View original document

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

U. S. D E P A R T M E N T O F L A B O R

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
ROYAL M EEKER, Comm issioner

BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES\
( W H O L E O '!A
BUREAU OF LABOR S T A T IS T IC S / * * ' ( NUMBER lL J l
IN D U S T R IA L

A C C ID E N T S

AND

H Y G IE N E

S E R IE S :

NO.

18

T H E S A F E T Y M O V E M E N T IN T H E
IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y
1 9 0 7 TO 1 9 1 7




LU CIAN W. C H AN E Y
and
H U G H S. HANNA

JU NE, 1918

W ASH IN GTON ,
GO VE R N M EN T PR IN T IN G OFFICE
1918




CONTENTS.
Page.

Introductory note..............................................................................................................
9
Part I.— A review of the safety movement, with special reference to the w ar.. . 11-32
Safety experience of a large steel plant, 1905 to 1917.......................................
15
Safety experience of a group of plants, 1907 to 1917......................................... 15,16
Results of the safety movement in various departments................................. 16-22
Blast furnaces..................................................................................................... 16,17
Bessemer and open hearth steel works......................................................... 17,18
Sheet mills..........................................................................................................
18
Tube mills........................................................................................................... 18,19
Unclassified rolling mills.................................................................................
19
Wire drawing department................................................................................
20
Fabricating shops.............................................................................................. 20,21
Mechanical department................................................................ 4................. 21, 22
Yard department...............................................................................................
22
Summary of departmental experience................................................................. 22, 23
Special study of accidents during the war period.............................................. 23-32
Accident rates, by products.............................................................. ............ 25-27
Accidents in connection with industrial railways......................................
27
Trend of accident causes, 1913 to 1917.. .....................................................
28
Illustrative charts.............................................................................................. 29-32
Part n .— Causes and prevention of accidents......................................................... 33-257
Summary..................................................................................................................... 35-51
Purpose of the investigation............................................................................
35
Scope of the report............................................................................................
35
Accident severity rates..................................................................................... 35, 36
Physical causes of accidents............................................................................ 36, 37
Control of accident causes in the departments........................................... 37-39
The human factor in accident occurrence................................................... 39-42
Can serious industrial accidents be eliminated?........................................
42
Nature of the injury......................................................................................... 42-45
Progress of the safety movement in the industry......................................45, 46
Experience by departments and occupations............................................. 46-50
The methods of the safety man...................................................................... 50, 51
Chapter I.— Industrial accident rates................................................................... 52-66
Definition of “ accident” ................................................................................. 52, 53
The meaning of accident rates........................................................................
53
Accident frequency rates................................................................................. 53-55
Accident severity rates..................................................................................... 55-64
Fatalities......................................................................................................
56
Permanent total disabilities.................................................................... 56, 57
Permanent partial disabilities................................................................. 57-60
Illustrations of the use of severity rates............................................... 60-63
Growing recognition of importance of severity rating.......................
64
Use of rates in the study of accident causes................................................ 64, 65
Use of rates in the study of nature of injury, labor recruiting, etc........ 65,66




3

4

CONTENTS.

Part n .— Causes and prevention of accidents— Continued.
- page.
Chapter II.— Physical causes of accidents........................................................... 67-88
Principal accident causes in the iron and steel industry......................... 67-71
Importance of principal accident causes in different departments........72-86
Boilers and steam pipes, engines and motors, and power transmission
72
Working machines......................................................................................72-74
Cranes and hoists........................................................................................ 74-76
Hot substances.................................................................. '........................ 76-78
Falling objects............................................................................................ 78-80
Falls of worker............................................................................................ 80-82
Handling tools and objects....................................................................... 82-84
Power vehicles............................................................................................ 84,85
Miscellaneous causes.................................................................................. 85,86
86,87
Summary of accident causes, by departments...................................... .
Comparison of causes in iron and steel industry and in machine building 87,88
Chapter III.— Causes of accidents in blast furnaces........................................ 89-105
Working machines...................................... .......................................................
90
Cranes and hoists................................................................................................
91
Hot substances.................................................................................................. 91-100
Falling objects....................................................................................................
100
Falls of worker....................................................................................................
101
101
Handling tools and objects..............................................................................
Power vehicles................................................................................................ 101,102
Asphyxiating gas............................................................................................ 102,103
Unclassified causes.............................................................................................
104
Comparison of accident causes, 1906 and 1913............................................
104
Occupation and causes.................................................................................. 104,105
Chapter IV.— Causes of accidents in steel works and foundries...................106-116
Accident causes in the open-hearth department.................................... 106-1 ]4
Working machines......................................................................................
107
Cranes and hoists.................................................................................... 107,108
Hot substances........................................................................................ 108-111
Handling tools and objects................................................................... I ll, 112
Power vehicles............................................................................................
112
Unclassified causes................................................................................. 112,113
Accident frequency, by occupations and causes............................ 113,114
Accident causes in the Bessemer department........................................ 114-116
Accident causes in the foundry department...............................................
116
Chapter V.— Causes of accidents in rolling mills............................................ 117-124
Accident causes in heavy rolling mills..................................................... 117-119
Accident causes in tube mills..................................................................... 119-121
Accident frequency, by occupations and causes............................ 120,121
Accident causes in plate mills.................................................................... 121,122
Accident causes in sheet mills.................................................................... 122,123
Chapter V I.— Causes of accidents in the mechanical, fabricating, and yard
departments....................................................................................................... 125-130
Accident causes in the mechanical department..................................... 125,126
Accident causes in fabricating shops.............................................................
126
Accident reduction methods among mechanics and fabricators..........126,127
Accident causes in yard department........................................................ 128,129
Safety methods in yards............................................................................. 129,130
Chapter V II.— The human factor in accident occurrence............................ 131-163
Influence of inexperience upon accidents............................................... 131-141
Influence of age upon accidents................................................................. 141-144




CONTENTS.

5

Part II.— Causes and prevention of accidents— Continued.
Chapter V II.— The human factor in accident occurrence— Concluded.
Page.
Inability to speak English as related to accidents................................. 144-146
Day and night accident rates...................................................................... 146-152
Conjugal condition as influencing accidents................................................
152
Possible influence of use of alcohol upon accidents............................... 153,154
Distribution of accidents and production through the working hours. 154-163
A provisional explanation.................................................................. 159-161
Extreme inexperience.......................................................................... 161-163
Chapter V III.— What are the limits of accident prevention?..................... 164-177
Accident causes by departments over a period of years....................... 166-169
Blast furnaces............................................................................... « ____166,167
Open hearth furnaces........................................................................... 167,168
Rolling mills........................................................................................... 168,169
Miscellaneous departments......................................................................
169
Yards............................................................................................................
169
Importance of organization......................................................................
169
Analysis of causes of fatal injuries............................................................. 169-174
Analysis of the nature of injury in fatal cases......................................... 174-176
Illustrations of so-called “ carelessness ” ................................................... 176,177
Extent of accident reduction.........................................................................
177
Chapter IX .— Nature of injury.......................................................................... 178-193
Nature of injury, by departments............................................................. 179-184
Nature of injury and occupation................................................................ 184-191
Blast furnaces......................................................................................... 184-187
Open hearths.......................................................................................... 187-189
Tube mills............................................................................................... 189-191
Use of hospital records................................................................................. 191,192
The more rapid decline of short-term disabilities.......................... 191,192
Average time lost is not a measure of progress....................................
192
192
Distribution of accident cases during the first week.........................
Care of the injury.......................................................................................... 192,193
Chapter X .— Progress of safety movement in iron and steel industry___ 194—
204
Accident rates over a series of years......................................................... 195-197
Accident rates according to results of injury over a period of years.. 197-199
Illustrations of progress in accident prevention..................................... 199, 200
Comparison of iron and steel industry with other industries............... 200-203
Effect of organized safety work in reducing accidents......................... 203, 204
Chapter X I .—Accident experience, by departments and occupations___ 205-245
Blast furnace department............................................................................ 206-211
Bessemer department................................................................................... 211-214
Open hearth department............................................................................. 214-218
Crucible melting department..................................................................... 218, 219
Foundries........................................................................................................ 219,220
Heavy rolling mills....................................................................................... 220-222
Plate mills....................................................................................................... 223, 224
Puddle mills.................................................................................................. 224, 225
Rod mills.............................................................................................................
225
Sheet mills...................................................................................................... 225-227
Tube mills....................................................................................................... 228-230
Miscellaneous light rolling mills................................................................. 230, 231
Fabricating shops........................................................................................... 231-233
Forge shops.........................................................................................................
233
Wire drawing department............................................................................ 234, 235




6

CONTENTS.

Part n .— Causes and prevention of accidents— Concluded.
Chapter X I .— Accident experience, by departments and occupations— Con. page.
Electrical department................................................................................... 236, 237
Mechanical department................................................................................ 237, 238
Power houses....................................................... ........................................... 238, 239
Yard department............................................................................................ 239-241
Coke ovens..........................................................................................................
241
Miscellaneous departments.......................................................................... 241-243
Summary tables.............................................................................................. 243, 244
The period 1910 to 1914 as a standard of comparison............................ 244, 245
Chapter X I I .— The methods of the safety man.............................................. 246-256
Maintenance of interest....................................................................................
246
Use of records and charts............................................................................. 246-250
Method of preparing charts.......................................................................... 250,251
The charting of accident causes................................................................. 251-254
Awards and bonus plans............................................................................... 254—
256
Bulletin boards and displays..........................................................................
256
Cooperation with community agencies.........................................................
256
Cooperation of engineers...................................................................................
256
Appendix A .— Safety code for hoisting chains....................................................... 257-259
Appendix B.—Accident causes, by departments.................................................. 259-265
Appendix C.— Accident causes in blast furnaces......................................................
265
Appendix D.—Accident causes in open hearths.......................................................
265
Appendix E.—Accident causes in rolling mills.........................................................
266
Appendix F.— Working machines as a cause of accidents in mechanical and
fabricating departments. . ...........................................................................................
267
268
Appendix G.— Power vehicles as a cause of accidents in yards.............................
Appendix H .—Nature of injury, by departments................................. ............... 268, 269
Appendix I.— Result of injury, by departments.......................................................
270
Appendix J.— Data upon which charts 11, 12, and 13 are based....................... 271-273
Appendix K .— Result of injury, by departments and years.............................. 274^-276
Appendix L.— A comparison of accident severity rates according to the Bu­
reau of Labor Statistics scale and the scale proposed by the I. A. I. A. B .C . 276-289
CHARTS.
Chart A.— Trend of employment and fatality rates, years ending with
specified month.......................................................................................
Chart B.— Trend of employment and accident frequency, year ending with
specified month.......................................................................................
Chart C.— Accident frequency rates for year ending with specified month..
Chart 1.— Frequency and severity of accidents in the iron and steel industry.
2.— Accident rates for principal accident causes in the iron and steel
industry.....................................................................................................
3.— Working machines as a cause of accidents..........................................
4.— Cranes.and hoists as a cause of accidents..............................................
5.— Hot.substances as a cause of accidents...................................................
6.— Falling objects as a cause of accidents...................................................
7.— Falls.of worker as a cause of accidents...................................................
8.— Handling objects and tools as a cause of accidents.............................
9.— Power.vehicles as a cause of accidents...................................................
10.— Comparison of accident causes in the iron and steel and the
machine building industries......................,..........................................
11.— Relation.of labor recruiting, employment and output to accident
occurrence, 1908 to 1914: Plant A .......................................................




