View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Injuries and Accident Causes
in Carpentry Operations
A Detailed Analysis of Accidents
Experienced by Carpenters
During 1948 and 1949




Bulletin No. 1118
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Maurice J. Tobin, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Ewan Clague, Com m issioner




Injuries and Accident Causes
in Carpentry Operations




Bulletin No. 1118
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Maurice J. Tobin, Secretary
BUREAU OP LABOR STATISTICS
Ewan Clague, Com m issioner

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D. C. - Price 35 cents

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS,
Washington, D. C., September 25> 1952

The Secretary of Labors
I
have the honor to transmit herewith a report on the occurrence
and causes of work injuries experienced by carpenters.
This report constitutes a part of the Bureau•s regular program
of compiling work-injury information for use in accident-prevention
work. The statistical analysis and the preparation of the report
were performed in the Bureau's Branch of Industrial Hazards by
Frank S. McElroy and George R. McCormack. The specific accidentprevention suggestions were prepared by Roland P. Blake of the
Division of Safety Standards in the Bureau of Labor Standards.

Ewan Clague, Commissioner.
Hon. Maurice J. Tobin,
Secretary of Labor.

II




CONTENTS

The injury record..............................................
Scope and method of survey..........................................
Injury rates (definition of terms and procedures)..............
Injury-frequency rate..............................
Average time charge per disabling injury.......... ........
Injury severity rate...................
Accident-cause analysis (definition of terms and procedures)....
Agency of injury..........................................
Accident type..............
Hazardous working condition............
Agency of accident.......................................
Unsafe act................................................
Hazards of the occupation........................
Kinds of injuries experienced........................... „..........
Fatalities....................
Permanent-total disabilities....................................
Permanent-partial disabilities.................................
Temporary-total disabilities................
Accident analysis.... ..............................................
Manner of injury (accident type)...........................
Accident causes.....................................................
Hazardous working conditions.............................
Defective agencies.... ..................
Improperly guarded agencies..............................
Lack of proper equipment..................................
Hazardous working procedures..........
Poor housekeeping........................................
Lack of personal protective equipment.....................
Unsafe acts....................................................
Assuming an unsafe position or posture....................
Incorrect handling or unsafe use of equipment.............
Failure to secure or warn, operating without authority....
Unsafe loading or placing.................................
Miscellaneous unsafe acts....................
Accident prevention suggestions.....................................
Case descriptions and recommendations.........................
Appendix - Statistical tables...................................




Page
1
2
2
3
3
3
3

k

3
5
5
3

6
7
7
9
9
11
12
lU
13
13
16
16
18
18
18
18
19
20
20
22
22
22
23
23
38

III




INJURIES AND ACCIDENT CAUSES IN CARPENTRY OPERATIONS

The Injury Record
All available information indicates that the injury-frequency rate 1/ for
carpenters is slightly higher than the average for all construction occupa­
tions. A somewhat lower than average frequency of fatalities* however, gives
carpenters a comparatively favorable injury-severity record.
In 19U8, the most recent year for which separate injury rates are avail­
able for the various construction operations, carpenters experienced an
average of 38.2 disabling injuries in every million employee-hours worked. 2/
The corresponding average for all construction workers in that year was 36.7.
The injuries to carpenters produced an average time charge of 106 days per
case, representing a time loss of l+.l days for every 1,000 employee-hours
worked. For the construction industry as a whole the comparable averages
were 135 days charged per case and 5*0 days lost per 1,000 hours worked.
In comparison with most nonconstruction activities, the carpenters* in­
jury record was less favorable. The all-manufacturing injury-frequency rate
in 19U8 was only 17.2, less than half the rate for carpenters. 3/ Similarly,
the average severity of the injuries experienced by manufacturing workers
tended to be much less than for carpenters* injuries. In manufacturing, the
average time charge per injury was 83 days and the severity rate was 1.5 in
contrast to the carpenters' averages of 106 and I..I.
4

1/ The injury-frequency rate is the average number of disabling work in­
ju r e s for each million employee-hours worked.
A disabling work injury is any injury occurring in the course of and
arising out of employment, which (a) results in death or any degree of per­
manent physical impairment, or (b) makes the injured person unable to perform
the duties of any regularly established job open and available to him,
throughout the hours corresponding to.his regular shift on any day after the
day of injury, including Sundays, holidays, and periods of plant shut-down.
See chapter on Scope and Method for further discussion of injury rates
and their computation.
2/ Work Injuries in Construction, 19U8-U9, Bureau of Labor Statistics
Bulletin No. lOOi*.
3/ Work Injuries in the United States During 19U8, Bureau of Labor
Statistics Bulletin No. 975.




1

2
The lack of specific injury data for carpenters in subsequent periods pre­
cludes exact comparisons for more recent years* The indications are, however,
that the spread between the injury rates for carpenters and for manufactur­
ing workers has widened rather than narrowed. The all-construction injuryfrequency rate rose to 39.9 in 19U9 and to 1(1.0 in 1950. Presumably, the
carpenters• frequency rate rose proportionately with that of the industry.
On the other hand, the all-manufacturing injury-frequency rate dropped sharp­
ly to lli.5 in
rising only slightly to lii.7 in 1950.

19k9i

b/

The 19l|8 data indicate in detail a considerable variation in the injury
experience of carpenters engaged in different types of construction activity.
On the whole, the carpenters working for general contractors had higher
injury-frequency and severity rates than those working for special-trades
contractors. In the general-contracting field, for example, carpenters em­
ployed by highway and street contractors had an injury-frequency rate of 55 .2 ;
those employed by heavy-engineering and marine contractors had a rate of II .8}
41
and those employed by general-building contractors had a rate of 37 .8 .
Scope and Method of Survey
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has compiled annual injury rates for the
construction industry as a whole and for each of the three primary types of
construction— building, heavy engineering, and highway— each year since 1958.
In general, the reports received in the surveys prior to 19l|8 came from gen­
eral contractors, although some reports were received from special-trades
contractors in each classification.
In 191+8 the coverage and detail of the survey were enlarged and injury
rates were presented for a wide range of special-trade operations and also
in occupational detail. The occupational breakdowns were not continued in
subsequent years, but separate injury-rate information was compiled for a
number of special-trade contracting operations in both 19i|9 and 1950. All
the data assembled in the injury-rate surveys were collected by mail.
Reporting is entirely voluntary.
Injury Rates
The injury-rate comparisons presented in this report are based primarily
upon injury-frequency and severity rates compiled under the definitions and
procedures specified in the American Standard Method of Compiling Industrial
injury Rates, as approved by the American Standards Association in 19ti5.
These standard rates have been supplemented by an additional measure of in­
jury severity designated as the average time charge per disabling injury.
These measures are computed as follows:

b/

Work Injuries in the United States During 1950, Bureau of Labor
Statistics Bulletin No. 1098.



3
Injury-Frequency Rate.— The injury-frequency rate represents the average
number of disabling work injuries occurring in each million employee-hours
worked. It is computed according to the following formula:
Number of disabling injuries
Frequency rate * multiplied by 1,000,000_____
Number of employee-hours worked
Average Time Charge Per Disabling Injury.— The relative severity of a
temporary injury is measured by the number’of calendar days during which the
injured person is unable to work at any regularly established job which is
open and available to him, excluding the day of injury and the day on which
he returns to work. The relative severity of death and permanent impairment
cases is determined by reference to a table of economic time charges included
in the American Standard Method of Compiling Industrial Injury Rates. These
time charges, based upon an average working-life expectancy of 20 years for
the entire working population, represent the average percentage of working
ability lost as the result of specified impairments, expressed in unpro­
ductive days. The average time charge per disabling injury is computed by
adding the days lost for each temporary injury and the days charged accord­
ing to the standard table for each death and permanent impairment and divid­
ing the total by the number of disabling injuries.
Injury-Severity Rate.— The injury-severity rate weights each disabling
injury with its corresponding time-loss or time-charge and expresses the
aggregate in terms of the average number of days lost or charged per 1,000
employee-hours worked. It is computed according to the following formula:
Total days lost or charged
Severity rate ■ multiplied by 1,000
Number of employee-hours worked
Accident-Cause Analysis
The individual accident case records collected for this study were ob­
tained from State workmen's compensation files. This represents a deviation
from the Bureau's regular practice in similar surveys for other industries
in which the data are obtained from the records of individual employers. A
basic characteristic of the construction industry dictated this change in the
method of data collection. Most firms which employ carpenters are relatively
small. Therefore, even though the injury rate is comparatively high, the
number of injuries experienced by employees of any one establishment is also
small. The number of visits to individual establishments necessary to ob­
tain an adequate volume of case records for analysis, therefore, would have
been prohibitive both in terms of time and expense.
Use of the compensation files as the source of the data placed some limi­
tations upon the analysis, particularly in respect to the degree of detail
in which the findings could be presented. It is believed, however, that the



h

greater volume of case records obtained by this collection method compensated
in large measure for the lack of additional details which could have been ob­
tained through discussion of the individual cases with the employers, super­
visors, or workers who might be acquainted with the unreported circumstances
associated with the accidents.
The workmen's compensation agencies of nine States cooperated by making
their files available for this survey. These States— Arkansas, California,
Colorado, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West
Virginia— constitute a reasonable cross section of the country, insuring the
reflection of all possible variations in hazards introduced by differences
in climate or construction procedures as well as the differences arising from
State safety codes and safety enforcement practices. A total of 9,061 in­
dividual accident records was obtained. The primary basis of selection was
occupational— the injured person in each instance was either a journeyman
carpenter, a carpenter aporentice, a carpenter's helper, or a carpenter super­
visor. In the great majority of these cases, the injured person was employed
by a general contractor. Included, however, were carpenters employed in many
of the special-trade contractors' groups. Maintenance carpenters employed by
nonconstruction companies were excluded. The selected cases were taken from
the records for the years 19i*8 and 19^9. For each case selected, a Bureau of
Labor Statistics representative transcribed from the records, insofar as the
data were available, the following items of information: Place where the ac­
cident occurred; the work in which the injured was engaged at the time of the
accident; the nature of the injury; the part of body injured; and a descrip­
tion of how and why the accident occurred.
The accident-cause analysis procedure used in this study differs in some
respects from the procedures specified in the American Standard Method of
Compiling Industrial Accident Causes, which are usually followed in the Bu­
reau's studies. The deviations from the standard include the introduction of
an additional analysis factor, termed the "agency of injury," and the modifi­
cation of the standard definitions of some of the other factors in order to
permit more accurate cross classifications.
Agency of Injury.— The standard classification provides for the selection
of only one "agency" in the analysis of each accident. By definition this
agency may be either (a) the object or substance which was unsafe and which
thereby contributed to the occurrence of the accident, or (b) in the absence
of such an unsafe object or substance, the object or substance most closely
related to the injury. Under this definition, therefore, a tabulation of
"agencies" for a group of accidents will include objects or substances which
may have been inherently safe and unrelated to the occurrence of the acci­
dents, as well as those which led to the occurrence of accidents because of
their condition, location, structure, method of use, or other unsafe charac­
teristic. The development of the classification "agency of injury" repre­
sents an attempt to separate and classify separately these two agency con­
cepts .




5
As used in this study, the "agency of injury" is the object, substance, or
bodily reaction which actually produced the injury, selected without regard
to its safety characteristics or its influence upon the chain of events con­
stituting the accident.
Accident-Type.— As used in this study, the accident-type classification
assigned to each accident is purely descriptive of the occurrence which re­
sulted in the injury and is related specifically to the agency of injury. It
indicates how the injured person came into contact with or was affected by
the previously selected agency of injury. This represents a change from the
standard procedure in two respects: First, the accident-type classification
is specifically related to the previously selected agency of injuryj and
second the sequence of selecting this factor is specified.
Hazardous Working Condition.— Under the standard definition, the hazardous
working condition indicated in the analysis is defined as the "unsafe mechan­
ical or physical condition of the selected agency which could have been
guarded or corrected." This implies the prior selection of the "agency," but
does not provide for recognition of any relationship between the unsafe con­
dition and accident-type classifications* Nor does the standard provide for
any definite relationship between the "agency" and "accident type" classi­
fications.
To provide continuity and establish direct relationships among the various
analysis factors so as to permit cross classification, the standard defini­
tion was modified for this study to read: "The unsafe mechanical or physical
condition is the hazardous condition which permitted or occasioned the oc­
currence of the selected accident type." The hazardous-condition classifica­
tion, therefore, was selected after the determination of the accident-type
classification and represents the physical or mechanical reason for the oc­
currence of that particular accident without regard to the feasibility of
guarding or correcting the unsafe condition.
Elimination of the condition "which could have been guarded or corrected"
is based upon the premise that statistical analysis should indicate the ex­
istence of hazards, but should not attempt to specify the feasibility of
corrective measures.
Agency of Accident.— For the purpose of this survey, the agency of accident was defined as the "object, substance, or premises in or about which the
hazardous condition existed." Its selection, therefore, is directly asso­
ciated with the hazardous condition which led to the occurrence of the injury.
In many instances the agency of injury and the agency of accident were found
to be identical* The double agency classification, however, avoids any
possibility of ambiguity in the interpretation of the "agency" tabulations.
Unsafe Act.— The unsafe act definition used in this survey was identical
with the standard definition, i. e., "that violation of a commonly accepted
safe procedure which resulted in the selected accident type."
234999 0 - 5 3




6
Hazards of the Occupation
In common with most other construction trades, carpenters face many more
hazards arising from the work environment than from the specific operations of
their trade. The fact that they seldom work for long periods at any one loca­
tion and the necessity of working in close proximity to other trades which are
usually under different supervision contributes greatly to the existence of
environmental hazards. Housekeeping problems are particularly difficult to
overcome in these circumstances.
On new construction, particularly residential and small commercial jobs,
the premises around the structures are frequently muddy, slippery, rutted, cut
by open trenches, obstructed by piles of dirt and materials, cluttered with
the equipment of many trades, and littered with scrap materials. The possi­
bility of injury from a slip or fall, or from contact with sharp or rough
materials arises as soon as the worker enters the construction area. These
hazards are intensified by the manual operations involved in the movement of
materials and equipment at the job site. Because the materials are frequently
heavy, bulky, or awkward to handle, the operation in itself presents consider­
able possibility for strains, sprains, or other injuries arising from over­
exertion. The hazardous surfaces over which they must be moved add greatly
to these possibilities.
Inside a new structure there are many possibilities of slips, falls, and
overexertion due to unfinished floors which are frequently rough, irregular,
and cluttered with materials or scrap; unguarded floor openings; open stair­
ways; and rough access ladders. Falling materials, originating in the opera­
tions of other trades on the premises as well as in their own, constitute
another important hazard for nearly all construction workers.
On many types of construction, carpenters work ahead of the other trades,
erecting the structural framework and building the surfaces, platforms, and
scaffolds on which the other trades will work. In doing this they frequently
must climb on and work from open structural members with little protection
from the possibilities of falls.
In repair work carpenters also encounter many hazards arising from poor
housekeeping conditions and frequently find it necessary to work in tight and
relatively inaccessible quarters. The lack of adequate scaffolds and ladders
on repair jobs of short duration frequently leads workers to utilize makeshift
methods of reaching elevated positions and results in falls.
The lumber and other materials with which carpenters work are frequently
heavy and awkward to handle. In addition, the edges of lumber may be sharp or
splintery. As most of these materials must be moved into position by hand,
carpenters face the possibility of hand cuts, crushed fingers and toes, and
strains and sprains from overexertion.




