This study was done with the aim to identify the specific ergonomic risk factors in the workplace affecting the both male and female workers while doing raw brick making activities and to analyze the pain/discomfort related to it. Twenty male and twenty female workers from the raw brick making unit were randomly selected and a detailed ergonomic risk factors were analyzed with the help of NIOSH Ergonomic Hazard Identification checklist. The questions were based on the primary job responsibility of the workers. Data revealed that nearly 8 percent males and 10 percent females were in ‘usually’ category, 25 percent males and 28 percent females in ‘sometimes’ and approximately 18 percent male and 13 percent females who never performed the task were kept in the category ‘never’. It was found that all the male and female workers usually require exerting force with their hands and used the hand tools to do the task. About 8 percent males and 5 percent females were usually, 15 percent male and only 10 percent female were sometimes and 28 percent males and 35 percent female were never stood continuously for a period of more than 30 minutes. On the whole all the male and female respondents were lifting or lowering the objects between floor and waist height or shoulder height and most of the workers were becoming exposed to the vibration while performing the task and they were carrying the weight more than 50 lb. The study indicates that the majority of the activities are in the high risk category and demands immediate ergonomic intervention in the form of tool, workstation and process design.
Brick factories, Ergonomics hazards, Musculoskeletal disorders, Workplace repetition
Bureau of Labour Statistics. (1993). Evaluating and improving world activities. current problems of Work Science. Sozialistiche Forstwirtschaft, 38 (5):137-139.
Bureau of Labour Statistics. (2010). U. S. Department of Labour. News release. November 8, 2012.
Hagberg, M., Silverstein, B.A. and Wells, R.V. (1995). Work related musculoskeletal disorders; A reference for prevention; Kuorinka I and Forcier L (eds) London; Taylor and Francis. 1995:556.
Marras, W., Knapik, G. and Ferguson, S. (2009). Lumbar spine forces during manoeuvring of ceiling-based and floor-based patient transfer devices. Journal of Ergonomics, 52(3): 384-397.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act. (1989). Official Gazette, Supplement, 1989-03-13, No.11, Vol. 12, p.23-36.
Johnson, W.M.S., Bertha, A. and Priscilla, J. (2011). Prevalence of upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders among workers in an industrial town in Tamilnadu. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 5(2):187-190.
Palmer, K.T., Haward, B., Griffin, M.J., Bendall, H. and Coggon, D. (2006). Validity of self reported occupational exposures to hand transmitted and whole body vibration. Occupational Environmental Medicine, 57:237-241.
Griffin, M. J., Howarth, H.V.C., Pitts, P.M., Fischer, S., Kaulbars, U., Donati, P.M. and Brereton, P.F. (2006) ‘Guide to good practice on whole-body vibration: non-binding guide to good practice for implementing Directive 2002/44/EC on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (vibrations)’, Brussels, Belgium.
Dul, J., Douwes, M. and Smitt, P. (1991). A work-rest model for static postures. In: Queinnec, Y., Daniellou, F. (Eds.), Design for Everyone; Proceedings of the 11th IEA Congress. Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 93-95.
Mathiassen, S. and Winkel, J. (1992). Can occupational guidelines for workrest schedules be based on endurance time data? Ergonomics, 35 (3): 253–259.
This work is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) © Author (s)