30
31
32
62
68
73
75
77
79
81
83
85
88
134

CONTENTS.

7
Page.

Chart 12.— Relation of labor recruiting, employment and output to accident
occurrence, 1908 to 1914: Plant B ................. .....................................
13.— Relation of labor recruiting, employment and output to accident
occurrence, 1912 to 1916: Plant C..................................... I ...............
14.—Night_and day accident rates in a large steel plant, by years___
15.— Night and day accident rates in a large steel plant, by departments. .
16.— Accidents and production among press hands.....................................
17.— Hourly.accident rates and hourly production......................................
18.— Accident rates in the iron and steel industry over a period of years
19.— Results of safety activity in a large steel plant.
Accident
frequency rates, 1900 to 1913................................................................
20.— Results of safety activity in a large steel plant, by departments..
21.— Accident rates in blast furnaces over a period of years......................
22.— Occupational accident rates in blast furnaces......................................
23.— Accident rates in the Bessemer department over a period of years.
24.— Accident rates in open hearths over a period of years........................
25.— Occupational accident rates in open hearths.......................................
26.— Accident.rates in heavy rolling mills over a period of years.............
27.— Accident rates in plate mills over a period of years...........................
28.— Accident rates in sheet mills over a series of years.............................
29.—Accident rates in tube mills over a series of years.. . ' ........................
30.— Accident rates in fabricating shops over a period of years................
31.— Accident rates in wire drawing over a period of years.......................
32.— Accident rates in mechanical departments over a period of years..
33.— Accident rates in yards over a period of years.....................................
34.— Accident rates plotted by months...........................................................
35.— Accident rates plotted by overlapping 12-month periods..................
36.— Trend.of accident rates in the principal cause groups........................

135
136
148
149
158
160
195
201
202
207
210
212
214
217
221
223
226
229
232
235
237
240
248
249
252

ILLUSTRATIONS.
Plate 1.—Mud gun in position for closing the tap hole............................................
2.— Cinder notch, with guard...........................................................................
3.— Old,.unsafe method of drilling a tap hole..............................................
4.— Improved method of drilling a tap hole.................................................
5.—Portion.of a cast house floor......................................................................
6.— Hot.metal ladle car showing double trunions and safety chains..........
7.—Automatic coupler on cinder ladle car...................................................
8.—Modern.blast furnace plant.......................................................................
9.—Open.hearth charging floor, charging machine in foreground............
10.— Pit side of open hearth, from pouring platform....................................
11.— Open hearth hot metal ladle with safety latch on trunion................
12.— Safety chamber on hot metal crane.................................................r
___
13.— Ladle crane in Bessemer plant, with safety dog on hoist.....................
14.—Transfer table, with shield for gears removed.......................................
15.—Transfer table, with shields over gears and bridge................................
16.—Bloom.delivery car, with danger sign and warning bell....................
17.— Shields over roll wabblers..........................................................................
18.— Former position of screwdown in plate mill..........................................
19.—New.position of screwdown in plate m ill...............................................
20.—Metal planer, with safety plates closing the openings in the bed........
21.— Circular saw, with guide plate and guard..............................................
22.— Shield.over revolving knife of wood planer..........................................




92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
106
106
106
106
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
118
126
126

8

CONTENTS.
Page.

P

late

23.— Clamp hooks for carrying plates...............................................................
24.— Clamp for carrying plate in vertical position........................................
25.—Hook.with solid forged handle.................................................................
26.— Looking safety hooks..................................................................................
27.—Yard.trestle with various safety devices.............................................. .
28.— Safety gate for track crossing....................................................................
29.— Skidder with target attachment...............................................................
30.—Target.signal, usable day or night............................................................
31.—Hailed crane bridge footwalks..................................................................
32.—Gantry crane, with wheel fenders, gear guards, and rail clamps. . .
33.— Locomotive crane, with safety devices...................................................
34.— Rail.and frog guards....................................................................................
35.— Guard for turntable pit...............................................................................




126
126
126
126
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128

BULLETIN OF THE

U . S. B U R E A U O F L A B O R S T A T IS T IC S .
W HOLE NO . 234.

W A S H IN G T O N .

M A Y , 1918.

THE SAFETY MOVEMENT IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY,
1907 TO 1917.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE,
In 1913 the Bureau of Labor Statistics published the results of a
study of accidents in the iron and steel industry, covering the period
1907 to 1910.1 The report now offered constitutes a much more
comprehensive study of the same subject, based upon a very much
larger amount of material and strengthened by the accumulated
knowledge of recent years in the field of accident prevention.
The report is divided into two distinct parts:

Part I constitutes a brief review of the course of accidents from
1907 to 1917, with special reference to the effects of the War upon
accident occurrence. Owing to the extreme difficulty of obtaining
entirely up-to-date accident statistics the information for the latter
part of the period under review is not* complete upon all points, but
it is sufficient to give a fairly accurate idea of the trend of accidents
during a period of extraordinary interest.
Part II contains a series of studies upon various phases of the acci­
dent problem in the iron and steel industry. The primary object in
view was, in every case, to find out where accidents occur, how serious
they are, why they occur, and by what means they may be prevented.
The material available for this part covers practically the entire
industry from 1910 to 1914. For the earlier years, 1907 to 1909,
approximately 10 per cent of the industry is included.
i R eport on Conditions of Em ploym ent in the Iron and Steel Industry in the U nited States.
Accidents and Accident Prevention. (S. D oc. 110, 62d Cong., 1st sess.)




V ol. IV ,

9




PART I.—A REVIEW OF THE SAFETY MOVEMENT, WITH SPECIAL




REFERENCE TO THE WAR.

11




PART I.— A REVIEW OF THE SAFETY MOVEMENT, WITH SPECIAL
REFERENCE TO THE WAR.
The period covered by this report—i. e., 1907 to 1917—embraces
practically the entire history of the safety movement, not only in the
manufacture of iron and steel but in the whole field of American
industry. Prior to that time efforts toward accident prevention had
been made, but they were isolated, were individual in character, and
were not productive of any general results.
At that time, indeed (say 1907 and the immediately preceding
years), there existed in American industry generally a frightful dis­
regard of human life. Accident occurrence had reached a condition
not paralleled perhaps at any other time or place. Two factors con­
tributed to such a condition: First, there was an unprecedented
degree of business activity; and, second, there was a larger propor­
tion of inexperienced immigrant labor than at any time before or
since. The combination of these circumstances, with the absence of
any organized safety effort as the term is understood to-day, pro­
duced accident rates of a degree of frequency and severity not fully
reflected in the available records. The records which it is possible
to secure for the early years of the period are those of the better plants.
The conditions in the worse establishments were not made a matter
of record.
Among the industries which had sinned most, and which most
needed to awake to the importance of accident prevention, the iron
and steel industry stood out prominently. It was not only one of
the great basic industries, but its intrinsic hazards were of a more
pronounced character than those of the majority of industrial em­
ployments. And because of this, because the industry was spectacu­
larly hazardous, the safety movement, when it finally began, had
room for equally spectacular accomplishments.
The awakening came slowly. But gradually there was a stirring
of dry bones within the industry. The accident prevention idea
began to spread. Many plants instituted accident compensation
schemes. Outside of industry there arose a strong propaganda for
the enactment of compensation laws by the States. The effect of
this combination of earnest study of the accident problem within
industry and the outside movement for compensation legislation was
to lay the foundation for the very remarkable progress in accident
reduction which will be demonstrated in the course of this review.




13

14

SA FETY M O V E M E N T IN IRO N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

The progress, however, has not been uniform throughout the indus­
try. Some plants were early in beginning their campaigns; others
were late in beginning. Even now there are some which have failed
to profit at all fully from the accumulating knowledge of recent
years. But, broadly speaking, the .iron and steel industry as a whole
experienced a steady decline in accident rates from 1906 or 1907
onward for a period of almost 10 years.
Then, into the natural and orderly progress in matters of safety,
there intruded the enormous dislocation of the great war. Its first
effect upon American industry generally was one of great depression.
Employment in the iron and steel industry declined to a point nearly
or quite as low as that reached in 1908. This decline continued
until about the middle of 1915. Then began an upward movement
in activity and in employment which was entirely without precedent.
And not only was it more rapid than any previous movement of its
kind, but it was modified very materially by entirely new labor con­
ditions. Instead of an influx of labor from European countries such
as had hitherto accompanied every revival of industrial activity,
there was an actual emigration. The demand for labor led to the
introduction of entirely new labor elements and to a movement of
labor from place to place and from employer to employer such as had
never before occurred.
All these factors combined to test the adequacy of accident pre­
vention effort in the iron and steel industry as no previous experience
had tested it. Both the strength and weakness of the movement
were now displayed.
On the whole, it may be said that the test was well met. In some
branches of the industry accident rates kept declining in spite of the
new pressure. In others, however, there was a condition bordering
on demoralization. Accident rates went up rapidly. But in very
few of the better organized plants did the new rates rise as high as
they had been in the next preceding period of industrial activity,
and by the middle or latter part of 1916 the situation almost every­
where was well in hand. Accident rates began to drop in spite of
the fact that employment went on increasing.
The safety movement in the iron and steel industry may thus be
said to have passed with credit its most serious test. But there
must be no resting on the oars. Accident rates are still high, and, if
necessary, the safety movement must revise its foundation principles
in order to meet new demands. There seems to be no good reason
why the downward movement should not continue indefinitely.
Indeed, as is pointed out in a later chapter,1 there must be no com­
promise on any lesser goal than the elimination of all serious acci­
dents. It is a goal which perhaps may never quite be reached, but




i Ch. VIII.