7
The hand tools of the trade, many of which have sharp cutting edges, pre­
sent many hazards when they are mishandled or are not kept in good condition.
Portable electric saws, jointers, drills, and other powered tools are fre­
quently used in carpentry operations. In many instances the cutting edges of
these tools are inadequately guarded and in field use they are frequently not
grounded to prevent electrical shock.
Kinds of Injuries Experienced
The 9,061 disabling injury cases which were examined in detail included 1+2
fatalities, 6 permanent-total disabilities, 309 permanent-partial disabili­
ties, and 8,7QU which were listed as temporary-total disabilities. Some of
the last group were still undergoing treatment at the time the records were
reviewed and their final classification could not be definitely determined.
Presumably, a f e w of these cases ultimately would develop into fatalities or
permanent disabilities.
Fatalities
Skull fractures accounted for 15 of the 1+2 reported deaths. Twelve of
these were the result of falls; 1 resulted from a collision of a truck with
a railroad train and another was due to a broken hoist cable which permitted
a creosoted pile to fall and strike a workman. For the fifteenth case, no
details were available.
Of the 12 falls resulting in skull fractures, 11 were from elevations;
1 of these were from scaffolds. For two of these accidents the records merely
+
indicated that the workmen had fallen from scaffolds. In the third case, a
carpenter was killed when a scaffold on which he was working collapsed. The
fourth scaffold accident occurred as a carpenter was temporarily operating a
hoist, the controls of which were located on the scaffold. Apparently, the
carpenter disengaged the brake as he was reaching for the hoisting lever.
The cage, carrying a wheelbarrow loaded with concrete, fell about 30 feet be­
fore the carpenter could stop it. When he applied the brake, the sudden stop
broke a guy wire on the boom of the hoist, permitting the boom to fall. The
workman was knocked from the scaffold by the boom and fell 60 feet to the
street.
Two carpenters fell from elevations to concrete floors and were killed.
In one case the carpenter fell from a ladder on which he had been climbing to
a scaffold. As he neared the top of the ladder, he grasped a 2" by 6" scaf­
fold timber. The plank, which had not been nailed, moved and he lost his
balance. In the second case a carpenter fell through a floor opening which
he had made to permit the erection of a smokestack.
Five other carpenters suffered skull fractures when they fell from eleva­
tions. One was knocked from a railroad car by a timber as it was being
raised by a hoist. Another lost his balance and fell from a roof as he was
handling lumber. A third slipped as he was walking on a steel beam and fell



8
17 feet to the floor. Still another, standing on a wall tightening bolts on
a form, lost his balance and fell to the ground when his wrench slipped. The
final accident in this group occurred as a carpenter was walking across a
piece of plywood which was being used as a covering for a pit. TShen the ply­
wood tilted, the carpenter fell into the pit.
The twelfth skull fracture occurred when a carpenter fell over debris on
the ground outside a new building. His head struck a surveyor's stake.
Brain concussions accounted for three deaths, in all of which falls were
responsible. In one case, a carpenter fell from a roof. In another, the
workman fell from a sawhorse and struck a pile of bricks. In the third ac­
cident, a carpenter, standing on a wall, was landing steel beams from a crane.
After he removed the chains from one of the beams, the boom of the crane
struck the beam which turned and knocked him from the wall.
Four carpenters died as a result of strains. In three of these accidents
death was actually the result of a heart attack induced by heavy lifting. In
the fourth case, a carpenter suffered a hernia when he tried to move a dolly
which had stopped and settled in a soft spot of the pavement.
Three carpenters were electrocuted— one by a short circuit in a drill and
two by direct contact with electric power transmission lines. Of the latter
two accidents, one occurred when a carpenter touched a "live wire" as he was
nailing sheeting to the gable of a house. In the other, a carpenter con­
tacted an 11 ,000-volt power line while he was using a hand line to lift ma­
terial to a scaffold.
An apprentice carpenter was impaled on half-inch reinforcing steel. While
he was woriclng from a plank which had been placed across two steel girders,
the plank slipped and he fell 38 feet onto the steel. One fatal injury was
due to heat prostration and another was attributed to an occupational dis­
ease contracted while the carpenter was working with creosoted lumber.
Four seemingly minor injuries resulted in death. In one case, a workman
tripped when his trousers caught on a board. He died 2 days later from in­
ternal injuries which he experienced while trying to maintain his balance.
In the second accident, a carpenter fell into a hole and bruised his head and
trunk. He returned to work but sometime later a malignant tumor developed
which caused his death. Two workmen died as a result of infections of
puncture wounds to hands. Splinters were responsible for both of these
injuries.
Six of the fatal injuries were general in nature. Falls from elevations
accounted for four of these and traffic accidents for the other two. Of the
falls, two were from scaffolds and two from roofs of buildings.




9
Permanent-Total Disabilities
Three of the six permanent-total disability cases were back injuries and
two were head injuries. The sixth was a multiple-fracture case. In this ac­
cident, a staging collapsed, crushing a caroenter in it.
Two of the back injuries did not at first appear to be serious— one, a
strain, occurred when a carpenter twisted his back as he trinped over a
level; the other, a bruise, resulted when a workman was struck by a drift pin
which fell on him. The third back injury, a severe fracture, was due to a
fall from a scaffold.
The two head injuries were a fractured skull and a brain concussion. In
the first accident, a staging tipped, causing the carpenter to fall to the
ground. In the second accident, a descending elevator cage struck the work­
man's head.
Permanent-Partial Disabilities
The 309 permanent-partial disabilities included 225 amputations, 5 enu­
cleations, and 79 cases involving the loss of use of a body part or function.
Thumbs or fingers were involved in all but three of the amputations which
were divided as follows:

3k

Thumb..............
1 finger............ li+8
2 fingers.......... 29
3 fingers..........
6
fingers...........
3
Thumb and 1 finger..
2
Great toe............
1
1 toe (not great)...
2
Total............ 355"

h

Of the 222 finger and thumb amputations, 117 resulted from contact with
powered saws and 81 with jointers. About half the injuries attributed to
saws resulted from contact with portable electric saws.
Shapers were responsible for two permanent finger injuries and four men
were permanently disabled by hoisting equipment— two had their fingers caught
in the buckets of cranes, one was caught on a chain, and another in a pulley.
Two carpenters suffered finger amputations in connection with the use of
motor vehicles. In one case, the workman tried to repair a truck and had his
finger amputated by the fan. In the second instance, the vehicle fell from a
jack as the carpenter was changing a tire.
Hand tools produced six finger or thumb amputations; hatchets were re­
sponsible for three, hand saws for two, and a sledge for the other. Lumber



10
contributed to five amputations. Two men were disabled when timbers toppled
over on their hands, one permitted a piece of lumber to slip from his hands
and fall on his finger, one had his finger crushed tinder a timber as he was
placing it into position, and another mashed his finger between a wall and a
piece of lumber which he was passing to a co-worker.
Three amputations were attributed to doors. In one case the door closed
on a workman's finger as he was fitting it, and in another the spring on a
garage door broke as an employee was hanging the door. His finger was caught
and amputated by the door when it fell. In the third accident a carpenter
inserted his finger in a small hole of a steel door to close it. As he did
so, a sliver of steel punctured his finger. The wound became infected and
the employee lost his finger.
Another carpenter guided a steel pile into a casing and lost a finger when
it was caught between the pile and the shell of the casing. In another case,
a carpenter had a finger amputated when it was crushed by a plasterboard
which was blown down by the wind.
Of the three toe amputations, two resulted from contact with electrically
powered hand saws. In the third case, the toe was crushed under a steel beam
which toppled over.
In one of the enucleation cases, a chip struck a carpenter's eye as he was
pounding a piece of steel with a hammer. In the second case, an apprentice,
holding a chisel which another workman was striking with a sledge, was struck
by a chip which flew from the chisel. Another apprentice lost an eye when a
fragment of a nail broke off and struck his eye as he was applying shingles.
A carpenter foreman lost an eye when an abrasive wheel broke and a piece
penetrated his eye. In the final case, a carpenter was applying baseboard.
When his hammer slipped, it shattered the plaster and a chip struck his eye.
Infection developed and the removal of the eye followed.
Finger and thumb injuries were the most common of the permanent loss-ofuse cases, accounting for 26 of the 79 disabilities in that group. Eyes were
involved in 18 loss-of-use cases, legs or feet in l i , backs in 7 , and arms or
i.
hands in 7. The 79 disabilities were classified by nature of injury as
follows:
Cuts, lacerations (mostly eye injuries)..
Fractures.......................
Bruises, contusions.....................
Strains, sprains.........................
Burns.....................
Foreign bodies, n.e.c..........

28
26
11
10
2
2

79
Moving objects inflicted 32 of the 79 permanent loss-of-use injuries.
Falling objects (building materials, walls, boxes, etc.) produced seven,



11
including two injuries to legs, and injuries to a hand, a thumb, an eye, and a
neck. In addition, an employee who was struck by a falling building-form,
suffered permanent injuries to several parts of his body. Flying chips, nails,
and other small particles, and thrown objects were responsible for 1 finger
and 13 eye disabilities. Bight finger injuries and one eye injury were traced
to blows by hand tools and two finger injuries were the result of workmen
being struck by powered hand saws.
Falls accounted for 20 permanent loss-of-use injuries. Of these, four foot
injuries, four leg injuries, two arm injuries, and one back injury were due to
falls from scaffolds. Other falls were responsible for nine permanent in­
juries, including three general body injuries, two arms, two feet, a finger,
and an eye.
Ten permanent disabilities resulted from workmen bumping into or striking
against equipment and other objects. Moving parts of powered equipment ac­
counted for eight finger or thumb injuries and one hand injury. The other
disability, an eye injury, occurred when a carpenter struck a nail which was
projecting from a form.
Six permanent finger or thumb injuries, a foot injury, and a back injury
were due to workmen being caught in, on, or between moving objects. Hand
tools accounted for two of these injuries and a motor vehicle, a form, a door,
an excavation, a tool box, and a tree each accounted for one. Overexertion
accidents were responsible for four permanent back injuries and a stumble was
responsible for a leg injury. Lime burns accounted for an eye injury, a de­
layed explosion of dynamite accounted for an ear injury, and a simple body
twist accounted for a permanent back injury. The final injury in this group,
a general disability, occurred when a carpenter contacted a "live wire'1 as he
was puddling concrete.
Temporary-Total Disabilities
Approximately 32 percent of all temporary-total disabilities were arm,
hand, or finger injuries, 28 percent were trunk injuries, 26 percent were leg,
foot, or toe injuries, and 10 percent were head injuries. The remainder were
general in nature and involved more than one body Dart.
Fingers were involved in about half of the arm, hand, and finger injuries;
hands in one-third; and arms in one-sixth. Cuts, lacerations, and punctures
were the most frequent type of injury in each group. Bruised arms and fingers,
strained or sprained arms and hands, and fractured hands and fingers were also
quite common. Arm, hand, and finger injuries most frequently occurred during
hand-tool operations or during the handling of materials and equipment.
Nearly two-thirds of all trunk injuries were strains; about one-tenth were
hernias. Most of these injuries occurred while workmen were lifting or carry­
ing materials and were generally the result of overexertion. Back injuries
predominated.




12
Foot injuries were primarily cuts, lacerations, strains, sprains, or
fractures. Many of these occurred when workmen dropped material or equipment
on their feet as they were lifting, carrying, or placing it. Foot strains or
sprains occurred most commonly as a result of slips or stumbles while work­
men were moving from one place to another at the job site or as a result of
their missteps as they were stepping to or from equipment.
Leg injuries were primarily bruises, strains, cuts, or lacerations.
Bruises generally resulted from carpenters striking themselves with their
hand tools during hand-tool operations or being struck by objects which they
dropped while they were lifting or carrying them. Strained or sprained legs
were, for the most part, experienced during lifting or carrying operations.
Cut and lacerated legs generally occurred during hand-tool operations, par­
ticularly those involving hatchets or powered hand saws.
More than half the head injuries involved eyes. Most of these were minor
foreign body cases, although approximately one-third of the eye injuries were
cuts or lacerations. Hand-tool operations were the chief source of these in­
juries. Other head injuries were generally cuts, lacerations, bruises, or
concussions.
Accident Analysis
Accident reports are frequently deficient in noting all factors relating
to accidents. In many instances the only available information comes from
the injured person himself, or from witnesses who merely happened to be
present at the time and who lack either the skill or the opportunity to in­
vestigate the event fully. In the analysis of a large number of cases, there­
fore, it is common to find a high proportion which lack details, especially
in respect to the causes of accidents. This was particularly true of the
reports analyzed in this study inasmuch as they were prepared primarily to
satisfy the reporting requirements of the various State workmen's compensa­
tion boards. In this type of reporting, injury information is stressed much
more than accident details.
Despite these limitations, however, the analyst can draw much useful in­
formation from even the most sketchy description. Almost invariably an ac­
cident description tends to follow the normal line of thinking on the part of
an interested person who hears that a friend or acquaintance has been injured.
The first thought is of the injury itself. Was it a burn, a cut, a bruise, a
strain, or something else? Then, what produced the injury and how did it
happen? These are all descriptive facts which are readily apparent to the
witnesses. They, therefore, loom large in the accounts of the events. The
more analytical question— why did it happen— normally arises only after the
desire for descriptive information has been satisfied. It frequently goes
unanswered, either because of preoccupation with the descriptive factors, or
because the answer may not be readily apparent.




13

(Insert chart)
Chart 1.— Major types of accidents in carpentry operations

Chart 1. MAJOR TYPES OF ACCIDENTS
IN CARPENTRY OPERATIONS

O

PERCENT OF ALL DISABLING INJURIES
10

Falls to lower levels

Striking against objects

Overexertion

Falls on same level

Slips and stumbles

Caught in, on, or between objects

Other

l
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS



234999 0 - 5 3

20

3
10

The direct approach in accident analysis, therefore, is to draw from the
records the various elements of information in the order in which they are
usually recorded. Standing alone, these elements may have limited value, but
when related to each other, they can do much to indicate the accidentDrevention activities which may be needed. The determination of the objects
or substances which most commonly produce injuries, coupled with information
as to how they oroduced the injuries, constitutes the first step toward an
understanding of the accident problem.
Manner of Injury (Accident Type)
The most common variety of accident experienced by the carpenters covered
in the survey was that in which the worker was struck by a moving object.
More than a fourth of the reported injuries occurred in accidents of this na­
ture, in a high percentage of which the object striking the worker was a hand
tool wielded by himself. Falling lumber also ranked high as a producer of
injuries in this group of accidents. In many instances the lumber slipped
from the worker's own hands and fell on his feet. Most commonly, however, the
lumber fell from elevations, i. e., structural framework of buildings, forms,
roofs, and scaffolds. Flying chips of wood, nails, and particles of stone,
cement, plaster, or metal produced a large number of eye injuries. In most
instances these flying objects were set in motion by hand tools used in cut­
ting, grinding, chipping, or hammering.
About 20 percent of the recorded accidents were cases in which the workers
fell from elevations. Another 7 percent were falls on the same level and
about 5 percent were near-falls, generally designated as slips and stumbles.
More than a third of the falls from elevations were falls from scaffolds or
working platforms; a fourth were from ladders, stairs, or make-shift supports
such as sawhorses; and another fourth were from structural elements such as
forms, walls, or roofs. Slippery surfaces and tripping hazards were re­
sponsible for most of the near-falls and for most of the falls on the same
level.
In about 20 percent of the reported cases the injury was produced by the
carpenter striking, bumping, or pressing against some object. In descending
order of numerical importance, these accidents included cases of contact with
the moving parts of machines and powered hand tools; stepping on objects
which penetrated, cut, or bruised the feet; striking against splinters which
penetrated the flesh; bumping into materials while moving about the work­
place; striking against projecting nails or wires, primarily in scrap lumber;
and kneeling on or rubbing against sharp or rough objects.
Overexertion in lifting, carrying, pushing, pulling, or wielding objects
was responsible for about 12+ percent of the reported injuries. These acci­
dents occurred primarily in lifting or carrying lumber or forms and in using
hand tools such as axes, sledges, hammers, pry bars, and saws. In most in­
stances the injuries resulting from these accidents were strains or sprains.




