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 the Manufacture of
Pulp and Paper
A Detailed Analysis o f Hazards
and o f Injury Rates for 1948
by Region, Plant Size, and
Operating Departments




Bulletin No. 1036
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Maurice J. Tobin , Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
E w a n C l a g u e , Com m issioner




Injuries and Accident Causes
in the Manufacture of
Pulp and Paper

Bulletin No. 1036
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
M a u r ic e J. T o b in , Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
E w a n Cla g u e ,

C o m m is s io n e r

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. - Price 30 cents



Letter of Transmittal
U nited Stat es D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r ,
B u r e a u of L a b o r Statistics ,

W a sh in g to n , D . C ., A u g u st 1 , 1951.

The S e c r e t a r y

of

Labor:

I have the honor to transmit herewith a report on the occurrence and causes
of work injuries in the pulp and paper manufacturing industry.
This report, a portion of which appeared in the September 1950 Monthly
Labor Review, 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, George R. McCormack, and Luther
E. Stone. The specific accident-prevention suggestions were prepared by Sheldon
W. Homan of the Division of Safety Standards of the Bureau of Labor
Standards.
E w a n C l a g u e , C om m ission er .
Hon. M a u r i c e J. T obin ,
S ecretary o f L abor .
u




Contents

Page

The industry record___________________________________________________________________________
Estimate of injury costs______________________________________________________________________
Scope and method of survey__________________________________________________________________
Injury rates (definition of terms and procedures)________________________________________
Injury-frequency rates_______________________________________________________________
Average time charge per injury_____________________________________________________
Injury-severity rate_________________________________________________________________
Accident-cause analysis (definition of terms and procedures)____________________________
Agency of injury____________________________________________________________________
Accident ty p e_______________________________________________________________________
Unsafe condition____________________________________________________________________
Agency of accident________________________ „ ______________________________________
Unsafe act___________________________________________________________________________
The industry and its hazards_________________________________________________________________
The woodyard____________________________________________________________________________
The wood room__________________________________________________________________________
Mechanical pulping______________________________________________________________________
Sulfite process____________________________________________________________________________
Sulfate and soda processes_______________________________________________________________
Semichemical process__ _________________________________________________________________
Pulp screening and washing_____________________________________________________________
Bleaching-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Beating__________________________________________________________________________________
Paper making____________________________________________________________________________
Coating__________________________________________________________________________________
Finishing and shipping__________________________________________________________________
Rag and waste-paper pulping___________________________________________________________
Factors in the injury record__________________________________________________________________
Product comparisons____________________________________________________________________
Regional and State comparisons_________________________________________________________
Pulp plants_________________________________________________________________________
Bookpaper plants___________________________________________________________________
Fine-paper plants___________________________________________________________________
Coarse-paper plants_________________________________________________________________
Sanitary-paper stock plants_________________________________________________________
Tissue-paper plants_________________________________________________________________
Container and boxboard plants_____________________________________________________
Building-paper plants_______________________________________________________________
Interplant comparisons__________________________________________________________________
Plant size comparisons___________________________________________________________________
Safety programs--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Medical and first-aid programs__________________________________________________________
Departmental injury rates___________________________________________________________________
Production departments______________________________________________________________
Service and maintenance departments________________________________________________
Kinds of injuries experienced______________________________________________________________
Fatalities-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Permanent-total disabilities_____________________________________________________________
Permanent-partial disabilities_________________________________________________________
Temporary-total disabilities_____________________________________________________________
Medical treatment cases______________________________________________________________




h i

1
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
8
9
10
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
16
17
17
17
18
19
20
20
21
21
22
23
23
24
25

Contents—Continued
Page

Accident analysis__________________________________________________________________________
Agencies of injury and accident types________________________________________________
Agencies of injury________________________________________________________________
Accident types___________________________________________________________________
Accident causes____________________________________________________________________________
Hazardous working conditions________________________________________________________
Defective agencies________________________________________________________________
Hazardous working procedures___________________________________________________
Inadequately guarded agencies___________________________________________________
Lack of personal safety equipment_______________________________________________
Hazardous arrangements_________________________________________________________
Unsafe acts____________________________________________________________________________
Unsafe handling or unsafe use of equipment_____________________________________
Unsafe position or posture_______________________________________________________
Unsafe placing or loading________________________________________________________
Failure to secure or warn_________________________________________________________
Failure to wear personal safety equipment or proper clothing___________________
Accident prevention suggestions___________________________________________________________
Case descriptions and recommendations______________________________________________
Appendix.— Statistical tables:
Injury rates:
Table 1. B y type of mill_________________________________________________________
Table 2. B y geographic area, State, and type of m ill____________________________
Table 3. B y size of plant_________________________________________________________
Table 4. B y plant safety organization___________________________________________
Table 5. By operating department_______________________________________________
Table 6. Distribution of plant frequency rates by size of establishment_________
Table 7. Number of plants, employees, injuries, and days lost, by plant fre­
quency rates__________________________________________________________
Injury detail:
Disabling injuries classified by—
Table 8. Nature of injury and type of mill__________________________________
Table
Part of body injured and type of m ill_____________________________
Table 10. Part of body injured and nature o f injury_______________________
Table 11. Part of body injured and department____________________________
Medical treatment cases, classified by—
Table 12. Nature of injury__________________________________________________
Table 13. Part of body injured______________________________________________
Accident detail:

9.

Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table

40
41
44
44
45
45
46

46
47
47

48
48
49

Accident type and agency of injury-------------------------------------Accident type and department___________________________________
Accident type and unsafe working condition_____________________
Agency of accident and unsafe working condition________________
Unsafe working condition and department_______________________
Accident type and unsafe act_____________________________________

50
52
53
55
56
57

Charts:
Chart 1. Comparison of injury-frequency rates: Pulp and paper and all-manufac­
turing______________________________________________________________________
Chart 2. Disabling injury-frequency rates, by department-----------------------------------Chart 3. M ajor types of accidents_____________________________________________________
Chart 4. M ajor types of unsafe working conditions----------------------------------------------

2
20
27
30

IV




14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.

25
26
26
28
29
31
31
31
31
32
32
32
33
33
33
33
34
34
34

Abstract
Injury-frequency rates for pulp and paper manufacturing improved more rapidly than the
all-manufacturing average in the 1944-49 period. In 1949 the frequency rate for pulp and
paper, 16.4, was only 9 percent above the all-manufacturing rate of 15.0. This was a reduc­
tion of 44 percent from the 1944 rate of 29.2, which was 59 percent higher than the all­
manufacturing average of 18.4 in that year.
Approximately 7,900 disabling injuries occurred in pulp and paper manufacturing during
1949. The economic loss, including direct and indirect costs, resulting from these injuries
is estimated at about $25 million.
Paper-making plants generally had lower injury rates than those exclusively engaged in
making pulp. The best group rate in 1948 was 11.8 for building-paper plants. For pulp
plants the corresponding average was 26.7.
Comparisons among the production departments of the reporting plants indicate that
injuries occur most frequently in the woodyards, which had an average frequency rate of
41.2. Woodrooms, paper-machine rooms, rag-shredding departments, groundwood mills,
sulfite mills, and beater rooms all had rates of over 20. Sulfate mills, soda mills, wet rooms,
bleaching departments, and converting departments had rates ranging between 10 and 20.
K ag mills had the lowest production department rate, 6.8.
The records show a definite inverse relationship between the frequency-rate level and
plant size with the first significant break occurring at about the 250-employee level. Up to
the 250-employee level, plant size variations appear to have little bearing upon the occur­
rence of injuries.
An unusually high proportion of the plants in the pulp and paper industry maintain
organized safety programs. Over 75 percent of the 534 plants surveyed reported having
some form of safety program. There seemed to be a significant relationship between a
plant’s injury record and the presence of a safety engineer. The development of in-plant
safety programs and the maintenance of medical or first-aid programs both seem to be
closely related to plant-size variations.
About a fourth of all the recorded injuries resulted from contact with machines; flying
particles produced 12 percent; hand tools, 9 percent; pulpwood logs, 7 percent; working
surfaces, 6 percent; paper, 6 percent; and chemicals, 4 percent.
Over 37 percent of the recorded accidents were cases in which workers were struck by
moving, falling, or flying objects. About 14 percent of the injuries resulted from workers
bumping into or striking against fixed objects. Another 14 percent resulted from workers
getting caught in or between objects. Falls were responsible for 10 percent of the injuries,
overexertion for 9 percent, and slips or stumbles for 5 percent.
Slippery working surfaces, inadequately guarded machinery, exposure to hot or toxic
materials, and improperly piled materials were the physical causes of many accidents.
Manual handling of heavy materials and the absence of personal protective devices were
also prominent accident causes.
Outstanding among the unsafe acts which resulted in accidents were: Misuse of hand tools,
improper material handling, inattention to footing or surroundings, improper piling of
materials, failure to warn others when starting machinery, and failure to wear goggles where
required.
Accident-prevention suggestions, prepared by the Division of Safety Standards of the
Bureau of Labor Standards, indicate that most accidents in the industry could be prevented
through the application of very simple precautions.




v




Injuries and Accident Causes in the Manufacture
of Pulp and Paper
The Industry Record
In 1949 the injury-frequency rate 1for pulp and
paper manufacturing dipped to its lowest level in
many years. In that year the industry average
of 16.4 disabling injuries 1 for every million em­
2
ployee-hours worked was only 9 percent higher
than the all-manufacturing average of 15.0. This
was in sharp contrast to the wide spread between
the two rates in 1944 and previous years.
In 1939 the injury-frequency rate for pulp and
paper manufacturing was 22.0, about 48 percent
higher than the all-manufacturing rate of 14.9.
During the next few years, wartime influences such
as shortages of trained workers, new equipment,
and repair parts, and pressure for increased pro­
duction caused the injury-frequency rates for most
manufacturing industries to rise. The pulp and
paper rate, however, rose more than the average,
1 The injury-frequency rate is the average number of disabling work injuries
for each million employee-hours worked. See chapter on Scope and Method
p. 3 for additional definitions.
2 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 perma­
nent physical impairment, or (b) makes the injured person unable to perform
the duties of any regularly established job open and available to him, through­
out the hours corresponding to his regular shift on any day after the day of
injury, including Sundays, holidays, and periods of plant shut-down.

and in 1944 reached 29.2. At this point it was 59
percent above the all-manufacturing average of
18.4. Since 1944, the pulp and paper rate has
consistently improved, moving downward much
more rapidly than did the all-manufacturing aver­
age. The 1949 rate of 16.4 for paper and pulp
manufacturing represents a remarkable achieve­
ment—a reduction of 44 percent in work injuries
during a period of only 5 years.
Despite this praiseworthy improvement, the
pulp and paper industry was still faced with a
substantial work-injury problem not fully evident
in the injury rates. The abstract qualities of in­
jury rates give injuries somewhat the status of
bookkeeping entries and tend to obscure the
human and economic factors constituting the
fundamentals of the problem. The suffering,
despair, and frustration of injured workers and
their families cannot be measured. Nor can the
full monetary cost of accidents be determined from
any available records. It is possible, however, to
approximate the economic loss arising from the
injuries and thereby bring the problem into better
perspective.

Estimate of Injury Costs
About 7,900 workers in the pulp and paper
industry experienced disabling injuries in the
course of employment during 1949. This repre­
sents 1 disabling injury for every 29 workers in the
industry.
Approximately 40 of these injured workers died
as a result of their injuries and 10 others were
totally disabled for the remainder of their lives.



In addition, about 600 experienced some lesser
degree of permanent physical impairment. The
remaining 7,250 workers suffered no permanent
ill effects, but each was injured seriously enough
to require at least one full day for recovery.
Although no accurate records of the costs of
these injuries are available, it is apparent that
they represent a tremendous economic loss which
l

2

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R




SC OPE A N D M E TH O D OF S U R V E Y

must be absorbed by the injured workers, their
employers, and the consumers of the industry’s
products.
The actual time lost by the injured workers
during 1949 is estimated at about 183,000 mandays. Time lost within the year, however, does
not adequately measure the real work loss resulting
from injuries. Many of the seriously injured
workers will find their earning ability reduced for
the remainder of their lives. The loss for fatally
injured workers is equivalent to their total expected
earnings for years in which they would have worked
had their careers not been cut short. If additional
allowance were made for the future effects of the
deaths and permanent impairments included in
the total, the economic time-loss chargeable to the
injuries experienced in 1949 would amount to
825,000 man-days. Evaluated on the basis of
1949 average earnings for production workers in
the industry ($59.83 a week),3 this represents a
loss of about $7 million in present and future
earnings. In part, this loss is covered by work­
men’s compensation payments financed by the
employers. Because compensation payments are
never equivalent to full wages, however, a consid­

3

erable portion of this loss must fall upon the
injured workers and their dependents.
Wage losses, however, are only part of the total
cost of accidents resulting in work injuries. In
addition, there are payments for medical and
hospital care and many indirect costs, such as
damage to materials and equipment, interrupted
production schedules, cost of training replacement
workers, time lost by other workers stopping to
offer assistance at the time of the accident, and
supervisory time spent caring for the injured or
reorganizing operations after the accident. Unfor­
tunately, the indirect costs are seldom recorded,
and, as a result, cannot be determined accurately.
Studies have indicated, however, that the indirect
costs of injury-producing accidents for all-manu­
facturing average about four times the direct
costs of compensation payments, plus medical and
hospital expenses.8 Assuming that this ratio is
4
approximately correct for the pulp and paper
industry, the indirect cost of the injury-producing
accidents in 1949 would amount to about $17
million, bringing the total costs including medical
expenses to approximately $25 million.
4Industrial Accident Prevention, by H. W. Heinrich, New York, McGrawHill Book Co., 1941.

8 Monthly Labor Review, May 1950.

Scope and Method of Survey
The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics
has compiled annual injury rates for the pulp and
paper manufacturing industry each year since
1926. In recent years these surveys have included
reports from nearly 500 employers, representing
a total exposure of over 400 million man-hours of
employment. All of the data assembled in the
annual surveys are collected by mail. Reporting
is entirely voluntary.
In order to provide greater detail and to
permit more specific analysis than is usually
possible on the basis of the annual surveys, the
survey was modified in 1948. The report form was
enlarged and each cooperating employer was
requested to report separately for each department
or type of operation carried on in his plant. In
addition, he was asked to describe his plant safety
program and the first-aid facilities available to
his employees. Usable reports were received from
966013°— 52----- 2




534 plants, employing approximately 207,000
workers, with a total exposure of over 454 million
man-hours. The reporting group included 14
plants which manufacture pulp only, 281 which
manufacture one or more varieties of paper, 152
which manufacture paperboard, and 87 which did
not identify their principal products sufficiently
to permit exact classification on this basis.
In addition to supplying summary reports for
use in evaluating the magnitude and general
aspects of the injury problem in the industry, 106
of the cooperating plants also made their original
accident records available for detailed analysis.
This group of plants, employing about 80,000
workers, had a combined injury-frequency rate
of 20.6. Although this was about 4 percent above
the industry average, there was no indication that
their hazards differed greatly from those of other
plants in the industry.

4

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P AN D P A P E R

A representative of the Bureau visited each
of the 106 cooperating plants, and insofar as the
data were available, transcribed from their records
the following items regarding each accident: (a)
Place of accident; (b) occupation, age, and sex of
injured worker; (c) nature of injury and part of
body injured; (d) object or substance producing
injury; (e) type of accident; (J) unsafe condition
and/or unsafe act leading to accident; and (g)
object or substance associated with the unsafe
condition. In order to broaden the analysis and
permit a greater degree of detail, this part of the
survey was extended in some plants to cover not
only disabling injuries, but also to include all
injuries requiring treatment by physicians. Some
3,286 disabling injury cases and 2,960 medical
cases were recorded.
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 1945. These standard rates have been
supplemented by an additional measure of injury
severity designated as the average time charge per
disabling injury.
In ju ry-F req u en cy R a te s .—The injury-frequency
rate represents the average number of disabling
work injuries occurring in each million employeehours worked. It is computed according to the
following formula:
Frequency rate=
Number of disabling injuries X 1,000,000
Number of employee-hours worked
A verage T im e Charge P e r I n ju r y .—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 estab­
lished job 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 per­
manent 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 unproductive days.
The average time charge per disabling injury is
computed by adding the days lost for each tempo­
rary injury and the days charged according to the
standard table for each death and permanent
impairment and dividing the total by the number
of disabling injuries.
In ju ry -S e v e rity R a te. —The injury-severity rate
weights each disabling injury with its correspond­
ing 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 follow­
ing formula:
_ .
lost or charged X 1,000
Severity rate= Total -----------------------------------——— days employee-hours worked
Number ot
Accident-Cause Analysis
The accident-cause analysis procedure used in
this study differs in some respects from the pro­
cedures specified in the American Standard
Method of Compiling Industrial Accident Causes
and usually followed in the Bureau’s studies. The
deviations from the Standard include the intro­
duction of an additional analysis factor, termed
the “agency of injury” and the modification of
the standard definitions of some of the other fac­
tors. These changes permit more accurate cross
classifications.
A g en cy oj I n ju r y . —The standard classification
provides for the selection of but one “ agency” in
the analysis of each accident. By definition, this
agency may be either (a) the object or substance
which was unsafe and 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 includes
objects or substances which may have been
inherently safe and unrelated to the occurrence
of the accidents as well as those which led to the
occurrence of accidents because of their condition,

T H E IN D U S T R Y A N D IT S H A Z A R D S

location, structure, or method of use. The de­
velopment of the classification “ agency of injury”
represents an attempt to separate and classify
separately these two agency concepts.
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 constituting the accident.
Accident T ype .—As used in this study, the
accident type classification assigned to each acci­
dent is purely descriptive of the occurrence
resulting in an injury and is related specifically
to the agency of injury. It indicates how the
injured person came into contact with or was af­
fected by the previously selected agency of injury.
This represents a change from the standard pro­
cedure in two respects: First, the accident type
classification is specifically related to the pre­
viously selected agency of injury, and second,
the sequence of selecting this factor is specified.
Unsafe Condition .—Under the standard defini­
tion, the unsafe condition indicated in the analysis
is defined as the “ unsafe mechanical 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 pro­
vide for recognition of any relationship between
the unsafe condition and accident type classifica­
tions. Nor does the standard provide for any
definite relationship between the “ agency” and
the “accident type” classifications.
To provide continuity and to establish direct
relationships among the various analysis factors

5

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 occurrence of the selected accident type.”
The unsafe condition classification, therefore, was
selected after the determination of the accident
type classification. It represents the physical or
mechanical reason for the occurrence of that par­
ticular 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 existence of hazards, but should not attempt
to specify the feasibility of corrective measures.
Agency of A ccident .—For the purpose of this
study, the agency of accident was defined as “the
object, substance, or premises in or about which
the unsafe condition existed.” Its selection,
therefore, is directly associated with the unsafe
condition leading to the occurrence of the accident
and not with the occurrence of the injury. In
many instances the agency of injury and the
agency of accident were identical. The double
agency classification, however, avoids any possi­
bility of ambiguity in the interpretation of the
“agency” tabulations.
Unsafe A c t .—The unsafe act definition used in
this survey is identical with the standard defini­
tion, i. e., “that violation of a commonly accepted
safe procedure which resulted in the selected acci­
dent type.”

The Industry and Its Hazards
The pulp and paper industry, as defined for
this survey, includes all plants manufacturing
either pulp or paper, or both. Many of these
plants also process their paper into various spe­
cialties, engaging in what are commonly termed
finishing and converting operations. Where these
finishing and converting operations are performed
upon paper manufactured in the same plant, the
plant has been considered as being in the pulp
and paper industry. Plants engaged exclusively



in finishing or converting paper manufactured in
other establishments have been excluded from
the survey.
Many of the pulp and paper plants own timber
lands and cut their own pulpwood as an integrated
part of their operations. However, because the
hazards of pulpwood logging were covered in a
previous study 5 these operations have been ex­
4 Injuries and Accident Causes in the Pulpwood Logging Industry, 1943
and 1944, Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin No. 924.

6

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

eluded from this survey. The sequence of opera­
tions covered in this survey, therefore, begins
with the arrival of the pulp wood at the plant
woodyards.
The Woodyard
Although practices vary among plants, most
of the mills in the East, South, and Central
regions receive their pulpwood in precut standard
lengths. In the Northeast it is customary to
field cut the logs into lengths of about 50 inches.
In the South the standard length is about 63
inches, whereas operators in the Great Lakes
areas cut to a length of about 100 inches. In
general the pulpwood sticks in these regions are
of relatively small diameter. The West Coast
mills, on the other hand, commonly receive logs
of full saw-timber size, approximating 40 feet
in length and ranging up to 4 feet in diameter.
Logs reach the mills in a variety of ways.
Much of the wood is floated to the mills on rivers,
lakes, or sluices in the North and West Coast
areas. On the rivers and lakes, the common
practice is to assemble the logs into rafts which
are then towed to the mills. Barges are also
used to transport the sticks in many instances.
Many mills receive some or all of their wood
by rail or truck. Truck deliveries are by far
the most common in the South.
Logs reaching the mill by water are usually
floated into a mill pond where boom men direct
them to a chain conveyor called a log haul,
which carries them directly to the slasher saws
or barker. Wood arriving by rail or by truck
may be unloaded by hand or by means of a cranetype mechanism called a jammer. In manual
operations the pulpwood sticks are usually trans­
ferred directly onto a conveyor leading to a storage
pile or to the wood room for processing. With
the jammer, the wood may be lifted directly
from the car or truck to the pile or it may be
dropped onto the conveyor. Jammers are also
used to transfer logs from the storage piles to
the conveyors leading into the wood rooms of
the mills.
Workers in the woodyards face a wide variety
of hazards. Even in the highly mechanized
yards a great deal of strenuous manual work is
necessary. The logs are usually quite heavy
and awkward to handle. Strains and sprains



from overlifting are, therefore, very common.
Insecure footing also leads to many injuries.
Wet and slippery surfaces around the ponds
present the possibility of slips or falls into the
water. In the yard proper the ground is fre­
quently slippery with moisture or ice and is
often rough and irregular because of the heavy
traffic.
In removing wood from cars or trucks there
is always the possibility of being struck by a
dropped log or that logs may roll from the vehicles
onto workers on the ground. Generally, someone
must work on top of the load, where he faces the
possibility of falling on the irregular surfaces
of the logs and the more serious hazard of having
loose logs roll and carry him to the ground.
Pulphooks and pickaroons are commonly used
to handle the logs in manual operations. These
tools have sharp points to pierce the wood, but
usually a great deal of force is required to drive
them home. When the points are dull or the
log is not struck at the proper angle these tools
may glance off and strike the user or a nearby
co-worker. When not properly imbedded in
the wood, they may pull out and throw the worker
off balance or cause him to lose control of the
log, which may then fall or roll against him or
some other worker.
Mechanical handling speeds the work and
eliminates some of the hazards of manual opera­
tions. It does, however, introduce other and
sometimes more serious hazards. When jammers
or other types of hoisting equipment are used to
lift the logs, workers on the ground are exposed to
the danger of being struck by sticks falling from
unbalanced loads. There is also the possibility
of being struck by a swinging load which may
crush the unwary worker, if he happens to be
caught between it and a fixed object. In addition,
there is the danger that the logs may roll or slide
when released on the stack. Other mechanical
hazards include the possibility of becoming caught
in the conveyors and of being struck by the log
trucks as they maneuver about the yard.
The Wood Room
The wood is usually carried by conveyor or
sluice from the woodyard to the wood room,
where it is reduced and prepared for pulping. In
the mills of the Eastern and Central regions the

T H E IN D U S T R Y A N D IT S H A Z A R D S

logs are sorted by size. The smaller logs are
passed directly to the barking drums, but the
larger ones go first to a slasher saw.
The slasher may be either a swing saw or a
stationary saw. In a swing saw operation the
circular saw blade is suspended at the end of an
arm or bar which swings in a vertical arc from
an overhead pivot. When not actually cutting,
the saw blade is swung away from the cutting
position and held by balance weights and chains.
The log-haul conveyor moves the log in front of
the saw and is stopped when it is in the proper
position. The saw is then swung down to cut
the log to the desired length. When the saw has
been swung back, the conveyor carries the cut
pieces on to the next operation.
A stationary slasher may consist of one or
several circular saw blades mounted in a saw table
at the side of the conveyor. A section of this table
slides horizontally from the conveyor to the saw.
The logs are pushed from the conveyor onto this
slide, which carries them against the saw or saws
and returns the cut pieces to the conveyor.
A typical barking drum consists of a rotating
cylinder about 40 feet long and 10 feet in diameter.
The cylinder is a framework of longitudinal steel
slats with openings of about 3 inches between the
slats. This drum is mounted on a slight angle off
the horizontal. The conveyor dumps the sticks
into the high end of the revolving drum where
they are tumbled and rubbed against each other
and against the steel slats as they work their way
to the lower end. This grinding and rubbing
knocks off most of the bark which falls through
the openings between the slats. In some instances
water is sprayed into the drum to help loosen the
bark and wash it through the openings between
the slats.
From the barking drum the sticks again pass
onto a conveyor. Here they are inspected and
those requiring further barking are removed and
returned to the barker. If fine paper is being
made, all sticks containing knots or defects are
directed to the knotters. Several types of knotters
are in common use. A popular type consists of a
slotted disc holding four radial knives. As the
disc revolves at high speed, the knotter man
pushes the stick against the knives which plane
off the knot or defective portion. This equipment
may also be used to remove small sections of
bark which may still be adhering to the wood.



7

Another type of knotter in common use is a boring
device. In this process the stick is placed under
the boring tool which drills out the knotty portion.
Sticks of large diameter must go to the splitter.
This consists essentially of a heavy butt plate that
holds one end of the log and a steam-powered
shaft that drives a wedge-shaped tool against the
other end. Using a single wedge, the smaller logs
are split into two longitudinal sections. Larger
logs are split into quarter sections by using a
double wedge. As the log reaches the splitter, the
splitterman stops the conveyor and, using two
hooks, places the log against the butt plate and
releases the steam which forces the shaft against
the other end.
In the West-Coast mills the wood room opera­
tions are performed on a more massive scale,
similar to sawmill operations. Usually, the 40foot logs are carried by conveyor first to a huge
swing saw. Here the logs are cut into two 20-foot
lengths which then pass on to a hydraulic barker.
This operation is completely enclosed and is con­
trolled by a barkerman from an adjoining room
where he watches the process through five-ply
laminated glass. The log is held by its two ends
and rotated similarly to a piece of stock in the
chuck of a lathe. An arm carrying a nozzle moves
lengthwise over the log and directs a high pressure
stream of water against it. This water jet
knocks the bark off.
From the hydraulic barker the logs go by con­
veyor to the head rig bandsaw, where they are
placed upon a moving carriage. This carriage
carries them repeatedly against a large bandsaw,
which cuts them into long slabs about 8 inches in
thickness. A transfer carriage carries these slabs,
called cants, to a pair of parallel saws set about 8
inches apart, which reduce the slabs to pieces of
about 8 by 8 inches. Decayed sections are cut
out and removed for use as fuel. Unbarked cants
from logs which bypassed the hydraulic barker are
also pulled out at this point and are routed to the
mechanical barker. Here they are placed, bark
side up, on a carriage which carries them under a
set of revolving knives. These shave off the bark.
They are then returned to the conveyor, which
carries them to the chipper or grinder, depending
upon the type of paper to be made. Chipping
prepares the wood for the first of the chemical
pulping operations. This is usually a wood room
activity. Grinding, on the other hand, is actually

8

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

the first step of the mechanical pulping process
rather than a preparatory operation.
The chipper usually consists of a very heavy
rotating disc carrying four radial knives. The
disc rotates in a vertical position, but the pulpwood sticks or cants are fed to it through a chute
set at a 45 degree angle. A conveyor carries the
wood to the chute where it slides by gravity
against the rotating disc. The revolving knives
slice off chips, roughly three-eighths of an inch
thick and three-fourths of an inch in length,
diagonal to the grain of the wood.
From the chipper a conveyor or chute carries
the chips to a three-layer vibrating screen. Here
the oversized chips and all dirt, dust, and under­
sized chips are screened out. The chips of proper
size are carried by a chip belt from the screen to
the chip bins above the digesters. These bins are
enormous cylinders, each holding several charges
of chips for its digester.
Many of the hazards prevailing in the woodyard
are also common to the wood room. Strains and
sprains result from the handling of pulpwood.
Sticks often fall from poorly imbedded pulp hooks
or from conveyors, resulting in bruises and frac­
tures. The use of pulp hooks results in many
puncture wounds. Power equipment in the wood
room also presents many hazards. Shearing
injuries may result from getting caught in chains,
sprockets, belts or pulleys of conveyors, barking
drums or saws. There is danger of being struck
by chips or slivers of wood thrown from the hand
barkers or chippers. The operation of hand
barkers and knotters is particularly hazardous,
as it is very easy to permit the fingers to slip into
the knives. In the splitting operation there is the
possibility of crushed hands or fingers from
getting them caught between the log and the
butt plate or the log and splitter head. Pieces
of wood may fly from the splitter and strike the
splitterman. Saws are a source of lacerations or
amputations. In many wood rooms it is necessary
to walk on the wood transfers or conveyors. This
hazardous footing leads to falls. It is often neces­
sary to enter the hydraulic barker enclosure to
remove logs which become fouled. Here the
surface is of metal and is always wet and very
slippery.