IN F L U E N C E OF T H E W A R .

15

nevertheless the possibility of reaching it exists and must be steadily
kept in mind.
SAFETY EXPERIENCE OF A LARGE STEEL PLANT.

The movement outlined is well illustrated by Table 1.
TABLE 1.—ACCIDENT E X P E R IE N C E OF A L AR G E ST E EL P LAN T, 1905 TO 1917.

Year.

1905.......................
1906.......................
1907.......................
1908.......................
1909.......................
1910.......................
1911.......................
1912.......................
1913.......................
1914.......................
1915.......................
1916.......................
1917.......................

Accident
Number of frequency
rates
300-day
(per 1,000
workers.
300-day
workers).

6,406
7,494
7,585
4,575
6,215
7,642
5,774
7,396
7,562
4,741
5,599
9,634
10,862

300
214
189
150
174
134
112
153
115
74
48
96
85

Accident
severity
rates
(days lost
per 300day
worker).
34.5
54.3
38.1
29.9
23.7
19.9
18.6
14.3
21.3
12.2
20.6
13.4
12.9

This table shows the course of accident rates in a large steel plant
from 1905 to 1917. The experience of this plant is of particular in­
terest, since complete accident records were available for it as early
as 1905 and as late as 1917. There is a pronounced, although not
entirely regular, decline in both the frequency and severity of acci­
dents during the course of the period.
SAFETY EXPERIENCE OF A GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1917.

The experience of the plant cited above is not entirely typical of
the industry, as safety activities in it were developed unusually early
and have been applied with more than usual thoroughness. But, on
the whole, its experience is not very dissimilar from the majority of
other plants. This is brought out in Table 2, which gives the accident
rates for a large group of plants from 1907 to 1917. As the plants
included constitute about 25 per cent of the entire iron and steel
industry of the country, deductions may be made as fairly repre­
sentative of the industry.
The table gives both accident frequency rates and accident severity
rates. The accident frequency rates are expressed in terms of so
many cases of accident per 1000 300-day workers, and entirely dis­
regard the character of the resulting injury; all accidents are counted
as of equal value. The severity rate takes into account the resulting
seriousness of the accident; accidents are expressed in terms of the
number of workdays lost (according to a scale later explained) and
the average number of days lost per worker is used as the unit of
measurement. The severity rate is thus a much truer measure of
accident hazard than is the frequency rate.1




1For a full discussion of severity rating see Chapter I, Part n .

16

S A F E T Y M O V E M E N T I N IRO N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

T a b le 2 ,—ACCIDENT R A T E S IN T H E IR ON A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y , 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

of 300-day
workers.
Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

27,632
79,486
80,029
93,666
91.107
77,474
79,065
108,994
86,847

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

2.2
1.2
.9
.9
1.1
.8
.7
.7
.8

3.8
5.2
5.3
5.1
4.5
3.4
4.2
4.9
3.2

236.3
177.7
167.6
186.3
150.3
108.5
106.5
95.1
77.0

Total.

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

19.9
11.0
7.8
8.2
10.3
6.9
6.4
6.3
7.0

4.0
3.9
3.8
3.4
2.9
2.5
2.6
3.1
2.0

3.2
2.2
1.9
2.2
1.9
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.2

242.4
184.1
173.8
192.3
155.9
112.7
111.4
100.8
81.0

Total.

27.1
17.1
13.5
13.8
15.1
10.9
10.3
10.7
10.2

Examination of Table 2 shows the same steady, although irregu­
lar, decline in accident rates during the course of the period covered
as was noted in the case of the plant earlier referred to. The fre­
quency rate declined from 242.4 cases per 1,000 300-day workers in
1907 to 81.0 cases in 1916, a decrease of 67 per cent. Between the
same years the severity rate declined from 27.1 days lost per 300-day
worker to 10.2 days, a decrease of 62 per cent. The high points of
accident severity occurred in the years 1907 (27.1 days), 1910 (17.1
days), 1913 (15.1 days), and 1916 (10.7 days).
RESULTS OF THE SAFETY MOVEMENT IN VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.

In tracing more in detail the accident history of the iron and steel
industry, it is necessary to consider separately the more important
departments. The steel industry is made up of several divisions
or departments—blast furnaces, Bessemer, rolling mills, etc., each
with its distinctive activities and its distinctive hazards. Safety
work has been developed somewhat differently, and has met with
differing degrees of success, in the different departments. To com­
bine them all into one unit is very often to balance the good experi­
ence of one department with the bad experience of another. Or
again, in such a combination one or more large departments may,
by the fact of size, dominate the showing of the industry as a whole.
This latter condition actually occurs in the table just presented, as will
appear in the following presentation of accident rates by individual
departments. Here, as in the preceding table, all accident rates are
expressed in two forms: Frequency rates, i. e., the number of acci­
dent cases per 1,000 300-day workers; and severity rates, that is,
the average number of working days lost per 300-day worker.
BLAST FURNACES.

On the whole, the blast furnace department exceeds all other
departments in the severity of its accidents. This is due, in consid­
erable measure, to the hazard of asphyxiating gas.




17

IN F L U E N C E OF T H E WAR*

Table 3 shows in detail the course of accidents in the blast furnace
department from 1907 to 1917.
T a b l e 3 .—ACCIDENT R A T E S IN BLAST FU RN ACES, 1907 T O 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Number,
of 300-day
workers.

Year.

Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

961
3,891
3,921
5,034
5,641
4,797
4,835
6,694
5,194

5.8
2.8
1.8
3.0
2.7
2.3
2.5
1.3
3.5

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

7.0
3.1
4.6
6.0
4.8
5.0
3.9
6.0
2.9

291.2
243.1
201.9
233.2
166.1
104.6
97.0
95.5
70.0

TotaL

304.0
249.0
208.2
242.2
173.6
111.9
103.4
102.8
76.4

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

51.7
25.4
16.1
26.8
24.0
20.6
22.3
12.1
31.4

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

6.9
2.3
8.0
6.4
5.1
3.8
2.7
4.9
1.9

5.5
2.8
2.3
2.8
2.3
1.7
1.3
1.5
1.1

Total.

64.1
30.5
26.4
36.0
31.4
2G 1
.
20.3
18.5
34.4

The decline in the accident rates between 1907 and 1916 is very
striking. Thus, total frequency rates declined from 304.0 to 102.8
cases, a decrease of 66 per cent; and severity rates declined from
64.1 to 18.5 days, a decrease of 71 per cent. In 1917 the frequency
rate continued to decline, but the severity rate showed a marked
increase, due to the occurrence of several fatal accidents.
The high years, as regards severity rates, are 1907 (64.1 days),
1910 (30.5 days), 1912 (36.0 days), and 1917 (34.4 days). These do
not exactly coincide with the high years for the industry as a whole.
BESSEMER AND OPEN HEARTH STEEL WORKS.

The Bessemer and open hearth steel works are so different in their
operations that they should be studied separately. But, with the
present group of material, it was impossible to make a satisfactory
separation, and therefore the experiences of these two departments
are presented in combined form in Table 4.
T a b l e 4 — ACCIDENT R ATES IN ST E E L W O R K S , 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Number
of 300-day
workers.

Year.

Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

1,176
4,246
4,293
5,546
5,207
3,073
4,713
6,556
6,347

3.4
4.2
1.6
2.2
1.5
2.3
1.3
1.5
1.6

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

6.0
6.1
5.4
7.2
6.2
3.9
8.1
7.5
3.6

276.4
223.0
174.1
229.2
179.2
131.5
100.6
107.2
71.0

12771°— 18— B u ll. 234------- 2




Total.

285.7
233.4
181.0
238.5
186.9
137.7
109.9
116.2
76.2

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

30.6
38.2
14.7
19.5
13.8
20.5
11.5
13.7
14.2

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability..

13.7
6.5
4.4
4.7
3.7
3.3
4.6
6.3
1.9

5.5
3.2
2.3
3.1
3.1
2.1
1.6
1.8
1.4

Total.

49.8
47.9
21.4
27.3
20.6
25.9
17.7
21.8
17.5

18

SA FETY M O V E M E N T I N IR O N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

The hign years, as regards severity rates, run as follows: 1907
(49.8 days), 1910 (47.9 days), 1912 (27.3 days), 1914 (25.9 days),
1916 (21.8 days). Attention has been called to the fact that the
year 1913 does not correspond exactly to the period of highest in­
dustrial stress but that a year including portions of 1912 and 1913 is
the high year. As a result the high rate in that period sometimes
appears in one calendar year and sometimes in the other.
The descending series is therefore in essential accord with that of
the entire industry. One exception of a character likely to occur
from time to time may be noted. The year 1914, though one of low
activity, has a high severity rate, 25.9 days. This is due to unusual
fatality in that year such as may happen in a highly hazardous de­
partment under the most favorable circumstances.
SHEET MILLS.

It would add greatly to the interest of this presentation of data for
the sheet mills if the characteristic occupation, the hot-mill crew,
could be isolated for separate study. At present such isolation is
impossible, and the mills have to be accepted as units.
Table 5 shows the accident rates in sheet mills from 1907 to 1917.
It will be noted that the rates for 1907 are lower than those for 1910.
This is exceptional, and may be due to the rather small size of the
group in 1907.
T a b l e 5 __ ACCIDENT R A T E S IN SH E ET M ILLS, 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

2,211
15,485
14,461
19,129
15,780
12,963
16,266
21,640
23,916

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

0.9
1.5
.4
.6
.9
.2
.4
.5
.4

3.6
2.5
3.0
2.9
1.6
2.4
1.4
2.4
1.4

129.8
199.7
195.6
225.8
176.1
143.9
116.9
111.7
100.3

Total.

134.3
203.6
199.0
229.3
178.5
146.4
118.7
114.5
102.1

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

8.1
13.4
3.1
5.2
8.0
1.4
3.9
4.2
3.4

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

3.8
1.7
2.5
1.8
.7
1.5
.6
1.0
1.0

1.2
1.7
1.8
2.3
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.5

Total.

13.1
16.8
7.4
9.3
10.7
4.6
6.0
6.8
5.9

TUBE MILLS.

Table 6 shows the accident rates for tube mills f;om 1907 to 1917.
These mills show a constant increase in employment from 1910 to 1913;
employment then drops off in 1914, to rise again through 1915 to its
maximum in 1917.




19

IN F L U E N C E OF T H E W A R .
table

6 .—ACCIDENT R A T E S IN TU B E M ILLS, 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

2,007
6,038
7,678
8,694
9,619
6,459
7,109
11,355
11,657

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

0.5
.2
.1
.7
.6
.6
.3
.2
.7

2.1
1.5
4.6
3.8
4.2
2.8
3.0
2.3
2.2

286.4
161.2
145.9
150.2
79.0
30.0
25.6
' 37.4
27.9

Total.