15
Accident Causes
A generally accepted tenet in accident prevention is that every accident
may be traced to the existence of some hazardous condition in the working en­
vironment? to the commission of an unsafe act by some individual? or to a
combination of these two accident-producing factors. Accident analysis con­
sists of identifying these factors in and summarizing the information relat­
ing to a number of accidents in order to indicate the kinds of hazards most
commonly involved and which thereby warrant the most intensive attention by
persons responsible for accident prevention.
Generally, the elimination of hazardous working conditions is solely the
responsibility of management. The avoidance of unsafe acts, on the other
hand, requires understanding and cooperation by both management and workers.
Management must take the lead, however, by providing safety-minded super­
vision and by making sure that all workers are acquainted with the hazards of
their operations and are familiar with the means of overcoming them.
The function of accident analysis is to sunply as much information as
possible for use in accident prevention— not to assess blame for the oc­
currence of any accident. The practice, therefore, is not to choose between
an unsafe act and a hazardous condition when both are factors in an accident,
but rather to indicate both as contributing elements in the occurrence of the
accident. Experience indicates that when all accident details are known both
an unsafe act and a hazardous condition will be found to have been involved
in the great majority of accidents. Moreover, it is usually evident that if
either the unsafe act or the hazardous condition had been eliminated the ac­
cident probably would not have occurred.
As pointed out previously, the materials available for analysis in this
survey were primarily injury reports rather than detailed accident reports.
They were almost invariably explicit in indicating the kind of accident which
produced the injury, but many failed to indicate the circumstances leading to
the accident. About one-third gave no indication of the existence or non­
existence of a hazardous condition and only one in five contained sufficient
details to permit adequate conclusions regarding the commission of an unsafe
act. In this analysis the distributions of hazardous conditions and of un­
safe acts have been based upon the reports which were complete in respect to
these details and the incomplete reports have been listed as unclassified.
These unclassified items should not be interpreted as representing cases in
which no hazardous condition or unsafe act was involved. No conclusions can
be drawn from the data as to the proportion of all carpenter accidents that
can be ascribed solely to hazardous conditions or solely to unsafe acts.
Hazardous Working Conditions
Expressed in general terms, the hazardous conditions most commonly con­
tributing to carpenters' injuries were: defective agencies, responsible for
37 percent of the accidents? improperly guarded agencies, accounting for 22



16
percent; and the lack of proper equipment, associated with 20 percent of the
accidents. Of somewhat lesser prominence, unsafe working procedures ac­
counted for 10 percent of the accidents, and poor housekeeping and the lack of
necessary personal protective equipment were each responsible for
percent.

h

Defective Agencies.— The most common hazard in the defective agency group
consisted of projecting nails or wires in scrap lumber or in structural mem­
bers. In about two-thirds of the cases attributed to this hazard the injury
occurred when the carpenter stepped on the projecting nail or wire. Most of
the others were cases of striking against projecting nails or wires while
placing materials in position.
Materials of inadequate strength for the purpose used were responsible
for nearly as many accidents as were projecting nails and wires. A high per­
centage of these were cases in which scaffolds, ladders, and forms collapsed
under load because of defects in the materials used in their construction.
Nails which broke and flew while being driven and hand tools or materials
which shattered or spalled under impact to throw off chips or fragments were
the sources of most other accidents in this group.
Scaffolds, apparently composed of adequate materials but which gave way
because they had been improperly designed or assembled, were responsible for
a considerable volume of falls. Similarly, many carpenters fell when they
placed their weight on forms or structural members which had been put in
position but not adequately secured. Others, in somewhat fewer numbers, were
struck by structural materials which fell because of inadequate nailing or
assembly.
Damaged lumber with sharp and splintery edges and slippery working sur­
faces were both prolific sources of accidents. The splinter injuries oc­
curred mostly in the course of handling the lumber. The slippery working
surfaces occurred principally on the grounds around new structures or on sur­
faces which were exposed to the weather and resulted primarily in falls or
near falls.
Improperly Guarded Agencies.— The hazards in this group consisted pri­
marily of unguarded power equipment and inadequate provision of guard rails
and toeboards on scaffolds or around openings in working surfaces. In most
instances the unguarded machines were saws, although jointers, sanders, and
also grinders were involved in many of these accidents.
The great majority of the accidents attributed to the lack of guard rails
were falls, two-thirds of which were from scaffolds or temporary working
platforms. The remainder were falls into floor openings or into open
trenches and excavations. The accidents which more adequate provision of
toeboards would have prevented were all cases in which carpenters were struck
by objects falling from scaffolds.




17

(insert chart)
Chart 2.— Major types of hazardous working conditions

CHART 2.

MAJOR HAZARDOUS WORKING CONDITIONS
IN CARPENTRY OPERATIONS
PERCENT OF ALL DISABLING INJURIES

0

10

Defects of agencies

Improperly guarded agencies

Lac! of equipment

Other
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS




20

30

40
“ l

18
Lack of Proper Equipment.— Two-thirds of the accidents attributed to this
general type of hazard were lifting accidents in which carpenters experienced
strains, sprains, or hernias while manually moving heavy materials without
sufficient assistance. The remainder were primarily fails, about equally
divided between falls from make-shift platforms used as substitutes for non­
existent scaffolds and falls resulting from climbing on forms or structural
members where no ladders were available.
Hazardous Working Procedures.— Working or walking on open joists or narrow structural members is quite common in construction work. Frequently it
is tolerated or accepted as necessary simply because it seems impractical to
lay planking over the joists or to build walkways for jobs of short duration.
The risk which this entails, however, is obvious because nearly 6 percent of
the reported accidents experienced by carpenters were attributed to these
hazardous procedures. Nearly all the resulting accidents were falls— the
majority being falls to lower levels.
The practice of assigning work at different levels in open structures is
also common in construction operations. In large measure this circumstance
arises from the fact that the different crafts generally operate under separ*
rate supervision and frequently have their tasks scheduled without particular
consideration of what the other crafts may be doing at the same time. Workers
on the lower levels are thereby directly exposed to the hazard of being
struck by falling materials originating in the overhead operations. Acci­
dents of this type were not particularly common, but occurred in sufficient
volume to warrant closer attention to the elimination of this hazard.
Poor Housekeeping.— The designation "poor housekeeping" was applied in
this analysis primarily to the tripping and stumbling hazards created by the
accumulation of scrap and debris on working surfaces. This very common haz­
ard in construction was a prolific source of injury-producing accidents,
particularly on the grounds around the structures being constructed.
Lack of Personal Protective Equipment. The use of personal protective
—
equipment is not common in carpentry operations, although the record is re­
plete with cases in which it is obvious that the use of protective devices,
such as safety shoes, impact goggles, gloves, safety hats, or knee pads,
would have prevented or minimized injuries. Wider use of these devices is
unquestionably desirable. In the great majority of cases, however, the use
or nonuse of these devices has no bearing upon the occurrence of the accident
itself. Therefore, because accident analysis is primarily concerned with
determining the factors which led to the accident as contrasted with the in­
jury which resulted from the accident, the absence of personal protective de­
vices is seldom indicated as a hazardous working condition.
There are, however, certain types of operations performed by carpenters
which can be performed safely only through the use of proper protective
equipment. Typical operations in this category include the use of power
grinders to dress or sharpen tools and the breaking, chipping, drilling, or



19
hammering of concrete, plaster, stone, or metal. These operations frequently
throw off fast-flying chips or particles which can inflict serious eye in­
juries unless the eyes are protected by a face shield or goggles. In erect­
ing scaffolds, forms, and structural members, carpenters are frequently
called upon to work from precarious elevated positions. In these instances
the use of life lines and safety belts are essential for the prevention of
falls.
Carpenters frequently find it necessary to work in a kneeling position and
as a result experience a considerable number of cuts and abrasions on their
knees from contact with rough surfaces. Knee pads probably would prevent most
of these injuries.
Most of the accidents ascribed to the lack of personal protective equipment
in this analysis occurred in operations of the types described above. In
about a third of the cases the deficiency was the lack of a safety belt or
life line. These were the most serious cases consisting of falls from eleva­
tions. In nearly another third it was the lack of knee pads and in about a
fifth of the cases the deficiency was the lack of goggles or face shields.
The fact that steel-toed safety shoes would have prevented many toe injuries
was recognized, but their nonuse was not considered an accident cause.
Unsafe Acts.
For the purpose of this analysis an unsafe act was defined as that viola­
tion of a commonly accepted safe procedure which occasioned or permitted the
occurrence of the injury-producing accident. Literally, this definition
means that no personal action should be designated as unsafe unless there was
a reasonable and less hazardous alternative procedure. For example, the use
of a ladder which was not equipped with safety shoes when no properly
equipped ladder was provided was classified as a hazardous condition and not
as an unsafe act. On the other hand, the use of a nail keg or other make­
shift platform as a working surface was classified as an unsafe act because
other safe means of reaching overhead work were generally available.
The analysis, however, does not imply that the alternative safe procedure
was known to the person acting in an unsafe manner, nor that his act was the
result of a considered choice between two possible procedures. It was ap­
parent in many instances that the individual knew the safe procedure but
knowingly decided not to follow it. In other cases, circumstances indicated
that the person acted unsafely simply because he did not know the alternative
safe method.
In broad categories, the unsafe acts most commonly found to be responsible
for accidents to carpenters were: Assuming an unsafe position or posture,
which occurred in 58 percent of the casesj using unsafe equipment or using
equipment unsafely, which contributed to the occurrence of 25 percent of the
accidentsj operating without authority, failure to secure or warn, associated
with 11 percent of the accidents; and unsafe loading or placing, which was



20
responsible for 3 percent.
Assuming an Unsafe Position or Posture.— In general, most of the unsafe
acts in this group could be designated as inattention to surroundings. More
specifically, in more than 60 percent of the cases in the group the unsafe
act consisted of failure to observe the well-known safety admonition "watch
your step." Because of the irregular surfaces and poor housekeeping condi­
tions so frequently, encountered in the areas where carpenters must work,
close and constant attention to footing is a "must" for these workers. The
number of missteps into openings or off the edges of scaffolds, platforms,
and other elevated surfaces, and the number of trips or stumbles over mis­
placed materials which should have been quite visible indicates, however,
that this precept is frequently forgotten.
A large proportion of the inattention to footing accidents occurred while
the workers were simply moving about the work site. Another large group oc­
curred while the workers were lifting or carrying materials. In the latter
instances concentration on the work being performed probably was responsible
for the inattention to footing. Cases were quite common in which falls re­
sulted from steeping on loose objects while getting down from ladders, de­
scending stairs, or stepping from one surface to another.
Also in the category of inattention to surroundings, many of the reports
indicated that the injured workers simply walked into piled materials, posts,
or parts of the building in which they were working. Others swung their tools
too widely or raised their heads too sharply while working in confined spaces
and were injured when they struck against obstructions.
The training of skilled workers usually includes instructions on how to ap­
ply the tools of the trade safely, particularly how to avoid contact with edge
tools or impact tools if these slip or happen to be misdirected. Nevertheless
there were many instances reported in which tools were used in such a manner
that when they slipped or glanced from the material they were directed against
the worker's body. Of somewhat similar character, a number of cases were re­
ported in which carpenters used their shoulders or other parts of their bodies
to support lumber which they were nailing into place and then drove the nails
through into their own flesh.
Unnecessary exposure to falling or sliding objects was not a particularly
common unsafe act, but occurred frequently enough to warrant some attention.
In a number of these cases the injured person had placed himself under a heavy
fixture or object to support it while it was being fastened in place. In
other instances they unnecessarily entered areas where overhead work was being
performed or where scrap materials were being dropped or thrown from overhead.
Incorrect Handling or Unsafe Use of Equipment.— Reflecting the preponder­
ance of manual operations in carpenter work, a large proportion of the acci­
dents were directly related to improper methods of handling tools or materials.
In many instances workers dropped objects on their own toes or set objects



21

(Insert chart)
Chart 3 —

Major types of unsafe acts in carpentry operations

3. MAJOR TYPES OF UNSAFE ACTS IN CARPENTRY OPERATIONS
PERCENT OF ALL DISABLING INJURIES
0

10

20

Inattention to footing

Gripping objects insecurely

Inattention to surroundings

Operating without authority*, failure to secure or warn

Exposure to moving objects

Taking wrong hold of objects

Unsafe loading or placing

Other

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

234999 0 - 5 3 - 4




30

40

22
down on their fingers simply because they had not taken or maintained a
oroper grip on the materials. In other instances workers were struck by their
own hand tools because they were not holding them properly to keep them under
control. In some cases the fault lay in attempting to lift objects which were
too heavy or bulky for one man to handle or in using one hand instead of two.
The misuse or abuse of tools was also a common source of injury. These un­
safe practices included procedures such as striking hatchets or hammers with
other metal tools, which caused metal chips to fly and inflict eye injuries;
using hatchets or wood chisels as pry bars; and using tools of incorrect size
or capacity.
Failure to Secure or Warn, Operating Without Authority.— The predominating
unsafe act in this group was that of placing materials in positions from
which they could fall and leaving them without adequate support. This oc­
curred most frequently in the course of fitting lumber, forms, doors, sash,
cabinets, and other millwork. Typically, these were cases in which the cabi­
nets or other objects had been put in final position, but were supported only
by wedges or temporary fastenings pending completion of the fitting job. Such
fastenings frequently were inadequate to hold the weight and the improperly
supported objects pulled away and fell on the worker
In the category of operating without authority, the most common unsafe act
was that of carpenters attempting to operate vehicles or power equipment, such
as bulldozers or hoists, with which they were not familiar. In most instances
this occurred when the regular operator happened to be unavailable, and rather
than delay his own work waiting for the operator the carpenter elected to move
or use the equipment himself.
Unsafe Loading or Placing.— Most commonly the accidents resulting from unsafe acts of this general variety resulted in injury to persons other than
those who committed the unsafe acts. Generally, the specific unsafe act con­
sisted of placing a tool or piece of material on an unstable surface, on a
sloping surface such as a pitched roof, or close to the edge of an elevated
surface from which it could fall or slide to strike someone below.
Miscellaneous Unsafe Acts.— -This group included a wide variety of unsafe
acts no one of which occurred in great numbers. The most common were: throw­
ing material instead of passing it or using a hand line; fighting; teasing or
startling other workers; jumping from elevations instead of climbing down; and
climbing on structural members or scaffold supports instead of using available
ladders to reach elevated surfaces.




23
Accident-Prevention Suggestions
To illustrate the general hazards encountered by carpenters, a number of
typical accidents were selected for special analysis. These accidents were .
analyzed by a member of the Division of Safety Standards in the Bureau of La­
bor Standards of the United States Department of Labor and suggestions were
made to indicate how they might have been prevented.
The purpose of this portion of the report is not to make all-inclusive
recommendations, nor to propound authoritative safety rules, but rather to
point out that there is a simple approach to the prevention of nearly every
accident. Many safety engineers, no doubt, would attack the problems involved
in these accidents in different ways and would achieve equally good results.
The method of prevention, however, is of little importance as long as it ac­
complishes its purpose.
Brief descriptions of the accidents with comments and recommendations of
the Bureau of Labor Standards' safety specialist are presented on the follow­
ing pages:

Case Descriptions and Recommendations
1. A carpenter was using a portable electric saw. The blade caught his
overalls, which pulled the saw against his leg. Investigation disclosed that
the saw was not guarded.
All powered saws should be adequately guarded. The proper type
of guard for a portable saw completely encloses all of the blade
not actually in the cut.
2. A carpenter was using a portable electric saw to cut wedges.
of wood kicked back and lacerated his left thumb.

A piece

A portable saw should never be used for cutting wedges. In­
stead, a fixed saw with suitable guides and jigs should be used.
3. A carpenter was using a portable electric saw. When the guard failed
to close quickly, the blade lacerated his leg. Investigation disclosed that
the guard was clogged with sawdust.
To be effective, guards of this type must be kept clean and
in good working order. Inspection of all equipment should be made
frequently and at regular intervals. Defective or unsafe equip­
ment should be repaired or corrected immediately or removed from
service.