Mechanical Pulping
Wood pulping consists of reducing the logs to a
wet fibrous mass. This is accomplished by one of
five processes. One is a mechanical process in
which the wood is ground into pulp. Three are
chemical processes (an acid process producing
sulfite pulp and two alkaline processes producing
soda and sulfate pulp). The fifth process is
semichemical.
In the mechanical process wood arrives at the
grinders in 2- or 4-foot lengths and 1 foot or less
in diameter. Three types of grinders are in
general use: the pocket, the magazine, and the
continuous type. Regardless of type, however,
the principle is the same. Each reduces the
wood to a fibrous pulp by pressing it against a
revolving grindstone. The stone used is from
4 to 6 feet in diameter and wide enough to accom­
modate a 2- or 4-foot length of wood. Formerly
natural stones were used, but recently specially
designed carborundum stones have been developed
which are rapidly replacing the natural stones.
The most widely used type is the pocket
grinder. It is essentially a carborundum stone,
or a series of carborundum stones, set on a large
electrically- or water-powered steel shaft. Each
stone is enclosed in a steel casing with three or four
pockets, from which the equipment derives its
name. The grinder man takes the wood from
the conveyor or sluice and places it in the pockets
or magazines by hand. When the pockets are
full, he closes the door and hydraulic pressure
pistons are released to press the logs against the
stone. A constant stream of water is sprayed on
the stone to keep down the heat generated by
the friction and wash the pulp to the troughs
below. Unlike chemical pulp, groundwood pulp
contains all the wood materials, lignin and other
associated constituents, as well as the cellulose
fibers. This mixture results in a greater yield,
but a weaker pulp. It is especially suitable for
newsprint, when combined with sulfite pulp. It
is used also to produce fine coated papers for books
and magazines, when mixed with a small propor­
tion of high-grade sulfite pulp.
Wood handling is the source of many injuries
in the grinding room. Lifting heavy logs results

T H E IN D U S T R Y A N D IT S H A Z A R D S

in sprains and strains. Logs falling from con­
veyors or dropping from hands or pulp hooks are
responsible for bruises and fractures. Picaroons
glancing off or slipping out of logs result in
numerous puncture wounds. In feeding wood
into the pockets of the grinders, fingers may be
mashed between the wood and the pocket. The
floors about the grinders are often wet and littered
with ground wood, constituting a slipping hazard.
Hot pulp and water sometimes splash from the
grinders, and result in burns.

indirect heat. The cooking liquor is pumped
from the bottom of the digester; forced through
the heating unit; returned to the top where it
begins its downward circulation through the
chips, and is again pumped from the bottom.
At the same time steam is admitted at the bottom
to create the necessary pressure. This drawing
off, reheating, and recirculating cycle is con­
tinuous throughout the cooking process which
normally takes from 8 to 16 hours, depending
upon the kind and the moisture content of the
wood and the desired character of the pulp.
In this process practically all of the lignin, sugars,
Sulfite Process
resin, mineral salts, and other constituents of
Chemical processing of wood chips into pulp the wood, except the pure cellulose fibers, are
consists primarily of cooking the chips under dissolved into the cooking liquor.
pressure in a chemical solution which dissolves
When the “cook” is finished the steam pressure
or separates the lignin and other constituents of is reduced, the valve on the blowpipe is opened,
the wood from its cellulose fibers. In the sulfite and the pressure in the digester blows the pulp
process, primarily used on long-fibered nonresinous through the blowpipe into the blow pit, a huge
woods, the cooking liquor is a solution of calcium tank holding about twice as much pulp as its
bisulfite. In most mills the production of this digester. The blow pit is lined with acid-resistant
liquor from the raw materials, consisting prin­ tile and has a perforated false bottom. The
cipally of sulfur, limestone, and water, is carried perforations permit the water with which the
on as an integral part of the pulping process. pulp is washed and the cooking liquor to pass,
Sulfur is fired by hand or through a hopper but are too small to admit the pulp. The water
into a small furnace, where it is burned in a and cooking liquor pass through an outlet in
carefully controlled atmosphere. Sulfur dioxide the bottom of the blow pit to the sewer. A
gas, given off by the burning sulfur, is piped off large hose is then used to thin the washed pulp
through the back of the furnace, cooled by passing to a consistency that can be pumped. The
through pipes submerged in water, and then thinned pulp is then pumped to the storage tanks
forced into an absorption tower. These are which supply the screens.
tall towers, constructed of concrete and lined
The chief hazards of the sulfite mill are those
with acid-resisting tile. Here the gas is absorbed associated with high temperatures, chemicals,
into water, producing sulfuric acid, which in and material-handling operations. In the sul­
turn reacts with lime from calcium limestone to fur-burning process harmful fumes may be en­
make the calcium bisulfite solution.
countered, and contact with the furnace or with
The digester, the vessel in which the chips the pipes carrying hot gas may produce severe
are cooked, is a huge upright cylinder with burns. The possibility of a dust explosion is also
conical ends. Digesters are constructed of 1%- present in the sulfur house. Manual lifting and
inch boiler plate and are lined with acid-resistant wheeling heavy limestone may produce strains
brick. They vary in size, ranging from about or sprains and rolling or sliding limestone may
9 to 19 feet in diameter and 45 to 58 feet in height, produce hand and foot injuries. Work around
producing about 8 to 25 tons of pulp each filling. the acid tower or the digester involves the pos­
A movable chute is used to feed the chips from sibility of contact with acids or acid fumes which
the overhead chip bin to the digester. When can produce severe chemical burns. Workers
the digester has been filled, the preheated cooking at the digester may be burned by steam leaking
agent is pumped in and a heavy lid 18 to 24 inches from the steam lines or by contact with the hot
in diameter is firmly bolted in place. All valves stock, particularly when unplugging stopped-up
are closed to prevent leakage and the cooking lines. Cappers may be injured in handling the
process is started. The chips are cooked by heavy digester caps and workers at the blow pit



10

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

face the possibility of falling into the pit. This
possibility is increased by the fact that the floor
around the blow pit is usually wet and slippery.
High atmospheric temperatures present the pos­
sibility of heat exhaustion and strains and sprains
frequently result from handling the large hoses
used in thinning the pulp.
Sulfate and Soda Processes
The sulfate process is used primarily in reducing
long-fibered wood to pulp. The cooking liquor is
a mixture of caustic soda and sodium sulfide which
is obtained by reducing sodium sulfate, the chemi­
cal from which the process derives its name.
The digester and the cooking method for sulfate
pulp is similar to that for sulfite pulp except that
the digester is unlined and the time for cooking
is less. Pulp produced by this process has the
longest fibers and makes paper of great strength.
The pulp and unbleached paper made by this
process is commonly known as “kraft.”
Washing sulfate pulp differs considerably from
the sulfite process. The pulp is blown from the
digester to the wash pan, where an agitator stirs
the pulp as it is washed and thinned with waste
liquor. In each succeeding wash, weaker liquor
is used. As little water as possible is used, since
all the water in the waste liquor has to be evapo­
rated in the recovery process. It takes about 6
hours to wash and drain the pulp in a wash pan.
The pulp is also washed in diffusers. Here the
method differs somewhat, but the principle is
the same.
As a matter of economy, it is necessary to
recover as much of the cooking liquor as possible.
The weak black liquor which is separated from
the pulp in the wash pan is pumped to the evapo­
rators in the soda recovery plant where the excess
water is removed.
When the liquor leaves the last stage of evapora­
tion it is a thick, gummy liquid. This is pumped
into a rotary furnace where it is binned to a black
ash composed of carbon and soda. The soda is
leached from the ash in a quenching trough,
causticized, and used in making fresh white liquor.
The soda process is used primarily for the
reduction of the short-fibered deciduous woods.
The chemical used in this process is sodium hy­
droxide (caustic soda). The chips are cooked 6
to 8 hours under about 110 pounds of steam



pressure. When the pulp is properly cooked, it is
blown from the digester to the wash pan, where it
is washed in about the same manner as sulfate pulp.
Many of the hazards common in the sulfite
mill are also found in the sulfate and soda mills.
Caustic soda is the primary ingredient in the
cooking liquor in the soda and sulfate processes
and the possibility of serious chemical burns is the
principal hazard in these departments. The
recovery process is particularly hazardous. Severe
temperature burns may result from bumping into
the evaporators and pipes. Contact with live
steam or steam lines may result in scalds or burns.
There is the possibility of explosions in the evap­
orators or rotary furnaces. Burns from hot, black
ash are not uncommon. In smelting, chunks of
smelt often fall on the employee or strike his
smelting rod thereby causing injury. Strains and
sprains can result from handling and wheeling
lime and soda ash. In the digester room the
same hazards exist as in the sulfite digester room.
There is, however, more danger of chemical burns
because of the caustic nature of the cooking liquor.
In the wash pan room hazards are similar to those
in the blow pit room, except for the added hazard
of exposure to caustic burns.
Semichemical Process
The semichemical process is more recently
developed and not extensively used. In this
process the chips are undercooked by one of the
chemical processes and the remainder of the
reduction is accomplished by mechanical treat­
ment. The process combines the advantages of
both the mechanical and chemical processes—
greater yield than chemical pulp and greater
strength than mechanical pulp.
The hazards in this process are primarily those
of the particular chemical process used.
Pulp Screening and Washing
Pulp leaving the grinders in the mechanical pulp
mills, the blow pit in the sulfite mills, or the
wash pans or diffusers in the sulfate and soda mills,
next passes through a series of screening and wash­
ing processes to remove any slivers, knots, dirt,
or other undesired matter. Larger pieces of
foreign matter are extracted as it flows through a
fixed screen or through perforations in a revolving
cylinder. Smaller, heavier particles of sand and

T H E IN D U S T R Y A N D IT S H A Z A R D S

dirt settle out of the pulp as it flows slowly through
the rifflers. These are long, shallow wooden
troughs, sometimes lined with felt, with low
partitions or baffles spaced about a foot apart to
catch the heavier materials. For the final
screening the pulp flows onto a brass plate which
is pierced by a number of exceedingly fine slots.
A vacuum applied to the under side of this plate
pulls the water and pulp through these narrow
slots.
The pulp is usually washed before the first
screening or between the various types of screens,
and again after it passed the final screen. Wash­
ing takes place in a dekker, a larger cylindrical
framework covered with wire mesh.
Slippery floors, steps, and platforms present
the principal hazards in washing and screening.
Water and stock frequently splash into the areas
surrounding the operations thereby causing in­
jury-producing slips and falls. There is also the
possibility of getting caught in the revolving
screens or in the moving parts of the washers. The
caustic still remaining in the pulp at this stage is
strong enough to cause chemical burns, particularly
to the eyes.
Bleaching
Most soda and sulfite pulps are bleached after
being screened and washed, but the greater pro­
portion of sulfate pulp is left unbleached or only
partly bleached. Sulfate pulp, having the strongest
fibers, is primarily used for wrapping paper,
bags, container board, or other products not
requiring a white finish. Bleaching liquor is
usually made at the mill from chlorine and lime.
The pulp is first subjected to a chlorine bath,
then to a clear water bath. This may be repeated
six or more times for sulfate pulp and three times
for sulfite pulp. For semibleached sulfate, no
more than three bleachings are required.
The principal hazards connected with bleaching
are associated with the chlorine and caustic soda
used in making the bleach liquor. The inhalation
of chlorine results in moderate to very serious
injuries, depending upon the amount inhaled.
Contact with caustic soda may result in severe
chemical burns. Floors in the area of the bleachers
and bleach washers are often wet and slippery.
----- 3

966013°— 52




1
1

Beating
Beating is usually considered the first step in
the manufacture of paper, the processes up to this
point being considered as pulping operations. The
washed pulp is pumped from the bleachers and
dekkers to a storage chest or directly to the beater,
an oval-shaped tub with a partition extending
part way down the center. On one side of the
partition is a ridged beater roll which revolves
against a bedplate. As the beater roll revolves
in paddlewheel fashion, the pulp is drawn between
it and the bedplate and circulated around the
partition, passing each time around between the
roll and bedplate. This fibrillates and hydrates
the fibers in the pulp, the amount of fibrillation
and hydration depending upon the distance of
the beater roll from the bedplate. Fibrillation
causes the fibers to be roughened and frayed,
which helps the fibers carry more water and
cohere or mat together more easily.
From the beater the stock is pumped to the
beater storage chest and from the storage chest to
the Jordan, which further refines the pulp. The
Jordan consists of a conical shell and a plug which
rotates at high speed. The plug corresponds to
the beater roll and the inner surface of the shell
to the bedplate. The degree of refining in the
Jordan can be regulated by moving the rotating
plug in or out, thus changing the distance between
the inner surface of the shell and outer surface
of the plug.
In addition to preparing the fiber, the beaters
are often used as mixing vessels in which various
types of pulps and other materials are combined to
produce the desired grade and type of paper. The
most common additives are clay, size, alum, and
dye.
Beaters are also used to repulp partially
finished paper, which has been torn or found im­
perfect while going through the paper-making
machines. This material, called “broke” is usually
introduced into the beaters by hand. Similarly,
cakes or “laps” of partially dried pulp shipped
in from other mills or drawn from storage may be
added to the mixture. In some instances the laps
may be shredded before being introduced into the
beater. Frequently, however, they are fed di­
rectly into the beater roll. For this operation

12

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

the beater man uses a long paddle to guide the
laps to the nip point.
The floor in the beater room is frequently quite
slippery because of the water and stock which may
splash from the beaters. This splashed stock may
also produce chemical irritations, particularly if
it gets into the beater man’s eyes. In manually
feeding broke, laps, or other materials, the
beater man faces the possibility of falling into the
tank. Tending the equipment also involves the
possibility of getting ca&ght between the beater
roll and the bedplate or in the power-driven
gears or pulleys when they are not properly en­
closed. Broke-beater men often have to handle
heavy rolls or slabs of broke which may cause
strains and sprains. Knives used to cut slabs from
rolls of broke sometimes slip, thereby inflicting
lacerations. Broke is usually hauled to the
broke beater room by broke cart or hand truck.
Truckers may sustain sprains or strains when
pushing or pulling the trucks.
Paper Making
After beating and refining in the beaters and
Jordans, the stock is further diluted with water
and pumped to the head box of the paper machine.
The most widely used paper machine is the
Fourdrinier. The sheet is formed on this machine
in the following manner: From the head box the
pulp flows onto the Fourdrinier wire, a fine wire
mesh screen made in the form of an endless belt.
This belt vibrates laterally as it moves forward,
causing the fibers to form a matted web. As the
wire carries the sheet to the presses, a dandy
roll flattens and smooths out the fibers. Much of
the water drains by gravity through the wire
screen and still more is extracted by suction boxes,
leaving a wet matted layer. The wire carries the
matted layer to the first wet felt, an endless
belt which carries the paper through the rolls.
The presses consist of three pairs of rolls which
squeeze out still more water and smooth the web.
The sheet is then picked up by the second felt
and carried through the second press rolls. The
operation is repeated by the third set, each set
squeezing out additional water. The paper car­
ries its own weight from the last press to the
dryers. The dryer part of the Fourdrinier con­
sists of a series of rotating cylinders, steamheated to about 260 degrees surface temperature.



The number of dryers in a unit varies. Staggered
one over the other, they may extend several
hundred feet. From the dryers the paper carries
its own weight to the calender stack. The stack
consists of a set of seven highly polished steel
rolls. As the paper passes through the nips of
the rolls, tremendous pressure imparts a smooth
finish. As the paper leaves the stacks it is wound
on a reel, then carried by crane to the finishing
room, where it is reduced and packed in sizes
specified by the customer or for subsequent
converting processes.
Paper stock runs on the wet end of the machine
as almost 100 percent water. In most plants
some of this water splashes or runs on the floor
around the wet end of the machine presenting a
slipping hazard. Steps and catwalks on the
machine also become wet and slippery, and make
footing hazardous. Spots of oil are also found on
and about the machine. The more serious
accidents m the machine room result from getting
caught in the inrunning nips of rolls on the ma­
chine. There is danger of getting caught in the
nips when taking over a break, cleaning off the
rolls, or straightening the felt. The majority
of nip accidents, however, occur while threading
the stacks o f while working on the winders.
Weights sometimes drop from levers and strike
employees. Handling winder shafts is the source
of many injuries which occur when the shafts
slip from the hands of winder men or roll off the
winder tables. Fingers are often mashed between
shafts and winder cradles. Loose pieces of
broke accumulate around the dry end of the
machine and present slipping hazards.
Coating
In plants producing fine coated papers, coating
machines are necessary. There are several types
in use, a common type being a brush coating
machine. In this process the coating material,
consisting of a mixture of one or more mineral
compounds with enough adhesive to bind it to the
texture of the paper, flows on the ribbon of paper
and brushes distribute the mixture evenly on both
sides of the paper. As the paper leaves the
machine it is passed over a series of ducts and
nozzles emitting jets of hot air which hold the
ribbon of coated paper in mid-air as it passes
through the drying chamber.

T H E IN D U S T R Y A N D IT S H A Z A R D S

Some Fourdriniers have been equipped with
coating units which apply the coating midway in
the drying process. The paper passes through
two rollers which have been evenly coated by
contact with other rollers and in turn impart the
coating uniformly to the paper. The paper then
passes through the remaining dryers and calender
stacks to the reels.
Finishing and Shipping
There is no clear-cut demarcation between
machine-room operations and finishing-room
operations, some mills performing operations
in the machine room which other mills perform
in the finishing room. Assuming that the machineroom operations end with the finished paper
coming off the calender and being wound on the
reel, the next operation would be super-calendering
in the finishing room. If the paper requires
more finish than can be obtained in the calender
rolls, the rolls of paper are transferred by overhead
cranes to the super-calenders. The super-calender
stack has alternating rolls of highly polished steel
and highly polished paper. After super-calendering
the paper may be rewound into rolls and cut,
slit, or trimmed to sizes specified by the customers*
orders. As the sheet passes through the rewinder,
sharp discs slit the paper into the desired widths
and a knife on a revolving cylinder cuts the paper
to the desired length. If paper of more exact
dimensions than that cut on the cutters is re­
quired, it is trimmed on a guillotine trimmer.
After inspection and counting, it is packaged in
rolls, bundles, cartons, or otherwise as required
and then stenciled for shipment. In the shipping
department, towmotors or hand trucks are used to
load the paper into boxcars or trucks for shipment
to its destination .
In the finishing room it is often necessary to
thread the super-calenders by hand. This in­
volves the hazard of getting fingers caught in the
inrunning nips, which may result in serious in­
juries to the tips of the fingers. Lacerations and
amputations may result from accidents occurring
on the cutters and trimmers. Serious accidents
may result from getting caught between the rolls
on the rewinder. Vehicular accidents occur fre­
quently in this department. Typical are those in
which the employee is struck by the industrial
trucks or is caught between trucks and other



13

equipment or objects. Bruised or fractured toes
may result from being run over by trucks. Sprains
may occur from pulling or pushing heavy loads.
Strains are sustained in lifting, and feet and
hands are injured by falling and rolling paper.
Crane accidents are prevalent in the finishing
department. These usually occur when the
claws or a roll of paper on a moving crane strike
the employee. Skids are also a source of many
accidents. These are often stacked in piles or
stood on end and fall on employees. Some have
projecting slivers which cause puncture wounds.
Sprains and strains may be sustained from lift­
ing or handling these skids.
All the hazards connected with handling and
moving paper in the finishing room also exist in
the shipping department. Additional hazards
arise in loading box cars. Many accidents occur
because of dock boards slipping or truck wheels
running off dock boards. In loading, rolls of
paper may roll or slide down on the car loader.
Rag and Waste-Paper Pulping
In many plants rags and waste paper are worked
over and used for paper. The rags are first
sorted and buckles, buttons, and other articles
removed. The rags are then weighed and passed
through a revolving duster where they are
thrashed free of dust, which drops through a screen
at the bottom. They are then carried by conveyor
to the rag cutter. The rag cutter consists of a
revolving drum on which there are four cutting
knives and a bedplate with cutting edge. The
drum rotates at high speed and chops the rags
into small pieces as they are fed to the knives by
a feed roll. The chopped rags are put in a large
horizontal boiler and cooked under pressure with
milk of lime. After cooking, the stock is beaten
and washed in a combination washer and beater.
Bleaching chemicals are usually added and washed
out in this machine. Further processes are about
the same as for wood pulp.
Old papers being reprocessed are first sorted
according to the pulping process used in the
original manufacture. Usually, printed paper is
separated from nonprinted paper. The printed
paper is soaked in chemicals which remove the ink.
The paper is reduced to pulp in a hydropulper or
other machine and then goes through the usual
processes of washing, beating, and screening.

14

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P AN D P A P E R

In rag and waste paper processing, it is neces­
sary to handle large bales of rags and paper.
Although most of this handling is done by me­
chanical equipment, lifting and handling injuries
still occur. Glass and other sharp-edged mate­
rials are often mingled with rags and paper, causing
lacerations and puncture wounds. Bales are
commonly handled with hand hooks, which can
inflict severe puncture wounds. Knives used to

open the bales may slip, thereby causing lacera­
tions. There is a possibility of contracting dis­
eases by handling contaminated materials. The
atmosphere around the cleaning and cutting
operations is often very dusty. There is danger
of getting caught in the conveyors or cutters and
shredders. Further pulping and paper making
processes are the same as those for wood and the
hazards are essentially the same.

Factors in the Injury Record
The injury record of any plant or of any group
of plants is a composite of a great many factors.
The kinds of material processed; the types of proc­
essing performed; the safety regulations of the
States in which the plants are located, and the ex­
tent to which those regulations are enforced; the
kind of personnel employed; the size of the plants;
and the extent of the safety programs carried on
in the plants all have a direct bearing upon the
volume of injuries experienced. In particular in­
stances the influence of these factors may offset
each other, but in comparisons based upon large
groups of operations their effects frequently can
be demonstrated, as in the following breakdowns
of the 1948 experience of the pulp and paper man­
ufacturing industry.
Product Comparisons
The plants engaged exclusively in manufacturing
pulp had a comparatively high injury-frequency
rate, 26.7. Their record also showed a relatively
high incidence of fatal and permanent-impairment
cases as well as a high average time loss for their
temporary-total disabilities. As a result, the
average time charge per disabling injury6 in these
plants was 175 days and the severity rate7 was
4.7, both considerably higher than the correspond­
ing averages for all pulp and paper plants. (See
appendix, table 1.)
* The average time charge is computed by adding the days lost for each
temporary-total disability to the standard time charges for fatalities and
permanent disabilities, as given in Method of Compiling Industrial Injury
Rates (approved by the American Standards Association, 1945), and by
dividing the total by the number of disabling injuries.
7 The severity rate is the average number of days lost or charged for each
1,000 employee-hours worked.




In the general group of paper-making plants,
those manufacturing building paper had the lowest
injury-frequency rate, 11.8. Their fatality rate,
however, was above average and their average time
loss per temporary-total disability was high. This
gave them a high average time charge per disabling
injury, 215 days. The influence of their low fre­
quency rate, however, held their severity rate
to 2.5.
In contrast, newsprint and absorbent-paper
plants had injury-frequency rates of 37 and 36,
respectively. Neither of these groups, however,
had any death cases, and the absorbent-paper
plants reported no permanent-impairment cases.
Their very high frequency rates, therefore, were
balanced by very good injury-severity records.
The 4 groups of plants manufacturing bookpaper, coarse paper, special industrial paper, and
tissue paper all had frequency rates of less than 20.
The book-paper and tissue-paper plants also
ranked very low in injury-severity rates. The
coarse-paper and special industrial paper plants,
cn the other hand, stood relatively high in the
severity comparisons.
Fine-paper plants had a frequency rate of 20.2,
but their injury-severity rate ranked much better
than average. Sanitary-paper stock plants, on
the other hand, had a relatively high frequency
rate, 24.8, coupled with a rather high injuryseverity. The average time charge per disabling
injury for these plants was 156 days and the se­
verity rate was 3.9. The groundwood-paperplants
similarly had high frequency and severity rates,
26.3 and 3.0, respectively; but the average time
qharge per case (112 days) was not particularly
high.