289.0
162.8
150.6
154.7
83,8
33.5
28.8
39.9
30.8

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

1.5
.3
2.7
1.9
2.0
1.5
1.5
.8
1.1

4.6
1.7
1.5
1.8
1.2
.9
.6
.8
.5

4.5
1.5
1.2
6.2
5.6
5.6
2.5
1.6
6.2

Total.

10.6
3.5
5.4
9.9
8.8
8.0
4.6
3.2
7.8

A most significant fact about this table is that between 1910 and
1912 severity rates were going up rapidly while frequency rates were
declining. Evidently the manufacturers of tubes were misled for a
time by their success in reducing frequency rates and did not pay
sufficient attention to the more serious kinds of accidents. Later,
realizing the true conditions, a somewhat different kind of safety
campaign was carried on, and thereafter both frequency and severity
rates steadily declined to 1916.
In 1917 the severity rate again rises, but does not reach the level
of the previous peak. This rise was due to a high fatality rate.
It has not been possible to make any inquiry regarding the factors
which may have been responsible for this increase.
UNCLASSIFIED BOLLING MILLS.

The accident rates for this group of mills could not be obtained as
early as 1907. Those for 1910 to 1917 are presented in table 7.
Here the decline in rates is somewhat more vacillating than in many
other departments, but there is the same evidence of steady progress
extending into the war period.
TABLE 7 .— ACCIDENT R ATES IN UNCLASSIFIED ROLLING MILLS, 1910 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

Number
of 300-day
workers.

5,615
8,205
10,448
10,673
5,992
9,111
13,027
11,505




Death.

2.1
1.5
.8
.9
.7
1.2
.4
.8

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

7.7
6.2
4.7
5.1
4.8
5.2
5.8
4.1

267.7
156.3
189.5
138.6
92.4
95.9
86.9
58.4

Total.

277.5
163.9
195.0
144.6
98.0
102.3
90.1
63.3

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

19.2
13.2
6.9
8.4
6.0
10.9
3.5
7.0

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

4.9
4.5
3.4
2.8
3.2
3.5
3.,8
2.6

3.2
2.2
2.5
2.1
1.3
.8
1.4
.9

Total.

27.3
19.9
12.8
13.3
10.5
15.2
8.7
10.5

20

SA FETY M O V E M E N T IN IRON A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

WERE DRAWING DEPABTMENT.

In the wire drawing department, as in the unclassified rolling mills,
no satisfactory record is available of accident rates for the year 1907,
but it is known that the rates at that time were materially higherthan in any of the years from 1910 to 1917. Table 8 gives the rates
for the latter period.
T a b l e 8 .—ACCIDENT R ATES IN W IR E D R A W IN G , 1910 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

8,374
8,186
8,278
7,604
6,306
7,859
9,552
9,528

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

0.5
.2
.2
.5
.2
.1
.4
.2

7.9
8.9
8.9
5.8
5.6
8.0
10.9
5.1

239.2
205.4
243.1
239.7
168.3
230.8
184.7
121.3

Total.

247.6
214.5
252.2
246.1
174.0
239.0
196.0
126.6

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

4.3
S. 2
2.2
4.7
1.4
1.1
3.8
.9

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

5.9
5.9
6.6
3.6
. 4.3
6.0
7.4
2.9

2.2
2.0
2.3
2.3
1.8
2.3
1.9
1.6

Total.

12.4
10.1
11.1
10.6
7.5
9.4
13.1
5.4

Inspection of the table will at once disclose that this department
was not able to prevent a considerable increase of its severity rate
in the year 1916 when the war stress reached its maximum, but
in 1917 the severity rate shows a very sharp decline. The increase
in 1916 was probably due to the fact that the rate of expansion
was very rapid in this department and that the pressure for product
was very great. This would in two ways tend to advance the rates:
(1) A relatively larger number of inexperienced men would be intro­
duced into the working force; (2) the speed of production would
undoubtedly be sufficiently increased to add some impetus to the
tendency.
Also it may well have been the case that the decline in frequency
which occurred in 1916 diverted attention from the increasing severity
of the accidents that did occur.
FABBICATING SHOPS.

The accident rates in the fabricating shops, as presented in the next
table, show that these shops have very markedly improved their
condition over what it was in 1907, but that there has been no
improvement in recent years. In fact, with the increased stress of
the war period, the accident rates rise to a higher level in 1916 than
in any year since 1907.




IN F L U E N C E

OF T H E

21

WAR.

T a bl e 9 . —ACCIDENT R A T E S IN FABRICATIN G SHOPS, 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-aay workers).
Number
of 300-day
workers.

Year.

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

2,081
3,936
4,007
5,023
5,313
3,811
2,994
4,465
5,020

2.9
1.0
.3
1.0
.9
.8
1.0
1.4
.8

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

5.8
3.8
7.0
6.4
6.6
3.4
4.3
5.4
5.2

274.4
185.8
164.7
190.3
187.5
111.8
122.2
140.0
105.7

Total.

283.1
190.6
172.0
197.7
195.0
116.0
127.6
146.9
110.7

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

25.9
9.2
2.2
9.0
8.5
7.1
9.0
14.1
7.2

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

6.9
1.7
3.5
3.2
5.6
1.9
1.9
1.7
3.8

2.5
1.8
2.0
2.6
2.3
1.5
2.1
2.6
1.6

Total.

35.3
12.7
7.7
14.8
16.4
10.5
13.0
18.4
12.6

MECHANICAL DEPARTMENT.

The accident rates in the mechanical department from 1907 to
1917 are as follows:
T able 1 0.—ACCIDENT R ATES IN M ECHANICAL D EPA R T M EN T , 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

Number
k)f 300-day
workers.
Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

2,542
7,871
6,712
7,122
7,474
5,125
5,693
9,185
8,892

0.8
.9
.7
.7
.9
.6
.2
1.0
.1

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

1.6
4.1
5.2
5.3
4.4
3.7
4.7
5.4
4.2

249.7
145.9
130.8
143.6
131.3
99.5
84.8
75.5
57.9

Total.

252.1
150.8
136.8
149.7
136.6
103.8
89.8
81.9
60.2

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

7.1
8.0
6.7
6.3
8.4
5.3
1.6
8.8
1.0

1.3
2.9
3.3
4.0
3.5
2.6
2.8
4.2
2.3

3.5
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.2
1.1
1.0
.8

Total.

11.9
12.3
11.5
12.0
13.6
9.1
5.5
14.0
4.1

This department exhibits the most striking opposition between
frequency rates and severity rates that has anywhere come under
notice. Thus the ascending series of severity rates for the high
years beginning with 1907 is as follows: 11.9 days, 12.3 days, 13.6
days, 14.0 days; and the corresponding descending series of fre­
quency rates is 252.1, 150.8, 136.6, and 81.9. While the frequency
rate declines 68 per cent the severity rate actually rises 18 per cent.
There can be no doubt that those responsible for conditions in these
departments were in a measure misled by the declining frequency
rate and did not give adequate attention to those causes which give
rise to more serious injury. In the years prior to 1917 not only was
there no reduction in serious injury, but serious injury was actually
increasing. In 1917 there was a very important decline in the se­
verity rate, due to a remarkably small number of fatalities.




22

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN IR O N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

That the war period materially influenced the severity rate of this
department is very evident from the fact that 1916 shows a rate
(14.0 days) more than double that (5.5 days) of 1915. In a measure
this result was to be expected. In a period of such rapid expan­
sion the amount of extraordinary repair work which the mechanics
must do under unfavorable conditions increases very greatly. Over­
time and night work greatly increase. All this tends strongly to the
increase of serious injury.
It may be said with serious emphasis that the remedy for this con­
dition does not lie largely with the men. It is a question of better
machines. The machines in use were probably not equal to the
task imposed by such a time. The evidence for this is the fact that
a multitude of machines which stood up under ordinary stresses are
going to the scrap heap to be replaced by others stronger, better
designed, more efficient, safer.
YARD DEPARTMENT.

The internal transportation problems of an iron and steel plant
afford many opportunities for severe injury. The result has been to
place the yard department among the seriously hazardous depart­
ments. It may, therefore, be regarded as definitely satisfactory to
find that the severity rate in the yard department in the war-year
1916 and 1917 was held down to a lower point than in any of the
preceding high years.
The details by years are shown in Table 11. The year 1916 can
hardly be compared with 1915, since that year is doubtless rather
abnormal in its entire escape from fatal accident.
T a b le

1 1 .—ACCIDENT R AT ES IN Y A R D S , 1907 TO 1917.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

1907............
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913............
1914............
1915............
1916............
1917............

2,618
5,111
3,726
4,102
4,275
2,900
3,689
6,302
4,738

1.9
2.0
.3
1.7
2.6
.7
1.3
1.7

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

3.8
3.3
6.2
7.8
4.4
4.1
4.9
7.9
4.6

194.4
106.8
160.0
201.9
162.8
135.2
111.7
110.4
65.6

Total.

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

17.2
200.1
112.1
17.6
166.4
2.4
211.4
15.4
23.2
169.8
6.2
140.0
116.6
119.6 ........i i .T
15.2
71.9

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tem­
porary
dis­
ability.

5.9
2.5
4.6
5.3
1.9
4.7
4.1
5.4
4.2

3.2
1.2
2.0
2.3
1.9
1.8
1.3
1.5
1.0

Total.

26.3
21.3
9.0
23.0
27.0
12.7
5.4
18.3
20.4

SUMMARY OF DEPARTMENTAL EXPERIENCE.

The above survey of accident rates in the several departments of
the iron and steel industry discloses:
(1)
That six of the nine important departments—blast furnaces,
steel works, sheet mills, tube mills, other rolling mills, and yards—




IN F L U E N C E OF T H E W AR .