2k
k»

A carpenter was using a portable electric saw to cut rafters. While
standing on wet ground, he picked up the saw and suffered an electric shock.
Investigation disclosed that the saw had not been grounded.
All portable electric-powered tools should be adequately
grounded. In addition, they should be inspected periodically
to insure safe operating conditions.
5. A carpenter picked up a portable electric saw and tripped over the cord,
accidentally closing the switch. He became excited and dropped the saw, which
struck his leg. Investigation disclosed that the saw was not guarded.
(a) Portable electric saws should be adequately guarded to
prevent accidental contact with the blade.
(b) Workmen should be carefully trained in the safe use of
all tools. In tnis case, he should have placed the saw in a
position where it would not present a tripping hazard when it
was not being used.
6. An employee was cutting a 2" x 6" rafter with a portable electric cir­
cular saw. When he had finished his cut, he shut off the power and dropped
his hand with the saw to his side. The still-moving blade cut a deep gash in
his leg. Investigation disclosed that the guard had been removed from the saw
several days before and had not been replaced.
Employees should not be permitted to use any equipment with­
out the safeguards which have been provided. Adequate super­
vision should be maintained to enforce this rule.
7. While a helper was breaking concrete with a hammer and chisel, a piece
of concrete lodged in his eye. Investigation disclosed that no goggles or
other eye protective devices were provided.
Suitable eye protection should be provided for this work.
Although goggles will protect the eyes, face shields with or
without goggles are more desirable.
8. A carpenter was standing on a sawhorse platform installing rock lath on
the ceiling. A particle fell from the lath and lodged in his eye. The em­
ployee failed to have the particle removed and infection developed.
(a) Eye protection should be provided and worn on all
ceiling and other overhead jobs.
(b) Particles which have become lodged in workmen's eyes
should be removed as soon as possible, but only by a physician
or other qualified person.




25
9.
An employee was using a chisel to cut a bolt. As he struck the chisel,
a piece of steel chipped from the head of the chisel and punctured his arm.
Investigation disclosed that the head of the chisel was mushroomed.
Maintaining tools in good condition at all times is im­
portant in accident prevention. Workmen should be trained
to remove defective tools from service until they are re­
paired or corrected.
10. A carpenter was driving a stake with a sledge.
the sledge struck his foot.

When the stake split,

All workmen should be carefully trained in the safe use
of hand tools. In this case, the carpenter should have
placed himself in a position so that when the stake split
he would not have been struck by the sledge.
11. An apprentice was holding a stake while it was being driven into the
ground by a co-worker. The second employee missed the stake and struck the
apprentice’s hand.
Close teamwork and adequate instruction will prevent many
accidents of this type. The best practice suggests the use of
tongs to hold the stake.
12. A carpenter was installing wall brackets. When one of the brackets
slipped, the screw driver he was using punctured his left hand.
All employees should be carefully trained in the safe per­
formance of their duties. In this case, the carpenter should
have placed his left hand in a position so that it would not
have been struck by the screw driver when it was misdirected.
13. A wharf builder was using an adz to shape a post.
the post and struck his foot.

The adz slipped from

The adz is a highly dangerous tool. Careful training in
safe procedures is essential to prevent accidents of this type.
In this case, the workman should have stood in a position so
that he would not have been struck by the adz when it glanced
from the post.
l ) . An apprentice was cutting rock lath with a pocket knife.
i.
closed and caught his finger.

The blade

Apprentices should be carefully instructed in the safe
performance of their duties. A spring-blade knife should never
be used in this work. Instead, a one-piece knife, properly
guarded, should be used.



26
15* A helper was drilling holes in an overhead angle iron.
of steel fell into his eye.

Snail particles

Employees engaged in this work should be furnished pro­
tective goggles, and should be required to wear them.
16. A carpenter was using a pair of pliers to remove a nail. When the nail
loosened suddenly, the force applied to the pliers threw the nail, which
struck the carpenter's eye.
Thorough instruction in the safe method of using hand
tools should be a part of the training given every carpenter.
Pliers are not intended for use in removing nails. Instead, a
claw hammer or a nail puller should be used.
17. A carpenter was using a hatchet to shape a piece of lumber. The hatchet
glanced from the lumber and cut his leg. Investigation disclosed that the
hatchet was dull.
All workmen should be carefully trained in the safe use
of hand tools. In this case the carpenter should have
(a) placed himself in such a position that he would not
have been struck by the hatchet when it glanced from the
lumber, and (b) removed the hatchet from service until it
had been properly dressed.

x

18. An employee was cutting a 2"
with a hand saw. As he started a
U5-degree cut, the saw slipped and cut his thumb. Investigation disclosed
that the carpenter did not start the cut carefully because of haste.
(a) Carpenters should develop safe working habits in
using hand tools. In this case the workman should have
drawn the saw slowly and carefully across the board until
the cut was started.
(b) Wherever possible, a miter box should be used when
sawing at an angle.
19. A carpenter was using a wrecking bar to pry a board. He did not secure
a good "bite" on the board and the bar slipped when pressure was applied,
smashing his fingers between the bar and the board.
Workmen should be carefully trained in the safe use of
hand tools. In this case, full pressure should not have
been applied to the bar until the proper "bite" had been
secured. A proper stance might have prevented the injury
even though the bar slipped.




27
20. A carpenter was standing on a ladder removing forms from a concrete
column. When the bar he was using slipped, he was thrown off balance and fell
to the ground. The injured worker stated that he could not get a good "bite1
*
with the bar.
The carpenter’s difficulty in getting the proper "bite” with
the bar was probably due to his limited position on the ladder.
Portable steps or platforms should be provided to give more
secure footing.
21. A carpenter was placing tie wires on a form.
wire it flew up and the end struck him in the eye.

As he cut a piece of

For this type of work plastic face shields or goggles
are necessary.
When cutting wire the worker should stand to the left
of the cut and should hold the wire with his left hand.
The free end of the wire will then spring away from him.
22. A carpenter was constructing an archway in an old building. While he
was removing the plaster and lath, sane particles of plaster lodged in his
eyes.
Goggles or face shields should be provided and worn
in this work.
23. As a carpenter was climbing a ladder, a rung broke and he fell to the
ground. Investigation disclosed that the rung had broken through a knot.
Ladder rungs should be manufactured from knot-free lumber.
In this case, an equipment-inspection procedure should have
revealed the defect.
2
l+« While a carpenter was descending a fixed ladder, his foot slipped be­
tween the rungs of the ladder. Investigation disclosed that the rungs of the
ladder were covered with ice.
Under weather conditions where ice may be present, all
fixed ladders should be carefully inspected and all ice
removed before the ladders are used.
25.
A carpenter tried to carry a piece of lumber up a ladder.
balance and fell to the ground.

He lost his

Employees, climbing ladders, should never attemot to carry
lumber or other materials. The material should be passed from
one employee to another, or it should be raised by a hand line
or by mechanical lifting equipment.



28
26. A workman was using a ladder to climb a scaffold. When the ladder
slipped he fell against a brace on the scaffold. Investigation disclosed
that the ladder was not equipped with safety shoes and that the base of the
ladder had been placed too far away from the scaffold.
(a) Ladders which are not anchored should be equipped
with safety feet.
(b) Workmen should be carefully trained in the safe use
of ladders. Generally, ladders should not be placed more
than one foot away from the verticle line of support for
every U feet of height to the support.
27. While a carpenter was grinding the cutting edge of his hatchet, a par­
ticle of steel lodged in his eye. Investigation disclosed that the grinder
was equipped with a shield but that no goggles or other eye protective de­
vices were available to him.
Sane form of eye protection is desirable in nearly all
construction work. In grinding operations, such protection
is essential. Either goggles or a face shield would have
prevented this injury.
28. A carpenter had his thumb amputated in a joiner when the board he was
cutting turned and his thumb struck the cutter. Investigation disclosed
that the point-of-operation was not guarded.
The point-of-operation of a joiner should be guarded,
preferably by a guard which will ride on top of the stock.
29. While a carpenter was using a circular saw, his hand struck the moving
saw blade when he attempted to brush some small pieces of wood from the table.
Investigation disclosed that the saw blade was not guarded.
(a) Circular saws should be equipped with a hood-type guard.
(b) Workmen using circular saws should be carefully trained
in their safe use. A suitable brush should be used to clean
the saw table.
30. While a carpenter was cutting a plank on a circular saw, a piece of
sawdust lodged in his eye.
Some type of eye protection should be worn on this work.
A face shield is preferable for operators of circular saws
or other woodworking machines where sawdust or chips are
likely to be thrown from the operation. However, for men
who perform various types of work, goggles are desirable.
Generally, the spectacle type will suffice.



29
31. A carpenter was adjusting the guide on a circular saw while the saw was
running. His hand touched the blade, which amputated a finger.
(a) All circular saws should be equipped with a hoodtype guard to prevent accidental contact with the blade.
(b) Adjustments or repairs should never be made on
equipment while it is in operation.
32. A roofing contractor was hoisting material to the roof of a building
with block and tackle and had roped off the area beneath the tackle. A car­
penter dropped his hammer into the roped-off area and entered the area to get
it. As he did so, a hammer fell from a bucket being hoisted to the roof and
struck him on the head.
(a) Roped-off areas should be entered only after an ex­
change of signals whereby the hazardous operation would be
interrupted.
(b) Construction workers should wear safety hats while
they are on the job.
33• While working on a scaffold, a carpenter slipped and fell, thereby in­
juring his back. Investigation disclosed that spots of ice had formed on the
surface of the scaffold.
Scaffolds should be inspected frequently to insure safe
condition. Where ice may be present, scaffolds should be
inspected before they are used and all ice should be removed
or sanded.
3i*. An employee was standing on a scaffold. One of the scaffold boards
broke, throwing the workman to the ground. Investigation disclosed that the
2" x 10" plank split through a large knot.
All lumber used in scaffolds should be inspected before
being used and only lumber which is free of large knots should
be used for platform planks.
35.
A carpenter was working on a scaffold nailing siding to a new building.
A second carpenter, working on the roof, dropped his hammer, which struck the
first workman on the head.
(a) Whenever practical, work assignments should be planned
to avoid anyone having to work in unprotected areas when other
operations are being performed overhead. In this case, one of
the operations should have been delayed until the other was
complete.




30
(b) All construction workers should wear safety hats while
on the job.

36 . The scaffold on which a carpenter was working collapsed and he fell to
the ground. Investigation disclosed that the scaffold had not been designed
to carry the weight imposed upon it.
Scaffolds should be carefully designed for the maximum expected
loads, which should not be exceeded.
37. As an apprentice was nailing^bne end of a 2" x 12” plank to a post, the
other end jarred loose and fell. To avoid being hit, the apprentice stepped
back and fell from the unguarded scaffold upon which he was working.
(a) Scaffolds should be constructed with guardrails
and toeboards.
(b) Sufficient help and adequate supervision should be
provided for all operations. In this case, a second workman
should have been assigned to hold one end of the plank.
38. Two carpenters were working from an unrailed scaffold. To startle his
co-worker, one employee shook the scaffold. The second workman fell from the
scaffold.
(a) All scaffolds should be adequately guarded with a rail
and toeboard.
(b) Horseplay should be prohibited. Sufficient supervision
should be provided to assure the enforcement of this rule.
39* The middle plank of a three-plank scaffold slipped and the workman
standing on it fell to the floor. Investigation disclosed that the platform
planks had not been nailed.
All platform planks should be securely fastened to pre­
vent their slipping or turning.

h

0. A carpenter was standing on a bracket scaffold which collapsed and
threw him to the ground. Investigation disclosed that the metal bracket hold­
ing the scaffold had been nailed to a soft white pine studding and that the
traffic on the scaffold had loosened the nails.
Brackets used in scaffolds should be bolted in accordance
with the American Safety Standard A 10.2 - 19l4i> Safety Code
for Building Construction.




31
2*1. A carpenter who had been working on a scaffold attempted to climb down
the scaffold because there was no ladder available. The scaffold lumber was
wet and when his foot slipped, he fell to the ground.
Every scaffold assembly should include a ladder or some other
means of safe access.
2*2. A carpenter laid his hammer on a scaffold. Later, when he accident­
ally kicked it, the hammer fell, striking a second carpenter working under the
scaffold. Investigation disclosed that the scaffold did not have a toeboard.
(a) All scaffolds should be equipped with toeboards.
(b) Whenever practical, work assignments should be
planned to avoid anyone having to work in unprotected areas
when other operations are being performed overhead. In this
case, one of the operations should have been delayed until
the other was completed.
(c) All workmen should be thoroughly trained to work safely.
In this instance, the carpenter should not have placed his ham­
mer where he was likely to strike it with his foot.
2*3• A carpenter stepped from a sawhorse platform 18 inches high onto a
block of wood and twisted his ankle. Investigation disclosed that the floor
was littered with discarded scraps of lumber.
(a) Good housekeeping is essential to safety. Before
starting work, the supervisor of the crew should make sure
that all working surfaces are cleared of loose materials.
(b) Portable steps or platforms with steps are preferable
to sawhorse platforms for this type of work.
22.
**

A carpenter stood on a sawhorse, slipped, and fell astride it.
Sawhorses should never be used as working surfaces. In­
stead, portable steps or a platform should be provided and
used for this type of work.

2*5. A carpenter stood on a sawhorse, stepped off, and twisted his back.
Investigation disclosed the sawhorse to be 18 inches high.
Sawhorses should not be used as working surfaces.
Instead, portable steps or a platform should be provided
and used for this type of work.




32
1+6. A carpenter stood on a nail keg, looked up toward his work, tipped the
keg, and fell to the floor.
Nail kegs should never be used as working surfaces.
Portable steps or stools so designed that they will not
tip should be provided.
1+7. A carpenter was standing on the floor joists while he was nailing a
walkway into place. His foot slipped and he fell, straddling a joist.
Workmen should be carefully trained in the safe per­
formance of their duties. In this case, the workman should
have nailed the walkway from the walkway itself. If that
was not practical, he should have laid a plank across the
joists to provide suitable footing.
1+8. A helper was carrying a sheet of plywood 1 ' x 8' x 3/8". His vision
+
was blocked by the plywood and he stepped into an opening in the floor and
fell. Investigation disclosed that the opening had been made for a hot-air
duct.
(a) All floor openings in buildings under construction
should be adequately guarded with railings and toeboards or
should be covered with planks.
(b) In handling heavy or large objects, two or more work­
men should be assigned to the operation.
1+9. A carpenter, working on the second floor of a new house, fell to the
basement through an open stair well.
All floor openings should be adequately guarded with
railings and toeboards or should be covered with planks.
50. While carrying a piece of lumber, a carpenter fell to the basement
through an unguarded chimney hole.
All floor openings in buildings under construction
should be guarded by guard rails and toeboards or covered
with planks.
51. A carpenter working on a roof stepped on some wet sap, slipped, and
fell off. Investigation disclosed that the contractor had thought a scaffold
unnecessary because the pitch of the roof was slight.
Level walkways should be provided for all roof work
regardless of the slope of the roof.




33
52.
As a carpenter was setting forms, his foot slipped and he fell against
a form, fracturing his rib. Investigation disclosed that the ground was
muddy, very slippery, and had a considerable slope.
Before any work is started, safe footing should be provided.
This not only reduces the hazard of the work but increases
the rate of production.
53* A carpenter was standing on the wall of a foundation setting the first
floor joists. As he reached to pick up a joist, he lost his balance and fell
from the wall to the ground. Investigation disclosed that the wall was 6 feet
high and that no scaffold had been provided.
Foundation walls should not be used as working surfaces.
Instead a scaffold or a portable railed platform should be
provided.
5U« A carpenter was building forms for a concrete bridge. While he was
walking on a plank which had been placed between an earthen bank and the
bridge footing, the plank turned and he fell, striking the concrete footing.
Investigation disclosed that the 10-inch plank had been laid as a walkway
over uneven ground.
Provision should be made for safe access to all jobs.
In this case, the plank should have been secured so that it
would not turn. In addition, elevated walkways should be
constructed of two or more planks, cleated together.
55.
A helper was carrying a door up a stairway, slipped on a 2" x ^ block,
and turned his ankle. When he fell, the door mashed his fingers against the
stairway.
Good housekeeping is essential to safety. Each crew
should be required to remove its own scrap. Periodic in­
spections and adequate supervision should be maintained to
enforce this rule. Particular attention should be given to
keeping stairs free of loose objects.
56.
A carpenter was working on the first floor of a new building while
other carpenters were placing joists on the second floor. One of the joists
fell, striking the carpenter across his back.
Whenever practical, work assignments should be planned
to avoid anyone having to work in unprotected areas when
other operations are being performed overhead. In this case,
one of the operations should have been delayed until the other
one was completed.