F A C T O R S IN IN J U R Y R E C O R D

For the 4 groups of paperboard plants, the
injury-frequency rates were 13.6 for those manu­
facturing special paperboard stock; 17.5 for the
building-board plants; 23.6 for the container and
boxboard plants; and 34.4 for the wet machineboard plants. Injury severity tended to be high
in each of these groups. The wet machine-board
plants had a very high ratio of fatalities, and the
special paperboard stock plants had a very high
ratio of permanent-partial impairments. The
most striking element in the record of the container
and boxboard plants was the unusually high inci­
dence of permanent-total disabilities—1 in every
12 million employee-hours worked, as compared
with 1 in every 95 million employee-hours for all
other plants surveyed.
Regional and State Comparisons
Variations in injury rates among the different
States and regions may reflect any one or any
combination of several factors. State safety
regulations and the degree to which they are
enforced, the age and maintenance of plants and
their equipment, and employment factors, such as
the experience of available workers, all tend to
influence the average level of injury rates in any
area.
The wide variations noted in the average rates for
plants producing different types of products in the
pulp and paper industry, indicate that the composi­
tion of the industry in any area, in terms of products,
may also have much to do with the general level
of injury rates in that area. For example, the
highest national average frequency rates were for
plants manufacturing newsprint, absorbent paper,
and wet machine board. Any area in which
these particular operations constitute a high pro­
portion of the total production, therefore, would
logically be expected to have a comparatively high
over-all average regardless of other factors which
might influence the rate. Because of these
variable internal weighting factors, the significance
of comparisons among the States and regions on
the basis of industry-wide averages may be
questioned. The most realistic area comparisons,
therefore, are those based upon specific types of
production rather than upon industry totals.
(See appendix, table 2.)
P u lp P la n ts .—Average



injury rates for plants

15

engaged exclusively in manufacturing pulp could
be computed for only two States. These were
widely different. In Maine, 5 pulp plants had an
average frequency rate of 17.0, which was well
below the national average of 26.7. In New
York the average for 3 plants was 34.4. For
injury severity, however, the comparison was
sharply different. The Maine plants reported 1
fatality and 3 permanent impairments, which gave
them an average time charge of 256 days per case
and a severity rate of 4.3. The New York plants,
on the other hand, reported no deaths and no
permanent impairments, which held their average
time charge down to 25 days per case and their
severity rate to 0.9. It is interesting in this con­
nection to note, however, that the average time
lost in temporary-total disability cases in Maine
was only 17 days, whereas in New York it was 25
days. This is unusual in that the average time
lost in temporary-total disabilities usually varies
inversely with the frequency-rate level rather than
directly as in this instance.
BooJcpaper P la n ts .—Average rates for plants
manufacturing bookpaper were computed for five
States. The lowest frequency rates were for the
Pennsylvania plants, 13.2, and the Wisconsin
plants, 13.9; the highest was for the Maine plants,
29.7. In the middle range, the Michigan plants
had an average of 17.4 and the New York plants
an average of 17.9. The national average for
bookpaper plants was 16.9.
The Michigan bookpaper plants had by far the
best injury-severity record. The plants in that
State reported no fatalities and no permanent
impairments. Their average time charge per
disabling injury, therefore, was only 14 days and
the severity rate was only 0.2. None of the other
four State groups reported fatalities, but each had
one or more cases of permanent impairments.
The Maine plants, nevertheless, held the average
time charge down to 27 days and the severity rate
to 0.8. In contrast, the average time charge for
the New York plants was 138 days and the
severity rate was 2.5.
F in e-P a p e r P la n ts .—Injury rates covering the
manufacture of fine paper were computed for
eight States. As against the national average of
20.2 for this type of plant, the frequency rates for
these States covered a very wide range: 14.2 in

16

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S—M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P AN D P A P E R

Wisconsin; 14.7 in New York; 16.8 in Pennsyl­
vania; 22.8 in Maine; 23.8 in Massachusetts; 32.1
in Michigan; 36.4 in New Jersey; and 43.7 in
Ohio.
All of the injuries reported by the fine-paper
plants in Massachusetts were temporary-total
disabilities. Their average time charge, 17 days
per case, and the severity rate, 0.4, were, therefore,
very low. The only fatality reported by a finepaper plant occurred in Wisconsin. Coupled
with several permanent impairments, this gave
the Wisconsin plants an average time charge of
127 days and a severity rate of 1.8. In New
York, however, a large proportion of relatively
serious permanent impairments yielded a much
higher average time charge, 220 days, and a
severity rate of 3.2. In Ohio the high frequency
rate forced the severity rate up to 3.3 although the
average time charge, 75 days, was not unduly high.
Maine, Michigan, and Pennsylvania each had
relatively good severity averages.
Coarse-Paper Plants.—Four State frequency
rates were computed for plants manufacturing
coarse paper: Louisiana, 16.4; New York, 20.7;
Ohio, 25.9; and Wisconsin, 37.5. All of these,
except the Louisiana rate, were well above the
national average of 16.7. The high frequency
rate in Wisconsin, however, was balanced by a
relatively low average time charge of 20 days per
case and a similarly low severity rate of 0.7. In
Ohio, where the total coverage was quite small,
1 death and 3 permanent impairments in a total
of only 28 reported injuries drove the average
time charge up to 265 days and the severity rate
to 6.9. Although the New York plants had no
death cases, their high ratio of permanent impair­
ments gave them an average time charge of 117
days and a severity rate of 2.4. In Louisiana, the
effect of a death case was balanced by a relatively
low volume of permanent impairments to produce
an average time charge of 111 days and a severity
rate of 1.8.
Sanitary-Paper Stock Plants.—State averages for
plants manufacturing sanitary paper stock were
available for Wisconsin and New York only. In
Wisconsin the injury-frequency rate was 18.4. In
New York it was 22.5. Both of these rates were
lower than the national average of 24.8.
Despite the inclusion of a death case in their



record, the Wisconsin plants also had the better
severity record. Their average time charge was
92 days and the severity rate was 1.7. The cor­
responding averages in New York were 274 days
and 6.2.
Tissue-Paper Plants.—The four-State frequency
rates for tissue-paper plants showed an extremely
wide variance. In Pennsylvania the frequency
rate was 6.2, in Wisconsin 8.7, in New York 32.9,
and in Massachusetts 84.5. For comparison, the
national average was 19.7.
Offsetting its very high frequency rate, Massa­
chusetts had the best injury-severity record among
the four States.
The Massachusetts plants reported no deaths
and no permanent impairments, and recorded a
very low average time loss for temporary injuries.
Their average time charge, therefore, was only 7
days and their severity rate 0.6. The Wisconsin
plants reported some permanent impairments
which lifted their average time charge to 33 days
per case, but the low injury frequency held their
severity rate to 0.3. In Pennsylvania the average
time charge, influenced by 2 relatively serious
permanent impairments, was 253 days per case,
and the severity rate was 1.6. The New York
report included both a death and a relatively high
proportion of permanent impairment cases. As
a result, their average time charge was 250 days
and the severity rate was 8.2.
Container and Boxboard Plants.—Eleven State
averages were computed for boxboard plants. As
against the national average of 23.6, the lowest
frequency rate in this group was 9.4 for North
Carolina. The highest was 51.6 for New Jersey.
California’s average rate of 18.6, Ohio’s 21.2,
Michigan’s 21.7, and New York’s 23.1 were slightly
below the national figure. In the higher range,
Illinois had a frequency rate of 29.8, Georgia, 30.0,
Connecticut, 37.3, Indiana, 41.3, and Pennsylvania,
44.9.
Indiana, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Connecti­
cut had the most favorable injury-severity records.
No deaths were reported by any of the boxboard
plants in these States, and there were no perma­
nent impairments in the Indiana plants. The
North Carolina and California plants reported no
death cases, but relatively high proportions of
permanent impairments. North Carolina’s aver­

F A C T O R S IN IN J U R Y R E C O R D

age time charge was 438 days per case, higher
than for any other State, but her severity rate of
4.1 was exceeded by three other States. Three
deaths were reported in Michigan boxboard plants,
but these cases were partially balanced by a com­
paratively low ratio of permanent impairments.
Two deaths were reported in Ohio and one in
Georgia. In Georgia, however, the death case
was accompanied by 5 permanent impairments
in a total of only 49 disabling injuries. This gave
Georgia an average time charge of 171 days and
a severity rate of 5.1. New York, with a death,
a permanent-total disability, and 9 permanentpartial disabilities in a total of 142 injuries, had
an average time charge of 197 days and a severity
rate of 4.5. New Jersey’s very high frequency
rate was accompanied by a very high severity
rate, 13.8, as well as a comparatively high average
time charge of 268 days per case.
B u ild in g -P a p e r P la n ts .—All of the three State
frequency rates computed for plants manufactur­
ing building paper were comparatively low in
terms of the 11.8 national average. In California
the average frequency rate was 5.2; in Illinois,
12.3; and in Pennsylvania, 12.5.
The injury severity in the California and Illinois
plants tended to be quite high in contrast to their
low frequency rates. The average time charge
was 346 days per case in California and 308 days
in Illinois. Their severity rates were also com­
paratively high, 3.8 in Illinois and 1.8 in Cali­
fornia. The Pennsylvania plants, on the other
hand, had no death or permanent impairment
cases and achieved a very low average time charge
of 13 days per case with an equally favorable
severity rate of only 0.2.
Interplant Comparisons

The range of frequency rates among the report­
ing plants was extremely wide. Fifty-two plants
had frequency rates of zero and 13 had rates of
over 100. The zero-rate plants were all relatively
small; only 7 had as many as 100 employees and
only 1 of these had as many as 250 employees.
The plants at the top of the range were also
relatively small; 10 had fewer than 100 employees
each, and none of the other 3 had as many as
250 employees. (See appendix, tables 3, 6, and 7.)
Approximately a fourth of the reporting plants



17

had injury-frequency rates of 40 or higher. This
group accounted for only about 10 percent of the
total employment in the sample, but they reported
nearly 30 percent of the total volume of injuries.
At the other end of the range, another group of
plants, also constituting approximately a fourth
of the sample, had frequency rates of less than
9.0. This group of plants had 27 percent of the
total employment, but reported less than 7 percent
of the total volume of injuries.
Approximately half of the reporting plants had
frequency rates in the range between 9.0 and 40.0.
These plants, accounting for about 63 percent of
the total employment in the sample, reported 64
percent of the injuries. The highest concentration
of plants fell in the frequency-rate range of 15 to
20. About 12 percent of the plants had rates in
this narrow range. As a group they accounted
for slightly more than 15 percent of the total
employment and just over 13 percent of the
reported injuries.
Plant Size Comparisons

Previous studies in other industries have shown
that there is often a direct correlation between
injury-frequency rates and plant size. In some
instances the average frequency rate varies in­
versely with plant size throughout the plant size
range. In other instances the very small plants
have comparatively low rates, approaching the
level of the rates for the large plants, with the
highest rates occuring in the medium-size plants.
The common finding that the larger plants tend
to have lower than average frequency rates has
generally been interpreted as reflecting the organ­
ized safety programs frequently found in those
plants. The occurrence of low average rates in
the very small plant group similarly has been
rationalized as reflecting the close personal super­
vision exercised by the plant owners. The higher
rates for medium-size plants in contrast have
been attributed to the fact that these shops are
too large for intimate supervision by top manage­
ment and too small to have regularly established
safety departments.
The breakdown of injury experience by plant
size in this pulp and paper survey did not show a
frequency-rate differential in favor of the very
small plants. However, it did show a definite
inverse relationship between the frequency-rate

18

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P AN D P A P E R

levels and plant size. In the plant-size range
below 250 employees there was a striking similarity
in the average frequency rates of the three size
groups for which rates were computed. The
plants employing fewer than 50 workers had an
average rate of 31.4; those employing 50 to 99
workers had a rate of 35.4; and those employing
100 to 249 workers had a rate of 33.3. Since
variations of this order are of doubtful significance,
these rates, for all practical purposes, may be
assumed to be identical. Up to the 250-employee
level, therefore, plant size variations appear to
have had little bearing upon the occurrence of
injuries.
Above the 250-employee level, however, there
was a sharp break in the average frequency rates.
For plants with 250 to 499 workers the average
frequency rate dropped to 26.1, and for those
with 500 to 749 workers it dropped to 17.1. With
each successively larger employment step the
average rate declined further, reaching its lowest
level of 9.6 for plants employing 1,500 to 1,999
employees. For the very large plants at the top
of the range—i. e., those employing 2,000 or more
workers apiece—the average rate reversed its
downward movement and rose to 16.0. This
upswing in the rate reflected the experience of
4 plants in this 12-plant group—one had a rate of
over 35 and 3 had rates ranging between 20 and 25.
Safety Programs

An unusually high proportion of the plants in
the pulp and paper industry maintain organized
safety programs. In large measure it is this fact
which accounts for the industry’s excellent record
of reducing its frequency rate so sharply during
the last 5 years.
Over 75 percent of the 534 plants surveyed
reported that they had some form of organized
safety program. Full-time safety engineers were
employed in 148 plants, and in 137 of these the
activities of the safety engineer were supplemented
by formally organized safety committees. In
the group with no full-time safety engineer there
were 254 which had organized safety committees.
Only 102 reported having neither safety commit­
tees nor safety engineers. Twenty-seven plants
did not report regarding their safety activities
and eight did not report on all details of their
programs. (See appendix, table 4.)



It is recognized that in a broad comparison
covering a wide variety of plants of greatly differ­
ing sizes and complexities of organization, the em­
ployment or nonemployment of a safety engineer
may simply be a reflection of the development of
the individual plant safety programs rather than
the controlling factor in a plant safety record.
Nevertheless, it appears significant that of the 507
plants reporting on this point, the 148 with full­
time safety engineers had an average frequency
rate of 15.3 compared with 25.5 for the 359 plants
with no safety engineer. In terms of exposure
(man-hours worked) death cases and permanenttotal disabilities occurred twice as frequently in
the plants without safety engineers as in those
employing safety specialists. Similarly, tempo­
rary-total disabilities occurred 70 percent more
frequently in the plants with no safety engineer.
The frequency of permanent-partial impairments,
however, was about the same in both groups of
plants.
Despite their higher frequency of fatalities, the
plants without safety engineers had a somewhat
lower average time charge per injury than those
with safety engineers. This was primarily because
of their higher proportion of temporary-total dis­
ability cases and to a substantially lower average
time-loss for those cases. The latter element em­
phasizes the fact that the plants employing safety
engineers also generally had more elaborate medi­
cal departments, which in turn was an added factor
tending to hold down the frequency rate for this
group of plants.
It is to be noted that the average employment
was over 750 workers in plants having full-time
safety engineers. In the group not employing
safety engineers the average was slightly under
250 workers.
A large proportion of the plants employing
safety engineers also reported that their safety pro­
grams included some form of organized employee
participation through safety committees. This
was also reflected in the frequency rates. The 11
plants with safety engineers, but no safety com­
mittees, had an average frequency rate of 19.0 in
contrast to the average of 15.1 for the 137 plants
with both safety engineers and some form of safety
committee organization.
Within the latter group there appeared to be a
significant correlation between injury frequency
and the manner in which the safety committees

F A C T O R S IN IN J U R Y R E C O R D

were organized. In 12 plants, the committees
were composed entirely of supervisory employees.
The average frequency rate for this group was 17.5.
In 110 plants, the safety committees were com­
posed of both supervisory and nonsupervisory
employees—their average frequency rate was 15.5.
In a third group of 11 plants, where the safety
committee membership was limited to nonsuper­
visory employees, the average frequency rate was
8.9. In general, throughout these comparisons
the average time charge and the severity rates of
the different groups varied in the same manner
as the frequency rates.
The significance of these variations in the expe­
rience of the plants with full-time safety engineers
was enhanced by an almost identical pattern of
variations within the group of plants without
safety engineers. Within the latter group, 102
plants had neither safety engineers nor safety
committees. These plants had an average fre­
quency rate of 31.1, whereas the 254 plants report­
ing safety committees, but no safety engineer, had
an average rate of 24.7. In the breakdown
according to the composition of the committees,
the average frequency rates were: 25.9 for 58
plants in which the committees were composed of
supervisory employees; 24.6 for 178 plants where
both supervisory and nonsupervisory employees
served on the committees; and 22.4 for 17 plants
in which only nonsupervisory employees were
members of the committees. Again, the severity
of injuries, as measured by the average time
charge and the severity rates, in these groups of
plants tended to follow the same general pattern
of the frequency rates.
Medical and First-Aid Programs

A very large proportion of the reporting plants
indicated that they maintained an organized firstaid or medical program on their premises. A
similarly large proportion indicated that they
required preemployment physical examinations
for all new employees for the purpose of assist­
ing in making proper job assignments.
A total of 515 plants reported on their medical
and first-aid plant facilities. Of these, 383 had
specially equipped first-aid rooms which were
open and attended throughout the working hours.
In 174 plants the first-aid rooms were operated by
----- 4

966013°— 52




19

professional attendants; i. e., by a doctor or a
registered nurse. In the other 191 plants the
first-aid rooms were operated by nonprofessional
attendants who in most instances had been given
some first-aid training. Practically all the plants
with no established first-aid rooms reported that
they maintained first-aid kits on the premises.
Replies relating to preemployment physical
examinations were received from 491 plants, of
which 340 reported that they required such exami­
nations. The great majority of these were plants
which also maintained organized first-aid programs
on the premises.
In general, the existence or nonexistence of a
medical or first-aid program appeared to be closely
related to plant size. Plants with first-aid rooms
under professional management had an average
employment of over 800 workers. Those with
first-aid rooms operated by non professional attend­
ants averaged 200 workers, and those depending
upon first-aid kits averaged 130 workers. Simi­
larly, plants requiring 'preemployment physicals
had an average of nearly 500 employees in con­
trast to about 125 for those not requiring such
examinations.
Because of this close association with plant size
it is probable that injury rates for groups of plants
classified on the basis of their medical and first-aid
programs also reflect the influence of many other
factors. Efforts were made to break down the
sample to show rates for groups of plants which
were similar in all respects except medical and
first-aid programs. This effort, however, failed
to yield significant results because of the many
plant differences which had to be reconciled and
the comparatively small samples available. It
was impossible, therefore, to secure objective sta­
tistical evidence of the influence of medical and
first-aid programs upon the occurrence of work
injuries.
It is interesting, however, to note that the
average time lost in temporary-total disability
cases was 14 days in the plants with no first-aid
room and 18 days in those having first-aid facilities.
Although injury treatment facilities on the prem­
ises may not actually prevent injuries, their
availability apparently avoids loss of time for
many minor injuries which might otherwise result
in the loss of 1 or 2 days' time.

20

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P AN D P A P E R

Departmental Injury Rates

Because the internal organization of the report­
ing plants differed greatly, many were unable to
furnish complete breakdowns of their operations
according to a standardized pattern. Nearly all,
however, reported on some of their operations in
sufficient detail to permit the inclusion of those
figures in typical departmental groups. On this
basis, separate injury records were compiled for 14
standard production departments or operations.
(See appendix, table 5.)

Production Departments

Injuries were most common in the woodyards.
Because of the very high frequency rate, 41.3, their
severity rate, 3.3, was somewhat above average;
but the average time charge per injury, 79 days,
was comparatively low.
The wood rooms and the paper-machine rooms
had identical frequency rates, 30.1. Both of these
departments had a high incidence of serious

CHART 1
DISABLING INJURY - FREQU EN CY RATES IN TH E
PULP A N D PAPER INDUSTRY, BY DEPARTM ENT, 1 9 4 8
FREQUENCY RATES

0
•Wood yards
Yards (except wood yards)
Wood rooms
Paper machine rooms
Ground-wood mills
Beater rooms
Stock rooms
Rag shredding departments
Maintenance departments
Garages
Sulfite mills
Industry, average
Soda mills
Bleaching departments
Power departments
Sulfate mills
Shipping departments
Wet rooms
Finishing departments
Watchmen
Rag mills
Laboratories.
Administration

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS




10

20

30

40

50

K IN D S OF IN JU R IE S E X P E R IE N C E D

injuries. Wood rooms had the highest severity
rate recorded, 6.4, and their average time charge
of 214 days was exceeded by only one other pro­
duction department. For the paper-machine
rooms, the severity rate was 5.0 and the average
time charge, 167 days.
The rag-shredding departments, the groundwood
mills, the sulfite mills, and the beater rooms all had
frequency rates ranging between 20 and 30. No
deaths were reported in the groundwood mills, ragshredding departments, or the sulfite mills. As a
result, their severity records were relatively good,
although they each had some permanent-partial
impairment cases. In the beater rooms the pro­
portion of permanent-partial impairments was low,
but the ratio of death cases was relatively high,
giving them an average time charge of 125 days
per injury and a severity rate of 3.3.
Sulfate mills, soda mills, wet rooms, bleaching
departments, finishing departments, and convert­
ing departments had frequency rates ranging be­
tween 10 and 20. The sulfate mills had a rather
high proportion of death and permanent-total
disability cases. The soda mills had some serious
permanent-partial impairments. The wet rooms
and the bleaching departments, with no death and
very few permanent impairments, had outstandingly good severity records.
The rag mills had the most favorable record
among the production departments. They re­
ported no death or permanent impairment. Their

21

frequency rate was only 6.8; their severity rate
0.1; and their average time charge, only 9 days
per injury.
Service and Maintenance Departments

The highest frequency rates in the service and
maintenance group were for the yard (33.0), stockroom (25.8), plant maintenance (23.2), and garage
(22.5) departments. The yard departments, how­
ever, had a very good severity record to balance
their high frequency rate. The garage depart­
ments reported no death cases, but a high ratio of
permanent impairments gave them a severity rate
of 5.7 and an average time charge of 253 days per
disabling injury. The plant maintenance depart­
ments had approximately 12 percent of all the
reported employees, but they reported 15 percent
of all the injuries—1,362. These injuries included
6 deaths, 1 permanent-total disability, 102 perma­
nent-partial disabilities, and 1,253 temporary-total
disabilities.
The power-plant departments had an average
frequency rate of 18.1; the shipping departments,
17.5; and the watchmen’s department, 10.2. The
lowest of the departmental, frequency rates were
5.4 for the laboratories and 1.4 for the clerical and
administrative personnel. The severity rates for
these two groups were quite low, but the average
time charges per disabling injury were above
average.

Kinds of Injuries Experienced
Individual case records were collected in this
survey for 3,285 disabling injuries and for 2,960
injuries requiring medical attention but not re­
sulting in loss of time after the day of injury.
The disabling cases included 12 fatalities, 2
permanent-total disabilities, 150 permanentpartial disabilities, and 3,121 temporary-total
disabilities. (See appendix, tables 8 through 13.)
The definitions of these several disability clas­
sifications as applied in this survey are as follows:
(1) Fatality.—A death resulting from an indus­
trial injury is classified as an industrial fatality
regardless of the time intervening between injury
and death.
(2) Permanent-Total Disability.—An injury



other than death which permanently and totally
incapacitates an employee from following any
gainful occupation is classified as a permanenttotal disability. The loss, or the complete loss of
use, of any of the following in one accident is
considered permanent-total disability:
(a) Both eyes;
(b) One eye and one hand, or arm, or leg, or
foot;
(c ) Any two of the following not on the same
limb: Hand, arm, foot, or leg.
(3) Permanent-Partial Disability.—The com­
plete loss in one accident of any member or part
of a member of the body, or any permanent im­
pairment of functions of the body or part thereof

22

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

to any degree less than permanent-total disability
is classified as permanent-partial disability,
regardless of any preexisting disability of the in­
jured member or impaired body function.
The following injuries are not classified as per­
manent-partial disabilities, but are classified as
temporary-total, temporary-partial disabilities, or
medical treatment cases, depending upon the
degree of disability during the healing period:
(a) Hernia, if it can be repaired;
(b) Loss of fingernails or toenails;
(c) Loss of teeth;
(d ) Disfigurement;
(e ) Strains or sprains not causing permanent
limitation of motion;
(/) Fractures healing completely without
deformities or displacements.
(4) T em p o ra ry -T o ta l D is a b ility .—Any injury
not resulting in death or permanent impairment is
classified as a temporary-total disability if the
injured person, because of his injury, is unable
to perform a regularly established job, open and
available to him, during the entire time interval
corresponding to the hours of his regular shift on
any one or more days (including Sundays, days
off, or plant shut-downs) subsequent to the date of
injury.
(5) M e d ic a l T reatm en t C a se .—For the purpose
of this survey, any injury not resulting in death,
permanent impairment, or temporary-total dis­
ability, but requiring treatment by a physician,
is classified as a medical-treatment case.
Definitions (1), (2), (3), and (4) are from the
American Standard Method of Compiling Indus­
trial Injury Rates as approved by the American
Standards Association, October 11, 1945. Defi­
nition (5) represents a combination of the Ameri­
can Standard Definitions of temporary-partial
disability and medical treatment cases.
Fatalities

Three of the 12 reported fatalities resulted from
blows on the head; 2 were electrocutions; 3 re­
sulted from multiple crushing injuries; 1 was a
drowning; 1 resulted from a fall; and 2 resulted
from burns.
One of the three fatal head injuries occurred in
the woodyard. In this instance a stacker was
struck by a stick of pulpwood faffing from a pile.



In the second case a maintenance man was struck
on the head by a chunk of concrete falling from a
wall which he was repairing. The third fatal head
injury occurred at the slasher saw. A section of
pulpwood thrown by the saw struck the sawyer in
his face.
One of the electrocutions occurred when a helper
was attempting to change the air hose on a pre­
cipitator. He had cut the current on one section
of the machine but had not pulled the switch for
the section on which he was working. The other
electrocution involved a carpenter making repairs
near a 2,300-volt fine. An electrician had gone to
cut off the power, but the carpenter contacted the
line before it was de-energized.
A woodyard laborer was crushed under the
boom of a crane being used to pull a derailed
freight car back onto the track. The boom cable
broke under the pull and allowed the boom to
fall on him. In another crushing accident, a
machine tender was removing loose paper from a
shaft puller. The paper caught in the nip of the
winder and pulled him between the winder drum
and the roll of paper, thereby crushing his chest.
The third crushing fatality occurred in a vehicle
accident when a lift truck operator in the receiving
department backed his vehicle into the path of an
oncoming highway truck. In the collision the lift
truck was overturned on top of the operator.
Burns from contact with hot pulp cost the life
of a diffuser operator when he was caught in a
“ blow-out”. In this case the diffuser had “hung
up” and knowing the possibility of a blow-out, the
operator was trying to dump the diffuser before it
blew. He was standing in front of the diffuser
door when the blow-out occurred and was covered
by the hot pulp. The other case of a fatal burn
occurred in the woodyard. An open bucket of
gasoline became ignited and the flame threatened
a nearby pile of pulpwood. An unloader attempt­
ing to kick the bucket away from the wood
splashed the flaming gasoline over himself and set
his clothes on fire.
In the drowning case, a boom man was carrying
a steel cable along the log boom race. Apparently
the load he was carrying threw him off balance
and he fell into the water.
The case in which death resulted from a fall was
a typical unguarded elevator accident. A hand
trucker pushing a load of broke pushed his truck

K IN D S OF IN J U R IE S E X P E R IE N C E D
through an open elevator gate— but the elevator
was at a higher floor. As the truck plunged into
the open shaft, it pulled the operator with it.

Permanent-Total Disabilities
One of the two reported permanent-total dis­
abilities occurred in the course of piling logs. The
injured worker was on the pile when the logs
started to roll. He was thrown to the concrete
floor and landed on his elbows. Both elbows were
shattered, permanently depriving him of the use
of his arms.
The second case involved a maintenance man.
He was sitting astride a conveyor preparing to
tighten it when someone threw the switch, setting
it in motion. Both his legs were severely mangled
and were rendered permanently useless.

Permanent-Partial Disabilities
The 150 permanent-partial impairment cases in­
cluded the amputation of 4 arms, 3 hands, 66
fingers, and 3 toes; 1 loss of sight in 1 eye; and 73
cases of contusions, fractures, cuts, and strains
involving some residual loss of use of a body part
or function.
Two of the arm amputations resulted from acci­
dents on paper-making machines. In one instance
the employee was cleaning stock from a moving
press roll, when his hand caught under the felt and
his arm was pulled into the rolls. In the other case,
the worker was feeding sheets into a smoothing
press, when his hand caught in the nip and his arm
was pulled between the rolls. In the third arm
case as a worker was adjusting loose paper at the
winder, the paper caught his arm and pulled it
through the rewinder. The fourth arm amputation
involved a maintenance man who reached inside
a pulverizer to check a bearing while the machine
was in operation.
Two of the hand amputations resulted from
workers becoming caught in the paper machine
rolls. In both instances the workers were attempt­
ing to remove some stock which had adhered to one
of the rolls. The third case involved a woodyard
laborer who was on a barge acting as signal man
for the crane operator who was picking up pulpwood from the barge. The crane bucket swung as
it was lifted and pinned the signalman’s hand
against a barge post.