23

show essentially the same downward movement in both the frequency
and severity of accidents since 1907. Broadly speaking, the move­
ment is marked by four points of high industrial activity with accom­
panying high points or “ peaks” in accident rates. The four peaks,
occurring usually in 1907, 1910, 1913, and 1916, form a descending
series in which, as a rule, the rate of each succeeding peak year is
lower than that of the one next earlier.
(2) That three departments show in 1916 (a year of intense war
activity) accident rates which exceed those of the next preceding
high year, but that each of the three shows a reduction in 1917 over
1916.
(3) That the six departments in the first-mentioned group are of
such size and importance that they dominate the showing of the
combined departments, as brought together in Table 2, and give to
it, as a whole, the same series of descending rates as that found in
the six departments.
Finally, it may be noted that the accident showing of a given
department at any fixed time is the resultant of three determining
influences. These are: (1) The intrinsic hazard of the department.
This gives, for example, a higher severity rate to blast furnaces than
to tube mills. (2) Changing industrial conditions. When industry
revives from a period of stagnation, there usually occurs an influx
of new and inexperienced men, and from this fact rising accident
rates are to be expected. (3) Efforts at accident control. Whenever
increased business activity occurs, with its tendency toward increased
accident rates, both instruction in safe and effective methods of work
and the efforts to make working conditions safe by adequate “ engi­
neering revision” should be pushed with the utmost energy.
SPECIAL STUDY OF ACCIDENTS DURING THE WAR PERIOD.

The preceding section dealt with the general trend of accident
rates in the iron and steel industry during the period 1907 to 1917.
The results of a special study of accidents in the period immediately
antecedent to the War and extending to the end of 1917 will now be
presented.
The material available covers not less than 50 per cent of the
industry and the plants are so distributed both industrially and
geographically that they may be accepted as entirely representative
of the industry.
The value of the material, however, is diminished by the fact that
it was not in sufficiently complete shape to permit of the compila­
tion of severity rates. This omission, however, is in part supplied
by the use of fatality rates, and in any case the period covered is so
important that even incomplete information is of great value.
Table 12 presents the fatality and general frequency rates for this
group of plants from 1913 to 1917. The data are carried back to




24

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN IRON A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

1913 for the reason that a fair comparison is not possible unless
periods of similar industrial stress are brought into relation. It will
be noted that the rates as given in the table are shown by overlapping
years ending with March, June, September, and December. This
method of showing accident rates by years ending with specified
months gives a more complete view of the change occurring than is
possible by any presentation by individual months or by calendar
years.
T a b l e 1 2 .— F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S OF F A T A L IT IE S AN D OF A L L ACCIDENTS IN THE

IR O N AN D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y , 1913 TO 1917.

Year ending with—

December, 1913............................
March, 1914...................................
June, 1914.....................................
September, 1914..........................
December, 1914............................
March, 1915...............................
June, 1915.....................................
September, 1915..........................
December, 1915............................
March, 1916...................................
June, 1916.....................................
September, 1916........................
December, 1916............................
March, 1917...................................
June, 1917...
...............
September, 1917.................
December, 1917............................

Fatal­
Total
Number ities per accidents
of 300-day 1,000 300- per 1,000
workers.
300-day
day
workers* workers.
153,098
146,522
137,816
128,023
117,214
111,881
111,794
117,933
133,627
148,221
160,819
168,790
175,013
178,937
182,587
185,445
186,357

1.34
1.29
1.09
.81
.70
.63
.65
.85
.86
.96
1.09
1.02
1.11
1.15
1.08
1.11
.98

181.0
168.4
154.7
138.9
130.4
118.0
114.0
118.6
124.5
131.8
134.1
135.5
133.2
128.5
121.6
110.9
103.4

On examination of the table, it will be noted that employment was
declining from 1913 to the year ending with June, 1915, and that
coincident with this decreasing employment went a still more rapid
decline of both the fatality rate and of the total frequency rate.
This is most readily observed in Charts A and B, which offer a graphic
presentation of the data of this table.
When the turn in industrial activity came, about the year ending
with June, 1915, fatality rates increased for a time more rapidly than
employment. The general frequency rate also increased, but less
rapidly than employment. Finally
about the middle of 1916 the
total rate began to decline and later the fatality rate also declined.
That this decline in accident rates began while employment was
still increasing is of the utmost significance. All existing data on the
subject show that accident rates always tend to rise when recovery
from industrial depression calls for the introduction of new men.1
Unless special efforts at instruction and accident prevention are un­
dertaken at the same time, this rising accident rate is likely to con­
tinue as long as the increasing employment continues. The fact,
that, in the case now under consideration, accident rates began to




iS w C h . VII, p. 131.

25

IN F L U E N C E OF T H E W AR .

decline prior to the culmination of employment can have no other
explanation than that the countervailing influences of the safety
movement proved measurably successful, in spite of the unprece­
dented stress of war work.
ACCIDENT BATES, BY PBODTJCTS.

In the above statement the plants of the iron and steel industry
covered are considered as a unit. In that procedure lurks the possi­
bility that some portion of the industry may have an entirely differ­
ent experience. To meet this possibility an analysis of the general
experience set forth above has been made by products and causes.
Table 13 isolates the fatality rates for the producers of certain
products. Four of the six groups have almost the same course
in their fatality rates as that shown by the industry as a whole.
The groups thus conforming to the industry type are sheets, miscel­
laneous steel products A, miscellaneous steel products B, and tubes.
The wire products group follows a similar course, but its high point
occurs rather later than the others. The group of fabricated products
maintains its rising rates longer than any other group.
T a b l e 1 3 .—F A T A L IT Y R ATES IN PLAN TS PRODUCING

SPECIFIED PRODUCTS,

1913 TO 1917.

Fatality rates per 1,000 300-day workers in plants producing- Year ending with—
Fabricated
products.

December, 1013...........................
March, 1914..................................
June, 1914.....................................
September, 1914..........................
December, 1914...........................
March, 1915..................................
June, 1915.....................................
September, 1915..........................
December, 1915...........................
March, 1916..................................
June, 1916.....................................
September, 1916..........................
December, 1916...........................
March, 1917..................................
June, 1917.....................................
September, 1917..........................
December, 1917...........................

0.62
.64
.57
.49
.49
.56
.60
1.05
1.01
1.07
1.09
1.01
1.17
1.11
1.29
1.17
1.09

Sheets.

0.70
.78
.59
.44
.20
.27
.38
.43
.48
.58
.64
.60
.65
.60
.51
.61
.42

Wire
products.

0.86
.61
.31
.24
.04
.09
.27
.47
.48
.71
.76
.68
.83
.89
.76
.78
.64

Miscella­
Miscella­
neous steel neous steel
products
products
(group A ). (group B).
1.84
1.86
1.77
1.30
1.21
.89
.67
.82
.88
1.11
1.42
1.45
1.63
1.63
1.44
1.57
1.35

1.50
1.48
1.22
.83
.87
.95
1.34
1.44
1.42
1.12
1.22
1.11
1.19
1.33
1.33
1.52
1.44

Tubes.

0.58
.61
.50
.45
.45
.43
.38
.57
.55
.53
.48
.35
.33
.33
.40
.36
.41

It is clear from this table that substantially similar influences were
at work in all the divisions of the industry represented. This
conclusion is strongly supported by consideration of Table 14 in
which are given the total frequency rates for the six groups of plants,
and for a considerable group of industrial railways. The sheet mills
alone vary from type, these mills maintaining a declining frequency
until near the end of the period.




26

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN IR O N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

T a b le

14.—T R E N D OF ACCIDENT FRE QU EN C Y RATES, 1913 TO 1917, IN PLANTS PRODUC­
ING SPECIFIED PRODUCTS AN D ON IN D U ST R IA L R A IL W A Y S .

Plants producing specified products.
Year ending with—

Fabri­
cated
prod­
ucts.

Sheets.

Wire
prod­
ucts.

Tubes.

Miscellane­
ous steel
products
(group A).

Miscellane­
ous steel
products
(group B).

Total.

Indus­
trial
railways.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).
December, 1913.......
February, 1914........
March, 1914.............
April, 1914...............
May, 1914.................
July, 1914.................
August, 1914............
September, 1914----October, 1914...........
November, 1914 —
December, 1914.......
February, 1915........
March, 1915.............
April, 1915...............
May 1915.................
June, 1915................
July, 1915.................
August, 1915............
September, 1915___
October, 1915...........
November, 1915----December, 1915.......
Januarv, 1916..........
Februrry, 1916........
March, 1916.............
April, 1916...............
May, 1916.................
June, 1916.................
July, 1916.................
August, 1916............
September, 1916..'..
October, 1916...........
November, 1916----December, 1916.......
January, 1917..........
February, 1917.......
March, 1917.............
April, 1917...............
May, 1917.................
June, 1917.................
July, 1917.................
August, 1917............
September, 1917___
October, 1917...........
November, 1917 —
December, 1917.......

300.9
288.7
276.6
263.6
264.5
236.0
226.6
215.6
200.0
189.5
184.9
178.5
176.9
170.9
165.3
164.9
159.9
159.9
153.6
147.9
152.6
156.7
155.5
159.1
160.4
160.3
159.9
158.3
158.2
161.8
163.6
162.3
164.1
160.4
160.3
157.2
156.2
158.7
159.3
161.9
162.8
161.9
159.8
159.2
158.2
158.1
157.6
159.5
154.0

184.9
179.7
176.6
173.0
169.7
164.9
161.0
157.3
148.3
142.1
141.7
141.8
141.5
140.7
139.9
135.4
134.2
128.9
125.3
120.0
117.1
115.5
114.1
114.3
111.8
110.9
111.0
111.8
111.2
110.5
109.4
109.7
108.4
107.2
105.6
104.3
102.0
102.3
100.9
99.4
96.8
96.5
97.0
100.8
104.6
102.5
102.7
101.5
101.7

177.9
169.6
164.2
159.4
159.3
157.6
152.9
148.7
146.6
143.9
140.4
140.2
138.6
136.1
136.1
131.0
129.5
129.9
132.9
135.4
138.5
149.8
154.2
154.4
157.2
157.9
158.4
159.9
158.8
158.8
156.5
154.5
153.2
149.2
146.7
147.9
144.5
141.4
139.1
136.6
135.1
132.6
127.7
123.0
118.6
111.5
108.1
101.7
97.5

81.5
76.9
72.1
67.4
63.6
60.4
57.2
51.9
48.1
45.0
41.8
39.5
37.5
35.5
33.4
30.7
27.9
27.1
26.1
26.3
28.8
30.0
31.4
32.2
32.3
33.4
34.0
34.9
36.2
36.5
36.7
37.2
37.0
36.7
36.6
36.2
37.1
36.1
36.2
35.6
34.8
34.6
34.6
33.2
32.2
31.7
31.2
30.8
30.5

212.8
210.4
208.0
205.8
201.9
196.6
188.3
181.7
173.3
167.1
160.6
155.4
152.0
145.3
136.1
130.4
126.8
126.2
128.1
130.5
134.9
140.3
145.5
151.2
155.8
164.1
172.5
179.3
183.6
186.1
188.2
193.0
197.9
200.1
202.8
203.6
202.7
201.5
199.6
196.4
193.9
190.9
186.7
180.5
173.7
167.4
162.6
158.8
154.0

123.8
118.3
115.6
116.7
106.4
102.7
100.0
91.1
92.9
88.1
85.2
82.1
82.7
80.8
83.1
81.3
79.1
75.2
69.9
65.4
60.3
61.3
62.9
66.4
69.0
73.5
76.1
75.9
76.1
78.3
81.0
82.5
85.6
86.2
86.9
86.1
84.6
82.1
79.7
78.5
77.4
76.0
73.4
70.6
67.5
65.4
63.1
61.9
61.4

181.0
176.0
171.9
168.4
164.0
159.5
154.7
149.7
143.7
138.9
134.9
132.1
130.4
127.1
123.1
118.0
117.2
114.9
114.0
112.8
114.3
118.6
120.8
122.8
124.5
127.3
129.8
131.8
132.7
133.8
134.1
135.4
136.3
135.5
135.1
134.8
133.2
131.7
130.1
128.5
126.7
124.7
121.6
118.2
115.0
110.9
108.6
105.9
103.4

106.4
110.3
114.1
117.5
121.9
126.1
131.5
138.0
143.6
145.9
151.2
153.4
153.9
155.7
157.5
157.1
156.2
157.8
157.3
153.7
151.0
150.5
147.6
146.6
146.9

137,816
111,794
160,819
182,587

112,240
i 16,690
1 17,840

Number of 300-day workers.
June,
June,
June,
June,

1914.................
1915.................
1916.................
1917.................

