible if lots
of writing necessary
- divide stacks of paper for punching holes
- use electric staplers , hole punches where possible
- hold spring loaded stamps with pistol grip if many
repetitions necessary
page 4
4 . Adjust VDT equipment to appropriate height and angle
- top of screen at eye level (may need to be lower if
using bi-focals )
- position document at same angle as screen
- type with wrists flat
- wrist rests optional
5 . Take constructive breaks including stretching
exercises : neck, shoulders , back, wrists ' ( see.
attached)
6 . Get routine eye examinations . Be sure to tell your
eye doctor to check for medium range vision. If you
are over 40 years old you may need bi- or tri-focal
lenses . If only doing VDT work, single vision lenses
may work best, however they will not work if doing
multiple tasks .
7 . Report problems early to your supervisor
8 . Seek medical advice for persistent problems
Employee Occupational Health Clinic in Richmond
Call .Vee Ainars, PHN at 374-3101 for appointment
ATTACHMENT D
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL SAFETY . AND HEALTH HAZARDS OF-VDT WORKERS
The following is a brief summary of potential safety and
health hazards associated with use of Video Display Terminals
(VDTs ) . This summary is based on a reviev, of medical literature
and the report of the Ad Hoc Expert Advisory Committee on VDTs
convened by the Division of Occupational Safety and Health ( see
Attachment E ) .
VISION
Vis-Lon-related complaints are the most frequent complaints
iron VDT workers . While, there is no conclusive evidence of
permanent damage to the visual system related to use of VDTs,
common complaints include difficulty focusing, blurred vision,
burning eyes , eye strain, double vision, colored after images,
fatigue and headaches . The visual complaints may arise from
-factors including the nature of the task, the physical
characteristics of the VDT worker, the functional- characteristics
of the visual display, the VDT work station environment , or a
combination of these factors . Similar vision-related complaints
can be present among workers with other visually demanding jobs .
Factors which can reduce visual problems among VDT workers
include proper visual correction of the worker, absence of glare
on the screen, adequate lighting, proper placement of equipment,
and training regarding proper use of equipment . These factors also
apply to other workers with visually demanding jobs . These
solutions have been effective in individual cases for alleviation
of visual discomfort, but there have not been adequate studies to
determine their effectiveness for the general population of VDT
users .
MUSCULOSKELETAL,
Extended VDT work may be associated with increased rates of
musculoskeletal discomfort ,and disorders , especially if the work
station is not adjusted properly for the worker. The neck
shoulders, back and wrists are more commonly affected than other
Parts of the body. Tendinitis may occur in the arms or wrists , and
a condition known as Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (presst:re on the nerve
in the wrist) which may require surgical treatment has been
described. These problems are also present in other workers doing
similar repetitive tasks , and none of the disorders which may be
associated with use of VDT are unique to this type of work. The
causes of these problems include inadequately designed desks and
chairs which do not permit personalized adjustments , improper
posture , repetitive tasks resulting in overuse of certain muscle
groups , fast work pace, underlying medical conditions or
attributes , and work stressors .
Provision of well-designed and_ adjustable chars- and - work
surfaces , document holders , foot and wrist rests , and tilting
screens can help to reduce injuries . Alternate work-rest breaks
every two hours may be helpful , but have not been adequately
studied in a controlled manner to determine their effectiveness .
Training the employee about proper posture, adjustment of the
furniture and equipment, working with the wrists in the neutral
position, stretching exercises , and avoidance of excessive force
can be helpful for reducing injuries .
STRESS
There is no convincinq evidence that VDT work is inherently
more emotionally stressful than other similar work. indeed the
access to wordprocessors has reduced the stress -ir jobs demanding
extensive document production or editing. The primary emotional
stress related to VDT worm is the individual reaction to
interpersonal relationships and the nature of the task at hand aU
it is in similar jobs . P?zysical stress related to VDT work is
primarily due to prolonged or repetitions muscle activities and has
been discussed .above .