23

The 66 finger-amputation cases included 57 am­
putations of 1 finger, 6 involving 2 fingers, and 3
involving 3 fingers. One of the 3-finger amputa­
tions occurred on a coating machine. The paper
had broken and the operator had pulled most of it
out of the machine. When he then attempted to
pull off some paper sticking to one of the squeeze
rolls, his fingers were pulled into the nip point.
The second 3-finger amputation occurred on a
parchment machine. The operator placed his hand
on a moving shaft which pulled his fingers against
a bearing. In the third case a trimmer operator’s
foot slipped as he was feeding his machine. While
off balance, his hand went under the knife.
Two of the 2-finger amputations involved
machine tenders; the other four involved mainte­
nance men. One of the machine tenders reached
over the slitter roll while standing on the frame
of the machine. His foot slipped and in trying to
catch himself he put his hand under the cutter
bar. The second operator got his fingers caught in
the winder rolls while threading the machine. One
of the maintenance men lost his fingers between
two rolls while checking their adjustment. Another
maintenance man was planing a small wedge on a
jointer when the piece kicked back and his fingers
slid into the blade. The third maintenance man
lost two fingers when his portable electric saw
slipped and struck his hand. The fourth of this
group of maintenance accidents was experienced
by a pipe fitter. As he was placing a heavy piece
of pipe in a vertical position, it slipped and dropped
on end onto his fingers.
The 57 1-finger amputations occurred under
various circumstances. The great majority, how­
ever, arose from contact with moving machinery.
Ten workers were caught in conveyor mechanisms;
6 while removing materials from moving conveyors,
2 while making repairs on moving conveyors,
and 2 when stopped conveyors were started with­
out warning. Nine others were caught in moving
gears or pulleys; eight while making adjustments
or repairs on their machines. Five workers each
lost a finger by getting caught between moving
rolls; two while threading calender rolls, two while
cleaning calender rolls, and one while making a
splice on a re winder. Four 1-finger amputations
occurred in the use of power saws and four in the
operation of jointers. While cleaning or adjusting
their machines, six operators were caught between
a moving part and the frame or other stationary

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

24

part of the machine and lost a finger apiece. The
other six 1-finger amputations which occurred
on machines included: one case of contact with the
knives of a knotter; one of striking against a
knotter drill; one of getting caught by the wedge
of a splitter; one of touching the knives of a hand
barker; one of getting caught under the knife of
a paper cutter; and one case of getting caught
under a steam hammer.
The 13 1-finger amputations not involving
machines included 10 cases in which workers
crushed their fingers between objects they were
lifting or moving and other stationary objects;
one in which the finger was badly burned by hot
rosin; one in which the finger was caught in a
closing door; and one which occurred in coupling
two railroad cars.
One of the toe-amputation cases occurred in
the shipping department where a large gear was
being moved. When the crew lost control of the
gear it rolled onto the toes of one of the workers
not wearing safety shoes. A somewhat similar
accident involved a yard laborer. As he was
placing a spare roll on a storage rack, it slipped
off the rack and fell on his foot. The third toe
amputation resulted from an accident in the
furnace room. When a worker attempted to
throw a heavy stick of wood into the furnace,
it struck the side of the furnace door and fell
back on his foot.
The single accident causing the complete loss
of an eye occurred while a worker was cleaning
out a sewer pump. Pressure in the line blew
waste cooking liquor directly into his eye when
he loosened a connection.
The 73 cases resulting in some permanent loss
of use of a body member or function without
complete amputation included 39 cases of severe
contusions, 14 cuts or punctures, 17 fractures
which failed to heal properly, and 3 serious mus­
cular strains. Eight of these were arm injuries;
45, hand or finger injuries; 11, foot or leg injuries;
5, eye injuries; 2, back injuries; 1, a hip injury;
and 1, an ear injury. These injuries resulted
from the following accidents:

N u m ber
o f cases
45

K in d o f accident

Hand or finger injuries
16 Caught in rolls
4 Caught in pulleys or gears
2 Caught in conveyor mechanism




N um ber
of cases

K in d of accident

2 Caught in splitter
1 Caught in jointer head
1 Struck saw blade
4 Caught in pinch points of other machines
12 Pinched or struck by objects being handled
1 Struck against post
1 Fell on staging
1 Fell on slippery floor
11 Foot or leg injuries
7 Pinched or struck by materials being
handled
2 Fell into moving parts of machines
1 Fell from pile of laps
1 Struck by fork truck
8 Arm injuries
2 Caught in rolls
1 Caught in car-puller cable winch
3 Falls from elevations
1 Struck by crane bucket
1 Struck by falling motor
5 Eye injuries
2 Struck by chips from hand tools
1 Struck by piece of metal thrown by Jordan
1 Fell against pipe in walkway
1 Horseplay
2 Back injuries
1 Lifting
1 Working in strained position
1 Hip injury
1 Fell on wet floor, fractured hip
1 Ear injury, loss of hearing
1 Struck by sliding log

Temporary-Total Disabilities
Nearly 36 percent of the temporary-total dis­
abilities resulted from bruises or contusions.
Another 22 percent resulted from strains or
sprains; 14 percent from cuts or lacerations; and
12 percent from fractures. Temperature burns
accounted for over 4 percent of the total; hernia
cases for nearly 4 percent; and chemical burns
for over 2 percent.
Measured in terms of average time lost per
case, the hernia and fracture cases were the most
serious types of temporary-total injuries. In
terms of total time lost to the industry, however,
the cases of bruises and contusions accounted for
nearly 30 percent of the time lost because of
temporary-total disabilities; sprains and strains

A C C ID E N T A N A L Y S IS
accounted for 22 percent; fractures for 21 per­
cent; cuts and lacerations for over 10 percent;
and hernias for 8 percent.
About half the bruises and contusions were foot
and leg injuries and another third were hand and
arm injuries. Nearly half the strains and sprains
were back injuries and 20 percent were foot in­
juries. Nearly hah the cuts and lacerations were
hand or finger injuries; another fourth were foot
or leg injuries. Forty-six percent of the fractures
were foot or toe injuries; 22 percent hand or finger
injuries; 9 percent leg injuries; 7 percent broken
ribs; and 6 percent arm injuries. The temperature
burns causing lost time occurred more or less
equally to all parts of the body. Chemical burns
on the other hand, were primarily eye and foot
injuries.
The general distribution of temporary-total
disabilities indicated that 25 percent were injuries
to the trunk; 24 percent, foot and toe injuries; 19
percent, hand and finger injuries; 12 percent, leg
injuries; 5 percent, eye injuries; and 5 percent, arm
injuries. The trunk injuries, including hernias,
accounted for 34 percent of all lost time charged to
temporary-total disabilities; foot and toe injuries,
23 percent; and hand and finger injuries, 14
percent.

25

Medical Treatment Cases
Over 32 percent of the injuries requiring medical
treatment, but not resulting in loss of time other
then for treatment, were bruises or contusions.
Cuts and lacerations accounted for 27 percent of
the medical treatment cases; foreign bodies in the
eyes, nearly 16 percent; and strains and sprains,
nearly 15 percent.
The medical treatment cases included a large
proportion of injuries to the hand and finger, 29
percent; eye, 20 percent; foot and toe, 12 percent;
leg, 7 percent; and back, 6 percent. The record
indicated that in the total volume of reported eye
injuries 10 required only simple medical attention
without significant loss of time for every 1 result­
ing in a day or more of disability. For other head
injuries the ratio was much lower, about 4 to 1.
For injuries to the upper extremities it dropped
to just over 3 to 1 and for trunk and lower ex­
tremity injuries, it dropped to 1.5 to 1. The exact
significance of these ratios, of course, is open to
some question, inasmuch as there is no way of
knowing the volume of minor injuries in the
various categories which might have benefited by
medical treatment, but which were unreported.

Accident Analysis
Accident reports frequently do not show the
specific reason for the occurrence of the particular
events culminating in an injury. In most instances,
the only available information comes from the in­
jured person himself, or from witnesses present at
the time who may lack either the skill or the op­
portunity to investigate the event fully to deter­
mine the actual accident cause. In the analysis
of a large number of accident reports, therefore,
it is common to find a large proportion deficient
in the one respect most important to the safety
engineer. Despite these limitations, however, the
analyst can draw much useful information from
even the most sketchy accident description.
Almost invariably the description of an accident
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 usually
readily apparent to the witnesses. They, there­
fore, loom large in the accounts of the events.
The more analytical question, “ Whydidithappen?”
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 readiiy apparent.
The direct approach in accident analysis, there­
fore, is to draw from the records the various
elements of information in the order in which they
are usually recorded. Standing alone, these ele­
ments may have limited value, but when related
to each other they can do much to indicate the
accident-prevention activities which may be
needed. The determination of the objects or

26

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S—M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

substances most commonly producing injuries,
coupled with information on how they produced
the injuries, constitutes the first step toward an
understanding of the accident problem. (See
appendix, tables 14 and 15.)

Agencies of Injury and Accident Types
A gen cies o f I n ju r y .— About a fourth of all
recorded injuries resulted from some form of con­
tact with machines or machine parts. Paper­
making machines, including winders and calender
stacks, were involved in 5 percent of the injuries;
vehicles about 5 percent; conveyors and hoisting
apparatus about 3 percent; and various machine
parts, including shafts and cores, about 7 percent.
A large proportion of the injuries inflicted by
paper-making machines resulted from workers
being caught in the moving parts, primarily at
the point of operation. This was also true for
winders and calenders. There were also many
instances in which workers were injured simply by
bumping into these machines, by falling against
the machines, or by being struck either by moving
parts of the machines or by parts which fell from
the machines.
Hand trucks were involved in over half of the
vehicular accidents— the others were primarily
highway motor vehicles and railroad cars. The
most common accidents involving hand trucks
were those in which the injured workers were
struck by the vehicles. There were also many
cases of over-exertion in moving hand trucks and
a considerable number of instances in which
workers bumped into improperly parked vehicles
or had parts of their bodies pinched between the
vehicles and other objects. Crowded workplaces
and poor traffic lay-out contributed to the occur­
rence of many of these accidents.
About half of the injuries inflicted by conveyors
and a third of those inflicted by hoisting apparatus
resulted from workers becoming caught in moving
parts of the equipment. The most common
hoisting equipment accidents, however, were those
in which the injured persons were struck by swing­
ing loads or by materials spilled from the loads.
The injuries resulting from contact with shafts,
cores, and metal machine parts occurred largely
during manual handling of these items. In many
instances the workers dropped them upon their
feet, pinched their fingers under them as they set




them down, or strained themselves in attempting
to lift them.
Flying particles and airborne dusts, generally
unidentifiable, were responsible for about 12 per­
cent of the reported injuries. All of these were
eye injuries and in most instances were relatively
minor. Their substantial numbers and the fact
that some produced severe disabilities, however,
makes them an important group worthy of serious
consideration in the development of a safety
program.
Contact with hand tools produced more than 9
percent of the reported injuries. Pulphooks were
most commonly involved in these accidents, but
wrenches, knives, bars, hammers, and portable
power tools were each responsible for a substantial
number of injuries. The pulphook injuries usu­
ally occurred when the hooks pulled out of the
logs or glanced off and struck the users. The
other hand-tool accidents were generally cases in
which the tools slipped from the object to which
they were being applied and struck the worker or
pinched his hand against some other object.
Pulpwood logs were the injury-producing agen­
cies in nearly 7 percent of the recorded cases. The
great majority of the accidents involving pulpwood sticks were cases in which the workers
dropped logs on their feet; pinched their fingers in
piling the logs; were struck by logs rolling or
falling from a pile; or strained themselves attempt­
ing to lift or move heavy logs.
Working surfaces, listed as the agency of injury
in about 6 percent of the recorded cases, were
involved primarily in fails. Over half the acci­
dents in the group were cases in which the workers
slipped or stumbled and fell to the surface on which
they were walking or standing. Most of the
others were falls from an elevation.
Paper, primarily in rolls or packages, was the
agency of injury in nearly 6 percent of the acci­
dents. In more than a third of these cases the
injuries were strains or sprains from overexertion
in lifting or moving the paper. Most of the others
were cases in which the workers were struck by
rolls of paper they dropped, or which rolled from
hand trucks or other equipment, or in moving
caught and pinched them against some other
object.
Nearly 5 percent of the reported injuries re­
sulted from sharp and straining movements of
the body rather than from contact with any par­

A C C ID E N T A N A L Y S IS
ticular object or substance. These were not the
simple overexertion cases resulting from pushing,
pulling, or lifting heavy objects— they were prac­
tically all cases in which the injured person Jost
his balance on a slippery surface or stumbled
over an object lying in his way and strained him­
self in his efforts to avoid falling. About half the
resulting injuries were back or abdominal strains
and most of the others were foot or ankle sprains.
The relatively high incidence of this type of acci­

27

dent implies a need for improved housekeeping,
particularly pointed to the elimination of slippery
and cluttered working surfaces.
Chemicals were the injury-producing agents in
over 4 percent of the reported cases. Chemical
burns and dermatoses resulting from contact with
the cooking liquors were the most common in­
juries. There were, however, a considerable
number of internal injuries resulting from the
inhalation of chemical fumes.

CHART 3. MAJOR TYPES OF ACCIDENTS IN THE
PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY, 1948
PERCENT OF ALL DISABLING AND MEDICAL INJURIES

0

5
10
15
20
25
30
--------- ,
--------- i
--------- 1
--------- 1
----------- 1
----------1
--------

OTHER

UN ITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

966013°




35

r~

40

"1

28

IN J U R IE S A N D A C C ID E N T C A U SE S— M A N U F A C T U R E OF P U L P A N D P A P E R

A ccident T y p e s .—As the analysis of the reported
cases moved from injuries to a determination of
how the injuries occurred, it became apparent that
the most common variety of injury-producing
accidents encountered in the pulp and paper
industry were those in which the injured persons
were struck by moving, falling, or flying objects.
Over 37 percent of all the recorded accidents were
in this group. Next in numerical importance
were the cases in which the workers struck against
or bumped into objects. This group, which
accounted for over 14 percent of the injuries,
however, was nearly equaled by the cases in
which the workers were injured by being caught in,
on, or between objects. The latter group of acci­
dents produced 14 percent of the injuries. Next
in importance, falls were responsible for 10 percent
of the injuries; overexertion for 9 percent; and
slips or stumbles, which did not culminate in
falls, over 5 percent.
About a third of the “ struck-by” accidents were
cases of flying particles, generally unidentifiable,
entering the eyes. The great majority of these
flying-particle accidents caused only minor in­
juries. Much more important, in terms of the
seriousness of the resulting injuries, were the cases
in which workers were struck by their own hand
tools or by other objects which they dropped in
handling. Pulpwood logs which were thrown or
fell upon workers from piles or from machines, and
machine parts which fell or rolled from equipment
were also involved in a considerable number of
“ struck-by” accidents. Accidents in which workers
were struck by vehicles were not numerous, but
were important because of the relative severity of
the resulting injuries. The majority of the ve­
hicular accidents involved hand trucks although
there were a number of cases involving powered
vehicles.
“ Struck-by accidents” were common in all the
operating departments. They were, however, of
outstanding importance in the woodyards, where
they constituted over 55 percent of all recorded
accidents. In the wood rooms and ground wood
mills about 45 percent of the injuries resulted
from “ struck-by” accidents.
About half of the “ striking-against” accidents
were cases in which the workers bumped into plant
equipment. The others were primarily cases of
striking against projecting nails, or splintered edges
on skids, stepping on sharp objects, or bumping




into piled materials. The most serious injuries
resulted from striking against moving parts of
machines.
All the operating departments reported a con­
siderable number of “ striking-against” accidents.
They were most prominent, however, in the sulfite
mills, where they amounted to 21 percent of all
recorded accidents, in the paper-machine rooms
(over 18 percent), and in the wood rooms (over 17
percent).
The “ caught in, on, or between” accidents were
particularly important, not only because of their
volume but because they frequently caused serious
injuries. Nearly half of these accidents resulted
from workers being caught in the pinch points of
moving machinery, and amputations were fre­
quently necessary. The remainder of the group
consisted primarily of accidents in which fingers or
toes were crushed under materials being moved
manually or in which workers were pinched be­
tween moving objects (hand trucks, crane loads,
etc.) and other fixed objects. In the papermachine rooms and in the shipping departments,
one out of every five accidents fell into the “ caught
in, on, or between” category.
Slightly over two-thirds of the reported falls
were cases in which the injured person fell only to
the surface on which he had been standing. Most
of these resulted from slipping or tripping on regu­
lar working surfaces. There were, however, many
such falls on piled materials and on machines.
The falls from elevations included many cases of
falls from piled materials, from platforms, and
from ladders. Departmentally, falls on the work­
ing level occurred most frequently in the beater
rooms and shipping departments. Falls from ele­
vations were most common in the sulfite mills,
the shipping departments, and the maintenance
departments.
The great majority of the “ overexertion” acci­
dents occurred in lifting, carrying, pushing, or
pulling heavy objects, such as rolls of paper or
sticks of pulpwood. In the finishing rooms, one
in every six injuries resulted from overexertion.
In the beater rooms one in every seven accidents
was in this category and in the wet rooms and yard
departments the ratio was one in every eight.
About 80 percent of the accidents designated
as slips or stumbles (not falls) were cases in which
the workers lost their balance because of slipperi­
ness or irregularities in the working surfaces of

A C C ID E N T C A U SE S
their plants. The others were primarily cases of
stumbling over materials lying in the workplaces.

29

These accidents were most common in the paper­
machine rooms and in the wet rooms.

Accident Causes
Modern accident analysis is based upon two
premises: first, that there is an identifiable cause
for every accident; and second, that when an acci­
dent cause is known, it is usually possible to
eliminate or counteract that particular cause as
the probable source of future accidents of the
same character. In many instances it is true that
a variety of circumstances contribute to the occur­
rence of an accident, and the course accident pre­
vention should take may seem confused because
o f the multiplicity of the possible avenues of action.
It is commonly accepted, however, that every acci­
dent may be traced to the existence of some hazard­
ous working condition, to the commission of an
unsafe act by some individual, or to a combination
o f these accident-producing factors.
The sole purpose of accident analysis, as applied
to large groups of cases, is to determine what
specific factors within each of these two categories
of accident causes are most frequently involved in
the occurrence of accidents. With this knowledge
available, it is then possible to plan a safety pro­
gram concentrating upon the elimination of these
specific accident factors with assurance that suc­
cess in this objective should quickly lead to a
substantial reduction in the volume of injuries.
It must be recognized, however, that accident
analysis has definite limitations. At best, it can
only furnish clues as to the directions in which
accident-prevention activities can most effectively
be pointed. What those activities should be and
how they are to be carried out must be determined
by the individual in control of each safety program
after his general objectives have been indicated
through accident analysis. It must also be recog­
nized that accident analysis cannot go beyond the
reported facts. In other words, the accuracy of
any analysis is wholly dependent upon the accu­
racy and completeness of the original accident
reports. In this respect, it has been consistently
apparent in the Bureau’s surveys that the inade­
quacies of reporting seriously limit the possibilities
of effective analysis. The limitations are not great
in broad studies of this type, which bring a suffi­
cient volume of adequate reports into considera­



tion to support an analysis. The shortcomings are
specifically at the company or establishment level
where the most effective analysis can be performed
only when the necessary facts are available.
In general, the inadequacies of most plant­
reporting systems stem from the tendency to base
accident records upon the legal requirements of
the workmen’s compensation jurisdiction in which
the plant is located. These requirements relate
primarily to information about injuries with rela­
tively little emphasis upon how the injury occurred
and even less upon why it occurred. These influ­
ences were strikingly apparent in the present
survey.
Most of the plants included in the survey were
those that maintain the most extensive accident
records in the industry. All of the 4,170 case
records collected were readily classifiable by the
nature of the injury experienced, and. over 99
percent were readily classifiable by the agency of
injury and accident type. The situation was quite
different in accounting for the reasons for the
occurrence of accidents. Over 44 percent of the
case records contained no information on which
to base a conclusion concerning the existence or
nonexistence of a hazardous condition to which
the accidents could be related. Over 65 percent
of the case records were similarly deficient in in­
formation relating to the commission or noncom­
mission of an unsafe act. Because of the rela­
tively large volume of adequately reported cases
yielding significant classification patterns, these
deficiencies in accident recording were not serious
in this survey. It is evident, however, that they
would present serious obstacles to effective analysis
at the plant level in many establishments.
In interpreting the findings relating to hazardous
conditions and unsafe acts, it is essential to recog­
nize that these two factors are not necessarily
exclusive. In other words, the analysis procedure
was not directed toward the determination of a
single major cause of each accident, which would
have involved an exercise of analytical judgment
seldom possible from the available facts. On the
contrary, an effort was made to determine inde-

30

INJURIES A N D

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

pendently for each accident whether there was a
hazardous condition which contributed directly to
the occurrence, and whether the event could be
directly associated with an unsafe act.
Because many of the reports were inadequate
for the determination of one or the other of these
factors, it is impossible to draw any conclusion as
to whether hazardous conditions or unsafe acts
were the leading cause of accidents. For the
accident preventionist, however, this is a limita­
tion of little consequence. For his purposes, the
pattern of the specific factors within each general
category is of more importance than the inter­
relationship between the major groups of accident

C H A R T 4.

OF PULP AND

PAPER

causes. This results from the fact that his ap­
proach to the elimination of accident causes in the
two categories necessarily must be different.
The correction of hazardous working conditions
usually is entirely within the powers of manage­
ment and can be accomplished by direct action.
The avoidance of unsafe acts, on the other hand,
requires cooperation and understanding by both
management and workers. To achieve this under­
standing, management must take the lead by
providing safety-minded supervision and by mak­
ing sure that all workers are acquainted with the
hazards of their operations and are familiar with
the means of overcoming them.

M A J O R TYPES O F UNSAFE W O R K IN G C O N D IT IO N S
IN THE PULP A N D PAPER INDUSTRY, 1948
PERCENT OF ALL DISABLING AND MEDICAL INJURIES

40
~1

SLIPPERY FLOORS AND OTHER DEFECTIVE AGENCIES

LACK OF PERSONAL S A FETY EQUIPMENT

O THER

U N ITED STA TES DEPARTM ENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STA TISTIC S




ACCIDENT CAUSES

Hazardous Working Conditions
In broad general groupings, the analysis indi­
cated that the hazardous conditions most com­
monly leading to accidents in the pulp and paper
industry are: defective agencies, which accounted
for 34 percent of the accidents; hazardous working
procedures, accounting for 23 percent of the acci­
dents; and inadequately guarded agencies, which
accounted for 19 percent of the accidents. Of
somewhat lesser importance, the lack of personal
safety equipment was responsible for nearly
8 percent of the accidents, and the hazardous
arrangement of materials and equipment ac­
counted for 6 percent. (See appendix, tables
16, 17, 18.)

Defective Agencies. — Slippery working surfaces,
leading to slips and falls, constituted the most
common hazard in this general group. No operat­
ing department was entirely free of these accidents,
but their greatest concentration occurred in the
wet rooms, beater rooms, paper-machine rooms,
and shipping departments. In the shipping de­
partments many of the slippery surface accidents
were attributed to metal dockboards which had
been worn smooth. In the operating departments,
the slipperiness was most commonly ascribed to
water or wet pulp which had spilled or splashed
onto the floor.
Sharp-edged or pointed agencies were common
sources of severe cuts or abrasions. Projecting
nails, wires, or bolts on machines or in dunnage or
packing cases, splintered lumber, pallets, or hand
tools and projecting nails or splinters on working
surfaces were responsible for many injuries of this
nature.
H azardous W orking Procedures.— The general
practice of manually lifting or moving heavy
objects was the cause of more than half the acci­
dents associated with the general group of hazard­
ous working procedures. The bulk of these acci­
dents were cases of overexertion, resulting pri­
marily in strains, sprains, and hernias. There were,
however, many cases in which workers dropped
materials on their feet or had their fingers, toes, or
other body parts pinched by objects which they
were moving, simply because those objects were
too bulky or too heavy to be manually controlled.
About a third of these overexertion accidents



31

resulted from lifting or moving rolls or bundles of
paper. The others occurred mainly in the handling
of boxes or crates of supplies, shafts, cores, pulpwood logs, machine parts, and hand trucks. Depar tmentally, these accidents were most heavily
concentrated in the finishing departments, shipping
departments, and yard departments.
Working procedures requiring exposure to hot
materials, toxic or corrosive chemicals, or flying
objects, and working in overly restricted quarters
were responsible for over a third of the hazardous
procedure accidents. Accidents resulting in chem­
ical burns and dermatoses were the most numerous
in this group. Most of these cases involved contact
with cooking liquors. The cases of temperature
burns also involved primarily contact with cooking
liquors. The accidents ascribed to the lack of
sufficient working space were primarily cases in
which workers struck against their own tools,
bumped into objects protruding into the working
area, or were struck by tools in the hands of nearby
workers. In the chemical pulp mills, the beater
rooms, and the yard and shipping departments
relatively high proportions of the reported acci­
dents were attributed to these types of hazardous
procedures.

Inadequately Guarded Agencies.— In general, the
accidents ascribed to inadequate guarding caused
injuries of more than average severity. Their
importance from the accident-prevention stand­
point, therefore, is greater than their number
indicated.
Approximately 70 percent of the accidents
ascribed to inadequate guarding were cases of
inadequate guarding of machines, including con­
veyors and hoisting equipment. The remainder
were primarily related to inadequate guarding of
elevated working surfaces, floor openings, and
openings into tanks or bins.
In most of the cases associated with machines,
other than conveyors and hoisting equipment, the
inadequately guarded condition occurred at the
point of operation, i. e., at the point where the
operator feeds material into the machine. These
accident-producing situations included many in­
stances of inadequately guarded nip points, per­
mitting operators to become caught between rollers
or under descending parts of machines, and of
inadequately covered saws or powered wood-cut­
ting knives, which permitted the operators to come

32

INJURIES A N D

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

into contact with the cutting tools. There were
also some instances of inadequate guarding of
gears, pulleys, and power transmitting chains
which resulted in serious injuries. These cases,
however, were not particularly common.
Most of the accidents associated with inadequate
guarding of conveyors were cases in which the lack
of side rails or similar protection permitted ma­
terials to fall off the conveyors and strike nearby
workers. Situations designated as inadequate in
the guarding of working surfaces involved pri­
marily scaffolds or other elevated working surfaces
equipped with neither railings to prevent the fall of
persons nor toe boards to prevent the fall of
materials. There were also a few accidents attrib­
utable to unfenced floor, tank, and bin openings.
In the wood rooms 44 percent of the accidents
were attributed to inadequate guarding; in the
paper-machine rooms the percentage was 30; and
in the power departments it was 21. In most of the
other operating departments well over 10 percent
of the accidents were associated with inadequate
guarding.
L ack o f Personal Safety E qu ip m en t .— The acci­
dent records of the pulp and paper industry are
replete with cases in which it is obvious that the
use of personal protective devices, such as safety
shoes, impact goggles, hand leathers, gloves,
aprons, or safety helmets, would have prevented
or minimized injuries. Wider use of these devices
in the industry 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. As accident
analysis is primarily concerned with determining
the factors which led to the accident, as contrasted
to the injury resulting from the accident, the
absence of personal protective devices is seldom
indicated as a hazardous working condition.
There are, however, certain types of operations
involving inherent hazards which can be over­
come only through the use of proper protective
equipment. Typical of these operations is the use
of grinding wheels or other tools or equipment,
which constantly throw off particles or chips, and
with which the use of impact goggles is essential to
avoid eye injuries. Similarly, it is generally ac­
cepted that the use of goggles, gloves, and other
protective clothing is an essential part of the opera­




OF PULP A N D PAPER

tions involved in mixing or handling caustics or
other hazardous chemicals.
Most of the accidents ascribed to the lack of
personal safety equipment in this analysis oc­
curred in operations of the types described above.
In two-thirds of the cases the deficiency was a lack
of goggles. In most of the other cases it was the
lack of gloves, rubber aprons, or other protective
clothing required in the handling of corrosive
chemicals. Nearly 65 percent of these accidents,
occurred in the maintenance departments.
H azardous Arrangem ents .— The hazardous ar­
rangements identified in this analysis are closely
related to the conditions normally designated as
poor housekeeping, but because they represent
relatively permanent situations, they were treated
separately.
Improperly piled materials falling onto the
workers, and improperly placed materials ob­
structing working areas or creating tripping
hazards, constituted the most important hazards
in this group. Pulpwood logs were the objects
most commonly piled in hazardous fashion.

Unsafe Acts
For the purpose of this analysis, an unsafe act
was defined as that violation of a commonly ac­
cepted safe procedure occasioning or permitting
the occurrence of the injury-producing accident.
Literally, this definition means that no personal
action should be designated as unsafe unless there
is a reasonable and less hazardous alternative
procedure. For example, the use of an unguarded
machine for which no guard was provided was
classified as a hazardous condition, but not as an
unsafe act. On the other hand, the failure to
wear goggles on an eye-hazardous operation when
such goggles had been provided was classified as
an unsafe act because in this instance there was
a less-hazardous alternative procedure.
The analysis, however, does not imply that the
alternative safe procedure was known to the person
acting in an unsafe manner, nor that his unsafe
act was the result of a considered choice between
two possible procedures. It was apparent in
many of the accidents studied in this survey'that
the individual knew the safe procedure, but con­
sciously decided not to follow it. In other cases,

ACCIDENT CAUSES

circumstances indicated that the person acted
unsafely simply because he did not know the
alternative safe method. The first step toward the
elimination of unsafe acts, therefore, is to make
sure that all workers are thoroughly instructed in
the safe methods of performing their duties and
that they are familiar with the hazards connected
with deviations from them. The second essential
step is to exercise strict supervision to see that
safe procedures are followed.
Of the accidents attributed to unsafe acts in
this survey, 48 percent resulted from unsafe han­
dling or unsafe use of equipment; 24 percent from
assuming an unsafe position or posture; 7 percent
from unsafe placing or loading; 6 percent from
failing to secure or warn; and 5 percent from
failure to wear safety equipment or safe clothing.
(See appendix, table 19.)
Unsafe H andling or Unsafe Use of Equipm ent .—
The outstanding unsafe act in this general group
was that of misapplying or wielding hand tools
in such manner as to cause the tool to strike the
operator or one of his coworkers. Pulphooks
were the tools most commonly involved in these
accidents, although there were many cases in­
volving other hand tools, such as hammers and
wrenches. The group also included numerous
accidents resulting from the use of hand tools or
other equipment for purposes other than that for
which intended.
The unsafe acts associated with manual handling
of materials consisted primarily of gripping objects
insecurely or of taking the wrong hold on objects.
The accidents resulting from gripping objects in­
securely most commonly were cases where the
workers dropped objects on their feet. In many
instances the fault lay in attempting to lift too
many objects at one time or in using one hand
instead of two. In other instances workers at­
tempted to lift irregular, slippery, or hot objects
by grasping only a small section and found it
impossible to hold them because they were
imbalanced.
Taking the wrong hold on objects was respon­
sible for many crushed fingers and hands. In
most of these accidents the workers’ fingers or
hands were pinched or crushed under or between
objects they were placing or piling.