8,817.
6,706
8,276
10,110

16,841
15,759
21,906
25,504

25,575
22,434
31,377
32,928

19,944
13,329
21,031
24,880

41,744
35,670
45,673
49,893

18,922
13,477
23,000
27,046

1 Year ending with December.

Chart C presents the data of this table in graphic form. Inspection
of the chart will at once disclose the downward trend of employment
to some point in 1915, after which time it rises to the limit of the
chart. Accident frequency declines in all groups to about the same
point, then rises, except in sheet mills, into 1916 and finally declines,




IN F L U E N C E

OF T H E

W AR.

27

although employment continues to rise. As before remarked, this
substantial uniformity in the elements of the industry is highly
significant of some underlying cause common to them all.
ACCIDENTS IN CONNECTION WITH INDUSTRIAL RAILWAYS.

The industrial railways deserve a word of special comment. These
are railways which serve primarily the purposes of transportation for
industrial plants and do little or nothing in the way of carrying for
the general public. There has been a distinct apprehension on the
part of some interested in and familiar with railways that the very
great stress under which they were operating would be accompanied
by seriously increasing accident rates, and there is good ground for
this apprehension. Some railways have felt that they were justified
by existing conditions in giving up their special efforts in the direc­
tion of safety.

This is a most shortsighted policy, especially at a time when
above all others the most strenuous effort should be made. The
experience of the steel mills is ample evidence that, imperfect as the
efforts doubtless were, a definite increase rather than diminution of
effort has saved them from what would otherwise have been inevi­
table, namely, an increase in accidents running above the former
high mark.
The railway is a difficult proposition from the standpoint of severe
injury. Some railway occupations have a hazard exceeded, if at all,
only by the erection of structural steel. On this account it is of
much interest to follow the experience of this group of roads as
shown in Table 14. On examining the accident rates as there listed
it will appear that the rise, which began no doubt about the middle
of 1915, as in the other departments, was of longer continuance.
The turn came in manufacturing about the middle of 1916. It did
not come for nearly a year later in the railways. The high point is
the year ending May, 1917. Since it was not possible to follow the
railway-accident rates back to the preceding period of high industrial
stress, in 1913, it can not be determined whether this high year
exceeds the earlier one.
From the high point there is a definite and constant though not
very considerable decline. Whether or not the safety work done on
these roads is comparable with that done in the manufacturing groups
it is impossible to state. It is known, however, that during the
war period there has been more rather than less attention to safety
matters. It may therefore be fairly concluded that railways do not
form an exception. Patient effort will hej*e as elsewhere hold in
check the tendency to rising accident rates which regularly tend to
accompany industrial revival.




28

SA FE TY M O V E M E N T IN

IR O N A N D S T E E L I N D U S T R Y .

TREND OF ACCIDENT CAUSES, 1913 TO 1917.

Table 15 gives the frequency rates for the^principal groups of acci­
dent causes in the iron and steel industry from 1913 to the end of
1917.
T a b l e 1 5 .— ACCIDENT FR E Q U E N C Y R ATES FOR T H E PRINCIPAL CAUSE GROUPS IN

TH E IR O N AN D STEEL IN D U ST R Y, 1913 TO 1917.
(Frequency rate means the number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers.t

Year ending with—

March, 1914.................
April, 1914...................
May, 1914.....................
June, 1914.....................
July, 1914.....................
August, 1914...............
September, 1914.........
October, 1914..............
November, 1914..........
December, 1914..........
January, 1915..............
February, 1915___ . . .
March, 1915.................
April, 1915...................
May, 1915.....................
June, 1915.....................
July, 1915.....................
August, 1915...............
September, 1915.........
October, 1915..............
November, 1915..........
December, 1915..........
January, 1916..............
February, 1916...........
March, 1916.................
April, 1916...................
May, 1916................. '..
June, 1916....................
July, 1916.....................
August, 1916...............
September, 1916.........
October, 1916..............
November, 1916..........
December, 1916..........
January, 1917..............
February, 1917............
March, 1917.................
April, 1917...................
May, 1917.....................
June, 1917....................
July, 1917.....................
August, 1917...............
September, 1917.........
October, 1917..............
November, 1917..........
December, 1917..........

Hot sub­
stances.

16.8
16.3
15.7
15.0
14.4
13.6
12.9
12.5

1 .0
2
1 .8
1
11.5
1 .2
1
10.9
10.5
10.3

1 .2
0
1 .2
0

10.5
.10.8

1 .0
1
1 .1
1
11.5
11.7
11.9

1 .1
2
12.4
1 .8
2

13.1
13.4
13.6
13.5
13.6
13.5
13.6
13.4
13.4
13.3
13.0
12.9
12.4

1 ,8
1
1 .6
1
1 .2 :
1
1 .1
1
10.9
10.5

Cranes
and
hoists.
10.3

1 .2
0
9.6
9.4
9.0
8.7
8.4
7.9
7.6
7.6
7.5
7.3
6.9
6.7

6.8
6.6
6.4
6.5

6.8
7.0
7.3
7.4
7.7
7.7
7.8
7.8
7.8

8.0
8
.1

8.4
8.4
8.4
8.3
8.4
8.4
8.5
8.7
8.7
8.7

8.6
8.5
8.2
8.0
8.0
8
.1
7.8

Falls of
workers.

14.2
14.2
14.1
13.7
13.1

1 .8
2
12.7
1 .6
2

12.5
12.5

1 .8
1
1 .1
1
1 .0
1
10.7
10.4
10.4
10.3
10.4

1 .6
0
10.7
10.7

1 .8
0
1 .1
1
1 .1
1
11.4
1 .2
1
11.3
1 .2
1
1 .2
1
1 .2
1
1 .1
1
11.3
1 .2
1
1 .2
1
1 .1
1
1 .1
1
1 .0
1
10.9
10.9

1 .8
0
1 .6
0
1 .1
0
1 .1
0
9.9
9.8
9.7

Opera­ Handling Flying
Falling
objects
tion of
objects. machines. and tools. objects.
34.3
33.1
31.6
30.6
28.8
27.1
25.7
24.9
24.3
23.7
23.3

2 .2
2
21.4
20.7
20.4

2 .8
0
20.5
2 .2
1

22.3
22.4
23.2
24.1
24.3
26.3
26.9
27.1
27.7
27.6
27.8
28.0
27.8
28.0
27.6
27.1
26.4
25.7
25.0
24.8
24.2
23.5
22.9
21.9

2 .0
1
20.5
2 .1
0
19.4

1 .6
2
12.4
1 .1
2
11.7
1 .0
1
1 .8
0
10.4
1 .1
0
1 .1
0
9.9
9.3
9.0
8.9
8.3

8
.1
8.2
7.9
7.8

8
.1
8.0
8
.1
8.2
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.8
8.8
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7

8.6
8.6
8.3
8.3

8
.1
7.9
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2

6.8
6.6
6.6
6.3

55.5
54.2
52.9
51.5
48.7
47.2
46.6
45.6
44.8
44.5
43.9
43.2
42.4
42.3
41.8
41.6
41.5
41.9
43.5
44.7
45.1
45.6
45.8
46.7
46.8
47.1
47.2
47.1
47.6
47.7
47.2
46.5
46.8
46.1
45.8
45.1
44.5
43.7
42.7
42.0
41.1
40.3
38.7
37.8
36.1
35.3

11.5

1 .1
1
1 .6
0
1 .1
0
9.3
9.0
8.4

8
.1
8.0
7.8
7.6
7.2
7.1

6.8
6.7
6.5
6.4
6.4

6.8
7.1
7.2
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.5
7.9
7.9

8
.0

7.9
7.8
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.8
7.6
7.1
6.9
6.7
6.4
6.3

6
.1
6.2

Power
vehicles.

6.4
6.4

6.2
5.9
5.5
5.4
5.1
4.7
4.6
4.6
4.5
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.6
4.6
4.8
4.9
5.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.1
5.1
5.0
4.8
4.7
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.2
4.3

Examination of the table shows that in each cause group there
is a downward trend during the depressed year of 1914, and extend­
ing into 1915, approximately to the middle of the year. From that
point there is an upward swing for about one year. The highest
point reached in this upward swing is in no case as high as that reached
in the year ending with March, 1914, which includes nine months
%f the calendar year 1913 and three months of 1914. From this
point near the middle of 1916 there is a decline in all causes except
one— cranes and hoists.




INFLUENCE OF THE WAR.

29

ILLUSTRATIVE CHARTS.

The three following charts illustrate graphically the data presented
in Tables 12, 13, and 14.
Chart A shows the relation of employment to death frequency;
chart B shows employment and the total accident rate; chart C gives
the course of the total accident rates in the plants producing different
products.
These charts are plotted by a method which projects the percentage
of difference, from period to period^ rather than the amount. On the
ordinary chart the distance from 100 to 200 is one hundred times as
great as that from 1 to 2. On a percentage chart, such as here used,
the distances are identical. Stated in general terms, this means that
on a chart plotted on the percentage basis a given vertical distance
in any part of the chart always represents the same percentage of
difference.1
i Renewed interest in this method of charting has resulted from the appearance in the publications of the
American Statistical Association, June, 1917, of an article by Prof. Irving Fisher, of Yale University.