Electronic monitoring of VDT work output may place additional
stress on workers especially if the monitoring is covert or seen
as incorrect or judgmental . We do not have a sense as to the
extent that electronic monitoring is problematic in local
industries .
REPRODUCTION
There is no conclusive evidence at present about whether there
is or is not an association between VDTs and adverse pregnancy
outcomes or birth complications . Studies have been of varying
quality and the findings are inconsistent. Extensive measurements
of radiation emitted from VDTs both in the United States and abroad
have determined that the radiation levels are well below currently
acceptable standards of exposure even when the devices are tested
under worst case conditions . Some levels of radiation are even less
than one might encounter around ordinary household appliances .
1,1though a recent epidemiologic study done by Kaiser Permanente in
the Bay area showed a statistically significant relationship
bet-ween VDT work and adverse pregnancy outcome, this study failed
to demonstrate that the relationship was due to the VDT itself .
Further studies are Deeded to determine the relationship between
VDITs and adverse pregnancy outcome . Based on a review of ti--e
literature , however, it appears that if there is an increased risk
of adverse pregnancy outcome due to VDT work, it is small .
t.ducation of workers as to the current medical knowledge could
..._..... -- J
be helpful to reduce excessive concern regarding pregnancy.
However, this issue is so important that it warrants further
evaluation. The State' s Hazard Evaluation System and Information
Service (HESIS) has been directed to monitor the literature
regarding pregnancy and VDTs. The County Health Services
Department will remain in contact with HESIS regarding new
developments on this issue .
NOISE
The noise of VDT cooling fans and impact printers is a
potential source of annoyance, however this noise rarely
contributes to hearing loss and is usually well-below the CAL/OSHA
permissible exposure level for noise in the workplace . Noise can
be reduced by enclosures or isolation of certain equipment from
-Dersonnel .
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
While the majority of VDT wormers do not experience adverse
health effects, there are some health concerns related to VDT use .
The major health risk to VDT workers is musculoskeletal discomfort
and disorders , especially if the work station is not adjusted
properly for the worker. Although visual complaints and noise are
a potential annoyance , they do not appear to constitute a major
hazard. VDT work does not appear to be more emotionally stressful
than other similar work. There is no conclusive evidence at
present about whether there is or is not an association between
VDTs and adverse pregnancy outcomes or birth complications; if any
association doe exist, it is small . VDT workers have health
concerns which are shared with other workers with physically and
visually demanding jobs .
It is medically prudent to recommend certain equipment,
training and work practices for VDT workers as outlined below:
Equipment :
- VDT .equipment and furniture which conforms with the American
National Standards Institute ( .NSI) guidelines
HFS 100-1988 Hu-man Factors Engineering of
Visual Display Terminal Workstations
- User adjustable chairs with low back support and optional
arm r e�tS
- Work stations which either have adequate proportions ( leg
room, low keyboard) for the user or are adjustable
- Workstations which provide adequate lighting, but do not
have e<,cessive glare or reflections
- Docament holders
- Noise redaction covers or absorbent material for noisy
impact printers
4
Optional foot rests , wrist rests , arm support, antiglare
screens for individuals requesting this equipment
- Corrective lenses for workers with visual complaints
Training:
- Optimal posture and positions for VDT use and how to adjust
tables and chairs
- How to avoid excessively forceful Motions
- Potential adverse health effects , how to recognize them and
how to prevent them
- Exercises
- Availability of equipment
Work practices :
- Where possible, prolonged repetitious activities should
be avoided. Variety in the job is desirable
from the standpoint of avoiding cumulative
trauma injuries and increasing job
satisfaction.
- Encourage constructive rest breaks including stretching
exercises
- Alternate work breaks 15 minutes every two hours or at the
worker' s discretion may be desirable
- Discourage computer monitoring, electronic supervision,
remote telephone surveillance, and other forms
of VDT surveillance without notice to the
worker at the time monitoring is occurring.
Prepared by
Ruth Lowengart, M.D. , M. S .
?tanager Occupational Medicine Program
Wendel Brunner, M.D .