33

Unsafe P osition or Posture. — Nearly two-thirds
of the unsafe acts in this group consisted simply of
inattention to footing or surroundings. Failure
to observe normal caution in ascending or de­
scending ladders or stairways, or in merely walking
across floors or yards was the most common fault.
Poor housekeeping was a contributing factor to
some accidents in which workers slipped or
stumbled over small objects on the floor. M ost
commonly, however, the accidents consisted
simply of the workers walking into or bumping
against machines, pipes, piled materials, and other
objects which should have been quite visible and
avoidable.
The most serious accidents in this group were
those resulting from workers unnecessarily ex­
posing themselves to contact with moving or fall­
ing objects. These cases included such actions as
walking or standing too close to the moving parts
of machines when not actually working on the
machines, standing under or in the line of move­
ment of crane loads, approaching the bottom of
pulpwood piles while they were being broken
down, and walking or standing in front of moving
vehicles.
Unsafe Placing or Loading. — The most common
unsafe act in this group was placing of materials in
insecure piles, or placing them in such fashion that
they fell onto the worker. The unsafe-piling acci­
dents usually were cases of material falling from
the piles onto the workers, but there were some in­
stances in which improperly piled materials
shifted or tipped, causing workers on top of the
piles to fall.
In addition, there were some accidents ascribed
to the parking of vehicles or the placing of ma­
terials in the workplace in such manner as to
create obstructions or tripping hazards.
Failure to Secure or W arn. — A wide variety of
unsafe acts fell into this group. Under the general
heading of failure to secure or block there were a
number of cases in which machine parts were set
in place but were not firmly screwed down or
otherwise attached so that they came loose later
and fell on the operators. Hand trucks and other
vehicles were sometimes parked on grades without
being properly braked or blocked to prevent their
running away. In other instances maintenance
men and machine operators were injured while

INJURIES A N D

34

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

cleaning or adjusting machines because they had
neglected to tag or lock the control switches to
prevent the equipment from being started.
The unsafe acts classified as “ failure to warn”
were primarily cases in which machinery was
started without notice to other workers who were
working on or close to the equipment. There
were also a number of cases in which workers
threw materials from vehicles or piles without
warning others below to stand clear.

OF

PULP

AND PAPER

Failure To W ea r Personal Safety E quipm ent or
P roper Clothing .— More

than half the unsafe acts
included in this group consisted of failure to wear
goggles which had been provided for use in
operations presenting extensive eye hazards.
The others consisted primarily of failure to wear
gloves, aprons, or face masks provided for use
when working with hazardous chemicals, and of
wearing loose clothing, particularly loose sleeves
and neckties, while working on moving machinery.

Accident Prevention Suggestions
To illustrate the general types of accident
problems in the pulp and paper industry, a number
of typical accidents were selected for detailed
study. These accidents were analyzed by a
member of the Division of Safety Standards of
the Bureau of Labor Standards of the United
States Department of Labor and suggestions were
made to indicate how these accidents 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 for the
industry, but to point out that there is a simple
approach to the prevention of nearly every
type of 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 secondary importance as long as
it accomplishes its purpose.
Brief descriptions of the selected accidents
accompanied by the recommendations of the
Bureau of Labor Standards’ safety specialist for
the prevention of such accidents are given on the
following pages.

€ase Descriptions and Recommendations

2. An employee was unloading lime from a rail­
road car. Lime dust mixed with prespiration,
resulted in burns on the employee’s ankles.
W orkers who handle or m ix lime should wear
clothing which will cover as much o f the body as
possible

(long

sleeves,

boots, gloves, goggles, etc.)

to m inim ize contact with the lim e.

3. A jammer (crane with grapple bucket) was
being used to unload pulpwood logs from a gondola
car. When the operator opened the bucket, a
log fell and struck an employee working on the
pile of logs.
The usual precaution o f not permitting men to
work under a suspended load was not customarily
observed in this plant and the inevitable happened.
M e n should never be permitted to work under a sus­
pended load, particularly when the load is carried
by

a grapple

bucket.

Logs

often fa ll fr o m

the

bucket even when the bucket is not opened.

4. An employee was helping to carry a large log.
When his co-workers dropped the log, a knot in
the log scraped the employee’s chest.
M e n doing work o f this sort should be carefully
trained in safe lifting and carrying methods.

This

is particularly true f o r a two or more, m an carry.
L eft to themselves, f e w m en will develop safe methods

1.
An employee was hauling bundles of news­ o f lifting.
paper from a boxcar at night. In the dark, he
5. While unloading wood from a railroad car,
misjudged his distance and one wheel of the truck
an employee dropped a log on his foot. The log
missed the plate. The truck jerked, causing him
was slippery owing to snow and ice.
to strain his shoulder.
This is an obvious case o f inadequate yard light­
in g.




Logs were being unloaded by hand and hazards
caused by ice and snow are difficult to control.

A

ACCIDENT PREVENTION SUGGESTIONS
mechanical means

o f unloading

logs is probably

the best w a y to control accidents o f this typ e.
the in ju r y .

6. A wood handler was moving logs with a
picaroon from a pile onto a conveyor. His
picaroon slipped from a log and struck his foot.
Investigation revealed that the picaroon was not
Picaroon points should be kept sharp at

all times so that the point can easily penetrate the
log .

7. An employee was unloading pulp wood from a
railroad car. When he attempted to throw a log
from the car, it struck the side of the car, fell
back and struck him on the foot.
The fa ct that pulpwood was being thrown fr o m the
car indicates a basic error in handling material .
M aterial as bulky and heavy as pulpwood should
not be handled in such a w a y that the em ployee
would be required to lift it over the side o f the car .
S afety shoes might have avoided or m inim ized

8. While unloading logs from a railroad car,
an employee tripped in a hole in the floor, lost
his balance, and dropped a stick of pulpwood on
his foot.
Investigation shows that the car was a boxcar
owned b y a com m on carrier.

The car, o f course,

was not done.

The

This

em ployee unloading the car

should have made tem porary repairs by covering the
hole.

S a fety shoes might have avoided or m inim ized

I n this case annealing was not ex­

pertly done.

11. As an employee was walking past a pile
of stored pulpwood, one log slid from the pile,
and struck and fractured his leg.
Regular

walkways

adjacent to

piled

materials

which m a y slide or roll should be protected b y a
barrier guard or should be elevated so that sliding
materials

m ay

pass

under

the

walking

surface.

12. An employee was wearing gloves while
drilling knots from pulpwood. When the gloves
caught in the drill his finger was pulled against
the bit.
Gloves should never be worn when operating a
drill .

13. An employee was placing wood in the
chipper. A chip flew from the machine and struck
his eye.
A

the in ju ry.

should have been repaired b y the railroad.

A nn ealin g should never be done except

by an expert.

Safety shoes might have avoided or m inim ized

sharp.

broke off.

35

screen should have been provided which would

protect the operator against fly in g chips.

Individual

eye protection , either goggles or a fa ce shield, should
also have been provided.

14. An employee was barking logs with a hand
barker. As he was pushing a stick of pulpwood
against the knives, the log slipped and his hand
struck the knives.
H an d barking o f logs is always dangerous.
mechanical feed

and

turn-over device is

A

usually

practicable to eliminate the need fo r the operator to

the in ju r y .

feed the logs against the knives by hand.

9. While unloading pulpwood, an employee was
injured when a splinter from a log punctured his
finger.

15. An employee was using an axe to remove
pieces of bark remaining on logs after they had
passed through the barking drum. His axe
struck a knot, glanced from the log, and hit his leg.

W h en handling pulpwood logs, gloves or other
type o f hand protection should be used .

A

10. An employee was using a picaroon to move
pulpwood logs. When the point of the picaroon
snapped off, the employee lost his balance and
fell on the log.
Investigation
been badly bent.
and

then

disclosed

the

picaroon

had

I n restraightening, it was heated

reforged.

and sharpening,

that

In

annealing

after

bending

it became brittle and the point




high in ju ry rate is characteristic o f axe work

unless the m en are trained in the safe use o f the axe.
Through training, however , such injuries can be
eliminated.

The grip , the stance , the swing, and

the return m ust all be correct and properly coordi­
nated .

16. An employee was wearing gloves while
using a disc-type barker. A knot on a log caught
his glove and pulled his hand into the barker.

36

INJURIES A N D

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

This appears to he another instance where the
wearing o j gloves created a hazard in a particular
operation.

H a n d protectors , i f needed , should he

o f a type that will pull fr e e i f caught.

17. An employee was using a bar to free logs
in the chipper. When a second worker threw a
log into the chipper, it struck the bar, causing
the bar to strike the injured employee’s head.
Chippers are hazardous machines.

Safe operat­

OF PULP AND PAPER

brought to cooking pressure, the charge backed
up into the acid line. When the acid feed line to
a second digester was opened during the charging
operation, the pressure on the line caused a blow­
out of chips, acid, and gas. An employee was
severely burned.
Obviously the workers on the first shift should have
closed the feedline valve.

The second-shift super­

visor , however , should have checked the equipment
before putting it into operation to make sure that

in g methods should he developed and the operators

everything was in proper condition.

carefully trained to follow them.

should be a standard procedure in connection with

I n this case the

chipper should have been shut down in order to fr e e it.

Such a check

18. The employee was pulling logs out of a
conveyor. His pulp hook slipped from a log and
the log fell on his foot.
Investigation o f this accident showed that the p u lp
hook was dull.

Pulphooks should he kept sharp so

that the p oin t can penetrate the log.

Safety shoes

might have avoided or m inim ized the in ju ry.

the operation o f a n y pressure vessel.

A type o f valve

with

readily

a

high-rising

spindle

which

shows

whether the valve is open or closed facilitates in ­
spection.

22. An employee entered the bleach house to
shut off the chlorine line and inhaled chlorine gas
escaping from a leaking flange.
I n this case the line was being shut off to perm it
repair o f the leaking flange.

I t was know n , there-

19. An employee was cleaning under the chip
conveyor. The belt caught his broom and pulled
his hand between the belt and roller.

fo r e , that gas was escaping and the em ployee should

I f the guarding is not adeguate to prevent contact

23. An employee was holding a two-wheeled
truck onto which a frozen bale of pulp was being
tipped. As the bale fell onto the truck, the truck
jerked, straining employee’s shoulder.
H andling two-wheeled trucks is hazardous , par­

with the belt} the conveyor should be shut down while
cleaning around it.
2 0 . A rag cooker was making a bleach by mixing
chlorine gas, lime, and water. Despite the fact
that he was wearing a canister mask approved for
chlorine protection, he inhaled some of the gas.
On investigation, it was found that the canister
had been in use longer than recommended by the
manufacturer.

have worn a suitable gas mask.

ticularly i f the objects handled are bulky and heavy.
On all such work , safe methods suited to the condi­
tions involved should be worked out and all the m en
thoroughly trained in their use.

I n this case the

basic rule calling f o r the handled object to be always
kept under control was violated.

The effective life o f a canister is definitely limited
a nd the manufacturer’s recommendations f o r replace­
m ent should he followed strictly.

F or this purpose

an accurate record should he maintained f o r each
canister showing both its age and the time it has been
worn.

A

regular

checking

procedure

should

24. An employee was opening a valve on the
leacher with a pipe wrench. The pipe he was
using for additional leverage slipped off the wrench,
causing the employee to fall.

he

The em ployee had placed a 2-foot section o f p ip e

developed and maintained to insure that replace­

over the wrench handle to get additional leverage.

ments are made within the specified time limits.

Extending the wrench handle is always dangerous
and only a type of extension which can be securely

21. Workers on one shift completed the
charging of a digester and left it for the next shift,
presumably ready for the “ cook.” However,
they neglected to close the valve on the acid line
leading into the digester, although they had closed
the main acid-line valve. As the digester was



locked into the handle should be used.
2 5 . While an employee was mixing lime in
mixing bin, some lime splashed in his eye.
W orkers who handle or m ix lime

a

should wear

clothing that covers as much o f the body as possible

ACCIDENT PREVENTION SUGGESTIONS

37

(long sleeves , boots , gloves , etc.) in order to m inim ize

must lift heavy objects should be trained in safe

contact

lifting methods.

with

the

lim e.

Tight-fitting

goggles

are

essential for eye 'protection in this operation.

26. An employee was standing in a broke cart
pulling broke from a chute. Because of insuffi­
cient head room, be had to work in a half-standing,
half-squatting position. He strained his abdomen.
The broke chute should never discharge into a

32. An employee was wiping moisture from a
V-belt to prevent it from slipping. His fingers
were caught by the belt and pulled into the pulley.
A

belt compound which would prevent slipping

should be used instead o f attempting to w ipe away
the moisture.

P u lleys should be guarded.

location with head room insufficient f o r the employee
to stand erect.

27. While pushing broke into the broke hole,
an employee lost his balance and fell into the pit.
In

some plants a railing is placed around the

broke hole to prevent accidents o f this kind.

A

28. While walking across a wet floor, an em­
ployee slipped and fell, striking his head against
a paper machine.
Adequate drainage facilities will go a long w ay
toward eliminating slipperiness owing to wet floors.
Rubber soled shoes would also help to prevent fa lls.
W h en floors are laid or resurfaced , a high-friction
floor surface sloping gently to drainage channels
can be provided.

shaft

should

catch pail o f some kind should be installed

under the bearing so that grease could not drip on
the floor.

I n this instance the grease should have

been cleaned u p immediately.

34. An employee was applying a stick dressing
to a belt at the in-running side of a pulley. The
stick adhered to the belt and pulled the employee’s
hand into the pulley.
W h en a stick dressing is applied , it should be
done at the out-running side o f the pulley.

29. While an employee was setting slitters, the
shaft rolled off the saw-horses and struck him
on the foot.
The

33. Some excess grease fell to the floor as an
employee was wiping the bearings of a machine.
Later, he slipped in the grease and grabbed a hot
condensate line to keep from falling. He burned
his hand.

have

been

securely

blocked.

S om e shops use special horses which hold the shafts
securely yet permit them to be easily turned over b y

35. An employee was trucking pulp to the
beater. When a wheel of his truck hit a hole in
the concrete floor, the truck jerked, straining the
employee’s back.
P oor housekeeping is indicated.

hand.

The

in-running side o f pulleys should be guarded.

The hole in the

concrete flo o r should have been repaired as soon as

30. An employee attempted to thread paper
through the dryer rolls by hand. His hand was
caught and pulled between the rolls.
Feeding
A

paper into rolls is

always

dangerous.

blast o f air on a feeder belt would eliminate the

it was noticed.

36. An employee was cutting a metal strap
from a bale of pulp. As it was severed, the strap
flew back, striking the employee’s eyes.

a

This operation should be performed by standing

mechanical device cannot be used , a rounded stick

to the left o f the cut, holding the band with the left

is sometimes used or the paper is thrown into the

hand and the cutter with the right.

pinch point.

o f the band w ill then move aw ay fr o m the worker

necessity

o f getting

close

to

the

rolls.

W h en

The fr e e end

when it is cut.

31. As an employee attempted to pick up a
200-pound roll of paper, he strained his back.
N o one should attempt to lift a 200-p ou n d roll
o f paper.

Either a mechanical lifting device should

be used , or the em ployee should get help.




A ll who

E ven when performed with the greatest care , this
is a hazardous operation.

The possibility o f ex­

periencing serious eye injuries or severe fa ce cuts
dictates that fa ce shields , or goggles as a m in im u m ,
should always be worn on this work.

INJURIES A N D

38

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— .MANUFACTURE

37. While loading rolls of paper into a railroad
car, an employee was injured when the steel
loading platform to the car slipped and fell
between the car and the loading dock.

helmet.

OF PULP AND

PAPER

H e raised the helmet to knock off the slag

and a piece

o f the slag penetrated the eye.

No

goggles were worn under the helmet; i f they had been
worn this in ju ry would have been avoided.

Car-loading platforms should be so designed that
they cannot slip out o f place during the loading
operation .

38. An employee attempted to walk across a
steel plate into a boxcar. The plate was worn
and slippery owing to extended use. The em­
ployee slipped and fell between the car and the
loading platform.
Car-loading plates should be o f material that does
not readily wear smoothy or the surface should

44. As a carpenter was using a circular saw, a
board he was cutting kicked back and struck him
on the chest.
Investigation

disclosed

the

saw

to

have

been

eguipped with a hood but not with kick-back dogs or a
spreader.

The board was warped and kicked back

when forced through the saw.

A

spreader would

have prevented the accident; kick-back dogs on the
saw guard would probably have prevented it.

be

periodically roughened to prevent slipperiness,

39. While an employee was loading a boxcar, a
locomotive bumped the car, throwing the worker to
the floor of the car.
W arning signs should have been placed on the spur
track to warn the locomotive engineer that the car was

45. Liquor in the pipe of an evaporator sprayed
the face of a pipe fitter, as he was removing a
valve.
E m p loyees

working

with

p ip e

lines

carrying

steam , hot liquids , or hazardous chemicals should
be provided with , and be required to wear , tight-fitting
goggles

or fa ce

shields.

Full fa ce

protection

is

in u se.

usually preferable.

40. While a maintenance worker was repairing
a paper machine, another employee was cleaning
it with an air hose. Some foreign particles en­
tered the maintenance worker’s eye.

46. A machinist was turning a piece of metal on
a lathe. A small particle flew from the lathe and
lodged in his eye.

Extrem e care must be used when using an air
hose fo r a n y p u rp ose , particularly in cleaning where
dust or dirt m a y be blown toward another worker.

41. A pipe fitter was standing on a pipe repair­
ing a leak in a 6-inch steam line in the caustic
room. When his foot slipped off the pipe, he
stepped into the hot water from the steam and
burned his foot.
P ip e s are fo r the purpose o f transporting material
and not to stand on.

A secure footin g fo r the p ip e

fitters would have avoided this accident.

42. An employee left a 25-pound wrench on a
nut which he had just tightened. Later, as he
walked by, he knocked the wrench from the nut.
The wrench fell on his foot.
A fte r a wrench is used , it should always be removed
fr o m the nut and returned to the tool box or work
bench .

This type o f work obviously calls fo r eye protec­
tion.

Face shields are often preferred to goggles.

47. An employee carrying an angle iron up a
ladder, lost his balance and fell, straining his side.
The angle iron weighed about 8 5 pounds.

Instead

o f being carried up the ladder, it should have been
hauled up with a rope.

48. A stick of pulp wood fell from a conveyor
while a janitor was cleaning under it, and struck
him on the head.
I f work o f a n y kind is permitted under an open
conveyor , a shield guard should be placed under the
conveyor to catch materials falling fr o m it.

49. A painter was burned by the current in
noninsulated wires, when his steel-banded brush
touched them.
N o work should be perform ed within contact dis­
tance o f noninsulated wires until they have been de­

43. Some chips lodged in the eye of a welder
who was knocking hot slag from his weld.
Investigation disclosed that this m an was doing
electric welding, his eyes being protected by a welder’s




energized.

Arrangem ents should have been made to

lock the switch in open position and the key given to
the painter so that no one else could close the switch
while he was working around the wires.

ACCIDENT PREVENTION SUGGESTIONS

39

50.
A mason was working in the blow pit of a charge o f the equipment. M a so n s and other service
digester. The digester was not operating and
or maintenance workers , however , should be required
the acid line feeding into it had been closed,
to n otify the operating supervisor whenever they are
hut the discharge line leading from the digester
going to work on or about the equipment and to ask
had been left open. Someone opened the acid
that a n y necessary precautions be taken.
line and allowed some acid to flow into the digester.
51.
A small particle of concrete lodged in the
Fumes from the acid seeped into the pit through
eye of a foreman watching jackhammer workers
the open discharge line and the mason was
break a concrete floor.
overcome.
The injured forem a n was fr o m another depart­

Both the acid line and the discharge line should

ment and should not have been there.

This is a good

have been locked shut, or a guard posted before the

illustration

m ason was permitted to enter the p it .

This should

around any operation where there is a fly in g particle

the responsibility o f the operating supervisor in

hazard, whether or not actually working in the area.

be




o f the

necessity f o r

wearing

goggles

Appendix.—Statistical Tables

T

a b le

1.—Work-injury rates for 534 pulp and paper mills, classified by type of mill and by extent o f
disability, 1948
Frequency rates of 2_

Number of disabling injuries

Type of mill

Total *______________________
Paper mills :
Absorbent paper. _ ____
Book paper
_ __
Building paper__________
Coarse paper____________
Fine paper_______ ______
Groundwood p ap er___ _
Newsprint______ ___
Sanitary paper s t o c k -----Special industrial paper__
Tissue paper _______
Paperboard mills :
Building board___________
Container and boxboard___
Special paperboard stock, _
Wet machine b o a rd ,____
Pulp mills___ ____ ______ _

Num­
Employeehours
ber of Number
worked
estab­ of em­
lish­
ployees
(thou­
Total
sands )
ments

534

207,309

454,207 9,012

g
31
41
43
72

659
29, 609
12, 296
29,838
22, 935
3,731
3,470
4,884
1,197
12, 019

1,417
51
65, 639 1,110
26, 625
315
64, 271 1,073
50, 856 1,026
8,320
219
293
7, 917
243
9,807
44
2,481
25,844
510

6, 536

14,841
259
72, 722 1, 713
89
6, 533
1,366
47
4,748
127

11
6

24
6

39
15
85
10
12

14

33, 796
2, 988
619
2,058

Resulting in-

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

(10) 55

510

4
( 1) 2

49
29
79
42

1

10

8

2
1
1

( 1) 1
(6) 20

1 Figures in parentheses indicate the number of permanent-total
disability cases included.
2 The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per
million hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in (a)
death, or (b) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c) renders
the injured unable to work at any regularly established job open and avail40




2
2

5
19
30
27
79
25
2

7

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
Per­
Tem­
and
per—
All
Se­
perma­ manent- porarydis­
ver­
nent- partial total
Tempo­ abling
Tem­
ity
disa­
disa­
raryinjuries total bilities bilities Disa­ porary- rate *
disa­
bling
total
total
bilities
in­
disabil­
disa­
jury
bility
ity
8 ,447

19.8

51
1,061
282
986
982
208
288

0.1

1.1

.2
.1

1.1
1.2
.8
1.2
.6

36.0
16.9
11.8

16.7
20.2

222

43
479

26.3
37.0
24.8
17.7
19.7

231
1, 614
64
43
118

17.5
23.6
13.6
34.4
26.7

18.6

123

18

16
71
215
163
85

1.2

36.0
16.2
10.5
15.4
19.4
25.0
36.4
22.7
17.3
18.5

16
17
24
25
16
19
18
15
16
13

.3

1.8
1.1

15.6
22.2

1.5
.4

3.8
1.5
1.5

9.8
31.4
24.8

213
137
296
280
175

.7
(s)

.1

.2

.4
(1
5)
*
2
.1

1.9

112

30
156
152
95

15
15
12

13
24

2.4

.6

1 .2
2 .6

2.7
1.7

3.0
1.1

3.9
2.7
1.9
3.7
3.2
4.0
9.6
4.7

able to him, throughout the hours corresponding to his regular shift on any
day after the day of injury.
3 The severity rate is the average number of days lost per thousand
hours worked.
4 Totals include figures not shown separately because of insufficient data*
8 Less than 0.05.

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL T A B L E S
T

a b l e

41

2 .— W ork-inju ry rates for 534 pulp and paper m ills, classified b y geographic area, State, type o f
m ill, and extent of disability, 1948
_
Frequency rates o f :2

Number of disabling injuries

Geographic area, State,
and type of mill

Num­
Employeehours
ber of Number
worked
estab­ of em­
(thou­
lish­
ployees
Total
sands)
ments

Resulting in

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
and
Per­
Tem­
per—
All
Se­
perma­ manent- porarydis­
ver­
nent- partial total
abling
ity
disa­ Disa­ Tem­
Tempo­ injuries total
disa­
rarydisa­ bilities bilities bling porary- rate 3
bilities
total
total
in­
disabil­
disa­
jury
bility
ity

Total, all areas_______________

534

207,309

454,207 9,012

(10) 55

510

8,447

19.8

0.1

1.1

18.6

123

18

2.4

New England area: Total4___

119

34,828

77,782 2,115

6

45

2,064

27.2

.1

.6

26.5

53

16

1.4

4
5
25
3
3
9

5, 622
' 923
6, 233
1,273
2,009
M91

13,011
2,339
1?' 040
2,804
4, 596
3,329

377
53
305
95
223
213

5

372
52
301
92

26
27
24
118
23
29

.8
!6

.2
1.2

28. 6
22. 3
23.1
32.8
48.3
62.8

13

.4

.4
.4
.3
.7

Paper mills :
Book paper
_ _ __
Coarse paper _ _ _ _
Fine paper
Gronndwood paper___
Newsprint _______
Tissue paper__ ______
Paperboard mills :
Container and box-

4

209

29.0
22.7
23.4
33.9
48.5
64.0

1

4
1

2
1

222

22

15
16

6

4.0

20
10

1.9

1.1

6

Special
paperboard
stock___
___ __
Pulp mills_
_ __________
Connecticut : Total 4____ ___
Paperboard mills
Container and box
board
_____ -

:

1,411

2,876

111

2

109

38.6

.7

37.9

42

16

1.6

4
5

882
989

1,955
2,353

28
40

1

3

14.3
17.0

.4

.5
1.3

13.8
15.3

22

256

12

1

27
36

17

3
4.3

15

3,335

7,059

237

1

12

224

33.6

.1

1.7

31.8

87

16

2.9

1

88

37.3

.4

36.9

33

13

1 .2

2

22

943

26.3

.6

25.6

51

15

1.3

5
4

361
116

29.7

.4

29.3

13

1.3

48.3
15.3

27
36
23
256

12
20

.8
‘g
l" i

.2

28.4

31

17

.9

23.8
84.5

17
7

17
7

.4

123

17

2.5

3

1,181

2,386

89

Maine Total 4______________
Paper mills
Book paper__________
Fine paper. ______ .
Newsprint__________
Pulp mills_______________

23

15,924

36,703

967

3
4
3
5

5,292
2,348
2,009
989

12,338
5,254
4,596
2,353

366
223
40

1

3

222

36

48.5
17.0

Massachusetts : Total 4______
Paper mills :
Fine paper___________
Tissue paper_________

54

9,926

21,453

613

1

4

608

28.6

21

4

3,885
551

7,786
1,254

185
106

185
106

23.8
84.5

New Hampshire : Total---------

19

3, 912

8,182

165

159

20.2

3, 711

115

:

:

120

1

.1

22.8

2

4
3

112

31.0

( 2)10

150

1,693

21.3

201

82
245
90

16.6
14.6
17. 7
29.4

.8
.2

.4
( 5)

.6

19.5

-f

.8

30.2

30

16

.9

1.7

19.5

162

18

3.5

1.4
1.4

122

138
109
271

16
25

2.0
2.0

3.7

15. 2
13.2
16 7
25.4

2.0

18.8
15.5

2.3

7

1,479

147

39.220

8
8

6,077
2, 946
6, 469
1,631

13,231
6,236
14, 720
3,538

220

16
14

91
260
104

1

19
9
15
13

3
19

929
3,623

1,867
8,201

36
144

1
1

16

35
127

19.3
17.6

4

590

1,291

30

3

27

23.2

20

9,844
1,192

323
41

(1) 3

24

296
41

32.8
34.4

.3

2

32

257

21.4

.1

1

45

36.4

:

4.3

.5

Vermont : Total.......................
Paper mills :
Book paper__________
Coarse paper ___ _
Fine paper. _____
Sanitary paper stock. _
Special in d u stria l
paper.. _ _ _ __
Tissue paper ______
Paperboard mills
Building board. __
Container and boxboard____ _ . . .
Pulp mills______________

17

.2

Middle Atlantic area: Total 4__

86,803 1,853

22.0

17

19
8.0

182
250

16
14

3.5

20.9

221

12

5.1

2.4

30.1
34.4

184
25

14
25

6.0

2.4

18.9

225

20

4.8

.8

.3

20

35.6

80

15

2.9
13.8

1 0

.5
.1

4.4

3

4,409
512

New Jersey : Total 4_________
Paper mills :
Fine paper. ____ _
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard_____________

25

6,271

13,580

291

3

622

1,265

46

3

1,016

2,191

113

i

14

98

51.6

.5

6.4

44.7

268

14

New York : Total 4__________
Paper mills :
Book p a p e r._______
Coarse paper____ _
Fine paper. ______
Sanitary paper stock. _
Tissue paper
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard____ ________
Pulp mills______________

80

20,984

47,155 1,075

(1) 5

106

964

22.8

.1

2.2

20.5

177

18

4.0

5

4,429
1, 651
2,262
1,324
1,445

9,735
3, 286
5, 460
2,890
3, 555

174

18

68

80
65
117

6
12
10

156
62

16.1
18.9
12. 5
19 0
28.7

138
117

15
17

220

274
250

21

2. 5
2. 4
3. 2
6. 2

2,804
512

6,137
1.192

142
41

21.3
34.4

197
25

See footnotes at end of table.