O

SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U STRY,




ChartA .;— T E D O E P O M N A D F T L Y R T S Y A E D G W If
R N F M L Y E T N A A IT A E , E R N IN IT

INFLUENCE
O
F
THE
WAR,




Chart B.----- TREND OF' E PLO EN A O ACCIDENT F E U N Y Y A E D G W
M YM T N
R Q E C , E R N IN
ITH

C
O
to

SAFETY
MOVEMENT
IN' IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U ST R Y.




ChartC--- A C E T F E UNY R T S FRY A E DN W H
C ID N R Q E C A E O E R NI G I
T
SEI I D M T.
PC E O H
F
W

PART II.—CAUSES AND PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS.

12771°— 18— Bull. 234------ 3




33




PART II.— CAUSES AND PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS.

SUMMARY.
PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION.

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the frequency
and severity of accidents in the iron and steel industry and particu­
larly to study the occurrences in such ways as to point out effective
safety measures. To this end the report locates, as far as possible,
the accident hazards in particular departments and occupations,
develops the causes for accident occurrence, and discusses methods
of prevention which experience has shown to be effective.
SCOPE OF THE REPORT.

The fundamental departments of the iron and steel industry are the
blast furnaces, steel works, and rolling mills. Since, however, many
of the large producers include in their processes the production of
more finished materials, such as wire and structural fabrications, it is
desirable to include them in this revioW.
From 1910 to 1914 the data secured cover all the important steel
plants of the country with only three exceptions.1 In these years the
number of 300-day workers included varies from 202,157 to 319,919,
the total being 1,310,919. The total number of accidents considered
is 232,909. The plants involved number over 400. In addition it
was possible to extend the review back to 1907 for six plants having
from 19,481 to 29,766 300-day workers. This latter group carries the
study back to the beginning of the safety movement.
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES.2

This report continues and extends the use of “ severity rates*’
begun in the report on machine building— Bulletin No. 216 of this
bureau.
The meaning of this term may be best expressed by means of an
example: Assume that a plant employing 1,000 300-day workers
during the course of a year had 200 accidents, and that the total
time lost by the men injured was 5,000 working days; the accidentfrequency rate for the year would be 200 per 1,000 workers; the
“ severity” rate would be 5,000 days lost per 1,000 workers, or, more
conveniently expressed, an average of 5 days per individual worker.




1 See p. 194.

2

See Chap. I.

35

36

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN

IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y .

To make such computations it is necessary, of course, to express
fatal and permanent injuries, as well as temporary disabilities, in
terms of workdays lost. This is done by valuing a fatal injury
(assuming the employees killed of an average age of 30) as equiv­
alent to the loss of 30 years’ work time— 9,000 days. Lesser per­
manent injuries— such as loss of hand or foot— are credited with
lower time losses in proportion to their probable effect upon earning
capacity— 2,196 days for a hand, 1,845 days for a foot, etc. This
method of evaluating permanent injury in terms of time loss, although
based upon somewhat rough estimates, is by no means arbitrary.
Severity rates, thus computed, constitute a very much more
accurate measure of accident hazard than do the older frequency
rates. A striking example may be cited: The machine-building
industry, in one year, had an accident frequency rate of 118 per 1,000
300-day workers. This was, as it happened, actually higher than
the accident frequency in a large steel plant in one year, the rate
there being 115 cases per 1,000 workers. But even a casual acquaint­
ance with the two industries would indicate that the steel plant repre­
sents the more hazardous employment, inasmuch as its accidents
are, on the whole, of a more serious character than those occurring
in machine building. This was evident when severity rates were
computed according to the method described, the steel plant having
a severity rate of 21.2 days lost per worker, as against only 5.6 days
lost per worker in machine building. In this case the severity rate
is clearly more valuable than the frequency rate in indicating the
relative hazards of the two industries.
A most important application of such rates is to the study of acci­
dent causes, nature of injury, and other similar subjects.
PHYSICAL CAUSES OF AQCEDENTS.1

In order to deal at all adequately with his problems the safety man
must have exact knowledge of the causes which bring about accidents.
Without the use of some system of severity rating such as that just
outlined no really satisfactory analysis is possible. It is found that
in the iron and steel industry as a whole the cause groups rank as
follows in the severity of the accidents attributable to them: Working
machines, 1.40 days per 300-day worker; cranes and hoists, 3.30 days;
hot substances, 3.27 days; falling objects, 2.23 days; falls of worker,
1.71 days; handling tools and objects, 0.92 day; power vehicles,
2.44 days; miscellaneous causes, 2.03 days.
“ Working machines” have their greatest importance in tube mills
(3.06 days), plate mills (2.22 days), and sheet mills (2.08 days).
“ Cranes and hoists” show high rates in all departments, particu­
larly in fabricating (9.29 days), Bessemer (4.68 days), foundries (4.84
days), and open hearths (4.47 days).




J8ee Ch. II.

SUM M ARY.

37

“ Hot substances” are naturally the characteristic hazard of blast
furnaces (11;96 days), Bessemer (11.05 days), and open hearths (5.81
days). The hazard of bums in foundries has been considered rather
serious, but the severity rate (1.87 days) is much below that for
cranes (4.84 days).
“ Falling objects” take the greatest toll of time in the Bessemer
(5.29 days), foundries (5.21 days), and mechanical departments (3.54
days).
“ Falls of worker” appear prominently only in blast furnaces (6.27
days) and among mechanics (4.05 days). In both cases this is due
to the necessity of climbing and working at elevations.
“ Handling tools and objects” in frequency rate (35. 6 cases) ranks
next to “ falling objects” (36.3 cases), but in severity rate “ falling
objects” (2.23 days) exceeds “ handling” (0.92 day) very decidedly.
This relative unimportance of “ handling” is found to exist in all
departments. “ Power vehicles” give rise to enough serious injury
to demand careful attention in each department. The departments
of conspicuous hazard are yard department (9.73 days), blast furnaces
(4.20 days), open hearths (3.83 days), and Bessemer converters (3.04
days).
“ Miscellaneous causes” have a striking severity rate only in blast
furnaces. This is entirely due to the results of the presence in them
of asphyxiating gas. The severity rate from this cause in blast
furnaces is 10.5 days.
CONTROL OF ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE DEPARTMENTS.

A satisfactory summary of the four chapters on this subject can
not be made. It is possible to touch only upon some conspicuous
points.
In order to determine the importance of the influences which act
upon accident causes it is necessary to follow the course of the rates
from year to year and also to know somewhat intimately the history
of the changes in equipment and method which have occurred during
the same period.
Blast furnaces.1 In blast furnaces the characteristic cause groups
—
are subdivisions of the general group of “ hot substances.” They
are “ breakouts,” “ explosions” connected with slips, and “ gas
flames.” Each of these has its appropriate remedy in some form of
structural improvement. Asphyxiating gas is also a serious menace
in the blast furnace and must be controlled, if at all, by better con­
struction.

The course of accidents from year to year will be shown to better
advantage at a later point where the experience of the departments
is detailed more fully. In this connection it is sufficient to call




i See Ch. III.

38

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN

IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y .

attention to the fact that the fairly steady decline which appears in
the rates is not 'confined to any particular group of causes. Some
causes are naturally much more sensitive to fluctuating industrial
conditions than others, but all of them have been influenced by the
efforts at prevention which have been in progress during the period.
Much light is shed upon the proper point for applying effort at
accident control by considering the relation of special occupations to
the causes. For example, it appears that injury from hot substances
is much more common among the members of the cast-house crew
than among other blast-furnace workers, while asphyxia is distributed
almost uniformly. Such facts indicate quite definitely the limita­
tions and particular direction of special effort.
Steel works and foundries present in a modified form the hazard of
“ hot substances.” The effective control is along lines similar to
those suggested for blast furnaces.
Open hearths} —Among the occupations of open hearths common
labor has much the highest frequency rate. In injuries due to “ hot
substances,” for example, the rate is 90.3 cases against. 41.9 cases for
pouring-platform workers, who stand next. In fact, common labor
has the highest rate in each cause group except “ handling tools and
objects” in which, naturally, the class of workers which includes the
specially tool handling mechanics is highest with 25.0 cases, while
common labor has 14.8 cases.
Bessemer steel worlcs.1
—The Bessemer department has two items
of procedure peculiar to itself which require some special efforts at
control. When the blast is turned into the converter many molten
particles are thrown out. Ordinarily these are not of a size to be
particularly dangerous, but at times they may cause serious burns.
Screens protecting the workers are now frequently used with good
effect, but more important probably is the adoption of a plan of
work which does not require the men to expose themselves as much
as formerly. The second item is the throwing of heavy masses of
scrap into the converters. When this was done directly the men
were exposed to great heat and often the masses of scrap would fall
to the pit floor, seriously endangering any one working there. In the
best plants this is now done behind water-cooled screens and through
chutes which make a fall to the floor below nearly impossible.
. Rolling mills.2
—In heavy rolling mills the element of hazard which
appears to be most difficult to control is “ hot substances.” In all
other particulars there is marked improvement. This control has
been largely due to the introduction of improved machinery both
in the apparatus used directly in the rolling process and in such
accessory apparatus as cranes.




i See Ch. IV.

2

See Ch. V.

39

SUM M ARY.

In tube mills there is a combination of mill processes with machineshop-conditions, making the problem of control quite different.
These mills have scored a remarkable success in the reduction of
accident frequency, while the severity rate, fairly low at the beginning,
has undergone relatively much less change.
The sheet mills present the unusual condition of a rising frequency
rate while the severity rate is falling. This was found on analysis
to be due to the group of employees particularly characteristic of this
department. When all sheet mill workers are taken as a unit they
show declining rates. The “ hot-mill crews,” however, when isolated,
have rising rates in both frequency and severity. It is probable that
the rate being generally lower than in other departments and the rise
not being very conspicuous, less attention has been given to conditions
than they have deserved.
Mechanical, fabricating, and yard departments.1
—The control of
accident causes in mechanical and fabricating operations must in the
nature of the case be considerably a matter of personal care. So
many of the operations are of a personal and manual character that
the individual worker’s attitude must be a material factor. Indeed,
it has been found that whenever an effort which succeeds in interesting
the men of such departments is undertaken the frequency of accident
at once begins to decline in a remarkable manner.
Mechanics and fabricators are the typical machine users. It is
therefore in these departments that the relative importance of
machines and other similar forms of hazard can be most readily
determined. In no year covered by this study did the contribution
of machines to the severity rate exceed 30 per cent. The average
is about 10 per cent and it sometimes drops to 4 per cent. The
working machine is therefore not a negligible source of injury, but
is of relatively minor importance.
The yard department has its chief danger in the operation of power
vehicles. In the plants studied the greater number of cases arise
from coupling and uncoupling cars. The obvious remedy is the
introduction of automatic couplers. The severity rate receives its
greatest contribution from the men being run down by moving
locomotives and cars. A study of these cases shows beyond question
that improvement in such matters as grade crossings, clearances,
permanent signal apparatus, and safety appliances on cars and loco­
motives is the main factor in an improved condition.
THE HUMAN FACTOR IN ACCIDENT OCCURRENCE.2

The points summarized above pertain to the physical causes of
accident. In the following section it is pointed out that the human
factor has probably been charged with much more than its fair share




i See Ch. VI.