Director Public Health
i�
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ATTACI-Ir1E4T E
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 31, 1989
TO: Steven A. Jablonsky, Executive Officer
Occupational Safety and alt Standar s Board
FROM: R: W. Stranberg, Chie
Division of Occupation of an, ,:alth
SUBJECT: AD.HOC EXPERT ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON VIS(:AL DISPLAY
TERMINALS (VDTs) FNAL REPORT TO THE BOARD
In response to the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board's Petition Decision regarding
Petition Files No. 205, 206, and 207, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health convened an :i
hoc expert advisory committee to study the problems associated with VbT use and to determine li
standards are warranted.
The Committee convened on September 27,1987 and concluded its two years of study and deliberations
on May 11, 1989. The Committee studied the three areas-of concern identified by the Petitioners, which
were: 1) Vision, 2) Musculoskeletal, and 3) Stress. The Committee also studied two other areas of
concern to VDT workers: 4) Reproduction and 5) Indoor Environment.
The results of the Committee's work appear in the enclosed report to the Board. The report details the
Committee's work and determinations. Although the Committee was unable to reach a consensus on the
necessity for VDT related standards in each of the five topic areas studied, the sections in the report
entitled "Member Recommendations" reflect the various options which resulted from the Committee's
deliberations and determinations.
The Division's recommendations are based on an independent assessment of the evidence submitted and
discussed by the Committee. The Division made every attempt to establish a well balanced as well as
scientifically sound advisory committee. However,the Committee deliberations made it apparent
that Committee concensus on most issues would not occur. Therefore,the Division has attempted to
digest all of the evidence,discussions and deliberations of the Committee, consider the test of necessity
for the Administrative Procedures Act (APA),and relate VDT worksite"problems" to similar
"problems"at non-VDT worksites in making its recommendations. The Division's evaluation and
recommendadons follow below.
The criteria used by the Division in making its evaluation in each of the five topic areas were as
follows:
Has the Committee research and deliberations demonstrated that a hazard or problem exists?
If yes, then;
1. Has the Committee demonstrated that the measures recommended will
eliminate or alleviate the hazard or problem?
2. Are the measures recommended.under the Board's jurisdiction?
T -M�1ML1.�IZs�S
(1) VISION
In the vision topic area the evidence presented and discussed did not demonstrate that %ision•rcij!,�d
complaints among VDT workers represent a hazard— that is, there is no conclusive evidence it.ariv
permanent damage to the visual system associated with working at a VDT.
However, the evidence presented and discussed did demonstrate that there is a problem,in that VDT
work can result in transient visual discomfort. Transient visual discomfort is not unique to VDT work.
The evidence presented and discussed also demonstrated that there are measures, some fairly simple,
which can be taken to eliminate or alleviate visual discomfort among VDT workers.
(2) MUSCULOSKELETAL
The evidence presented and discussed did not adequately demonstrate that musculoskeletal-resat--d
complaints among VDT workers represent a hazard—that is;there is no conclusive evidence of
permanent damage to the musculoskeletal system uniquely associated with working at a VDT.
However, the evidence presented and discussed did demonstrate that there is a problem,in that VDT
work can result in increased rates of musculoskeletal discomfort and disorders. Ergonomic problems,
including discomfort,carpel tunnel syndrome or repetitive motion syndrome are not unique to VDT
workers. Evidence was presented demonstrating that musculoskeletal problems can occur even when the
VDT worksite contains adequately adjustable equipment and furniture.
The evidence presented and discussed also demonstrated that musculoskeletal discomfort and disorders
may be alleviated by adequate workstation adjustability,worker knowledge of correct posture and
adjustments,and/or task redesign. In addition,the evidence showed that the incidence of
musculoskeletal discomfort or disorders could be reduced by training,which includes as a minimum,an
understanding of correct posture and how to adjust the workstation to the user. Education and training
covering correct posture and adjustment of the workstation appear to be an extremely important factor in
addressing musculoskeletal concerns. Since these factors are not unique to VDT workstations,a broader
approach to this problem can be utilized to address similar musculoskeletal concerns at worksites with
similar problems.