3k
57. Two carpenters were working on different floors of a new building. The
workman on the second floor asked the other workman to throw a chalk box to
him. When the first employee failed to catch the box, it fell, striking the
second workman on the head.
Materials and other articles should never be thrown. In
this case, the chalk box should have been raised on a hand
line.
58. A carpenter's helper was moving a large exhaust fan. A piece of bar
steel, leaning against a wall, fell and struck him on the head. Investigation
disclosed that the steel had been left by ironworkers who had recently com­
pleted a contract on the job and that the helper's foot struck the bar as he
was moving the fan.
(a) The ironworkers' foreman should have checked the
premises to make sure that his crew removed all their ma­
terials and scrap before leaving the ^ob.
(b) The carpenter foreman also should, have checked the
area to see that it was clear for his crew and should have
had the bar removed.
(c) The helper himself also should have inspected the
area before starting his work in order to spot any possible
hazards.
59. A carpenter was dismantling a scaffold and was tossing each piece onto
a pile. As he threw a board, a projecting nail scraped his hand.
(a) Nail wounds are a serious hazard in work of this
kind. If the lumber is to be reused, all nails should be
drawn as each piece is removed. If the lumber is to be
discarded, the nails may be bent into the wood.
(b) Gloves should be worn on work of this type.
60. When an apprentice attempted to pull a 2" x ii" from a loose pile of
used lumber, the pile shifted and fell against him.
Lumber should be piled in an orderly and stable manner.
This not only will reduce the hazard of handling the ma­
terial but also will save time when it must be moved.
61. A carpenter, carrying a plank, stumbled over a piece of lumber. In
trying to regain his balance he stepped on a nail projecting from a piece of
scrap lumber.




35
(a) Good housekeeping is essential for safety. Before
starting work, the supervisor of the crew should make sure
that all working surfaces are cleared of loose materials
and other tripping hazards. In addition, all working crews
should be required to remove their own scrap.
(b) It should be standard procedure on all jobs that nails
in scrap lumber must be drawn or bent into the wood before any
Diece is discarded.
62. In walking from one end of a building to the other, a carpenter walked
across the open floor joists. As he stepped on one, the nails pulled loose
and it turned. The carpenter fell, injuring his back. Investigation dis­
closed that the joists had just been placed into Dosition and that no walkway
had been provided.
Workmen should not be permitted to walk across joists.
A railed walkway should be provided.

63. A carpenter was nailing rafters. As he struck a nail, it flew back,
striking him in the eye. The employee lost the vision of the eye.
(a) Workmen should start nails carefully by striking
them squarely but lightly until they have penetrated the
lumber to a depth sufficient to be held securely.
(b) Goggles or other eye protection should be worn on
work involving the driving of nails.

).

64
A carpenter, installing mineral wool insulation, developed an infection
on his hands from contact with the mineral wool.
Gloves should be worn in work of this nature.

65. While an apprentice was using the freight elevator, his foot was
crushed between the elevator cage and a landing. Investigation disclosed that
he was standing hear the front of the elevator because of the heavy load being
carried and that the door of the cage did not extend to the floor.
According to the American Standard Safety Code for
Elevators, Dumbwaiters, and Escalators, Z17.1 - 1937, car
gates or doors for freight elevators should guard the full
opening, except that they need not be more than 6 feet high.
66. While a carpenter was handling rough framing, a splinter penetrated his
finger. Infection developed when he failed to have the splinter removed. In­
vestigation disclosed that no first-aid facilities were available.




36
(a) Employees who are required to handle rough lumber
should be furnished, and required to wear, suitable gloves.
(b) First-aid facilities should be available on every job.

a

67. A carpenter was nailing rafters. As he attempted to drive a nail,
rafter slipped off the plate. In replacing the rafter, he strained his arm.
Foremen should make sure that adequate help is provided
for all operations. In this work, a second employee should
be assigned to hold the rafter while it is being nailed. In
addition, whenever it is necessary to place heavy rafters by
hand, two or more men should be assigned to that work.
68. In placing a lU-foot 21 x 10" joist on the plate, a carpenter's finger
1
was crushed between the joist and the plate.
Thorough instruction in the safe handling of materials
should be a part of the training given every carpenter. ‘
In
this case, the workman should have grasped the joist so that,
when he set it down, his fingers would not be crushed.

69 . A block and tackle was being used to raise lumber to the roof of a
building. The cable broke and the lumber fell, striking a carpenter. In­
vestigation disclosed that the cable was badly frayed.
Cables should be inspected frequently on a regular
schedule. Frayed cables should be removed from service
immediately.
70. A scaffold builder and a helper were lifting a 12-foot 2" x 12" to a
scaffold. The carpenter strained his shoulder. Investigation disclosed that
the workmen had tried to lift the plank to a level 7 feet above the ground.
This accident illustrates the importance of proper
training and good teamwork in handling lumber. Overhead
lifting is likely to cause injury if the proper methods are
not used, but trained men can do such work without injury.
71. A carpenter was working from a ladder which was standing on soft
ground. The ladder tilted as one foot sank into the ground and the carpenter
jumped, fracturing his foot as he struck the ground.
(a) If the ladder had been equipped with safety feet,
this accident might not have happened.
(b) If the ladder had been secured at the top, the
accident might have been avoided.




37
(c) If the carpenter had checked the footing of the
ladder -when he put it in place or had tested its stability
before climbing above the first rung, he probably would have
discovered the hazard before he was in a position to be in­
jured.
72.
A helper on the ground was handing 8-foot 2 x l+'s to a carpenter on a
scaffold. He released one of the pieces before the carpenter had obtained a
good grip on it and it fell on his head.
This was a case of poor teamwork.
Coordination of
effort is essential for safety whenever two or more per­
sons are working together. One person in the team should
signal each move and the others should carefully follow his
instructions. In this instance, the carpenter should have
called the moves, because he alone could tell when he had
control of the material which was being handed to him.
73• An apprentice was using an electric table saw. When the belt slipped
from the pulley, he attempted to replace it with his foot. The belt caught
his foot, twisting it.
This case involved a number of unsafe conditions and
unsafe acts:
(a) Either the pulley or the belt was defective, other­
wise the belt would not have slipped off. An adequate equip­
ment inspection program should have revealed this defect and
permitted its correction before it caused an accident.
(b) All belt drives should be guarded.
(e) No one should attempt to adjust or replace a
drive belt until the power has been cut off and the
equipment has come to a complete stop. This rule should
be one of the first things taught to an apprentice.
(d) The apprentice should not have used his foot to
replace the belt. If the belt was too heavy to place by
hand, he should have used a bar.

7k.

A carpenter was removing forms from a concrete foundation wall.
bank on which he was standing caved in and he fell against the wall.
Safe footing should be provided for all operations.
In this case, the bank should have been properly sloped
or shored.




The

38
APPENDIX: STATISTICAL TABLES

Table 1 - Nature of Disabling Injuries and Parts of Body Injured by Occupation

Nature of injury and
cart of body injured

Journeymen

Apprentices

Helpers

Superintendents,
f oremen

Number PercentV Number 1
3ercentl/ Number 1ercentl/
3ercentl/ Number 1
3
100.0

582 100.0

355 100.0

268 100.0

193
1,550
36
35
2,181
254
1,067
142
29
2,231
76
62

2.5
19.9
.5
.4
28.0
3.3
13.7
1.8
•4
28.5
1.0
-

15
115
4
3
212
32
46
6
5
131
6
7

2.6
20.0
.7
.5
36.9
5.6
8.0
1.0
.9
22.8
1 .0
“

6 1.7
88 24.9
.8
3
1
.3
128 36.1
6 1.7
36 10.2
5
1 1.4
.3
77 2 1 .8
.8
3
1
-

16
50
2
58
9
42
6
3
78
3
1

779
426
128
225
2,195
471
1,156
199
88
248
33
2,557
405
753
1,399
1,941
823
972
146
317
67

10.0
5 .5
1.6
2.9
28.2
6.0
14.9
2.6
1.1
3.2
•4

72
47
14
11
99
15
49
7
6
17
5
222
28
70
124
160
52
91
17
20
9

12.6
8.3
2.4
1.9
17.3
2.6
8.6
1.2
1.0
3.0
.9
38.7
4«9
12.2
21.6
27.9
9.1
15.8
3.0
3.5
-

32
16
8
8
91
21
47
9
4
9
1
108
22
33
53
111
37
68
6
12
1

25 9.4
12 4.5
7 2.6
6 2.3
76 28.6
12 4.5
40 15.1
8 3.0
3 1.1
11 4.1
2
.8
86 32.3
17 6 .4
20 7.5
49 18.4
65 24.4
35 13.1
25 9.4
5 1.9
14 5.3
2
-

Total •........................... ••••••••••• 7,856
Nature of injury
Anroutations, enucleations...............
Bruises, contusions........................
Burns, scalds..................................
Chemical burns.................................
Cuts, lacerations, Dunctures..........
Foreign bodies, N.E.C.....................
Fractures................................... .
Hernias.............................. .
Industrial diseases.......... ..............
Strains, sorains.........................
Other................................................
Unclassified; insufficient data....

6.0
18.7
.7
21.8
3.4
15.7
2.2
1.1
29.3
1.1
-

^art of body injured
Head.................................................
Eye................................................
Brain or skull............................
Other...........................................
Trunk................................................
Chest, lungs, ribs, etc..............
Back...............................................
Abdomen....................................
Hips or pelvis..............................
Shoulder.......................................
Other.....................................
Upper extremities............................
Arm..............................................
Hand....................... ......................
Finger......................... .
Lower extremities.......... .
Leg................................................
Foot......................................... .
Toe......................................
Body, general................................ .
Unclassified; insufficient data....

1/ Percents are based on classified cases only.




5.2
9.7
17.9
24.9
10.6
12.4
1.9
4.1
3 2 .8

9.0
4.4
2.3
2.3
25.7
5.9
13.4
2.5
1.1
2.5
.3
30.5
6 .2
9.3
15.0
31.4
10.5
19.2
1.7
3.4
-

Table 2 - Nature of Disabling Injuries by Part of Body Injured

Part of body injured

T otal .............. .....................
Head................................•*•••
Eye......... ....................• ••*.
Brain or s k u ll•••♦ •••••

Total
number
of
injuries

9.061
906
501

157

250

Trunk.*................................ .
Chest, lungs, rib s, eto.
Back.......................................
Abdomen .......................... ..
Hips or p e lv is ...* .........
Other ................................ ..
Upper extrem ities••* •••••
Hand*•••••••••••••••*••
Finger .............................. .
Lower extrem ities . • ...........
I*g..............................
Foot.......................... ..
Toe. .............. ............
Body, general ..................
U nclassified; in su fficien t
data. ..........................




,

2 1*61

519

1,292
223
101

285

1*1

2,973
1*72
876
1,625
2,277
9k7
1,156
17h
363
79

Ampu­
tations
and
enucle­
ations

230

5

-5
_
-

-

222

Bruises
and
contu­
sions

Bums
and
scalds

Chemical
burns

1,803
163
32
62
69

1*5

39

6
2

26

386

2

169
96
19
33
51
18
i*o

-

k
-

-

2
23
5

-

116

222

250

16
2

3
-

600

8

3
-

7h

377
155
68
213
1

k
k

-

6

25
-

1

•
-

•

-

7
2
1*
1

3
3

3

Cuts,
lacer­
ations,
and
punc­
tures
2,579
299
117
65
117
3l*
1k
2
3
6
1*
5
1,620

Foreign
bodies,
H.S.C.

301
301
300

•
1
•
-

•
-

131*
521
965

-

600

-

196
396
8
22

1*

Frac­
tures

1.191
50
3°

20

360

251
1*7
27
25
10

361*
98
113
153
388

90

209
89

29

Indus­
Hernias tr ia l
diseases

Strains
and
sprain 8

159

38

-

2
1

2.517
31*

159
-

-

71

2

20
16

2
1

32

1

1

1,508

78
1,H*7
38
35
203
7
283
113
H*1
29

10

m

-

.

3
3

665

_
1

2
2

-

8
1

•
-

•
-

Other

88

•
-

159

Unclas­
sified ;
insuf­
ficien t
data

.

•

+

5
k
1

3

-

m
m
3

1
1
1

2
1

271
390

1
2
1
1

*

3

22

18

50

-

1

9

1

63

5

2

-

1*

-

1
1
1

Table 5 - Nature of D isabling Injuries by A ctivity of Injured

Fature of injury

Amputations, en u cleation s* * **..........
B ruises, contusions*..............................
Burns, s c a ld s .• • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Chemical burns
Cuts, lacera tio n s, punctures
Foreign bodies, N.E.C***............
Fractures .................................. ....................
H ernias*.. ................................*..................
Industrial d isea se s........................... ..
Strains, sprains* ......................... ....
O ther......................................
Unclassified; in su ffic ie n t d ata..**




Total
number
of
in ju ries

9,061
230
1,803
U5
39
2,579
301

1,191
159
38
2,517
88
71

liftin g ,
carrying,
or
placing

2,059
7
275
h

8
331
h

176
123
5
1,110
k

12

Using
hand
tools

Using
powered
tools

1.531
10
363
7
h

659

98
158
5
2

219

1
5

,m
203
35
8
1
598
83
50

1 0

-

1
50
11
1

Walking

Stepping
to or
from
equipment

Climbing
to or
from
equipment

U89

227

208

-

-

-

35

Uk

-

-

92
1
«

186
-

66
-

133
2
5

26
32
2
132
-

19

-

Running
or
jumping

Ul

-

8
8

-

h

6
2

-

-

US

93

23

-

-

2

Other
a c tiv itie s

157
2
28
9
U

29
-

38
5
2
31+
3
3

Unclas­
sifie d ;
in su f­
fic ie n t
data

3.306
8
923
16
22
723
116
619
18
28
723
67
U3

Table U - Parts of Body Injured by A ctiv ity of Injured.

Total
P art of body injured

T otal*. .................................................
Head*. • ...................*.............
Eye..................................................................
Brain or sk u ll* ...................................
O th er................................................* .* ••
Trunk................... • . • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • • •
C hest, lun gs, r ib s , e t c * .................
Back.......... •••• ............. •••••••••••••
Hips or p e lv is * . *•••••••••••••••
Shoulder •••••••••••••«••••*•••••
Other............................... •••••••••••••
Upper e x tr e m itie s •••••••••••••••••
Arm................... ••••• ..................................
Hand......................... ••••••••*•••••••
F in ger. .............. .
Lower extre mit ie s« • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Leg..................................................................
Foot*.. • • • • * • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • • •
Toe...............................................................
Body, gen eral*.
U n c la ssifie d ; in s u ffic ie n t data***




L iftin g ,

number

carrying,

of
in ju r ies

or
placing

9.061

2.059

1,531

63
10
17
36

269
211
15
1+3
189
U2.
108
8

908
501

157

250

519

1,132
95

101
285
1+1

155
23
87
10

2,1461

1,292
223

762

Using

Using

hand

powered

to o ls

to o ls

k

25
2

1+53
77
153
223

798
98
2J O
4
1460

171*

363
119
181
63

21+9
H+l
88
20

563
79

31
17

23
3

2,973
1+72
876

1,625

2,277
9l+7
1,15 6

Stepping

l.o ia

•

112
96
2

ii+

l+o
7
16
h
2
11

-

772
25
112
635
103
71+
16

13
10
i+

Walking

1x85
22
5
10
7
10l+
1+5
32
3
10
11
3
60

18
26
16

Climbing

to or

to or

from
equipment

227
1
-

1

60

19
23
1+
1
9
1+
18
7
10
1

277
70
201+
3

II4I+

17
5

1+

35
-

109

from
equipment

208
9
3
6

Running

Other
a c tiv itie s

or
jumping

..

hi

.

