Section B - Restrictive

Response – (Total 30 marks)

 Instructions: 

This section consists of two case studies. Students are required to

answer 

Case

Study 1: Accident Causation

Poultry Processing Corporation (PPC) is a major

supplier of processed chickens and turkeys for regional and international

grocery chains. Its operations involve a highly labour-intensive workflow,

where hundreds of employees perform repetitive manual tasks such as cutting,

trimming, deboning, and packaging. These activities require the frequent use of

knives, shears, and cleavers—tools that demand precision and repetitive hand

motions. Due to the perishable nature of poultry products, many job tasks must

be conducted in cold environments, adding strain to workers’ hands, wrists, and

overall musculoskeletal system.

In response to the inherent hazards of poultry

processing, PPC invested heavily in creating ergonomically designed

workstations, providing extensive personal protective equipment (PPE), and

implementing strict health and safety protocols. Over the years, these efforts

earned PPC several awards from occupational safety bodies, building its

reputation as an industry leader in workplace safety.

However, this reputation was challenged when a class

action lawsuit was filed on behalf of more than 50 PPC employees, all alleging

work-related carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The lawsuit stunned the poultry

industry, which held PPC in high regard. External consultants engaged by both

PPC and the plaintiffs conducted extensive investigations, reviewing years of

documentation, interviewing more than 100 witnesses, and conducting multiple

hearings.

Unexpectedly, before the trial commenced, PPC opted to

settle the lawsuit financially, despite widespread belief in their eventual

vindication. The turning point came when an external consultant identified a

critical internal failure: PPC’s centralized safety management system relied

almost entirely on one individual, the safety manager, Joe Don Huttle.

Huttle had an exemplary 20-year career in

poultry-processing safety and was well-respected across the state. Five years

into his role at PPC, he was elected president of a statewide safety

organization that had been struggling with declining membership and financial

instability. Seeing an opportunity to revive the organization, Huttle dedicated

enormous personal effort to his new role, often working seven days a week and

travelling for extended periods.

During this time, however, his responsibilities at PPC

were severely neglected. Key safety management functions, including safety

performance measurement, routine inspections, corrective actions, accident

investigations, and compliance monitoring, were left unattended for nearly six

months. Employees quickly realized that monitoring had stopped, and compliance

began to decline. Safety precautions designed specifically to prevent

repetitive strain injuries such as CTS were no longer consistently followed.

This lapse allowed hazardous conditions to worsen

unnoticed. Without regular ergonomic assessments, worker feedback loops, or

corrective interventions, the incidence of CTS rose dramatically. An

investigation later revealed that a series of unsafe acts and unsafe conditions

had developed, all tracing back to a central systemic failure: over-reliance on

a single safety manager and the absence of organizational backup systems.

Discussions:

1.      

Describe

the sequence of events that led to the unsafe acts and conditions at PPC. 

(5 marks)

2.      Using EITHER the

 Domino

Theory 

• Identify

  each “

  Domino Theory

  ”

  or 

  “Component 

  of the

  Accident/Incident Theory”

• Explain

  how each contributed to the accident chain.

(10 marks)

3.      Propose corrective

measures that PPC should implement to avoid recurrence of similar unsafe acts.

(10

marks)

4.      Recommend

improvements to PPC’s safety management system, addressing structural and

organizational deficiencies.

(5

marks)

(Total

30 marks)

Case

Study 2: Ergonomic Challenges on a Construction Site

Sunrise Constructions Ltd.

 is

currently undertaking the development of a five-story commercial building

located in a densely populated urban centre. The project involves multiple

high-risk, labour-intensive activities such as bricklaying, concrete pouring,

scaffolding assembly, electrical installation, and handling of heavy structural

components. While the company has maintained consistent compliance with

personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements, recent safety audits have

uncovered an important oversight: ergonomic design and safe-handling practices

have not been adequately integrated into site operations.

Over the past several weeks, the site manager has seen

a noticeable rise in worker complaints related to musculoskeletal discomfort,

including lower back pain, shoulder stiffness, wrist soreness, and general

fatigue. Some employees have begun requesting medical leave, resulting in

project delays and increased operational costs. The audit found that

workstations were not adjusted to worker height, mechanical lifting aids were

limited, and repetitive or forceful tasks were not properly rotated among workers.

Worker

Profile: Mark

Mark

, a full-time construction worker assigned to

structural installation tasks, frequently undertakes physically demanding

operations such as:

• Lifting,

  carrying, and installing steel beams weighing 

  20–40 kg.

• Operating

  a 

  pneumatic jackhammer

   for concrete demolition, often for

  extended periods.

• Assembling,

  positioning, and adjusting 

  scaffolding

   in confined and

  elevated spaces.

• Climbing,

  kneeling, squatting, and working in awkward postures for long durations.

The project is operating under tight deadlines

,

causing workers like Mark to perform repetitive, high-force tasks for several

continuous hours each day with limited rest opportunities.

Symptoms

and Observations

After several months on the project, Mark has

reported:

• Persistent

  lower back pain

   that intensifies after lifting or

  positioning steel beams.

• Shoulder

  and neck stiffness

  , particularly when adjusting scaffolding

  overhead.

• Numbness

  and tingling in the fingers

  , likely caused by prolonged

  vibration exposure from the jackhammer.

• Wrist

  and knee discomfort

   resulting from repetitive bending,

  squatting, kneeling, and climbing activities.

The site supervisor has also observed Mark:

• Frequently

  rubbing or stretching his lower back and shoulders.

• Taking

  short, unplanned micro-breaks to relieve discomfort.

• Requesting

  assistance with lifts that he previously performed independently.

These observations indicate potential cumulative

trauma and early signs of 

Case-Based

Discussion Questions

1.      

Identify

at least five ergonomic risks present in this construction scenario.

(5 marks)

2.      Propose

practical interventions that Sunrise Constructions Ltd. could implement to

reduce ergonomic strain on workers like Mark.

(8 marks)

3.      Explain how

ergonomic training could contribute to improved safety and productivity on the

construction site.

(6 marks)

4.      Discuss the

potential long-term consequences for worker health and organizational

performance if ergonomic issues remain unaddressed.

(6 marks)

5.      Recommend a

structured strategy for integrating ergonomic principles into the daily

operations of a construction site.

(5 marks)

(Total 30 marks)