6
6
11
11
10

3

1

14

102

17.9
20.7
14.7
22.5
32.9

(1) 2

9

131
41

23.1
34.4

68

55

1.8
1.8
2.2

.3

3.5
3.9

.3

1.5

.9

18
13

8.2

15
25

4.5
.9

42
T

INJURIES A N D

a b le

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

OF PULP

AND

PAPER

2.—Work-injury rates for 534 pulp and paper mills, classified by geographic area, State, type of
mill, and extent of disability, 1948—Continued
Number of disabling injuries

Geographic area, State,
and type of mill

Pennsylvania : Total 4_______
Paper mills :
Book paper__________
Building paper______
Fine paper *__________
Tissue paper________
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard_____________

East North Central area:
Total 4___ _______________

Paper mills:
Book paper________ _
Coarse paper_____ _
Fine paper_______ _
Sanitary paper stock. _
Tissue paper. ______
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard............... ........

Num­
Employeeber of Number
hours
estab­ of em­
worked
ployees
lish­
(thou­
ments
sands ) Total

42

11,965

26,067

487

3
3
7
5

1,648
710
3,585
2,050

3,496
1, 521
7 994
',
4; 369

589

1, 516

68

146

57,805

13

21,200

8

9,275
2; 780
8,103
2,741
5,828

5, 948
18,446
5,224
11, 786

361
152
425
96
118

10

27

6

126,942 2,429

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
and
Per­
Tem­
per—
All
Se­
perma­ manent- porarydis­
ver­
nent- partial total
Tempo­ abling
Tem­
ity
total
disa­
disa­
raryinjuries disa­ bilities bilities Disa­ porary- rate 3
bling
total
total
bilities
in­
disabil­
disa­
jury
ity
bility

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

(1) 3

12

472

18.7

1
2
2

45
19
132
25

13.2
12.5
16.8

1

46
19
134
27

7

Resulting in

Frequency rates of2
—

17

1.7

22

.8

6.2

.3
.5

61
13
53
253

67

44.9

.7

44.2

97

2,318

19.1

.8

7
15
5
5

349
144
409
90
113

17.0
25.6
23.0
18.4

22

756

22.8

.2

.6

22.0

78

13

1.8

8

163

20.4

.2

.9

19.3

145

15

3.0

3

35

12.3

.3

.9

11.0

308

15

3.8

99

29.8

.9

28.9

24

15

.7

78

30.8

.8

30.0

113

13

3.5

52

41.3

41.3

10

10

.4

24

821

23.7

.7

22.9

63

14

1.5

5

1
1
1

90

12.9
12.5
16. 5
5.7

3
2

(1) 14

18.1

.3

12

_________

.5

106
209

17.4
32.1

.7

17.4
31. 4

14
28

14
13

.9

.1

.1
.2
.1
.2

10.0

.6

1.2
.8
1.0
.4

17

.2
’9
1*6

18

14

.8

18.2

96

16

1.8

16.4
24.2

62
137
71
92
29

18
14
14
15
17

22.1

17.2
9.6

13
21

10
1.6

3.5

1.7
.3

32

15,463

34, 455

784

Illinois : Total 4......................
Paper mills :
Building paper_______
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard___________ . .

16

3,839

8,483

173

6
2

8

1,508

3,178

39

1

4

1,526

3,417

102

Indiana : Total 4____________
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard_____________

9

1,175

2,595

80

5

574

1,258

52

Michigan : Total 4................
Paper mills
Book paper_______
Fine paper__________
Paperboard mills
Container and boxboard_____ ________

36

15, 849

35, 739

848

4
9

2, 681
2,736

6, 105

6,669

106
214

11

8,052

17, 775

386

3

6

377

21.7

.2

.3

21.2

65

13

1.4

Ohio: T otal 4....................... .
Paper mills
Coarse paper_________
Fine paper__ _
_ __
Paperboard mills
Container and boxboard___ __________

40

13,187

29,672

551

( 1) 6

26

520

18.6

.2

.9

17.5

114

18

2.1

4
4

483
590

1,083
1,326

28
58

1

3

24
56

25.9
43.7

.9

2.8
1.5

42. 2

22.2

265
75

13
15

6.9
3.3

11

4,318

9,786

207

2

11

194

21.2

.2

1.1

19.9

104

13

2.2

_
Wisconsin : Total 4........ .
Paper mills :
Book paper__________
Coarse paper_________
Fine paper___________
Sanitary paper stock._
Tissue paper_________

46

23, 755

50, 454

777

4

37

736

15.4

.1

.7

14.6

107

17

1.7

7
3
13

13,194
2,350
10,185
5,224
10, 705

183

11
1

145
96
93

1
1

172
87
137
90

.5

8.2

127
92
33

19
13
16
15
17

1.4
.7
1.8

1.0

13.1
37.1
13.4
17.2

88

13.9
37.5
14.2
18.4
8.7

104

6
6

5,804
1,123
4, 663
2,741
5,369

1.7
.3

13

6,754

16,726

315

( 1) 2

24

289

18.8

.1

1.4

17.3

138

17

2.6

.8

30.9

31

13

a) 2

.1

1.4

16.1

145

18

:

:

:

:

West North Central area:
Total4___________________
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard— ............ .

Minnesota : Total___________
See footnotes at end of table.




3

88

2

7
5
5

4

1,684

3,914

124

3

121

6,172

14, 891

262

21

239

17.6

.8
.4
.1
.2

31.7

9

.1

.7

20

.2

1.0
2.6

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL T A B L E S

43

T able 2 .— W ork-inju ry rates for 534 pulp and paper m ills, classified b y geographic area, State, type of
m ill, and extent of disability, 1948— Continued
Number of disabling injuries

Geographic area, State,
and type of mill

South Atlantic area: Total 4„_

Paper mills :
Bnolr paper
Coarse paper_________
Fine paper
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard_____ ____ ___

Num­
Employeehours
ber of Number
worked
estab­ of em­
(thou­
lish­ ployees
sands)
Total
ments

47

30,416

4
9
3

7,126
9; 637
1, 579

63,753 1,015

Resulting in

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

Frequency rates of2
—

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
Per­
Tem­
and
per—
All
Se­
perma­ manent- porarydis­
ver­
nent- partial total
Tempo­ abling
Tem­
ity
disa­
disa­
raryinjuries total bilities bilities Disa­ porary- rate 3
disa­
bling
total
total
bilities
in­
disabil­
disa­
jury
bility
ity

a) 7

109

899

15.9

.1

1.7

14.1

184

19

2.9

14, 772
20; 510
3,358

131
388
34

4

8
32
7

123
352
27

8.9
18.9
10.1

.2

.5
1.6
2.1

8.4
17.1
8.0

70
189
431

26
18
19

.6
3.6
4.4

10

5,059

9.696

164

(1) 2

17

145

16.9

.2

1.8

14.9

184

15

3.1

Florida : Total______ ____ ___

5

3, 768

8,089

101

3

17

81

12.5

.4

2.1

10.0

334

26

4.2

Georgia : Total 4_ __________
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard______________

8

6,729

12,805

307

1

20

286

24.0

.1

1.6

22.3

145

14

3.5

3

1,405

1, 634

49

1

.6

3.1

26.3

171

10

5.1

Maryland : Total

4

2,347

5,234

63

1.3

10. 7

144

21

1.7

North Carolina : Total 4_____
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard—.

8

6,313

13,023

144

.1

1.2

9.8

250

20

2.8

3

1,429

2,879

27

South Carolina : Total_______

3

4,482

9,830

Virginia: Total_______ ____ _

11

5,859

East South Central area:
Total 4___________________

15

12,487

Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard____________

5

43

30,0

7

56

12.0

1

15

128

11.1

5

22

9.4

1.7

7.7

438

15

4.1

135

(1) 1

30

104

13.7

.1

3.1

10.5

262

23

3.6

12, 793

219

1

16

202

17.1

.1

1.3

15.7

119

20

2.0

27,218

354

(4) 5

38

311

13.0

.2

1.4

11.4

272

20

3.5
17.5

3

827

1,746

61

(3) 4

4

53

34.9

2.3

2.3

30.3

500

14

Alabama: Total....... ................

4

4,059

8,402

104

(3) 3

14

87

12.4

.4

1.7

10.3

432

25

5.3

M ississippi: Total

4

4,975

10,957

182

17

165

16.6

1.6

15.0

134

16

2.2

Tennessee: Total___________

7

3,453

7, 859

68

(1) 2

7

59

8.7

.3

.9

7.5

399

26

3.4

West South Central area:
Total4___________________

12

8,791

19,522

359

2

16

341

18.4

.1

.8

17.5

97

23

1.8

4
5

793
6,057

1,766
13,390

50
243

2

14

50
227

28.3
18.1

.1

1.0

28.3
17.0

9
121

9
29

.3
2.2

Paper mills :
Building p a p e r ,___ _
Coarse paper. _ ____

Arkansas

: Total____________
:
_

Louisiana Total 4___________
Paper mills :
_____
Coarse paper.

: Total______________
Pacific area: Total4_________
Texas

Paper mills :
Building paper. _____
Coarse paper_________
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard______________

3

2,170

4,863

102

1

9

92

21.0

.2

1.9

18.9

135

27

2.8

4

4,448

9,817

146

1

5

140

14.9

.1

.5

14.3

108

30

1.6

3

3,920

8, 593

141

1

5

135

16.4

.1

.6

15.7

111

30

1.8

5

2,173

4,843

111

2

109

22.9

.4

22.5

48

9

1.1

32

16,522

34,379

509

4

28

477

14.8

.1

.8

13.9

138

27

2.0

5
3

1, 763
3,032

3, 716
6,437

21
60

1
1

1
6

19
53

5.7
9.3

.3
.2

.3
.9

5.1
8.2

319
285

21
79

1.8
2.7
1.1

7

4,351

8,887

115

4

111

12.9

.5

12.4

81

27

California : Total 4___________
Paper mills :
Building paper.
___
Paperboard mills :
Container and boxboard---------- .

9

3, 797

8,002

99

1

5

93

12.4

.1

.6

11.7

145

18

1.8

4

1,746

3, 686

19

1

1

17

5.2

.3

.3

4.6

346

16

1.8

3

1,778

3,701

69

4

65

18.6

Oregon : Total____

6

2,534

5,330

93 ________

1

92

17.4 ______

Washington : Total.

17

10,191

21,047

22

292

317

1 Figures in parentheses indicate the number of permanent-total dis­
ability cases included.
2 The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per million
hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in (a) death,
or (b) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c) renders the
injured unable to work at any regularly established job open and available




3

15.1

1.1

.1

17.5

110

20

.2

17.2

28

20

.5

1.0

14.0

168

32

2.5

2.1

to him, throughout the hours corresponding to his regular shift on any day
after the day of injury.
3 The severity rate is the average number of days lost per thousand hours
worked.
4 Totals include figures not shown separately because of insufficient data.
6 Less than 0.05.

INJURIES A N D

44
T

a ble

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

Average number of employees

EmployeeNum­
ber of Number
hours
estab­ of em­
worked
lish­
(thou­
ployees
Total
sands)
ments

Total______________________

534

207,309

1 to 49______________________
50 to 99_____________________
100 to 249____________________
250 to 499____________________
500 to 749____________________
750 to 999____________________
1,000 to 1,499________________
1,500 to 1,999________________
2,000 and over___ __________

76
89
148
91
50
29
24
15
12

2,354
6,470
24, 536
32,110
30,344
25, 236
29,080
25.193
31,986

%Frequency rates o f 5

Resulting in

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
and
Per­
per—
Tem­
All
Seperma­ manent porarydis­
ver­
abling nent- partial total
ity
Tem­
disa­
disa­
injuries total
disa­ bilities bilities Disa­ porary- rate*
bling
bilities
total
in­
disa­
jury
bility

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

Tempo­
rarytotal
disabil­
ity

454, 207 9,012

(10) 55

510

8,447

19.8

0.1

1.1

18.6

123

18

2.4

166
507
1,835
1,854
1,116
876
1,018
528
1,112

1
4
(6) 19
(2) 9
(1) 6
(1) 5
(1) 7
4

12
16
75
94
80
51
70
70
42

153
487
1, 741
1,751
1,030
820
941
454
1,070

31.4
35.4
33.3
26.1
17.1
16.0
15.9
9.6
16.0

.2
.3
.3
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1

2.3
1.1
1.4
1.3
1.2
.9
1.1
1.3
.6

28.9
34.0
31.6
24.7
15.8
15.0
14.7
8.2
15.4

182
98
130
120
123
116
138
185
82

14
13
17
17
16
17
23
20
19

5.7
3.5
4.3
3.1
2.1
1.9
2.2
1.8
1.3

5, 293
14,312
55,104
71,061
65,351
54, 705
63,975
55,073
69,333

1 Figures in parentheses indicate the number of permanent-total
disability cases included.
2 The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per
million hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in (a)
death, or (b) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c)

a ble

PAPER

3.—Work-injury rates for 534 pulp and paper mills, classified by size of plant and by extent of
disability, 1948
Number of disabling injuries

T

OF PULP AND

renders the injured unable to work at 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.
3The severity rate is the average number of days lost per thousand hours
worked.

4.—Work-injury rates for 507 pulp and paper mills, classified by kind of safety organization
and by extent of disability, 1948
Number of disabling injuries

Safety organizations

Establishments
employing
full-time safety engineers 4__
And with safety COm m i t.t.pp.S 4

Composed of nonsupervisory
em­
ployees
........... ..
Composed of super­
visory employees___
Composed of both
supervisory
and
nonsupervisory em­
ploy A S
P
But without safety com­
mittees ....
Establishments without full­
time safety engineers 4.......
But with safety com­
m i t , t.PP.S 4

_________

Composed of non­
supervisory
em­
ploy prs ......... _ .
Composed of super­
visory employees___
Composed of both
supervisory
and
nonsupervisory em­
ployees____________
And without safety com­
mittees________________

Num­
Employeeber of Number
hours
estab­ of em­
worked
lish­
(thou­
ployees
Total
sands)
ments

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
and
Per­
Tem­
per—
All
Se­
perma­ manent- porarydis­
ver­
nent- partial total
abling
ity
Tempo­ injuries total
disa­
Tem­
disa­
3
2
rarydisa­ bilities bilities Disa­ porary- rate1
bling
total
bilities
total
in­
disabil­
disa­
jury
ity
bility

Resulting in—

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

148

112,919

247, 805 3,784

(3) 24

272

3,488

15.3

0.1

1.1

14.1

142

20

2.2

137

108,366

238,107 3,600

(2) 20

262

3,318

15.1

.1

1.1

13.9

141

20

2.1

.6

8.3

135

24

1.2

.1

1.5

15.9

197

18

3.4

11

9,740

21,315

189

13

176

8.9

12

11,198

24, 227

424

2

37

385

17.5

110

85,039

187, 216 2, 905

(1) 17

209

2, 679

15.5

.1

1.1

14.3

134

20

2.1

11

4, 553

184

(1) 4

10

170

19.0

.4

1.0

17.6

176

16

3.3

359

87,692

191, 595 4,885

(7) 30

226

4, 629

25.5

.2

1.2

24.1

111

16

2.8

254

76,300

166,700 4,118

(7) 27

200

3,891

24.7

.2

1.2

23.3

115

16

2.8

9, 698

17

4,947

11,341

254

1

10

243

22.4

.1

.9

21.4

80

15

1.8

58

14,714

31,652

821

(1) 5

46

770

25.9

.2

1.5

24.2

116

15

3.0

123,185 3,032

(6) 21

144

2, 867

24.6

.2

1.2

23.2

119

16

2.9

3

25

725

31.1

.1

1.0

30.0

85

16

2.6

178

56,371

102

11,084

24,184

753

1 Figures in parentheses indicate the number of permanent-total
disability cases included.
2 The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per
million hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in
(a) death, or (b) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c)
renders the injured unable to work at any regularly established job open




2___
Frequency rates o f :

and available to him, throughout the hours corresponding to his regular
shift on any day after the day of injury.
3 The severity rate is the average number of days lost perthousand
hours worked.
* Totals include figures not shown separately because of insufficient data,

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL T A B L E S

T able

5 .— W ork injury rates for 534 pulp and paper m ills, classified b y departm ent and by extent of
disability, 1948
Number of disabling injuries

Num­
Employeeber of Number
hours
estab­ of em­
worked
lish­
ployees
(thou­
Total
ments
sands)

Department

Total 1
4..................... .................
*
2
Production departments :
Woodyards--------- -----------Wood rooms____________
Rag shredding

......

Groundwood mills_______
fhdfit.A m ills

Sulfate mills.......................
finds, m ills
Rag m ills
W e t. rnnms

Bleaching_______________
Beater rooms____________
Paper machine rooms____
Finishing________________
Converting--------- -----------Service departments :
Administrative and cleri­
cal ___________________
Garage__________________
Laboratory______________
Plant maintenance_______
Power plants___________
Shipping

Stock room______________
Watchmen __________ _
Yard................... ...............

Resulting in

Death
or per­
manenttotal dis­
ability 1

Perma­
nentpartial
disabil­
ity

a ble

Frequency rates o f1

Severity

Average num­
ber of days lost
Deaths
or charged
and
Per­
Tem­
per—
All
Se­
perma­ manent- porarydis­
ver­
nent- partial total
ity
abling
Tempo­ injuries total
Tem­ rate *
disa­
disa­
rarydisa­ bilities bilities Disa­ porarybling
total
bilities
total
in­
disabil­
disa­
jury
ity
bility

534

207,309

454,207 9,012

(10) 55

510

8,447

19.8

0.1

1.1

18.6

123

18

2.4

132
115
30
72
57
29
11
8
66
87
401
456
335
156

5,193
4, 725
502
2,436
2,460
3, 549
732
866
1,638
1, 529
10, 078
23.847
23, 475
27,196

469
11,368
309
10, 281
1,054
27
5, 403
157
114
5,411
7,602
137
1,664
33
1,904
13
62
3, 716
68
3, 479
596
22, 508
53, 702 1. 619
50, 271
831
972
57,098

2
5

14
28
2
7
6
6
2

41.3
30.1
25.6
29.1
21.1
18.0
19.8
6.8
16.7
19.5
26.5
30.1
16.5
17.0

0.2
.5

1.2
2.7
1.9
1.3
1.1
.8
1.2

3
2
13
117
40
51

453
276
25
150
108
127
31
13
59
66
575
1,489
790
919

79
214
71
58
72
265
196
9
55
22
125
167
94
83

15
20
17
18
18
22
21
9
22
14
18
18
18
14

3.3
6.4
1.8
1.7
1.5
4.8
3.9
.1
.9
.4
3.3
5.0
1.6
1.4

431
104
242
446
411
116
230
292
150

20, 636
723
3,141
25, 664
7, 892
2,660
1,749
1, 623
3, 558

59
43,293
37
1,645
36
6,677
58, 637 1,362
18, 237
330
6,012
105
107
4,147
36
3, 543
256
7,757

4
4
2
102
18
5
2
1
6

54
33
34
1,253
310
100
103
34
250

1.4
22.5
5.4
23.2
18.1
17.5
25.8
10.2
33.0

268
253
144
128
127
102
133
205
53

22
17
12
20
20
15
16
26
19

.4
5.7
.8
3.0
2.3
1.8
3.4
2.1
1.8

(2) 4

(1) 8
(4) 13
(1) 1
2

1
(1) 7
2
2
1

.4
.2

.8
.6
.6
2.2
.8
.9

39.9
26.9
23.7
27.8
20.0
16.7
18.6
6.8
15.9
18.9
25.5
27.7
15.7
16.1

.1
.1

.1
2.4
.3
1.7
1.0
.8
.5
.3
.8

1.3
20.1
5.1
21.4
17.0
16.7
24.8
9.6
32.2

.5

0
0

0

.5
.3

open and available to him, throughout the hours corresponding to his
regular shift on any day after the day of injury.
3The severity rate is the average number of days lost per thousand
hours worked.
4 Totals include figures not shown separately because of insufficient data.
3 Less than 0.05.

1 Figures in parentheses indicate the number of permanent-total
disability cases included.
2 The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per
million hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in
(a) death, or (b) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or
(c) renders the injured unable to work at any regularly established job

T

45

6.—Distribution of wor^-injury-frequency rates for 534 pulp and paper mills by size of plant, 1948

Average numDer
of employees

Number
oi es­
tablish­
ments

Total________________ -1-49____________________
50-99___________________
100-249_________________
250-499_________________
500-749
_______
750-999
- ___
1 000-1 499
1 500-1 999

9 000 a n d o v e r

Number of establishments with frequency rates of 3
1-4

0

534

52

76
89
148
91
50
29
24
15
12

34
11
6
1

5-9

10-14

15-19

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

70-99

100 and
over

44

37

31

42

35

24

18

13

3
5
12
9
7
3
4
1

4
7
12
11
2
1

2
6
12
5
3
2

5
9
13
12
3

3
9
17
6

5
7
10
1

6
5
6
1

5
6
3

28

57

49

63

41

5
4
11
3
1
3
1

2
12
9
9
5
5
6
7
2

1
4
10
10
6
8
6
1
3

2
6
22
12
7
4
5
3
2

4
3
11
10
6
3
1

1The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per
million hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in
(a) death, or (b ) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or




3

1

1

(c) renders the injured unable to work at 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.

INJURIES A N D

46
T

a ble

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

OF PULP AND

PAPER

7 .— N u m b e r o f e s t a b lis h m e n ts , e m p lo y e e s , in ju r ie s , a n d d a y s lo s t in 5 3 4 p u lp a n d p a p e r m ills ,
c la s s ifie d b y in ju r y - f r e q u e n c y r a t e s , 1 9 4 8
Establishments

Frequency rates
of establishments 1

Employees

Cumulative

Number

Number
100 and over.
90-99_______
80-89_______
75-79_______
70-74...........
65-69_______
60-64........
55-59........
50-54______
45-49______
40-44______
35-39______
30-34...____
25-29........ .
20-24______
15-19______
10-14______
9........ ..........
8______
7________

6______
5__________
4_________
3__________
1 and 2____
0__________

13
18
21
25
31
42
55
68
90
106
132
163
200
244
285
348
397
406
417
427
438
454
464
476
482
534

2.4
3.4
3.9
4.7
5.8
7.9
10.3
12.7
16.9
19.9
24.7
30.5
37.5
45.7
53.4
65.2
74.3
76.0
78.1
80.0
82.0
85.0
86.9
89.1
90.3
100.0

13
5
3
4
6
11
13
13
22
16
26
31
37
44
41
63
49
9
11
10
11
16
10
12
6
52

Cumulative

Number

Percent

Injuries

Number
852
553
441
194
938
1,072
2,884
2,022
3,388
2, 791
5,988
9,897
8, 579
18,766
23, 212
32, 294
32,014
5,375
6, 503
7, 239
9,634
8,378
5,209
9, 765
6,240
3,081

Percent

852
1, 405
1,846
2,040
2,978
4,050
6,934
8,956
12,344
15,135
21,123
31,020
39, 599
58,365
81, 577
113,871
145,885
151, 260
157, 763
165,002
174, 636
183,014
188, 223
197, 988
204, 228
207,309

1The frequency rate is the average number of disabling injuries per
million hours worked. A disabling work injury is one which results in (a)
death, or (b) any degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c) renders

T

a ble

Number

Days lost

Cumulative
Number

.4
.7
.9
1.0
1.4
2.0
3.3
4.3
6.0
7.3
10.2
15.0
19.1
28.2
39.4
54.9
70.4
73.0
76.1
79.6
84.2
88.3
90.8
95.5
98.5
100.0

278
113
86
36
156
151
406
255
382
291
522
844
619
1,071
1,118
1,199
799
111
112
105
129
93
46
63
27

Cumulative

Number

Percent

278
391
477
513
669
820
1,226
1,481
1,863
2,154
2, 676
3, 520
4,139
5, 210
6,328
7, 527
8,326
8, 437
8, 549
8, 654
8,783
8, 876
8, 922
8, 985
9,012
9,012

3.1
4.3
5.3
5.7
7.4
9.1
13.6
16.4
20.7
23.9
29.7
39.1
45.9
57.8
70.2
83.5
92.4
93.6
94.9
96.0
97.5
98.5
99.0
99.7
100.0
100.0

Number
19,082
12,083
1,363
2,687
18, 651
40,791
17, 252
19,110
54,141
28, 737
51,980
79, 225
52,463
102,448
103, 552
120, 655
132,162
51, 565
57,152
18,874
39, 651
36, 111
22, 656
12, 556
16,478

Percent

19,082
31,165
32, 528
35,215
53, 866
94, 657
111, 909
131,019
185,160
213, 897
265,877
345,102
397, 565
500,013
603, 565
724,220
856,382
907, 947
965,099
983,973
1,023,624
1,059,735
1,082,391
1,094, 947
1, 111, 425
1, 111, 425

1.7
2.82.9
3.2
4.8.
8. &
10.1
11.8
16.7
19.2
23.9
31.1
35.8
45.9
54.3
65.2
77.1
81.7
86.8
88.5
92.1
95.3
97.4
98.5
100.9
109.9

the injured unable to work at 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.

8 .— D i s a b l i n g w o r k i n j u r i e s i n 1 0 6 p u l p a n d p a p e r m i l l s , c l a s s i f i e d b y n a t u r e o f i n j u r y a n d b y
t y p e o f m ill, 1 9 4 8
Type of mill

Nature of injury

Total
number of
injuries 1

Book-paper
mills

Coarsepaper mills

Container
and boxboard mills

Fine-paper
mills

Groundwood-paper
mills

Newsprint
mills

Pulp mills

Sanitarypaper mills

Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­
ber cent 2 ber
ber
cent
ber
cent
cent
ber
ber
cent
cent
ber
cent
ber
ber
cent
cent
Total_____________________ 3,286

100.0

615

100.0

729

100.0

172

100.0

360

100.0

121

100.0

390

100.0

205

100.0

164

100.9

Amputations. ......................
76
Bruises, contusions_______ 1,162
Bums, scalds (except chem­
ical)______ ______ _______
139
Chemical bum s___________
72
Cuts, lacerations, punctures.
462
Foreign bodies, not else­
where classified_________
70
Fractures. _ _____________
393
Hernias__________________
116
Industrial diseases.......... .
55
Strains, sprains (except
hernias)._______________
700
Welder’s flash......................
13
Other____________________
27
Unclassified;
insufficient
1
data__ _________________

2.3
35.4

14
252

2.3
40.9

23
218

3.2
30.0

4
72

2.3
41.9

6
114

1.7
31.6

2
43

1.7
35.4

4
167

1.0
42.7

4
56

2.0
27.4

6
52

3.7
31.7

4.2
2.2
14.1

22
14
85

3.6
2.3
13.8

54
24
75

7.4
3.3
10.3

9
2
17

5.2
1.2
9.9

6
9
58

1.7
2.5
16.1

6
1
21

5.0
.8
17.4

8
7
58

2.1
1.8
14.9

5
9
37

2.4
4.4
18.0

10
1
29

6.1
.9
17.7

2.1
12.0
3.5
1.7

19
57
15
10

3.1
9.3
2.4
1.6

14
121
47
12

1.9
16.6
6.4
1.6

17
4
1

9.9
2.3
.6

13
49
4
13

3.6
13.6
1.1
3.6

2
15
1
3

1.7
12.4
.8
2.5

8
26
8
1

2.1
6.7
2.1
.3

22
16
5

10.7
7.8
2.4

6
16
4
5

3 7
9.8
2.4
3.0

21.3
.4
.8

124
2
1

20.2
.3
.2

125
6
10

17.1
.8
1.4

41

23.8

23.9
.6

21.5
.8

103

26.3

44
1
6

21.5
5
2.9

34

20.7

2.9

86
2

26
1

5

1 Includes figures not shown separately because of insufficient data.




2 Percents are based on classified cases only.

1 ~

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL T A B L E S
T

a ble

47

9.—Disabling work injuries in 106 pulp and paper mills, classified by part of body injured and by
type of mill, 1948
Type of mill
Total
number of
injuries 1

Book-paper
mills

Part o Ibody injured

Coarsepaper mills

Container
and boxboard mills

Fine-paper
mills

Groundwood-paper
mills

Newsprint
mills

Pulp mills

Sanitarypaper mills

Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­ Num­ Per­
ber
cent
cent
ber
cent
ber
cent
ber
cent
ber
ber
ber cent 2 ber
cent
cent
ber
cent
Total_____________________ 3,286

100.0

615

100.0

729

100.0

172

100.0

360

100.0

121

100.0

390

100.0

Head. ___________________
Eye__________________
Brain and slnill
Other___ ____________

333
177
48
108

10.1
5.3
1.5
3.3

57
36
3
18

9.3
5.9
.5
2.9

96
49
28
19.

