ergonomics who decides?

[marcus]

Who decides if a job is setup wrong or not?We have a job on my team that hurts your back leaning over the frame and now there is a crash bracket that makes it much harder cause its in the way.
But the Ergo person said its ok.I say we make that Ergo person do and hold that job for a few weeks and not just LOOK AT THE JOB.
How do they decide if they cant even do the job?

[ScottR@KTP]

They are trained to come out and say, "it's perfect, it won't hurt you". That way, when it hurts you, they will say "it wasn't the job, it won't hurt you". Now, welcome to 'no work available'.

[marcus]

Was this job bid or did they get appointed to it?

[kessinger]

They take classes on ergo, I can't really break it down for you Marcus but I will have someone come see you that can.

They are appointed. You would want it that way so they have to answer to someone in the union, if they don't do their job now the chairman can remove. If they were bid and they didn't do their job you would have to wait til the company made them do their job, which of course that wouldn't happen.

Keep in mind though every job that is bad still may not reach the level needed to make it an ergo rotated job. They still have to go by the agreed upon standard, the company engineers are also trained in ergo and fight for the companies side, so they union person can't just make it so because they want to, they have to prove that it goes outside the ergo restrictions.

[mulewrong]

there are standards like the heat thing....I know it's not hot until the sweat on the nut sack reaches 85 degrees or something...so everyone is messed up it's not really hot.....Anyway there are standards like ft lbs of pressure to move a hoist, starting effort to move something, and keep it in motion angle of your back when picking up something like 15 degrees or it needs a lift table etc Quiz that ergo rep and pay your dues on time

Hey Kess what's barganning position on scum bag skilled trades worth defending...or cry baby trouble makers

[marcus]

Thanks Kess.

[ScottR@KTP]

Those positions should not be bid...but voted. I think that is what Marcus meant to say.

[kessinger]

Well, I am against voting them for this reason. example: Say the standards rep depends on votes to keep his job. NOONE ever likes having work added even if it fits under the 54 minutes workload. If the standards rep needs your vote he will be less likely to be honest with you since he knows any time he says "you can do the work" he loses votes. So IF he isn't honest with you, you will believe the union can win a grievance when you DON'T do the work, so you fight the job even though we can't win it, so you get screwed out of money in the long run.

It also take ALOT of training and hands on experience to get good at these jobs if you voted em out every three years, the first year of their term thaty wouldn't even know what they were doing.

These Jobs need to be able to do the right thing without worry of getting voted out. A Quality rep should be able to make the decision that is best for Quality even if it is an unpopular decision.

So what many have done, and that I agree with, is to appoint people that the membership has already voted FOR in the form of committeeperson or BC. Wise, Klefot, Baker, Houston, Powers, Judy, Dowell................ All of these people were elected by the people for their hard work. So, in appointing them they did appoint someone that you guys eleceted. That is not to slight the other people, or imply they didn't have skills that were good to those appointed jobs. We have alot fo good ones. I hear very little complaining about our appointed people overall.

Just my 2 cents.

[marcus]

yes Scott thanks for last post.BID jobs we need more BID jobs

[marcus]

If my math is correct(and it might not be) then I have 9 seconds between each truck to sit down or just stand there correct? If Im at 54 min work load.