12Z_--

1
1

23
3

-

16

-

k

Unclas­
s ifie d ;
in su f­
fic ie n t
data

3.306
1+08
175
106
127
815
281

77
22
28
6
6
13
2

7
5
2
-

37
8
12
5
1
+
6
2

32
13
13
6

3
1
2
-

1+8
6

77
32
1+5
-

33
7
26
-

31
11
li+
6

1,000

10

3

H+
i+

251
1+3

3

-

16
26

306

36
51
123
18

789
227
301+
258

1+58
1+73
69

42
Table

5

- T y p e s of Accidents b y Occupation of Injured

Superintendents,
Accident types

Journeymen

Apprentices

Helpers
foremen

3
Number 3
ercentl/ Number 1ercentl/
Total.................. ........
Struck by moving objects.........
■Falling objects...............
From hands of workers........
From framing or forms........
From roofs or scaffolds........
From other positions.........
Flying or thrown objects.......
Small particles..............
Lumber......................
Nails..................... ..
Other objects...............
Hand-operated or -wielded objects
Mechanically powered equipment...
Other.........................
Falls to lower levels............
From scaffolds, platforms, etc...
From forms, walls, roofs, etc....
From ladders, stairs, sawhorses..
Through floor openings.........
From other surfaces............
Striking against objects.........
Bumping moving parts of equipment
Stepping on objects......... . #
.
Striking splinters or slivers....
Bumping building materials..... .
Striking projecting nails, wires.
Kneeling on or rubbing against...
Other.......... ..............
Overexertion................. .
Due to lifting or carrying......
Due to pushing or pulling .......
Due to swinging objects........
Due to other activities........

7,656
2,150
719
252
198
71
198
588
h01
82
52
U7
539
276
28
1,586
627
Ii25
357
Ul
138
1,U93
U18
281
286
133
132
98
1U5
1,120
919
12U
59
18

Caught in, on, or between ••.......
Handled objects...............
Hand tools and other objects....
Other objects..... ...........

527
226
112
52
137
359
185
17U
235
98
39
98

Absorption of chemicals, poisons. ••

Falls on same level......... .
As a result of slipping
As a result of tripping........
■While stepping on loose objects*.
Other.........................

100.0
2 7.6

9.3
3.3
2.5
.9
2.6
7 .5
5.2

1.0

.7
.6
6.9
3.5
•U
20.3
8.0
5.U
U.6
.5
1.8
19.1
5.3
3.6
3.6
1.7
1.7
1.3
1.9
1U. 3
11.7
1.6
.8
.2
6.7
2.8
1.U
.7
1.8
U.6
2.U
2.2
3.0

582

191
51
18
10
5
18
57
U5
3
6
3
65
18
-

77
20
29
19
2
7
138
25
U8
27
Hi
10
8
6
70
55
10
5

100.0
35.0
8.8
3.1
1.7
.9
3.1
9.3
7 .3
.5
1.0
.5
11.3
3.1
13.3
3.5
5.0
3.3
.3
1.2
25.8

U.3
8.3
14.7
2. +
1
1.7
1.U

1.0

12.1
9 .5
1.7
.9

Number 1
Percentl/

355
101
hi
18
7
6
16
21
lU
1
h
2
21
10
2

65
21
16
16
3
9
83
15
33
lU

8

3
3
7

h3
38

l
i
-

1

-

-

26
13
7
1

U.5
2.2
1 .2
.2
.9

23
10
6
1

3.3

13

5

6

100.0
28.5
13.3
5.1
2.0
1.7
U.5
5.9
3.9
.3
1.1
.6
5.9
2.8
.6
18.5
6.0
U.5
U.5
.8
2.5
23 .U
h .2
9.U
3.9
2.5
.8

.8
2.0
12.1
10.7
lo l
.3
6.5
2.8
1.7
.3
1.7
3.7
1.7

Number Percentl/

268
61
16

100.0
22.8

2

6.0
1.5
1 .5
.8

lh
h

7.U
5.1
1.5

h
h

6
20

-

2
12
12
1
U6
19
11
9
2
5
59
2)i
5
8
5
3
6
8

2.2

.8

39
35
3
1

U.5
U.5
.u
17.3
7.1
U .l
3.U
.8
1.9
22.2
9.0
1.9
3.0
1.9
1.1
2.3
3.0
1U.7
13.2
1.1
.U

19

7.1

6
5

3

5

2.2
1 .9
1.1
1 .9

20
13

7

7 .5
U.9
2.6

3.9

6

2.3

.8

-

1.2

19
12
7
30
7
5
18

91

1.2

13

2.2

3

2.0
.8

Contact with extreme temperatures••

hi

.6

1.1

1

.u

20/4

2.6

.7
1.9

h

Other accident types............ .

h
11

6

1.7

10

3.8

Unclassified; insufficient data....

hh

-

3

-

-

-

2

-

Slips and stumbles (not falls)....
Stumbles......................
Slips.......................

1.3


l/ Percents
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ are b ased on classified cases only.
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

.5

2.1
1 .2
5.2
1 .2

6

7

xU

.9

h
3

3.1

7

2.0

lol

2

h

5

.8
-

1.5
1 .9

43
Table 6 - Acoident Types

\ -----

Working
Chips,
Ma­
Lumber
Hand Bodily splint­ chines Forms
sur­
faces tools motions ers

Total
Accident types
Number Percent
9.061

100.0

2 ,1*06

1,728

i,??7

576

Struck by moving o b j e c t s ......... . 2.503
Palling objects ...................
833
From hands of w o r k e r s ...... ...
292
From framing or f o r m s ....... ..
219
From roofs or scaffolds .......
alt
F*am other positions •••••••••.
238
Flying or thrown o b j e c t s . . . .....
686
Small p a r t i c l e s ............. . #
1*80
L u m b e r ........................
90
N a i l s ...........................
62
Other o b j e c t s ..................
5U
Hand-operated or -wielded objects
637
Mechanically powered equipment •.
316
O t h e r .................. ...........
31

27.7
9.2
3.3

637
519
175

2.1*

181

2
2
-

957
49
19
8
1
21
20
•

-

Falls to lower l e v e l s ..............
From scaffolds, platforms, etc. .
From forms, walls, roofs, etc. .«
From ladders, stairs, sawhorses •
Through floor openings
From other s u r f a c e s ..............

T o t a l ...............................

.9
2.6
7.6

71
92
90

5.3

-

1.0

90

.7

mm

2
•
-

.6

-

7.1

16

3.5
.3

12

1.771*
687
1*79
1*01
1*8
159

19.7
7-7

70
26

1,385

5.3

376
281;

.5

27
12
2

1*8

3

Striking against o b j e c t s ......... . 1,773
Bumping moving parts of equipment
1*82
Stepping on o b j e c t s ............ .
367
Striking splinters or slivers...
335
Bumping building materials ......
160
Striking projecting nails, wires
11*8
Kneeling on or rubbing against..
115
Other.................... ....... .
166

19.7
5«4
4.1
3.7
1.8
1.6
1.3
1.8

Overexertion......... ...... .......
Due to lifting or carrying......
Due to pushing or pulling.......
Due to swinging objects
Due to other a c tivities.........
Palls on same l e v e l ................
As a result of slipping.........
As a result of tr i p p i n g .........
While stepping on loose objects.
Other ................ ............ .

1.272
1.01*7
11*1
61*
20
595
255
130

51

153

i*.i*

830
3i*8
282
88
100
12
-

-

604

43
78
98
-

1
57
36

14.1
11.6
1.6
•7
•2

582
551
25
6

20

6.6

194
91
23
13
67

216
82
61
32
41

8
1
7

1
1
-

70

5

2.9
1*4
.6
1.7

19
1

3
2
-

•
•
•

•
•
mm
mm

1

-

•
•
_
•

8
2

137
103
2
•
•

•
5
•

18
•

72
67

16

2 k

8
19
4

_

1
•

1*
1
•

13
1

-

mm

19
2

21

•

15
1

9
7
4

-

-

1

1

381
378

79

59

•

mm

•

mm

1
12

3
42
4

23
19
4

142
139
3

68
66
1

-

-

-

1

_ .
_
-

•

5

-

-

6
1
1
2
2

-

384
208
176

163
21
76
64
2
17
8
4

285
111

3*2
1.2

127

1*7

•5
1.5

17

5

47
10

Absorption of chemicals, p o i s o n s ••

112

1.2

13

-

Contact with extreme temperatures*

56

.6

-

231

2.6

1*9

-


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
1/ Percents are based on classified cases only.
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

38
37
19

3

Caught in, on, or between....*....
Handled objects................ . .
Hand tools and other objects....
Other objects................ ••••

Unclassified? insufficient data...

20
6
1
•

21*5

36
5
25

13
19

195

Other accident t y p e s ........... .

5?5

•
« .
.

-

2.4
2.2

.

1*67
1*67

-

1*11
216

53

•
•
•
-

•
-

Slips and stumbles (not falls)....
Stumbles........... ......... . .*
S lips.......... .............. ]...

4.6

1* 7
6

•

20
608
280
-

1
3

J ik 8 .

w

Build­
ing
mater­
ial
N.E.C.

59
2

-

_

-

•
•

-

—

2
8

38
19
12

10

7

3
1
1

5
1
l

-

m
_
•

-

3
1
2

16

16

2

14

8
6

14

2

2

«
»

m

-

-

-

-

-

6

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

15

192

-

2

-

mm

2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

44
and

Agencies

of Injury

Doors
Build­
and
Nails
ing
windows steel

Accident types

Total..................................
Struck by moving objects ............
Falling o b j e c t s .....................
From hands of workers ...........
From framing or forms ...........
From roofs or scaffolds .........
From other p o s i t i o n s ........... .
Flying or thrown objects ...........
Small particles ..................
L u m b e r ............................
Nails .............................
Other objects
H a n d - o o e r a t e d or -wielded objects
Mechanically powered e q u i p m e n t
Other

...................

.. ..
.............................
......... .

Falls to lower levels
.....
From scaffolds, platforms, etc**.*
FVam forms, walls, roofs, etc*...*
From ladders, stairs, sawhorses...
Through floor o p e n i n g s ............
From other surfaces ................
Striking against objects .............
Bumping moving parts of equipment .
Stepping on objects ................
Striking splinters or slivers ....
Bumping building materials ........
Striking projecting nails, wires..
Kneeling on or rubbing a g a i n s t ....
Other ................................
Overexertion ..........................
Due to lifting or carrying ........
Due t o pushing or pulling .........
Due t o swinging objects ...........
Due to other a c t i v i t i e s .......... .
Falls on same level ••••.............
As a result of slipping ...........
As a result of tripping • *........ •
Ififhile stepping on loose objects...
Other ...............................

168
112
39
18

17
-

3
-

k
2

99

m

25
21
10
1
-

76
2
-

10

2
62
-

3
-

3
1
-

22

3

-

62
•
12
1

-

2
-

11
7
-

1
-

-

1

-

32
18
-

31
-

19
-

6b
63

l

8
5
1
1
1

Slips and stumbles (not falls) ......
Stumbles ............................
Slips ...............................

2

Caught in, on, or b e t w e e n ......... . •
Handled objects ....................
Hand tools and other objects ......
Other o b j e c t s ................. . • •. •

16

1
1

2

-

Vehi­
cles

Boxes
and
kegs

90

83

16

10
10
8
2
-

b
1

-

3
-

.
-

b
8

3
1
1
-

Cab­
Chem- ]
Excava­ inets, Other Unclas­
sinks,
icals tions
sified
etc*
71

70

66

599

110

-

-

3
3
1

135
72
16

3
2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

6
-

-

1

-

3

-

1

2

-

b

3

6b
9
9
1
-

.
.
-

•
•
-

13
1
-

1
•
-

5

3

1
2

25
20
5
-

•

-

-

23
1
21
1

5
52
2

21

3
2
1

5
3
1

3
2

-

•
-

-

1

1

-

1
1
-

•

1

-

38

6

3
25
1
2
-

9
b

b
b
6
■*
"
6
13
12

•

-

-

-

a.
•
-

-

-

b

5

-

-

-

-

-

3
2
1

•
_
•
-

2
1
•
1
-

-

-

b
-

b
bl
bl

7
2

bl
bo
13

27
3
15
5

1

•
-

m

2

-

-

mm

•
1

kb

25

81

7
3

3
13

13

l

26
21

lb
b
1

5
5
16
37
63

5b

2

18
•
•
•
-

8
10

b
1

-

6
-

-

-

3

3

58
22

9
3

b
3

-

-

1

b
b

b

-

1

18

2

w

2

2
2

-

-

2

3

38

1

2
-

8
_
-

•

1

b5

-

8

27

7

8

m
mm
mm

3

1

19

-

••••

-

-

-

-

-

70

-

-

21

2

•••

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

55

-

Other accident t y p e s .......................................

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

20

-

Unclassified; insufficient d a t a ...........

m

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

bl

Absorption of chemicals, poisons
Contact with extreme temperatures




Table 7 - *Brpes of Accidents by Activity^ of Injured

Accident types
■ Total »nntt t
Struck by moving objects*..........•*.
Falling objects*••••••...........
From hands of workers..............
From framing or forms*...........
From roofs or scaffolds...........
From other positions* ••••••••••
Flying or thrown objects..*•*••••
Small particles....... *..............
Lumber*....................................
Nails........................................
Other objects*....................... .
Hand-operatedpowered equipment*••
Mechanically or -wielded objects
Other.***.......................
Falls to lower levels*.**.**;.....*
From scaffolds, platforms, etc..*
From forms, walls, roofs, etc.*..
From ladders, stairs, sawhorses*.
Through floor openings..........*.*
From other surfaces............... *
Striking against objects................
Bumping moving parts of equipment
Stepping on objects*.......••••••••
Striking splinters or slivers....
Bumping building materials*•••••*
Striking projecting nails, wires.
Kneeling on or rubbing against...
Other*............................. ..........




Total Lifting,
number carrying,
of
or
injuries placing
2.059
9.061
301
2,503
833
267
292
198
16
219
84
13
238
40
686
13
480
4
90
6
62
54
3
637
13
316
6
2
31
108
1,774
687
31
479
23
401
18
48
7
159
29
285
1,773
482
1
50
367
156
335
160
27
148
32
115
4
166 ,
15
-

Using
hand
tools

Using
powered
tools

1.531
990
71
21
23
4
23
328
238
16
58
16
576
2
13
144
62
34
40
8
122
1
5
35
18
18
24
21

1.041
455
15
4
2
9
154
106
39
2
7
1
285
14
3
7
2
2
493
475
2
6
1
1
4
4

-

-

-

Stepping Climbing
to or
Walking to or
from
from
equipment equipment
208
485
227
17
5
4
2
9
5
1
1
1
1
4
2
1
2
2
1
6
2
-5
_
1
2
1
1
120
107
53
28
18
23
27
19
35
12
58
25
8
1
19
4
3
38
167
19
1
143
25
3
3
11
2
3
5
3
11
10
4
-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Running
Other
or activities
jumping
47
-

_
15
4
5
5
1
28
7
2
19
-

-

157
42
10
1
1
_
8
4
-1
3
19
6
3
18
6
3
3
6
11
4
3
-1
3
-

-

Unclas­
sified;
insuf­
ficient
data
3.306
689
454
66
171
64
153
179
131
24
2
22
28
16
12
1,195
512
326
238
32
87
610
4
132
131
93
88
83
79

Table 7 - Types of Accidents by Activity of Injured— Continued

Accident types
Overexertion..................................
Due to lifting or carrying.....•%
Due to pushing or pulling...........
Due to swinging objects...........
Due to other activities.,.....*..
Falls on same level........ .
As &result of slipping............ .
As a result of tripping..........
While stepping on loose objects..
Other.............. ................... ..
Slips and stumbles (not falls).....
Stumbles............ .
Slips..........................................
Caught in, objects......................
Handled on, or between..........
Hand tools and other objects.....
Other objects....................
Absorption of chemicals, poisons...
Contact with extreme temperatures..
Other accident types............ ......
Unclassified; insufficient data....