13.2
6.8
3.8
2.6

11
2
5
4

6.4
1.2
2.9
2.3

42
32

11.7
8.9

12
7

9.9
5.8

10

2.8

5

4.1

30
11
3
16

7.7
2.8
.8
4.1

29
14
7
8

14.1
12
6.8
8
3.4 _ __
3.9

Trunk________ ____ ______
Chest (lungs), ribs, etc.
Back.. ______________
Abdomen_____________
Hip or pelvis
Shoulder_____ ________
Other

799
111
391
173
41
81
2

24.3
3.4
11.8
5.3
1.2
2.5
.1

129
23
53
24
10
19

21.0
3.7
8.7
3.9
1.6
3.1

173
19
65
62
12
15

23.7
2.6
8.9
8.5
1.6
2.1

51
4
32
8

29.7
2.3
18.6
4.7

26.4
6.6
18.2
.8

38
3
17
9

.8

26.4
4.4
15.4
3.3
.5
2.8

29.3
3.9
14.7
10.2

1

103
17
60
13
2
11

60
8
30
21

4.1

1

.8

7

1

20.6
3.6
11.4
2.5
1.7
1.1
.3

32
8
22
1

7

74
13
41
9
6
4

Upper extremities......... ......
Arm__________________
Hand_________________
Finger________________

886
169
259
458

27.0
5.1
7.9
14.0

165
29
44
92

26.8
4.7
7.2
14.9

178
38
46
94

24.4
5.2
6.3
12.9

47
10
13
24

27.3
5.8
7.6
13.9

95
17
33
45

26.4
4.7
9.2
12.5

40
10
15
15

33.1
8.3
12.4
12.4

117
17
36
64

30.0
4.4
9.2
16.4

46
8
12
26

22.4
3.9
5.9
12.6

37
12
12
13

22.6
7.3
7.3

Lower extremities_________ 1,125
378
Leg__________ _______ _
545
Foot______________ ___
202
Toe-------------------- --------

34.3
11.5
16.6
6.2

243
85
117
41

39.5
13.8
19.0
6.7

236
77
129
30

32.4
10.6
17.7
4.1

44
20
16
8

25.6
11.6
9.3
4.7

133
48
60
25

36.9
13.3
16.7
6.9

34
7
18
9

28.1
5.8
14.9
7.4

131
47
64
20

33.6
12.1
16.4
5.1

61
26
25
10

29.8
12.7
12.2
4.9

70
23
30
17

42.6
14.0
18.2
10.4

141

4.3

21

3.4

46

6.3

19

11.0

16

4.4

3

2.5

9

2.3

9

4.4

7

4.3

Body, g e n e r a l.------ --------Unclassified;
data

insufficient

a b le

164

100.0

1
j

7.3
4.9

2

to!
i

100.0

23.2
1.8
10.4
5.5
1.2
4.3

8 .0

2

i Includes figures not shown separately because of insufficient data.

T

205

2 Percents are based on classified cases only.

10.—Disabling work injuries in 106 pulp and paper mills, classified by part of body injured and
nature of injury, 1948
Nature of injury

Part of body injured

Total
number
of in­ Ampu­ Bruises Burns, Chem­ Cuts
and
ical
juries
ta­
and con­
tions tusions scalds burns lacera­
tions

For­ Frac­
eign
Hernias
bodies tures

Indus­
trial
diseases

1,162

139

72

462

70

393

Head___________
Eye------------Brain or skull.
Other_______

333
177
48
108

74
12
28
34

23
8

36
32

70
70

19

15

4

80
32
16
32

Trunk___________________
Chest Qungs), ribs, etc.
Back.___ ____________
Abdomen_____________
Hip or pelvis_________
Shoulder_____________
Other________________

799

194
55
57
18
26
36
2

6
2
2
2

3
1
2

7
3
1

49
26
10

3

4
9

73
4
3
66

334
73
91
170

32
18
12
2

5
1
4

256
26
73
157

108
23
31
54

3

528
209
210
109

41
15
26

18
6
12

118
60
50
8

216
34
102
80

1

32

36

10

1

1

Strains Weld­
er’s Other
and
sprains flash

46

Total

3,286

111

891
173
41
81

2

Upper extremities.
Arm_________
Hand-----------Einger-----------

886

Lower extremities.
Leg--------------Foot_________
Toe__________

1,125
378
545

169
259
458

202

Body, general__________________

141

Unclassified; insufficient data___

2




76

3

1

116

700

13

27

2

4
15

55

7
1

13
13

9
9

2

6
423
23
319
37
8
36

1
1

6
1
5

71
23
39
9

1

1

199
54
144
1

1

116
116

1

1
15
1

Un­
classi­
fied;
in­
suffi­
cient
data
1

INJURIES A N D

48

T able

ACCIDENT

CAUSES— M A N U F A C T U R E

OF PULP AND

PAPER

1 1 — Percentage distribution of disabling work injuries in 106 pulp and paper m ills, classified b y
departm ent and b y part of body injured, 1948
Percentage distribution by part of body injured

Department

Total *________
Woodyard_____
Wood room____
Pulp m ills........
Wet rooms_____
Beater rooms. __
Paper machine
rooms........... .
Finishing...........
Shipping ..........
Yard................ .
Maintenance___
Power-------------

Total
num­
ber of
inju­
ries

3,286

Head

Trunk

Lower extremities

Brain
Ab­ Hip
Chest,
Total Eye
or Other Total ribs, Back do­
or Shoul­ Other Total Arm Hand Fin­ Total Leg
ger
skull
etc.
men pelvis der
10.1

5.3

1.5

3.3

359~ 8.1
233
9.0
334 15.0
64
1.9
204
8.3

.6
3.0
9.3
1.9
3.9

2.8
3.4
1.5

4.7
2.6
4.2

558
388
119
159
692
93

Upper extremities

6.1
5.9
6.7
6.3
16.2
14.0

2.8
3.8
4.2
1.9
11.3
4.3

"IT
1.1

.5
.8
.6
1.3
2.2

24.3

3.4

11.8

5.3

1.2

2.5

21.4
23.2
19.2
40.7
~2.9_ 33.4

4.7
1.3
1.2
5.6
3.4

10.0
11.1
10.5
14.7
18.7

3.1
5.2
4.2
14.8
7.8

1.4
1.3
.6
3.7
2.0

3.0
3.6
6.7
3.1
3.8
4.3

10.2
11.6
16.9
13.8
11.9
12.9

4.5
7.5
4.2
6.3
4.2
11.8

1.4
1.8
.8

22
3.9
.4
2. 7
1.9
1.5 ..........
1.3
.2
1.6
6.7
5.7
1.7
3.2 —

2.2
1.6
1.7
3.8
3.6
7.5

20.6
26.1
35.3
28.9
22.5
32.2

_

.9 '

......

0.1

Foot

Body,
gen­
Toe eral

27.0

5.1

7.9

14.0

34.3

11.5

16.6

6.2

20 9
30l 0
21. 0
14.8
23.5

28
2.6
3 9
5.6
7.8

7.0
7.3
7.8

11 1

10. u

ZO. Z

13.7
10.5

O O
K
17.2

QA
OO
.

1*7 O
It. Z

A K
4. O

1Z . R
O
I
o

8.3

9.3
3.7
7.4

A o
Q
iO« C
36.1
32 2
3L5
31.4

16.2

13.0
9.8

7.4
5.4

11.1
3.4

41.4
33.3
16.8
23.9
23.7
18.3

7.7
4.9
2.5
5.0
6.4
2.2

12.7
10.3
6.9
6.9
5.2
3.2

21.0
18.1
8.4
12.0
12.1
12.9

29.7
34.2
40.4
35.9
31.1
25.8

8.6
10.9
16.8
8.8
9.4
11.8

14.6
14.8
20.2
17. 7
16.8
9.7

6.5
8.5
3.4
9.4
4.9
4.3

2.2
.5
.8
5.0
6.5
9.7

5.5

2o !l

nil

5.2

4.3
Q
.O

1.7

1 Includes figures not shown separately because of insufficient data.

T

a ble

1 2 — D is a b lin g in ju r y a n d m e d ic a l t r e a t m e n t c a s e s in 5 1
n a tu r e o f in ju r y , 19 4 8

Total number of injuries
Nature of injury
Number
Total_________

________________

Amputations____________________________
Bruises, contusions_____________________________
Bums, scalds (except chemical)___________________
Chemical b u m s..____ ______________________________
Cuts, lacerations, p unctures____ _________________
Foreign bodies, not elsewhere classified- __ ________
Fractures__________________________
_________
Hernias___ _____ ________ __________
Industrial diseases_________________________________
Strains, sprains (except hernias)___________ _ __
Welder’s flash___________
__ ____
. ___
______
Other.___________ _______

Percent

Number of disabling
injuries 1
Number

Percent

4,170

100.0

1,209

100.0

33
1,370
139
100
954
481
233
67
60
674
21
38

.8
32.9
3.3
2.4
22.9
11.5
5.6
1.6
1.4
16.2
.5
.9

33
412
62
29
152
18
148
67
25
243
4
16

2. 7
34.2
5.1
2.4
12.6
1.5
12.2
5.5
2.1
20.1
.3
1.3

1A disabling work injury is one which results in (a) death, or (b) any
degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c) renders the injured unable
to work at 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.




p u lp a n d

p a p e r m ills , c la s s ifie d b y

Number of medical
injuries 2
Number

Percent

Average
number of
medical in­
juries per
disabling
injury

2,961

100.0

2.4

958
77
71
802
463
85

32.3
2. 6
2.4
27.1
15.6
2.9

2.3
1.2
2.4
5.3
25.7
.6

35
431
17
22

1.2
14^6
.6
.7

4*3

1.4
1.8

1.4

2 A medical injury is one which does not result in death, permanent
impairment, or temporary disability but requires treatment by a physician
or surgeon.

49

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL T A B L E S
T

a b le

1 3 .— D is a b lin g i n ju r y

and

m e d ic a l t r e a t m e n t c a s e s in 5 1
p a r t o f b o d y in ju r e d , 19 4 8

Total number of injuries
Part of body injured
Number

Percent

p u lp

and

Number of disabling
injuries 1
Number

Percent

p a p e r m ills , c la s s ifie d b y

Number of medical
injuries 2
Number

Percent

Average
number of
medical in­
juries per
disabling
injury

Total___________ __________________ __________ _ _ _

4,170

100.0

1,209

100.0

2,961

100.0

2.4

H ea d _____________________________________________
Eye___________________________________________
Brain and skull_____________ _____ _________ ___
Other__________________________________________

978
647
141
190

23.5
15.5
3.4
4.6

124
59
29
36

10.3
4.9
2.4
3.0

854
588
112
154

28.8
19.8
3.8
5.2

6.9
10.0
3.9
4.3

Trunk___________________________________________ _
Chest (lungs) ribs, etc________ _ __________
_ __
Back__________________________________ ______
Abdomen______________________________________
Hip or p e lv is ,__________________ ___________
Shoulder,,, _____________________ _____ _ _ ,_
Other__________ _
_ _____________________

778
139
339
178
37
79
6

18.7
3.3
8.2
4.3
.9
1.9
.1

313
33
147
89
13
30
1

25.9
2.7
12.1
7.4
1.1
2.5
.1

465
106
192
89
24
49
5

15.7
3.6
6.4
3.0
.8
1.7
.2

1.5
3.2
1.3
1.0
1.8
1.6
5.0

Upper extremities_______ ________ ____ ____ ______ _
Arm____________ ________ _________________
Hand_______
_ ________ , ,
___
Finger______ __________________________________

1,354
233
383
738

32.4
5.6
9.2
17.6

318
69
91
158

26.3
5.7
7.5
13.1

1,036
164
292
580

35.0
5.5
9.9
19.6

3.3
2.4
3.2
3.7

Lower extremities________ _
__
_ ________ _
Leg,---------------------------------------------------------------Foot____________ ______ ____________
, _
Toe____________________________________________

940
337
428
175

22.5
8.1
10.2
4.2

381
129
184
68

31.5
10.7
15.2
5.6

559
208
244
107

18.9
7.0
8.3
3.6

1.5
1.6
1.3
1.6

Body, general, ___ _______

120

2.9

73

6.0

47

1.6

.6

_______ _____________

1A disabling work injury is one which results in (a) death, or (b) any
degree of permanent physical impairment, or (c) renders the injured
unable to work at 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.




a

2 A medical injury is one which does not result in death, permanent
impairment, or temporary disability but requires treatment by physician
or surgeon.

T able

14.— D istribution of 4 ,1 7 0 disabling injury and medical treatm ent cases reported b y 51 pulp and paper m ills, classified by
accident type and agency of injury, 1948

o

Or

Agency of injury

Total : Number................ ........................
Percent 2........................................

4,170
100.0

475
11.5

462
11.2

391
9.4

283
6.8

243
5.9

231
5.6

199
4.8

Struck by : Total_____________________
Flying or thrown objects : Total____
Particles............... ........................
Other.......... ............................... .
Falling objects : Total_____ ____ ___
From hands of workers...... .........
From equipment______________
From other sources____________
Hand-operated or -wielded objects_
_
Mechanically powered equipment___
Rolling objects____________________
Other objects.................................. .

1, 557
' 638
513
125
506
208
148
150
303
45
16
49

475
475
475

33
9

294
17

172
34

1

60
2

51
1

9
11
1
9
1

17
25
9
8
8
244
3

34
132
54
34
44

2
37
15
17
5
13

1
8
2
4
2
30
12

5

1

3
3

176
4.2

91
2.2

86
2.1

68
1.6

53
1.3

45
1.1

641
15.5

27

31
7

33
1

38

34
1

1

22
18

1
29
14
3
12

144
22
9
13
91
41
18
32
8

4

7
19
7
4
8
2

33
31
28
3
1

3

1

1
2

20

31

4

65

63

1

94
2

9

7
23

4

2

1
1

1

51
42
72

4

1

1

1

6

1
5
9

Caught in, on, or between : Total. ...........
Moving parts of equipment : Total. _
Points-of-operation_____________
Gears, pulleys, etc_____________
Other parts...................................
Objects being lifted or placed_______
Rolling or falling objects.....................
Wheeled equipment and other
objects_______ ____ ______________
Hand tools and other objects. ...........
Other objects________ ____ ________

583
245
125
69
51
128
74

198
188
123
33
32
3
1

48
1
1

23

2
1

9
11

48
46
42

1
2
3

44

Overexertion—due to: Total........ ...........
Lifting objects______________ ______
Pulling objects____________________
Other operations__________________

377
235
63
79

10
1
4

27
2
9
16

See footnotes at end of table.




18

1
2
1
13
2

1
10
4
2
1

6
11
1
47

1
1

19
25

2
51
1
1
1
1

19

127

4

6

14

3

3

14

62

3

12

52

2
1

13
1

5
57

19

83
53

1
4

1

122
119

2
21

1

19

13

62

4

1

1

8
44
1

2

51

6
4

6
2
2

1

1
3

15
2

1

13
1

9
5
34

3

68
20

1

38

7

22

8

22

27
10

6
1

12
9

6
1

16
3

21
13

23
20

9
4

16
4
2

1

3

1

3

3

1

40
27
2
11

1

97
63
16
18

27
H
8
8

23
22

1

1

1

1
6
6

4

11
9
24
9

1

45

I

18

1

3

6

1

2

14

13
6
1
6

36
32
2
2

18
12
5
1

5
1
4

2
1
1

2
1
1

68
49
10
9

2
1
I

P A P E R

36

3

1

1

I
2

A N D

18
10

16
1

18

P U L P

166
159

1
17
1
16

O F

607

1

34
21
11
2
3

C A U S E S — M A N U F A C T U R E

1

93
2.2

14
24
8
1
15
3

4
5

107
2.6

42
14

89
6
1
5
74
35
22
17

126
3.0

306

1

17

6
2

182
4.4

Unclas­
Wire
sified;
and Other insuffi­
cables
cient
data

A C C I D E N T

13

1

191
4.6

Chips Shells Hoist- Con­
and
ingand
splin­ cores appa- vey­
ors
ters
ratus

A N D

Striking against : Total. ............... ...........
Bumping into or against equip­
ment : Total____________________
Moving parts of powered equip­
ment________ _______________
Other parts of powered equip­
ment________________________
Other equipment______________
Rubbing against or striking slivers,
splinters, etc_____ ____ __________
Stepping on objects________________
Striking -against projecting nails,
wires, etc_______________________
Striking against materials__________
Striking against other objects_______

Pulp- Work­
Con­
For­
ing
Ve­ Bodily Metal Chem­ Lum­ Pipes tain­
Ma­
Hand wood
and
eign
sur­ Paper hicles mo­ parts icals
ber piping
logs
tion
bodies chines 1 tools
ers
faces

INJURIES

Accident type

Total
num­
ber of
acci­
dents

T able

1 4 .— D istribu tion o f 4 ,1 7 0 disabling injury and m edical treatm ent cases reported b y 51 pulp and paper m ills, classified b y
accident type and agency of injury, 1948— Continued
Agency of injury
Accident type

jLorcu
num­
ber of
acci­
dents

Work­
For­
Ma­ Hand Pulp- ing Paper Ve­ Bodily Metal Chem­ Lum­ Pipes Con­
eign
wood sur­
and
mo­
hicles tion
parts icals
ber piping tain­
bodies chines 1 tools logs
ers
faces

294
181
111
70
28
85

25
21
15
6
2
2

Slips and stumbles (not falls): Total____
Slips: Total...........................................
On floors______________________
On other surfaces______________
Stumbles_____________ _________ _
_

231
182
91
91
49

17
16
7
9
1

Inhalation, absorption: Total...................
Absorption resulting in: Total______
Chemical burns............... ............
Dermatoses___________________
Other injuries_________________
Inhalation___ _____________________

193
163
98
32
33
30

Contact with extreme temperatures:
Total. ____________________________
Hot liquids________________________
Hot solids_________________________
Other_____________________________

128
45
34
49

7

1

3

7

1

3

Falls—to lower levels: Total........ ...........
From platforms, gangways, etc_____
From ladders______________________
From other elevations______________

122
33
24
65

6
1

3
2

5

1

3
2
2

8
7
2
6
1

1
1
1

2

1

4
4
4

18
9

6
3
2
1
1
2

9
1
8
10
8
2
6
2

148
112
66
46
36

4
4
2
2

2
2

4
2

2

2
2

4
4
4

83
21
20
42

1
1

62

Unclassified; insufficient data__________

133
84
66
18
12
37

2
2

1

22
6
2
4
2
14

6
5
4
1
1

1Includes paper machines, winding reels, calender stocks, etc., but excludes hoisting apparatus,
vehicles, and electrical equipment.




28
25
8
17
3

1

1
1

27
26
1
4
21
1

1
5

6

5

6

1
1

3
1
1
1

1
1

16

43

61
35
16
19
8
18

1
1

2
1
1

2

1

3

9
9

1

18

1

6
3

1

9

1
1

8
5
4
1
3

156
128
97
19
12
28

16

1
1
1

2

Unclas­
Wire
sified;
and Other insuffi­
cables
cient
data

1

29

1
1

1

3

1
3

1

88
10
49
11
3

1
1

8
18
1

2 Percentages are based on classified cases only.

1
1

15

T A B L E S

Other...

3
2
1
1

Con­
vey­
ors

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL

Falls—on same level: Total___ _________
Resulting from slips: Total................
On floors______________________
On other surfaces______________
Resulting from stumbles___________
Other.. _ n ____ ____________________

Chips Shells Hoistingand
and
splin­ cores apparatus
ters

C*

INJURIES AND ACCIDENT CAUSES— MANUFACTURE OF PULP AND PAPER

52
T

able

15.—Percentage distribution of 4,170 disabling and medical treatment cases reported by 51
pulp and paper mills, by type of accident and by department, 1948
Department
Total
number
of acci­ Wooddents 1 yard

Accident type

Total__________

___________________

_________

Wood
room

Pulp
mill

Wet
room

Beater
room

Paperma­
Finish­ Ship­
ing
chine
ping
room

Yard

Main­
tenance Power

2 4,170

2 407

2 221

2 322

2 81

2 270

2 692

2288

3160

2 240

*1,191

2 145

Struck by : Total_______________________________
Flying or thrown objects : Total. __ _________
Particles____ . . . _______ ______________
Other_______ __ ________ _ _________
Falling objects: Total______________________
From hands of workers___________________
From equipment_________
_______
..
From other sources. __ __________________
Hand-operated or -wielded objects____________
Mechanically powered equipment_____________
Rolling objects_____ _. 2_ * _ ______________
Other objects________________________________

37.5
15.3
12.3
3.0

55.8
10.6
6.4
4.2
9.1
4.7

33.2
10.2
7.8
2.4
14.1

8.8

19.9

8.6

1.2

43.7
26.7
23.2
3. 5
10! 5
4.5
3.1
2.9
4.6

2.1
4

1.2

1.0

.9
.5
.5

35.7
11.8
10.1
1.7
15'. 1
7.1
3.8
4.2
5.0

1.1

6.2
.6

32.7
8.8
6.3
2. 5
13! 8
7.5
3.1
3.1
5.0
1.9
19
l! 3

36.2
16.8
16.1

22.6

24.0
6.7
3.4
3.3
5.2
1.5

29.3
9.2
7.5
1.7

5.0
3.6
3.6
7.3

28.4
10.3
8.4
1. 9
10.7
3.5
4.1
3.1

29.7
16.1
16.1

12.2

44.3
18.9
8.6
10.3
14.9
4.1
6.3
4.5

.8
3
!8

Striking against : Total__________________________
Bumping into or against equipment : Total-----Moving parts of powered equipment_______
Other parts of powered equipment________
Other equipment________________________
Rubbing against or striking slivers, splinters,
etc..
___________________________ ______
Stepping on objects__ _ _____ ____ ___ ___
Striking against projecting nails, wires, etc------Striking against materials__________ _________
Striking against other objects_________________

14.6
7.4

8.8

17.6

12.6

13.0
3.7

Caught in, on, or between : Total___ ____________
Moving parts of equipment : Total______ _ . .
Points-of-operation___ ___ _____ _____ _
Gears, pulleys, etc_______ ______ _______
Other parts
. __________________ Objects being lifted or placed_________________
Rolling or falling objects___________ ____ _____
Wheeled equipment and other objects____ ____
Hand tools and other objects_____________
Other objects_______________________________
Overexertion—due to : Total_____________________
Lifting objects_______________________________
Pulling objects______________________________
Other operations____ _____ ____ ________ _____

.4

.5

1.1
2.6

9.9
.7

5.5
3.9
1.6
6.8

.7

,1

1.5

16.1
7.5

16.7
9.3
.7
3.7
4.9

18.6
13.0
4.2
6.5
2.3

14.6
7.0

.6

.4

3.6
2.4

1.3
1.9

1.3
2.0

2.2
2 .6

2.9
.4
.4

2.8
1.0

3.8

1.3

2. 5

.6

3*8

2.5
1.3

1.7

2^0
1.2
5

1.9

11.2

2.9
2.9

1.2

.7

4.5
5.3
1.4

2.0

1.0

1.4

.3

1.2

1.2

2.5
3.7

1.5
.7
3.0

1.0

1.2

1.1
1.1

11.1
6.2
6.2

11.9
4.1
.4

21.5
14.9

1.1
2.6
2.2
1.1

.9
3.2
3.8

.7
1.2
2.0
2.0

.9
2.3

14.0
5.8
2.9
1.7

9.1
2.9

15.8
7.1

1.9

1.2

1.0

3.1

1.5

1.8
1.2
1.1
1.0

2.0
1.0

1.7

3.9
1.4
4.1
1.4
.9
.9
1.4

9.1
5.7
1.5
1.9

8.6

5.4

8.1

2.2

1.8
1.8
1.8

3.7
1.9
2.5

Falls—on .same level : Total______________________
Resulting from slips : Total------ ----- --------On floors_______ _____________________
On other surfaces________________________
Resulting from stumbles__________ _________
Other
____ ___
_____ ___ _____ ________

7.1
4.4
2.7
1.7
.7

7.4
3.5

7.7
4.1

.2

1.8

6.9
3.5
2.3

3.6

3.4

Slips and stumbles (not falls) : Total-------------------Slips : Total_____________________ _
______
--------------------------------On floors----------On other surfaces------------------------------------Stumbles___
__ ________________________ -

5.6
4.4

3.6
3.6
1.4

3.4

1.7

2.0

2.2
2.2
1.2

1.8

1.8

5.9
.5

3.3
.7
3.2
3.9
2.9
.5
2.4

2.3

2.2

1.0

.3
1.9
3.4
6.5
3.2
1.7
.9
.9
.6

.9
.9

1.2

1.8
1.2
.6
1.6

4.6
3.9
2.3

Contact with extreme temperatures : Total. ...........
Hot liquids____ ____ _ _____________________
Hot solids___ _______ _______________ ________
Other_________ __________ _________________

3.1
1.1
.8
1.2

.5

Falls—to lower levels : Total___ ____________ ____
From platforms, gangways, etc________________
From ladders_______________________________
From other elevations___ __________
_______

2.9

3.2

.8
.6

.2

1.5

3.0

1.4

1.9

Other__________ _

1.5

1.5

.5

.3

.7

.8
.8

3.2
3.2
.5
1.8

.5

.7

.9

7.5

.6

Inhalation, absorption : Total____________________
Absorption resulting in : Total.____ __________
Chemical burns__________________________
Dermatoses______ _______________________
Other injuries___________________ ________
Inhalation__ _______________________ ________

1.2
1.2

19.3
14.6
11.8
2.2
.6

1Includes data not shown separately because of insufficient space.

.5

.9

10.8

1.0

1.4
1.4

2.5

1.5

1.4

.3

.6

2.1

6.3

1.7
.8
7*5

11.7
3.8
1.5
1*8
’5
3! 3

10.4
5.0
2.9
1.4
*7
2A

.6
1.7

2.1

'a

.7
10.4
4.8
1.4
4.2

2.8

.7

12.3
7.3
2.5
2.5

14.1

9.6
6.3
1.3

8.6

12.6

7.4

7.7

6.2
1.2
1.2

6.6
1.1

7.4
7.4
6.2
1.2

2.5
2.5
2.5

1.9
3.0

7.1
5.2
4.0
1.2
1. 2

.7

16.4
9.1
4.2
3.1

11.3
5.6
1.9
3.8

12.2

6.1

10.5
.4
1.3

4.2
1.3

7.3
4.6
4.3
.3
.3
2.4

10.1

6.7
3.8
1.3
2.5

4.2
2.9
1.7

3^8

2.9

6.6

6.3
5.0
3.7
1.3
1.3

5.5
4.7
1.7
3.0

.6
.6

5.5
5.1
3.0
1.7
;4

6.5
3.6
2.9
1. 7

5.9
3.8

4.8
3.3

1.0
1.0
.8
.1
.1

.7
.7
.4
.3

6.1

1.8

1.4

2.2

3.7
1.2

3.0
.4
.4

2.5

2.2

!i
.8

3.3

.6

3.3
1.5

2.1

.7

8.8

3.8

5.7
2.5
3.2
.6

.6

.8

19

.6

1.2

.3
L0
4.7
3.2
1.4

.7

7.6
4.1
3.4
.7
7

2.8
6.9
6.9
2.8

1.8
1.5

4.1

5.6
4.8
2 .5

4.2
4.2
1.4

’4

2.1
#7

’4

.5

2.5

29
3.4
13
L3

8.2

.4
1.5
8.6

2.4

6
.6

6.3
5.6
3.7
1.9
.7

1.1
1.8

#7
.7

18.9
2.5

1.1

2.0

5.5

.6

2.4
1.7

3.3

1.4
8.3
5.5

21.4
1.3
.7

2 1

8.2
2.6

14.0
6.3
1.5

2.8

9.7

1.0

.3

1.2

3.8

L3

7

8.Z
1.4
4.1

18.1
7.4
4.3

.6

1.2
1.2

10.9
5.0
2.5
3.4
.3

1.0

3.0
.4

2.5

4.7
.5

4.3
3.8
3.1
3.1
1.7

1.5

14.0
6.9
.3
1.9
4.7

1.6

6.0

2.5

1.3




1.2
1.2
6.2

11.0

.6

1.2
1.0

. . . ________________________

4.9
2.5

2 .6

.9
1.1
.6

.4

3.2

.4

.7
.4
.3

1*9
[s

1*3
[s

1.4
t. 2

4.2
1A
1. 4

1.1

9.7
2.1

1.5

1.4
1.1

5.0
2.5

1.7
.4

4.1

.6

.3

2.5

1.3

L4

2 .1

.4

2.7

2.1

3Number of accidents included.