(3) STRESS
The evidence pre5ented and discussed did not adequately demonstrate that a hazard exists with
respect to stress-related complaints among VDT workers.
However,the evidetce and discussions presented did demonstrate that there are features of VDT work
that may be associat::d with stress. There is evidence for positive and negative aspects of stress;
therefore,stress associated with VDT work or any other work is not necessarily detrimental. Stress is
not unique to VOT work. Electronic monitoring of VDT work output is not unique in itself. Work output
has long been used as a monitor of productivity. However,electronic monitoring,as can be used with
VDTs,unbeknownst to the employee,may be a factor in stress concerns with use of this equipment. It is
questionable whether this activity is within the purview of OSHA and the Board at this time. The
Board may or may not wish to address this issue of unknown electronic monitoring separately in the
future.
(4) REPRODUCT10N
The evidence presented and discussed did not adequately demonstrate that a -
respect to adverse reproductive outcomes amon VDT workers— that is, there u n
conclusive evidence at present about whether there is or is not an association D-> Jn,:
reproductive outcomes. The scientific papers presented were of varyrnng quality and the tin;;^
inconsistent. None of the papers showed a specific association between VDTs (as contrasted to IT
work")and adverse reproductive outcomes.
However, the discussions did demonstrate that there is a problem,in that a significant concern exists
among many VDT workers about adverse pregnancy outcomes in association with VDT work. In fact,
there is evidence that undue concern by pregnant VDT workers can result in inappropnate actions Ouch
as using lead aprons) which can have an adverse effect on pregnancy outcome. Thus, this"issue can not
be completely dismissed because of lack of evidence for an.effect.
(S) INDOOR EWIRONIvMENT
The evidence presented and discussed did not demonstrate that indoor air quality-related cornplaints
among VDT workers represent a hazard. However, the e��dence presented did demonstrate that ;here
is a problem, in that reduced indoor air quality may be an overlooked contributing factor in VDT worker
discomfort and health. This is not unique to VDT work and is an increasing concern among all office
workers, especially in energy efficient buildings.
DIVISION RECOMMENDATIONS
In view of the inadequate evidence as well as the Committee's inability to demonstrate that a hazard
exists in each of the five topic areas, the Division has some reservations concerning the necessity•for a
specific VDT standard. The Division concurs with the Committee that certain problems and concerns
exist and that appropriate and adequate training in combination with adjustable workstations appears
to be the most effective means of addressing,alleviating and/'or eliminating most of these concerns.
Therefore, the Division finds it more appropriate to recommend that training requirements and
adjustable workstation design be addressed in ways that broadly cover all situations where employees
have similar complaints and/or problems. However,even here it.is not clear that any regulations
addressing these issues should be specific to VDTs. Therefore,because it is more appropriate, the
Division recommends addressing training requirements and adjustable workstation design to broadly
cover all situations where employees have similar complaints and/or problems. This can be done as
follows:
1. Develop a nrew training standard to'address all training issues surrounding all types of workstations
(not just limited to the VITT workstation).
2. Develop a new ergonomic standard;including appropriate training,to apply to all workers,not just
VDT workers.
3. Develop a Cal/OSHA consultation training progTam specifically :Ie5ib!!%:
a,warcness to problems and concerns in these areas,and where passible, tram
on solution which can alleviate the problems and concerns to the workplai c
4. Follow the research and issues in these areas and convene expert advisory
analyse research results and develop regulations, DOSH has formally requc,tc.i that HE�;c,
'to LC 147.2) follow the VDT adverse pregnancy outcome issue and appnse DOSH of any new
developments which would warrant convening an expert advisory committee and developing new
standards. In addition,because of the high degree of concern about VDT use and reproductive outcome,
the Division will request HESIS to develop a fact sheet summarizing current scientific research on the
subject for distribution to employers and employees utilizing VDTs.
\Enclosure
cc• Frank R. Ciofalo, Ph D
Denise Miller