Total
number
of
injuries
1,272
1,047
141
64
20
595
255
130
57
153
411
216
195
285
111
47
127
112
56
231
49

Lifting,
carrying^
or
placing

Using
hand
tools

Using
powered
tools

995
953
38
4
129
52
32
12
33
124
57
67
82
68
14
16
3
12
4

136
15
55
63
3
39
15
5
2
17
9
4
5
55
3
45
7
7
5
22
2

30
8
20
_
2
6
3
_
3
3
3
17
1
16
1
2
19
1

-

Stepping Climbing
to or
to or Running Other
Walking
or
from
from
activities
jumping
equipment equipment
_
118
50
39
17
12
70
46
24
2
«.
1
1
2
2
-

_
29
7
5
8
9
57
44
13
46
-

8
5
3
25
7
18
1
_
•
1
30
-

_

_
_
2
1
1
_

2
1
1

_

-

-

25
23
2
7
4
1
2
5
2
3
33
1
32
5
9
1
1

Unclas­
sified;
insuf­
ficient
data
86
71
5
1
9
257
118
47
18
74
116
52
64
95
38
1
56
83
35
99
41

Table 8

Accident types

Struck by moving objects*..................
Falling o b j e c t s * . . . . . .
From hands of workers** ••••••••
From framing or forms*****.........
From roofs or sca ffo ld s...........
From other p o sitio n s•••* •••••••
Flying or thrown objects
Small p a r ticle s* • • • • • * * • • ......
L u m b e r ................. . . . . . . . .
N ails......................................................
Other objects*............. *...............
Hand-operated or -wielded objects
Mechanically powered equipment•*•
Other ......................
From scaffold s, platforms, etc.**
From forms, w alls, roofs, e t c .* ..
From ladders, sta irs, sawhorses•*
Through floor openings• • • • • • • • • • •
From other surfaces• • •••••••••••*
Striking against o b j e c t s * ..........
Bumping moving parts of equipment
Stepping on objects• • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Striking splin ters or s liv e r s * ...
Bumping building m aterials* ••••••
Striking projecting n a ils , w ires.
Kneeling on or rubbing against***
Other*............................ ........................




Total
number
of
injuries

On
scaf­
folds

. 9,061
2,503
833
292
219
82*
238
686
1*80
90
62
5U
637
316
31
1,77k
687
2*79
2*01
2*8
159
1,773
2*82
367
335
160
li|S
115
166

. . . 822
18
11
3
1
7
2*
2
2
2
1
677
673
1
2
1
32
9
2*
2
2
15
-

Types of Aooidents by Location of Accident

On
ground

. .623
67
33
21
2
1
9
10
3
5
2
21
2
1
2*1
—
2*1
65

•
2*5
1
5
2*
9
1

On
floors

..1*32
57
12
2*
6
•
2
12*
8
2*
1
1
26
5
61

2*2
19
113
1
21*
16
8
3
51
10

On
jo is ts ,
p lates,
rafters,
etc.
- , ,L 20
37
18
2*
12
1
1
5
2*
1
12
2
ia*+
-

183

.
1

29

5
2*
7
1
7
5

Oa
ladders

On
roofs

..... .361
5
5
1
1
1
2
•
278
1
276
1
19
3
8
1

337

-

-

-

7

68
12
5
2
5
22
12*
1
3
2*
18
15
1
133
2
129
2
38
3
3
5
8
3
ll
5

On
w alls
or
forms

On
saw­
horses

281
20
10
2*
6
2
Z
.
-

7
1
156
155
_
1
29
5
2*
2
5
2*
9

lh2
6
1
1
1
„
1
3
1
81
•
•
81
_
12*
2
8
•
2
-

_

2

Other
and
unclas­
sified
5.6U3
2,225
731
251+
193
72
212
628
24*9
78
58
1+3
52+8
290
28
163
12
10
2*2
5
91+
1,2*31*
2*73
260
301
127
130
31
112

Table 8 - Types of Accidents by Location of Accident— Continued

Accident types

Overexertion ........... ................. .
Due to liftin g or carrying •••.•• .
Due to pushing or p u llin g . .......
Due to swinging objects ••••••••••
Due to other a c t i v i t i e s . ... .... .*
Falls on same le v e l............................ .
As a resu lt of slip p in g ..
As a resu lt of t r i p p i n g . ... ... ...
■ While stepping on loose o b jects*.
Other........ .. • • • • • ............... ..
Slips and stumbles (not f a ll s )...*.
Stumbles• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
S lip s * ..,.................................................
Caught in , on. or between............. T_T
Handled objects..............................T__
Hand tools and other objects ••••*
Other o b jects* .* ......................... .
Absorption of chemicals, p o iso n s...
Contact with extreme temperatures*.
Other accident types*.................. .
U nclassified; in su fficien t data****




Total
number
of
injuries
1,272
1,Q(*7
i 1+1
6k
20
595
255
130
57
153
1+11
216
195
285
111
hi
127
112

56

231
k9

On.

scaf­
folds
23
17
3
2
1
23
13

6
-

1+
21
9
12
6

6
22

On
ground

On
floors

On
jo ists,
plates,
rafters,
etc*

hi

25
* 13
5
7

23
18
5

97
25
30
17
25
52
39
13
6
3
2
1
1
1

103
58
3
5
37
23
5
18
2
1
1

32
9

6
-

18i+
81
63
23

17

183
111+
69

li+
2
2

10
15
1

6

-

17
2

-

On
ladders

On
roofs

10
10

23
16

3
-

2
1
25
11
11+
1
1
-

6
-

1
33
19
3
2
9
19
1
18
3
1

1

-

2
1+
5

16

20

11

-

2

-

On
w alls,
or
forms
11+
9
3
1
1
32
16
8
1
7
16

8
8
3
1

On
saw­
horses

Other
and
unclas­
sified

1
1

1,10 6

_
-

5
1
•

k

18

H
+
1+

250

_
2
-

-

11

17

'

931
115
1+3
17
115
1+2
15
5
53
51+
15
39

'

102
1+1
107
90
1+8
111

1+7

Table 9 - Types of Accidents by Hazardous Working Conditions

Defects of agencies
Accident types

Total............... .
Struck by moving objects#•••.
Fallinghands of workers••• •
From objects#•••••••••#•
From framing or forms.##•
From roofs or scaffolds#.
From or thrown objects##.
Flying other positions.••••
Small particles..••••••••
Lumber...................... .
Nail ffiMftfMiMtttMtn
Other objects#...##......
Hand-wielded objects.•••••#
Powered equipment#•••••••••
Other
Falls to lower levels.#....##
From scaffolds, platforms..
From forms, walls, roofs.#.
From ladders, stairs, etc..
Through floor openings....#
From other surfaces#......*
Striking against objects#....
Bum moving parts of equipp
meat•• on obj ects#.......
Stepping ••••«••.......••••••
Striking splinters, slivers
Bumping building materials.
Striking projecting nails..
Kneeling on or rubbing#....
Other....................•••#•••




Total
number
of
acci- Total
dents
9,061
2,503
$33
292
219
$4
23$
6$6
480
90
62
54
637
316
31
1,774
687
479
401
48
159
1,773
482
367
335
160
148
115
166

2,206

ProLow Poor Projectmate- de— ject- Slip- Other
ing
ing
nailsj rial sign sliv- pery
wires strength
ers
528
_
_
-1
1
496

315
214
50
42
9
7

-

-

258
95
19
17
16
43
128
108
9
11
19
15
1
630
395
155
59
1
20
842
350 350
332 -1
9
144 144
1 -1
6
-

517
165
33
3
7
2
21
116
103
5
8
12
3
1

2
1

4

372 329 325 135
57 - 18 6
40 - 16 18
1
10 - 15 14
16 1 5
7
-5 _ -5
4
2
1 _ .2 2
3 9 3
_ 42 5
267
174 7 85 - 19 6 8 3
1 1 8 2
1 329 1 8
- 329
1 4
1 —
4
-

Improperly guarded agencies

Lack
Lack Haz­
of ardous Poor of Other
Un­
per­ haz­ U
equip­
n­
guarded Lack
work­ house­ sonal ardous
ment
clas­
point- of Other
ing keep­ safety condi­ sified
Total
(not proce­
of- guard
per­ dures ing equip­ tions
opera- rails
sonal)
ment
tion
1,350 812 382 156 1,232 627 286 251 3 3,106 _
10
340 321 10 9 104 101 8 57 - 1,610
526
84 125 9
19 -9 79 9 6 179
- 156
2
5 - 36
20
10 - 10 -5 - 39 -2 - 155
4 - 33 1 3 8
4 56 56
57 - 436
13 13
6 1 57 - 302
43 43 31
62
_ •
_
2 41
_
- 19 8
- 591
8 28
265 265 1 - 29
1
464 - 347 117 205 215 13 87 - 10
255 - 255 - 23 207 4 86 _ 159
2 1 21
1
6
3
- 84
109 - 46 109 142 3 4 •
46 1
51 - 44 7 19 5 4 1 1 58
480 477 _ 3 12 4 28 91 1 315
•
2 1 478 476 17 -1 «» 3
p 1
1
2 2 11 1 135
4
8 2 - 25
2 1 1 4 2 — 77
7
- 147
-

-

-

-

Table 9 - types of Accidents by Hazardous Working Conditions— Continued

Improperly guarded agencies

Defects of agencies
Accident types

Total
number
of
acci­ Total
dents

Overexertion*..............
1,272
Due to lifting or carrying*. 1,047
Due to pushing or pulling*.. 141
Due to swinging objects**..* 64
Due to other activities.*.•• 20
Falls on same level........... .
$95
As a result of slipping*•••• 255
As a result of on loose ob- 130
While stepping tripping* ••••
jocts.............. ...... 57
Other*•••• ...................* . 153
Slips and stumbles (nob falls) 411
Stumbles*............................. 216
Slips*................................. 195
Caught in, on, or between*•••• 285
Handled objects*.**•••••••*• 111
Hand tools and other objects 47
Other objects.............•••••• 127
Absorption of chemicals***.. .* 112
Contact extreme temperatures.. 56
Other accident types........ ..** 231
Unclassified........................... 49




22
1
17
1
3
224
140
38

7
39
170
50
120
26
3
4
19
2
8
24
-

Pro­
ject­ Low Poor
mate­ de­
ing
nailsj rial sign
wires strength
25
3
20
2
3
3
3
2
1
-

4 8
- 3 -5
1
- 3
18 25
- - 2
- 6
18 17
- - -5 8
2
3 8
- 2 2
1 4
- -

-

Pro­
ject­ Slip­
ing pery Other
sliv­
ers
.
-

3
1
2
137
137
118
118
6
1
5
-

7
7
19
16
1
2
49
47
2
4
1
3
2
4
19
-

Lack
Lack
of Haz­
U
n­
ardous Poor of Other
equip­
per­ haz­ Un­
guarded Lack
work­ house­ sonal
ment
ardous clas­
point- of
ing keep­ safety
Other (not proce-i
Total
condi­ sified
of- guard
ing equip­ tions
per­
opera­ rails
sonal) dures
ment
tion
820 .
- 800 -1 - 429
- 19 - 246
1 - 104
63
1 - 16
21 3 18 - 11 no 95 - 134
1 1 6 73 1 34
- 30
8 1 7 5 49
5
12 1 11 5 32 45 - 65
6 6 6 60
- 19
6
6
2 30 139 139
4 30 - 41
21 4
211
17 19 8
13
95
43
21 4 - 17 6 8 - 73
80 - 16 7 7 7
1 6
- 41 11 1 10 55 14 1 - 126
- 49
_

_

-

-

-

-

-

_

-

-

-

-

-

-

_

-

_

_

-

-

_

-

Table 10 - Hazardous Working Conditions by Agency of Accident

Work­
ing
Hazardous working conditions Total
sur­
faces

9.061
D efects of agen cies• • • • • • . . . . . 2,206
Projecting n a ils , w ires, etc. 528
Low m aterial strength*• • . • • • 517
Poor design or construction* 572
Projecting s liv e r s ................
529
Slippery* .................................... ..
3251
Rough or uneven*..............• •• ••
68
Improperly guarded agencies*••
Unguarded point-of-operation
Lack of guard rails, etc****
Other inadequate guard in g...
Lack of equi pmenfc»-not personal
Lack of lif t in g equipment.••
Lack of sca ffo ld s* • •• •• •• •* •
Lack of lad d ers*.• • • • • • • • • * •
Lack of other equipment** *.*
Hazardous working procedures••
Inadequate working surfaces*
Exposure to fa llin g objects*
Other hazardous procedures*•
Poor housekeeping******...........*
Lack o f personal sa fety equipment**.* .......................• • • • • • • •
Other hazardous conditions***•
U n classified *• • • • * • • • • • • • • • • • •




67
1,350
812
582
156
1,232
926
158
121
27
627
353
78
196
286
251
3

Lum­ Ma­ Hand
Fram­
Forms
ber chines tools
ing

Lad­
Roofs
ders

Build­
ing

W alls, Doors,
Saw­ Chem­
Excava­ Boxes,
(Dther Unclas­
founda­ win­
horses ic a ls
tions kegs
sifie d
ria ls,
tions dows
N.E.C.

mate­

757 hh9
8 797
230
33
205
3 282
235 25
68 8 8
333 -333 -482
68 1+81
18
1
1+6 4
1 88
59
1
29
268
-

soli 568 58li 356 237 193 238
119 H41+ 90 bZ 54 103
13
2
81 52 24 33 12 48
18 66 2 10 4
9 H+ 46 1 12 9
15 7 30 4
6
4 23 1 446 379 .4 117 6 _
1+37 375 6 9 1+ 4 117 23 6 163 24 78 7 133
23 2 148 2 66 1 132
3 12 1 •
15 19 -5 -1
i+
71
5 17 69 233 -- 23 23
233 - 23 12
5 2 -•
11
5 12
2 - 6
-

98
6
6
-

57

17

1+7

1+

97

10

-

-

-

-

-

-

l.h s k

-

1,569

1
1

5
-

-

.
-

92
1
72
19
.
-

-

59
1

-

1

_
•
-

53
53

-

5
-

59
22
10
5
6
1
-

1
-

1
11
-

11

56
28
4
3
18
-

3

-

28
28
-

-

-

-

-

25
25
-

-

-

-

56

-

54
-

4l
13
2
-

48 246 3. 106..
1 61
1 2 -23 11 .
4 8 •
13 _
10 -

2
8

-

-

68
37
9
4
18
88
3
2
83
10

-

-

7
2

-

2
•
-

-

47
4o
7
-

_
•
_
-

-

-

3,106

3,106

'

'

Table 11 - Hazardous Working Conditions by Activity of Injured

Hazardous working conditions

Total*............. .................. . ...................
Defects of agencies*• • •• • • • •• • • •
Projecting n a ils, w ires, etc**
Poor design or construction*.•
Projecting s liv e r s .* .. . . . . . . . .
Slippery*••••* • •• • • • • •• • » •• • • •
Rough or uneven*•• •* • • •• • • • • ••
Other d efects........... • • • • • • • • • • •
Improperly guarded a gen cies* ..••
Unguarded point-of-operation*.
Laok of guard r a ils, eto ...........
Other Inadequate guarding.........
Lack of equipment— personal.•
not
Lack of liftin g equipment.. . . .
Lack of sca ffo ld s..* •••••••••*
Lack of ladder8*.............................
Lack of other equipment......... ..
Hazardous working procedures*•••
Inadequate working surfaces* ••
Exposure to fa llin g objects..*
Other hazardous procedures***•
Poor housekeeping................••«••«••
Lack of personal safety equipment
Other hazardous conditions*•*•••*
U n c la ssifie d .............•••••••••••*




Total
number
of
accidents
9.061

L ifting,
carrying
or
placing
2,059 _

2,206

k3k

528
517
372
329
325
68
67
1*350
812
382
156
1,232

926
158
121
27
627
353
78
196

286
251
3
3*106

89
21
23
13k
111
30
6
51
3
39
9
853
8l+9
3
1
67
32
6
29
65
9

-

580

Using
hand
tools
1.531
266
2k
150
28
3k
17
2
11
56
1
35
20
37
6
26
5
51
32
5
1k
6
33
1,082

Using
powered
tools
,

1 01*1

52
3
h
13
6
3
23
807

791
k
12
k

2
2
8
3
2
5
2

Stepping
to or
Walking
from
equipment
227
. 1*85 .
26k
83
26
152
12
15
22
20
3
18
57
7
13
2
8
35
3
30
5
2
3
2
ke
-

2
3k

27
k
3

k6

7k
2

-

2

122

72

k
k3

1

Climbing
to or
from
equipment
208
38
6
8
15
8
1
22
2
20
77
2
2
72
1

6
6

k
3

kk

6
1

-

38

1

Running
or
jumping

Other
a c tiv itie s

k7

157

12
7
2
•
2
1
8

k6

-

k
k
1

1
2
2
1

-

-

60

23

1
8
9
k
12
2
10
3
1
2
18
1
2
_
15
10
2
8
5
k

-

71

Unclas­
sified ;
insuf­
ficien t
data
3.306

1,011
220
299
21*0
128
99
12
13
360
Ik
262
8k

192

66
119
5
2
1^5
21+6
61
138
83
156
1
1,058

Table 12- Hazardous Workiiiff ConditioEis bv Location of Acoident

Hazardous working conditions

,

Total
nisnber
of
aocidents

Total.......................................................... ...... 9^061 . ..
Defects of agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2,206
Projecting n a ils, w ires, e t c ...
528
Low material strength................
517
Poor design or construction••••
372
Projecting s liv e r s ..........................
329
Slippery* ................. • • • • • • • • • • • • •
325
68
Other d efects...................................
67
Improperly guarded agencies••••••
1.350
812
Unguarded point-of-operation•••
382
Lack of guard r a ils , etc* * •••••
Other inadequate guarding••••••
156
Lack of equipment— personal•••
not
1,232
926
Lack of liftin g equipment ••••• •
Lack of sca ffo ld s......................
158
Lack of ladders ......................
121
Lack of other equipment. . . . . . . #
27
Hazardous working procedures *••••
627
Inadequate working surfaces . . . .
353
Exposure to fa llin g o b je c ts ,.,.
78
Other hazardous procedures
196
286
Poor housekeeping *••••••••••*••••
lack of personal safety equipment
251
Other hazardous c o n d itio n s ...,,..
3
3,106
TJnclas s if ie d . ............................. .