1.0

1.1
l! 6

7

T able

16.— D istribution of 4 ,17 0 disabling injury and m edical treatm ent cases reported b y 51 pulp and paper m ills classified by
accident type and b y unsafe working condition, 1948
Unsafe working conditions

Accident type

Defective agencies

Total
num­
ber of
acci­
dents
T ota l1

Slip­
pery

Lack of
personal safety
equipment

Improperly guarded agencies

Hazard­
ous
working
Lack of
Project­ Hid­
proce­
point-ofing nails,
dures
den
Total i operawires, defects
tion
etc.
guards

Lack of
guard­
rails,
toeboards,
etc.

Lack of
power
trans­
mission
guards

Total i

Gog­
gles

Hazardous
arrangement

Un­
safely
T ota l1 stored
or
piled

Lack
Poor
house­ of nec­
essary
keep­ equip­
ing
ment

4,170

795

300

88

80

542

452

228

99

43

179

136

148

87

106

48

Struck by : Total__________________
Flying or thrown objects : Total. _
Particles___________________
Other............ ................. . . . _
Falling objects : T otal..................
From hands of workers______
From equipment____________
From other sources_________
Hand-operated or -wielded objects.
Mechanically powered equipment.
Rolling objects............... ................
Other objects................. ................

1,557
'638
513
125
. 506
208
148
150
303
45
16
49

147
46
21
25
68
24
31
13
16
9

21

3

91
41
7
34
40

39
32
6
26
5

28
7
1
6
21

104
104
103
1

102
102
101
1

103
1

72
1

16
5

1
97

1
68

37
3
1
8

5

20
1

19
78
1

10
58
1

2

4

8

1

1

2

2
4
1

2

1,864

1
2
1
1

1
1

5
2
2

5
3
3

36

5
1

1

122
18
3
15
54
40
10
4
29
9
4
8

1
1

16
16

31
20
11
9
7

Unclas­
sified;
insuffiient
data

2

1
58

4

1

17

17

1

13

8

249

58

3

1

1

13

1

2

3

178

1

2
11

1
2

2
1

76
88

607

204

3

80

3

30

69

306

30

3

2

2

11

68

65

1

1

49

48

122
119

17
12

6
4

18
1

10

83
53

66
48

51
42
72

38
10
12

Caught in, on, or between : Total____
Moving parts of equipment :
Total................................ ...........
Points-of-operation...............
Gears, pulleys, etc..................
Other parts.............................
Objects being lifted or placed____
Rolling or falling objects_________
Wheeled equipment and other
objects................. ........................
Hand tools and other objects........
Other objects................. ..............

583

52

6

245
125
69
51
128
74

18
3
2
13
13
4

1

48
46
42

8
3
6

Overexertion—due to : Total.............
Lifting objects____ ______________
Pulling objects............. .............. .
Other operations............. ..............

377
235
63
79

17
3
5
9

1
2

2

2

14

1
3
7

3

30

9
8
2
6
2

1
4

2
2
1

1
4
3
1

9
2

1

48

2

1

1

1

1
1
1

1

52

193

5
5
17
13
6
3
8
226
169
33
24

1
3
5

1
119

5

178
116
45
17

116
116

3

3

1

3
1
8

1
1

41

2
5
1

4
13

9

2

1

41

2
9

1
7
1

1
1

1
1
1

1

4

1

2
2

b

ft

267
42
6
21
15
95
44

1

1
1
1

1

1
1

1

41
3

4

1
15
44

1
3

I

T A B L E S

Striking against : Total_____ ________
Bumping into or against equip­
ment : Total____ _____________
Moving parts of powered
equipment..... ......................
Other parts of powered
equipment..... ........... ...........
Other equipment............... .
Rubbing against or striking
slivers, splinters, etc__________
Stepping on objects_____________
Striking against projecting nails,
wires, etc__________________
Striking against materials_______
Striking against other objects.......

3
1

1

969
422
379
43
242
140
50
52
252
15
7
31

-STATISTICAL

Total_________________ ____ ________

Other

29
38
19
129
63
23
43

See footnotes at end of table.




Or
co

T able

1 6 .— D istribu tion o f 4 ,1 7 0 disabling injury and m edical treatm ent cases reported b y 51 pulp and paper m ills classified by
accident type and b y unsafe working condition, 1948— Continued

Ox

Unsafe working conditions

Total i

Slip­
pery

161
143
97
46
3
15

138
135
93
42

3
2
2

2

3

1

2

Slips and stumbles (not falls) : Total.
Slips : Total_________ ________
On floors______________ _____
On other surfaces___________
Stumbles_______________________

231
182
91
91
49

125
121
71
50
4

112
112
69
43

____
Inhalation, absorption : Total
Absorption resulting in : Total__
Chemical burns __
__ _
Dermatoses __________ _____
Other injuries___ ___ _____
Inhalation________ ____________

193
163
98
32
33
30

29
19
19

16
13
13

10

3

Contact with extreme temperatures :
Total____________________________
Hot liquids_____________________
Hot solids________________ _____
Other...............................................

128
45
34
49

24
13
2
9
32
15
6
11

Other...........................

62

4

Unclassified; insufficient data_______

16

13
4
3
6

1Includes data not shown separately because of insufficient space.

4

22
4

21
4.

5
1
1

4
3
15

4
3
14

3
1

7
7
2
5

10
6

14
5
1
4
1
8

4
1

3

4

1
3

3

4

52
49
30
17
2
3

12
12
1

11
11

11

11

29
13
3
13

25
12
9
4

1

8
5
2
1

6
3
2
1

32
5
8
19

3

4

4

1

1
1
1

1

26
10
7
3
8
8

4
2

4
1

2

1
1
2

41
11
8
3
30

1

9
9
1
8

31
31
21

1
1

10

1

5

3

1

5

14
11

51
47
30
6
11
4

3

2

1

3
23
5

2

4

18

2

4

1
1
1
11
2
1

3
3
3

1
9
15
15

58
15
5
10
9
34
40
32
9
23
8
34
30
14
9
7
4
29
7
14
8

3

2
1

17
5

3
1

3

1

12

2

24
3
8
13

1

49
16

A N D
P A P E R




Un­
safely
Total i stored
or
piled

P U L P

122
33
24
65

Gog­
gles

Unclas­
sified;
insuffi­
cient
data

O F

Falls—to lower levels : Total________
From platforms, gangways, etc___
From ladders _
From other elevations...... ........... .

3
1
1
1

Total i

Other

C A U S E S — M A N U F A C T U R E

294
181
111
70
28
85

Lack of
power
trans­
mission
guards

Lack
Poor
house­ of nec­
essary
keep­ equip­
ing
ment

A C C I D E N T

Falls—on same lev el: Total_________
Resulting from slips : T o t a l____
On floors.......
_
___
On other surfaces___________
Resulting from stumbles. _ ____
Other.................. . . . .......................

Lack of
guard­
rails,
toeboards,
etc.

Hazardous
arrangement

A N D

Project­
ing nails, Hid­
den
wires,
defects
etc.

Hazardous
working
Lack of
proce­
point-ofdures
Total i operation
guards

Lack of
personal safety
equipment

INJURIES

Accident type

Improperly guarded agencies

Defective agencies

Total
num­
ber of
acci­
dents

T able

17.—

Distribution of

4 ,170

disabling injury and medical treatment cases reported by

51
agency of accident and b y unsafe working conditions, 1948

pulp and paper mills, classified by

Unsafe working conditions

Agency of accident

Total i

Slip­
pery

Hazard­
ous
working
Lack of
proce­
Project­
point-ofdures
ing nails, Hid­
Total i operaden
wires, defects
tion
etc.
guards

4,170

795

300

88

80

542

452

Working surfaces________________ __
Floors______________
________
Yards___
_
__ ___
_ __
Platforms, scaffolds__
Other surfaces__________ _______

440
317
65
37
21

288
216
37
24
11

237
187
29
13
8

6
5
1

5
1

4
2

3
1

2

42
24
2
8
8

Machines 2________ ______________
Paper machines _ __ __ ______
Winding reels__
__ _________
Other machines __
__ ______

435
80
68
287

79
26
9
44

12
7

6
2

5

4

9
3
1
5

26
5
4
17

Paper......................... ......
............
________
Rolls______________
________
Bales, reams___ ____
Other paper_______ _________ ___

155
79
45
31

4
2
1
1

Hand tools________
__
_______
_______
H a m m e rs.___
Other hand tools_______ _______

133
31
102

44
7
37

Chemicals
Cooking liquors__
__ __
Lime______ __ . . .
_______
Other chemicals .........................

108
30
26
52

Vehicles. ...........
Railway vehicles
Hand trucks
Motor vehicles

_______
_ ____

1

Lack of
power
trans­
mission
guards

99

43

12
6
6

12
4
8

179

Gog­
gles

136

216
28
47
141

3
3

23
2
1
20

36

35

36

12

60
19
41

49
10
16
23

26
6
10
10

40
22
7
11

10
8
2

4
2
1
1

Pulpwood logs

95

4

1

1

30

6

Lumber.

94

72

4

52

9

3

Containers............... ........ ................ .

68

12

42

2

2

Conveyors....... ..........................

65

8

3

1

8

46

31

Metal parts, not elsewhere classified. _

58

13

4

1

31

Pines and piping.

52

27

Hoisting apparatus

54

25

48

14

36

9

1

Boilers and pressnrp.

____

v p .s s p .1s

Shafts and corps
Steps, stairs
Other agencies
Unclassiflp.d; insufficient. dn.t.a

4

6
1
3
2

9

4

18

8

1

17

11

31

25
130

6

1,872

1

1

91
2

10

1

10
2
1

1
1

1

53

3

9
4
1
4

53

8

2
1

1

11

1

9

1

1

1

2

3
3

2

7

3

4
3
1

1

2

4

17

9

25

2

17

9
6

1

2

47

11
4
1
6

3

25

25

1
1

1,864

1

1

1
12

2

2

1

20

328

2

2

12
10

4

9
1

36

2

8
6
2

9

1

1

6

48

1
1

6
3
2
1

1

10
1

1 Includes data not shown separately because of insufficient space.




2

8
1
4
3

106

35

62
20
42

98
41
34
23

2

1

10
8
2

Unclas­
sified;
Other insuffi­
cient
data

98
71
26

87

1

1
12

12

148

Lack
Poor
house­ of nec­
essary
keep­ equip­
ing
ment

1

1

12

Un­
safely
Total i stored
or
piled

4
4

48
20
10
18
34
10
20
4

Total 1

34
24
2
7
1

136
66
41
29

1

2

272
38
53
181

228

Lack of
guard­
rails,
toeboards,
etc.

Hazardous
arrangement

A P P E N D I X — STATISTICAL TABLES

Total........... ...........................................

2

Lack of
personal safety
equipment

Improperly guarded agency

Defective agency

Total
num­
ber of
acci­
dents

2

1

2
9

2

3
10
2

6
1,864

2 Includes paper machines, winding reels, calender stacks, etc., but excludes hoisting
apparatus, vehicles and electrical equipment.

INJURIES AND ACCIDENT CAUSES— MANUFACTURE OF PULP AND PAPER

56
T

18.—Percentage distribution of 4,170 disabling and medical treatment cases reported by 51 pulp
and paper mills, by unsafe working condition and department in which accidents occurred, 1948

able

Department
Unsafe working condition

xotai
number
of ac­
cidents 1 Woodyard

Wood
room

Pulp
mill

Wet
room

Beat er
room

Paperma­
Finish­ Ship­
chine
ing
ping
room

Yard

Main­
te­
nance

Power

Total___________________________________________

2 4,170

2 407

2 221

2322

2 81

2 270

2 692

2 288

2160

2 240

21, 191

2 145

Defective agency________________________________
Slippery_________ ________________________
Projecting nails, wires, e t c . __________________
Hidden defects_
____
_ _ _ __________
Projecting splinters, slivers, etc ________ __
Improperly designed or constructed__________
Sharp-edged- _
_______ _________ __
Loose___ _______
_ ________
Rough or uneven. _ ___________ ____ ___ ___
Other defects ______________________________

34.4
12.9
3.8
3.5
2.9

26.6
9.3
4.1
1.5

27.2
2.4
1.6

35.3
10.5
5.3
4.7
3* 7

1. 5
.5

44.0
17.0
3.2
3.2
5.4
6.5

37.4
14.6
2.4
8.4

1.0

32.9
14.3
2.4
3.0
4.8

2.8

32.3
16.8
2.5
3.1
1.9
2. 5

35.6
16.3

2.6

53.2
28.7
10.3

35.8

11.2

32.4
9.6

1.1

4.8

2. 6
1*9
!3
5.2

1 .2

Hazardous working procedure
________ ______
Manual lifting or moving of heavy loads___ ____
Working with or around dangerous materials___
Other________ ____________________________

7.5
7.2

2.0

4.1

1.2
1.6

4.2
4.4
2.3
2.3
.5

4.6
3.1

.8

2 .6
1.1
1.6
1.1

3.2

6.3

4.1

3.7

23.5
13.0
5.0
5.5

19.9

15.2
7.2

16.3
10.2
2.0

9.1

7.2

29.6
5.8
17.5
6.3

Improperly guarded agency______________________
Lack of point-of-operat on guards_______ „ __
Lack of toe-boards, guard-rails, etc________ __
Lack of power-transmission guards_________ _
Other _______________________ _________ _

19.6
9.8
4.3
1.9
3.6

16.8

44.8
28.8
10.4
4.8

14.8

16.3

2 .6

10.2
6.1

Lack of personal safety equipm ent__ ____________
Goggles. _____ _______ _ _______ _ _
Other______ _
____ ______ ________

7.8
5.9
1.9

3.6
1. 5

Hazardous arrangement. _ _____________________
Unsafely stored or piled. __ __ __________ _
Unsafely placed. _ _____
__ _ __________
Other_______________
____ ________

6.4
3.8

6.4
4.8

2.6

1.8
.8

24.0
23.0
.5
.5

.8
.8

1.1

1.2

.5

5*4
1.2

Poor housekeeping_______________________________

4.6

6.6

.8

4.8

4.1

5.6

4.7

3.0

Lack of necessary equipment________________ _____

2.1

1.0

2.4

1.6

2.0

.6

1.2

1.8

Other_ _______________________________________
_

1.6

1.5

6.3

6.1

1.9

.7

1.7
1.4
1.3
4.1

1.0

8.2
2.6

2.0
10.8
2.0
2.0

2.1

Includes data not shown separately because of insufficient space.




.8

.8

.8

3.2
1.6
1.6

8.5

2.0

1.2
.6

2.0

1.8
1.8
.6
1 8

2.2

10.8

10.9
3.1
1.6
2 .3
L6
!8
1 6

1.1
2.6

7.9
5.8

2.0

2.1

2.0

1.0

2.4

6.5

3.1

33.5
15.5
13.0
5.0

22.7
15.4

32.9
25.1
3.0
4.8

36.5
23.6
3.2
9.7

35.2
21.9
9.4
3.9

16.9
9.9

12.4
1.9
4.9
1.9
3.7

30.4
23.2
.9
.7
5. 6

19.2

9.7

6.3

10.8
1.2

1.1

3.2

4.8
2. 4

5.4

.8
1.6
2.2
1. 6

17.2
8.5
3.2

5.6
]. 9
3.7

2.8

.6

8.1
3. 8

4.1

2.8

1.9

3.1

.5

2.1

5.2

1.9
.9

.2
1.2

2 Number of accidents included.

4.2

1.8

3* 7

19.3
8.5
4.8
6 .0

21.7
4.8
7.2
1. 2
8. 5

5. 5
3^9
1. 6

18.6
16* 3
2.3

7.0
4. 6
.8
1. 6

3.7
1*0
2*2

.5

2.4
2.4

6.5

6.3

4.2

2.4

2.2

3.9

3.1

2.4

1.0

3.6

.6

9.6
3.0

2.8

1. 2
L8

1.1

i!i

6.0
3’ 5

2. 4
7. 2

2 *4

T able

1 9 .— D istribu tion of 4 ,1 7 0 disabling injury and m edical treatm ent cases reported b y 51 pulp and paper m ills, classified by
accident type and unsafe act, 1948
Unsafe acts

Accident type

Total
number
of ac­
cidents

Using unsafe equipment or equipment
unsafely
Using equip­
ment unsafely
Total i

Grip­
ping
objects
inse­
Total i Hand curely
tools

All types 1___ ____ _____ _____________

4,170

697

412

358

Struck by : Total.............. ........... ..........
Flying or thrown objects : Total__
Particles....................................
Other................. ................. ......
Falling objects : Total..... ................
From hands of workers_______
From equipment_____ ________
From other sources. .................
Hand-operated or -wielded objects..
Mechanically powered equipment..
Rolling objects____ ______________
Other objects.______ _______ _____

1,557
638
513
125
506
208
148
150
303
45
16
49

397
15
6
9
133
115
11
7
230
7
2
10

285
13
6
7
37
29
6
2
225
2
1
7

262
11
5
6
29
2ST

81

43

31

107

84

92

75

45

32

30

2, 736

12
1

17
2

61
3

58
3

46
11

8
7

10
6

2
14
7
3
4

3
50
8
19
23
2
1
1
4

3
48
7
18
23
2
1
1
3

11
25
1
16
8
6
1
2
1

41
40
40

7

6
2
2

5
2
1
1

3

935
544
466
78
276
71
98
107
52
29
10
24

356

142

2

54
10

2

6

1
1

4
2
1
1

2

6
5
1

1

2

1
1

1

1
1

71

38

29

17

5

147

135

5

6

5

4

2

7

6

9

7

353

57

35

26

12

3

118

110

1

6

4

3

2

1

4

2

4

114

65

4

2

10

4

122
119

26
27

15
18

49
59

49
57

83
53

4

51
42
72

5
5

2
1

Caught in, on, or between : T otal.........
Moving parts of equipment : Total.
Points-of-operation____ ____ _
Gears, pulleys, etc___________
Other parts................... .........
Objects being lifted or placed_____
Rolling or falling objects__________
Wheeled equipment and other ob­
jects. ________________ _________
Hand tools and other objects...........
Other o b j e c t s __________________

583
245
125
69
51
128
74

174
26
6
16
4
78
19

56
11
2
8
1
2
3

48
46
42

7
35
9

5
34
1

34
1

Overexertion—due to : Total_________
Lifting objects................. ............
Pulling objects.................... ............
Other operations_______________

377
235
63
79

19
5
3
11

9

8

1
8

1
7

3

Falls—on same level : Total__________
Resulting from slips : Total............
On floors............ ........ ................
On other surfaces________ ____
Resulting from stumbles____ ____
Other. .................................... ...........

294
181
111
70
28
85

17

14

14

3

17

14

14

3 1
...........

See footnotes at end o f table.




11
15

6
6

2
1

2

2
1

1

40
2
2

13
1
1

93
7

1
2

6
6

2

2

1
3

1
2

1

1

4

2
1
1

43

2

45
26

1

1

2
1

6

1
1
9
18

1
7
17

1
1
4

12
1

2
1
7
6
3

14

3

9

5

1

2

2
1.
1

19
12
2
5
26
12
5
7
8
6

1
1

18
9
2
7
7
2

11

11

4
10

25
14
6
3
5

14

2
6

2
6

1
2

1
2

19
12
4
3

1
6
1

2

79
51

2
1

57
15
6
3
6
12
11

6
1
68
8

1

2
1

4

4

2
2

2
2

1

31
12
2
3
7
1
10
6

6
5
2
3
1

2
18
17
5
8
4

2
6

3

3
2
2

1
1

1

1

49
25
35

ft

T A B L E S

607
306

I
g
STATISTICAL

Striking against : Total______________
Bumping into or against equip­
ment : Total___________________
Moving parts of powered
equipment____ ____ ________
Other parts of powered equip­
ment___ ____ _________ ____
Other equipment......................
Rubbing against or striking
slivers, splinters, etc___________
Stepping on objects_______ _______
Striking against projecting nails,
wires, e t c ......................................
Striking against materials____ ____
Striking against other objects..........

1
218
2
1
1

Operat­
Unclas­
ing or
sified;
work­ Other insuffi­
ing at
cient
unsafe
data
speed

Expo­
sure
to
mov­
ing
equip­
ment

103

10
19
10
4
5
13
5
1
6

Repair­
ing (etc.)
equip­
mentmoving,
charged,
under
pressure

Inat­
ten­
tion
to
foot­
ing

98
2

2
1
1

Failure
Fail­ to wear
ure to proper
safety
secure
Expo­
Unsafe or warn equip­
sure to Total i plac­
ment or
fall­
clothing
ing
ing
objects

1

Inat­
Taking
ten­
wrong Total i tion
hold of
to sur­
objects
round­
ings

142

2
87
82
2
3
3
4

Unsafe loading,
placing, etc.

Taking unsafe position or posture

282
167
102
36
29
33
28
20
8
26

1

2
1
1
1
1
106
1

2
1
1
4

4

317
205
53
59
242
168
62
18
56

Or

T able

1 9 .— D istribution o f 4 ,1 7 0 disabling injury and medical treatm ent cases reported b y 51 pulp and paper m ills, classified by
accident type and unsafe act, 1948— Continued

Or

00

Unsafe acts

Total
number
of ac­
cidents

Using equip­
ment unsafely
Total i

Inhalation, absorption : T otal..............
Absorption resulting in : Total___
Chemical burns___________ _
Dermatoses____________ _____
Other injuries____ ___________
Inhalation... ____________________

193
163
98
32
33
30

2
2
2

Contact with extreme temperatures :
Total........ ...................... ........... __
Hot liquids____________ _________
Hot solids... ____________________
Other___________________________

128
45
34
49

7
1
2
4

1
1

Falls—to lower levels : Total_________
From platforms, gangways, etc____
From ladders______ ______________
From other elevations____________

122
33
24
65

5

4

2
3

1
3

3

Other_____ _________________ ________

62

4

3

2

Unclassified; insufficient data. __

16

1

30
23
5
18
7
1
1
1

2

1

2

2

1

1
1
1

1
1
1
14
13
6
1
6
1

2

3

7
2
4
1

3
2
1

2
2

2

1

2
1

3
3
3

5

7
3
1

1

1

1

2

2

1
1

1

4
3

2

2

1

3

2

1

3

8
8
2
6

15

158
133
83
25
25
25
100
38
23
39

1

6

1

2
7

1
1
1

191
154
83
71
37

5
3

5

10
1
4
5

3
3

5
3
2
1
2

2
2
2

1

2

100
29
18
53

1

43

O E
P U L P
A N D
P A P E R

!. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: ! 95 2




3
1
1

2
4

1Includes data not shown separately because of insufficient space.

to

28
23
5
18
5

Expo­
sure Expo­
to
sure to
mov­
fall­
ing
ing
equip­ objects
ment

Repair­
Unclas­
ing (etc.) Operat­
sified;
ing or
equip­
work­ Other insuffi­
mentcient
moving, ing at
data
charged, unsafe
under
speed
pressure

C A U S E S — M A N U F A C T U R E

231
182
91
91
49

Inat­
ten­
tion
to
foot­
ing

Failure
to wear
Fail­
proper
ure to
safety
secure
Unsafe or warn equip­
ment or
Total i plac­
clothing
ing

A C C I D E N T

Slips and stumbles (not fa lls): Total. _
Slips : Total........ .............. ..............
On floors.................... ................
On other surfaces.......................
Stumbles...................................... .....

Inat­
Taking
ten­
wrong Total i tion
hold of
to sur­
round­
objects
ings

Unsafe loading,
placing, etc.

A N D

Grip­
ping
objects
Hand inse­
T otal1 tools curely

Taking unsafe position or posture

I N J U RIES

Accident type

Using unsafe equipment or equipment
unsafely




OTHER REPORTS ON INDUSTRIAL HAZARDS AND WORKING CONDITIONS
A n n u a l R e p o r t s o n W o r k Injuries: A collection of basic industrial injury data for each year, presenting national average
injury-frequency and severity rates for each of the major industries in the United States. Individual establishments may
evaluate their own injury records by comparison with these data.
Bulletin N o .

Bulletin N o .

1

Pr i c e

Price

1025
975
945
921
889
849
802
758

Work Injuries in the United States During 1949_____________________________________________ 20 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1948_____________________________________________ 15 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1947_____________________________________________ 15 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1946__________________________ ^_________________ 10 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1945_____________________________________________ 10 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1944_____________________________________________ 10 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1943______________________________________________ 10 cents
Work Injuries in the United States During 1942______________________________________________ 10 cents
Q u a r t e r l y a n d M o n t h l y R e p o r t s o n W o r k I n juries i n M a n u f a c t u r i n g : Press releases presenting in jury-frequency rates for
selected manufacturing industries, by month and by quarter. Issued monthly from January 1943 to September 1944,
and quarterly thereafter. For free distribution upon request to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Also appears in
Monthly Labor Re T
iew.
Injuries a n d A c c i d e n t C a u s e s : Intensive studies of the frequency and severity of work injuries, the kinds of injuries, types
and causes of accidents in selected major industries:
1023
1004
962
949
924
884
855
839
834
805

Injuries and Accident Causes in the Manufacture of Clay ConstructionProducts________________ 30 cents
Work Injuries in Construction, 1948-49_____________________________________________________ 25 cents
Injuries and Accident Causes in Textile Dyeing and Finishing__________________________________ 45 cents
Injuries and Accident Causes in Fertilizer Manufacturing_____________________________________ 20 cents
Injuries and Accident Causes in the Pulpwood-Logging Industry, 1943 and1944________________ 10 cents
Injuries and Accident Causes in the Brewing Industry, 1944__________________________________ 15 cents
Injuries and Accident Causes in the Slaughtering and Meat-PackingIndustry, 1943______________ 15 cents
Fatal Work Injuries in Shipyards, 1943 and 1944____________________________________________ 10 cents
Shipyard Injuries, 1944____________________________________________________________________ 5 cents
Injuries and Accident Causes in the Foundry Industry, 1942__________________________________ 15 cents

Reprint
Serial N o .

R.
R.
R.
R.
R.
R.
R.

1737
1680
1666
1652
1639
1630
1582

Work Injuries to Women in Shipyards, 1943-44___________________________________________
Importance of Minor Injuries in Shipyards_______________________________________________
Basic Accident Factors in Shipyards_____________________________________________________
Shipyard Injuries During 1943__________________________________________________________
Chemical Poisoning in Shipyards________________________________________________________
Causes of Crane Accidents in Shipyards__________________________________________________
Causes and Prevention of Injuries from Falls in Shipyards_________________________________

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

Other Publications
Bulletin N o .

Price

923 Performance of Physically Impaired Workers in Manufacturing Industries___________________ 55 cents
917 Hours of Work and Output_____________________________________________________________ 35 cents
869 Workmen’s Compensation and the Protection of Seamen__________________________________ 20 cents

Reprint
Serial N o .

R. 1936 Illness Absenteeism in Manufacturing Plants, 1947________________________________________ (2)
R. 1931 Joint Production Committees, January 1948______________________________________________ (2)
R. 1928 Absenteeism and Injury Experience of Older Workers_____________________________________ (2)

1 For sale by Superintendent of Documents at prices indicated. How to order publications: Address your order to the Superintendent of Documents, Govern­
ment Printing Office, Washington 25 D. C., with remittance in check or money order. Currency is sent at sender’s risk. Postage stamps not acceptable.
* Free upon request to: Industrial Hazards Branch, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington 25, D. C.