On
scaffolds
822
U38
12
219
186
4
12
2
3
252

1
249
2
63
20

43
12
2

55

On
ground

On
floors

623
284
50
9
1
163
55
6
49
1
39
9
35
26

U32

-

-

9
2k

-

2
22
3i|2
7

-

82

92
27
12
k

16

29
k
69
8
60
1
15
l4
-

1
8
3
1

k

7k

48
1
125

On
jo is ts ,
plates,
rafters,
etc*

On
ladders

420
99
5
31
52
k
6
1
-

361
63
9
35
6
10
3

k
k

119

-

-

32
15
2
15

-

218
214
1
3
2
5

-

3
1
115
80
14
66

3
3

10

-

-

60

86

On
roofs

. . . 2?7 .
73
7
18
11
5
30
2
23
17
6
21
16
5
-

-

44
34
2

8
3

99
74

cn
walls
or
forms

Other
and
unclas­
sified

On
saw­
horses

281
102
18
16
42
4
18
4
2

-

-

2

37
11
25
1
98
96
-

.... M .

18
6
6
5
1

-

2
2
94
1
71
22

2

-

5

19

4
-

-

33

9

.

_

1,037
394
171
70
296
52
1
53
830

776
27
27
855
809
19
11
16
232

6
72
154
19
86

2

2,582

54

------ ---------------

Table 13 ~ Unsafe Acts by Occupation of Injured
-1

Journeymen

Apprentices

Helpers

Unsafe acts

Superintendents,
foremen

Number Percent1/ Number Percent1/ Number Percentl/ Number Percentl/
7,056
Assuming unsafe positions, postures 99U
630
Inattention to footing
On ground.•••••••••..•••••••••• 2 1 6
On scaffolds or platforxas......... 170
On floors
133
On stairways or ladders........
70
On other surfaces................... .
ia
Inattention to surroundings......... 1 9 7
Exposure to moving objects......• in
36
Other.....................................
Incorrect handlings unsafe use of
equipment........... ............
399
Gripping objects insecurely..••.• 282
61
Taking wrong hold of objects.....
Other. •••••.••....... ....................
56
Operating without authority;
failure to secure or warn......
178
Unsafe loading or p lacin g..........
k9
65
Other unsafe acts............
Unclassified; insufficient data .. 6,171

11.7
6.6
3.3
23.7
16.8
3.6
3.3

U3
32
8
3

35.0
26.1
6.5
2 .k

23
Hi
3
6

10.6
2.9
3.9

12
5
9

9.8

7

58.9
37.3
12.7
10.1
7.9
k .2
2 .h

l / Percents are based on classified oases only*




355 100.0

582 100.0
U3.8
bh
20.3
25
10 8.0
3.3
k
6 1+.9
l
.8
3.3
k
11 8.9
10 8.1
8 6.5

100.0

-

k59

U.i
7.3

-

29
16
7
2
k

2
1
7
3
3

6
2
288

U3.3
23.9
10.it
3 .0
6.0
3.0
1.5
10.it
k .5

it.5

268 100.0
63.U
hi
32 U3.0
2 .7
17 2 8.1
6
6 8.1
3 li.l11 lii.9
3 li.l
l
l.li

3U.3
20.8
It. 5
9.0

15
8
3

20.3
10.8
li.l
5.U

10.it
9.0
3.0
-

7
1

9.5
l.li
5.U

h

h

I

19 1

-

Table lk- Unsafe Acts by Types of Accidents

Assuming unsafe p osition s or postures
Total

Accident types

Total.......................................
Struck by moving objects*....••
Falling objects..............
From hands of workers*......
From framing or forms ...•••
From roofs positions
From other or scaffolds....
Flying or thrown, objects •. •• •
Small particles........••••••
Lumber.
Nails. objects...*..........••*
Other ....*•........•••••*••«
Hand-wielded objects.......•«
Powered equipment*.......••••..
Other. •• ••••••.......•••••.......
Falls to lower levels*.........
From scaffolds, platforms....
From forms, walls, roofs.....
From ladders, stairs, etc*...
Through floor openings.........
From other surfaces........... . .
Striking against objects.......
Bum moving parts of equipp
Stepping on objects.........
Striking splinters, slivers..
Bumping building materials...
Striking on or rubbing........
Kneeling projecting nails....
Other...................................



Incorrect handling;
unsafe use of equipment

Inatten­
number
Gripping Taking
Inatten­
tion Exposure
of
tion to
to Other Total objects wrong Other
acci­ Total to
inse­ hold
surround­ moving
dents
curely of
footing ings objects
objects
226 127
1,121+ 703
68 1+80 336
9.061
69
75
1
3 123
1+9
2,503
153
23 360 306
5
-+
1 176 171+
2
3 19
23
835
2
1 12
1
1
292
171+ 173
12
219
al+
2
6
2
1
1
1
238
9
18
1
686
l+o
11+
1+3
3
3
1+80
1
38
37
1
1
1
90
5
.62
2
2
15
13 122
5
3
5l+
6
92
92
637
113
3
8
316
18
1
7
15
3
12
11
1
1
1
51
.
.
_
.
•
316
1+
1.77U 321
-1
180 180
687
6
2
8
1+79
1
1+01
50
51
- *
1+8
37
37
2
“
“
159
1+
5
1+
3
16
22
221
2
11+
1,775 21+0
1+
5
1
11
11
1+82
13
11+
1
1
567
555
1
1
2
160 109
107
2
2
11+8
-1
1
1
1
5
115 113
1+
166
Ill
1
1
1
5
3

Opera ting

Unclas-

without Unsafe
Other sified;
author­ loading
unsafe insuf­
or acts
ity;
ficient
failure placing
data
to
secure
201+
61
80 7,H2_
181+
18 1,732
56
2 1+18
162
52
1
111
1+
12
80
115
27
1+
53
2 139
51
35
11 1+
603
7
1+
1*2
1
76
3
7
62
k
1+
3
23
- 1+15
8
6
2 282
1
11+
3
•
1
11 1 ,14+1
6 501
- 1+71
1+ 31+6
11
1 112
"
•
30 1,1+81
15 Ui2
366
2 335
1+8
H46
109
13
35

cn

cn

Table ll+- Unsafe Acts by Types of Accidents— Continued

Assuming unsafe positions or postures

Accident types

O verexertion. ...................................
Due to lif t in g or carrying •.
Due to pushing or p u llin g •••
Due to swinging o b j e c t s .....
Due to other a c t iv it ie s •• •••
F alls on same le v e l. . . . . . . . . . .
As a r esu lt of slip p in g ..........
As a r esu lt of trip p in g • •• ••
While stepping on loose objo c ts .......................................
O th er........................... ...................
S lip s and stumbles (not f a lls )
Stumbles • • • • • • • • • • . .............. .. .
S lip s ................ ................................
Caught in , on, or between. . . • •
Handled o b jec ts...........................
Hand to o ls and other objects
Other o b jec ts............
Absorption of chem icals..............
Contact extreme tem peratures..
Other accident ty p es..............
U n cla ssified ..................................




Total
number
of
a co idents

1,272
1.0+7
141
61+
20

595
255
130
57
153
1+11
216

195

285
111

1+7
127

112

56
231
1+9

Total

3
3
171
11
93
1+0
27
210

191
19
15
1+
1
10

2

9

Incorrect handling;
unsafe use of equipment

Inatten­
Inatten­
Exposure
tio n
to
tion
to
Other
moving
to
surround­
footing
objects
ings
-

159
10
93
39
17
208
191
17
2

-

2

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

1+
3
1

-

3
3
12
1

-

1
10
2

-

2
8
1

7
-

2

-

Total

8

-

3
+

1
1

_

89
62
15
12
-

1

Gripring Taking
objects wrong
in se­
hold
curely
of
objects

3
2
1

.

1
1
-

•

Other

+

1

1
2
1

-

_

-

-

-

+
-

1

67
56
3
8
-

-

3
_

2

1

1
1

.

-

•

_
_

-

-

_

•
1

_

-

Unclas­
Other sifie d ;
unsafe insuf­
acts fic ie n t
data

6

3
1
_

1,251
1 , 01+1
131+
60

2

16

2

1

.
-

22
6
12
1

Oper­
ating
without Unsafe
author­ loading
or
ity ;
failu re placing
to
secure

1+21
2

_

1

_
-

3
1

1

_

-

W
+
36
17
12 *
+
201
25
176

1h

2

8

151
39
31
81

-

112

-

-

16
2
_

-

3

11

2

52

-

221

1+9

Table 15- Unsafe Acts by Activity of Injured

Unsafe acts

T otal..............................................................
Assuming unsafe p osition s, postures
Inattention to footin g....................
On ground........................
On s oaffolds or platforms• •••••
On flo o rs•* .* ••.........••••« ••••••
On stairways or ladders• • •• • • • •
On other surfaces*.............
Inattention to surroundings*•••••
Exposure to moving obje ct8 •••••••
Inoorreot handling; unsafe use of
equipment.............................................
Gripping objects in securely.*•••••
Taking wrong hold of objects*•••••
Other............. ..............................................
Operating without authority; failure
to secure or warn............................
Unsafe loading or p lacing*.••••••••*
Other unsafe a c ts.......................................
U nclassified; in su fficien t d ata**...




Total
number
of
accidents

Lifting,
carrying,
or
placing

....9,0 61 .
1 , 121*
703
250
182
349
76
46
226
127
68
480
336
75
69
204

2,059
165
117
85
7
14
5
6
33
7
8

61

80
7,112

148
110
36
2
21
15
16

1,694

Using
hand
tools

Using
powered
tools

... 1*531....

l.o k l

170

33
l
21
8
3
26
97
14
-

205

149
9
47
27

7
3

1,119

7
1
3
1
2
5
2
17

31

-

37
18
2
17
6
.1
17
949

Walking

Stepping
to or
from
equipment

147
134
66
5
36
17
10
11
2

227
75
68
26
7
24
5
6
6
1

2
1
1

-

i*S5

-

2
-

1

333

-

-

-

152

Climbing
to or
from
equipment

Running
or
jumping

Other
a c tiv itie s

208
53
39
3
1
2
33
*.
13
1

47
10
6
3
3

-

4
-

1
2
5

•
-

.
.
-

4
2

-

-

6

1
154

-

16
21

157
13
5
3
1
1
-

2

-

3

9
122

Unclas­
sified;
insuf­
ficien t

data

3.306
460

294
62
134
63
16
19
127
19
20

84
56
25
3
142
35
17
2,568

58
REPORTS ON INDUSTRIAL HAZARDS AND FORKING CONDITIONS

Annual Reports on Work I n ju r ie s : A c o lle c tio n of b a sic in d u s tria l in ju ry d ata fo r
each y ear, p resen tin g n a tio n a l average in ju ry -freq u en cy and s e v e rity ra te s fo r each
of the m ajor in d u s trie s in the U nited S ta te s , In d iv id u al estab lish m en ts may ev alu ate
th e ir own in ju ry records by comparison w ith th ese d a ta .
P rice
20 cents#
B u lle tin 1025 Work In ju rie s in the United S ta te s During 19h9
15 cents#
B u lle tin 975 Work In ju rie s in th e U nited S ta te s During I9be
B u lle tin 9k5 Work In ju rie s in th e U nited S ta te s During 19U7
15 cents#
B u lle tin 921 Work In ju rie s in the United S ta te s During 19U6
10 cents#
10 cents#
B u lle tin 889 Work In ju rie s in the United S ta te s During 19U5
10 cents#
B u lle tin 814-9 Work In ju rie s in the U nited S ta te s During 19Ui
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes: In ten siv e stu d ie s of the frequency and se v e rity of
work in ju r ie s , the kinds o f in ju r ie s , types of a c c id e n ts, and causes of accid en ts in
se le c te d m ajor in d u s trie s :
B u lle tin 1079
B u lle tin 1036
B u lle tin 1023
B u lle tin 962
B u lle tin 9h9
B u lle tin 92l;
B u lle tin 88I4
.
B u lle tin 855
B u lle tin 839
B u lle tin 8314B u lle tin 805
S pecial S eries

In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in Plumbing O perations
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in th e M anufacture of
Pulp and Paper
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in the M anufacture of
Clay C onstruction Products
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in T e x tile Dyeing and
F in ish in g
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in F e r tiliz e r Manu­
fa c tu rin g
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in th e PulpwoodLogging In d u stry , 19b3 and I 9I44
IIn ju rie s and A ccident Causes in the Brewing Indus­
tr y , I 9W1
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in th e S laughtering
and M eat-Packing In d u stry , 19b3
F a ta l Work In ju rie s in Shipyards, I 9I4.3 and I 9 I4I4.
Shipyard I n ju rie s , 19bk
In ju rie s and A ccident Causes in the Foundry
In d u stry , 19U2
No. 5 In ju rie s to Crewmen on In lan d Waterways

B u lle tin No. IOOI4 Work In ju rie s in C on stru ctio n , 1914-8-14-9
.

25 cents#
30cen ts#
30cents#
U5 c e n ts#
20cen ts#
10cen ts#
15cents#
15cents#
10cents#
5cen ts#
15cents#
20cents#
25 cen ts#

#For sa le by Superintendent of Documents a t p ric e s in d ic a te d . How to order p u b li­
c a tio ns: Address your order to the Superintendent of Documents, Government P rin tin g
O ffice^ W ashington 25, D. C ., w ith rem ittance in check or money o rd er. Currency is
sen t a t sen d erfs r is k . Postage stamps not accep tab le.
Other p u b lic a tio n s can be obtained fre e of charge by addressing your req u est to :
In d u s tria l Hazards Branch, Bureau of Labor S t a tis tic s , W ashington 25, D. C.




☆ U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 0 — 1953