2See Ch. VII.

40

SA FE TY M O V E M E N T IN

IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y .

of importance. It only rarely gives rise to serious injury without
there being some factor of physical condition which could be remedied.
Labor recruiting}—The accident rates of the inexperienced worker
are uniformly high. The influence of inexperience is most clearly
apparent in the study of “ labor recruiting.” In times of increasing
industrial activity new men are taken on in larger numbers. Among
them there will be, except in very unusual circumstances, a proportion
of entirely inexperienced men. Even if not unfamiliar with the
industry they will be new to the particular conditions of the plant
into which they come. By dividing the number of new men taken
on in a given time by the number of 300-day workers for the same
interval a rate is obtained which may be called the “ labor recruiting
rate,” i. e.—the number of new men taken on during the period per
1,000 300-day workers. This is an exact measure of the extent to
which the introduction of new men is influencing the working force
When the experience of a number of steel mills is studied it appears
that this factor of labor recruiting is of very great influence in the
accident frequency rate. These rates follow the recruiting with
remarkable exactness, rising when recruiting rises and falling when
it falls except in special cases in which it is possible to identify other
factors tending to nullify the natural effect of labor recruiting.
Geographic location?—It seems possible to trace the influence of
inexperience in the records of some steel plants so located that they
naturally serve as ports of entry to the steel industry. It does not
seem possible on other grounds to account for steadily higher accident
rates in some such plants when the safety work being done in them is
of fully as high quality as that found in other plants having definitely
lower rates.
Influence o f age.3
—This is difficult to determine since workers in
different age groups are rarely employed in tasks of sufficient simi­
larity to admit satisfactory comparison in the matter of hazard.
That is, the differences observed are due to the differences in work
done rather than to any influence of age as such. In steel works the
decades 20 to 29 years and 30 to 39 years are very closely similar in
the work done. The younger group has very constantly a higher
accident rate. This can hardly be due to any other cause than
relative inexperience. Men of 20 to 29 years are the raw recruits of
the industrial army, coming largely from nonindustrial pursuits.
Their inexperience is reflected in their higher accident rate.
Inability to speak English.4
—Obviously of all inexperienced men the
one suffering the most serious handicap is the one who is both new to
his task and also is unable to communicate freely with the man to
whom he is responsible. Study of this condition shows that the acci­
dent rates of such workers are higher than of those familiar with the
1 See pp. 133 to 140.




2See pp. 140 to 141.

8 See pp. 141 to 144.

* See pp. 144 to 146.

41

SU M M ARY.

language. That this is not due to some racial peculiarity is indicated
by the fact that the English speaking foreign born have rates scarcely
higher than American born.
Day and night accident rates} —The data studied indicate that in all
heavy employments there is a very pronounced tendency to higher
rates at night. The explanation lies along two lines: (1) Imperfect
lighting, (2) an unsatisfactory condition of the worker due to various
causes.
The experience of some plants indicates that this tendency can be
controlled. Further study is necessary on this subject in order to
determine more fully the facts of the situation and the best method
of control.
Conjugal condition.2
—No new studies of this subject have been made
in connection with this report. In answer to questions concerning
the effect of dependents upon the care exercised by the worker in car­
rying on his work a table prepared for the earlier report is reproduced.
The conclusion derivable from it is that there is no measurable differ­
ence between the accident frequency rates of the married and the
unmarried of the same age groups.
The effect o f alcohol.3—Safety men are practically unanimous in the
conviction that the use of alcohol is an important factor in causing
accidents. In view of this attitude an effort was made in the course
of this study to determine the basis of their view and to apply to it
all possible tests. The conclusion was reached that it is entirely
impossible to secure the same kind of evidence which may be obtained
regarding physical causes. When a man is run down by a car that
fact can be determined and recorded. It is a very different matter to
determine whether alcohol had much, little, or nothing to do with his
failure to escape from his dangerous position.
In only one plant were records found which appeared to have a
definite bearing on this subject. This plant had higher rates at
night. When the records of discipline for use of intoxicants were
examined it was found that the rates for the night turn were much in
excess of those for the day turn. Further, during the years covered
the night rates for accident had declined more rapidly than those for
the day. The same was true of the rates for discipline for alcoholic
indulgence. That there is a possible causal relation in these parallel
series of events is evident.
Distribution o f accidents through the worTcing hours.*—Undertaken
primarily as a study of fatigue it has become increasingly evident that
other factors enter in to such a degree that the fatigue effect is com­
pletely masked. There are also undetermined elements in the situa­
tion, such, for example, as distribution of employment through the
working hours. These undetermined elements are of such weight
1See pp. 146 to 152.




2See p. 152.

3 See pp. 153,154

« See pp. 154 to 163.

42

SAFETY M O VEM EN T IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

that any final conclusions regarding the significance of the distribu- ,
tion curve is impossible until they are examined. The present pre­
sentation simply puts the accumulated records in form for reference
and offers a provisional suggestion regarding an explanation of the
form of the distribution curves.
CAN SERIOUS INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS BE ELIMINATED ? 1

This is the most interesting question which can be asked regarding
accident occurrence. The usual opinion is that it is an entirely futile
question, since it is a matter of common knowledge that they can
not be.
The results of this study discredit this “ common knowledge” at
several points. For example, when causes of accident are followed
closely from year to year it is found that certain causes which con­
tribute but a small number of cases are responsible for large losses of
time. The decreasing time loss from year to year shown in these
causes has been due to improved physical conditions. This is very
conspicuous in the case of hot metal “ breakouts” in blast furnaces.
A steady increase in strength of construction in the furnaces included
in the study finally brought “ breakouts” to an end. The result was
a reduction in the severity rate of 58:9 days per 300-day worker when
1906 and 1913 are compared. On the other hand, causes depending
largely on personal care, such as “ handling tools,” while showing
great reduction in number, contributed but meagerly to the reduction
of severity. Contrast 58.9 days per 300-day worker of decline in
severity rates which was due to “ the engineering revision” which
stopped “ breakouts” with 7.3 days in “ handling tools,” a part of
which must be attributed to better tools.
If, as appears to be the case, serious accidents are mainly reduced
by the process of physical improvement due to “ engineering revision,”
no limit can be set to it. Human carefulness probably can not be
speedily perfected, but physical conditions very possibly can be to a
point making serious accident a very rare occurrence.
This contention is reinforced by study of causes of death. In a
majority of cases it is evident that some improvement in physical
condition could have been made which would have tended to prevent
the accident.
It is impossible to summarize this section satisfactorily, but the
above will serve to give an idea of the line of discussion which is
followed.
NATURE OF THE INJURY.2

The nature of the injury is not so significant in accident prevention
work as the cause of injury. Since, however, a considerable number




i See Ch. VIII.

2See Ch. IX .

SU M M ARY.

of cases must be met by appliances placed upon the worker the nature
of his injury is an essential element in determining the appropriate
safeguard. For example, the number of eye injuries is an index of
the importance of the use of protective goggles.
Machine building and iron and steel.1
—Instructive comparison is
possible between machine building and the iron and steel industry.
For example, in the years and plants covered machine building is
below the iron and steel industry 56 per cent in frequency and 65 per
cent in severity. This shows that injuries of the iron and steel in­
dustry are as a rule of higher severity than those of machine building.
This has been shown elsewhere from other viewpoints. When, how­
ever, bruises and cuts are considered it appears that while machine
building has 52 per cent less frequency its severity is only 24 per cent
less than iron and steel.
Injury in the departments.2
—Certain departments are characterized
in a marked degree by certain kinds of injury. Blast furnaces, for
example, have the danger of asphyxia3beyond all other departments.
This hazard contributes 6.98 days per 300-day worker to the severity
rate of blast furnaces and only 0.38 day to that of open hearths, the
only other r apartment in which asphyxia is of any significance.
*
The fabricating shops, with the constant shifting of large girders by
means of cranes, suffer much from crushing injury (12.62 days).
Burns have high severity in blast furnaces ,(9-61 days), Bessemer
(10.44 days), and open hearths (6.36 days). Heat prostrations are of
noteworthy severity in sheet mills (0.93 day), plate mills (0.63 day),
and open hearths (0.42 day). These illustrations serve to show that
study of such records may afford important clues to useful lines of
preventive effort.
Infection.4
—Infection was formerly distressingly common. A
study of the available data indicates that the emphasis of recent years
upon prompt report of cases to the physician has had a measurable
effect. Infected cases have been declining at a more rapid rate than
other cases.
Injury and occupation-5
—Some important conclusions are possible
when injuries are considered by occupational groups. It was possible
to do this in three departments—blast furnaces, open hearths, and
tube mills.
In blast furnaces the cast house men furnish the greater number of
cases. Burns are most numerous (117.9 cases per 1,000 300-day
workers). Hot metal has 97.3 cases. Hot water and steam are of
1 See pp. 179.
2 See pp. 180 to 182.
3 For detailed instructions regarding prevention methods see Asphyxiation from Blast-Furnace Gas
Technical paper 106, U .S . Bureau of Mines.
< See pp. 183 to 184.
s See pp. 184 to 191.




44

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

considerable importance (10.3 cases) with the cast house crew.
Common labor also suffers seriously from burns. The significance of
these cases lies in the fact that many of them can be effectually pre­
vented by the use of proper clothing and other protective devices.
Open hearths have no occupational group in which the hazard is
comparable with cast house men in the blast furnace. Common labor
is in them, as in most departments, the employment of the greatest
danger. In every kind of injury this group has.the greatest fre­
quency. For example, bruises and cuts have a frequency of 299.3
cases per 1,000 300-day workers among common labor and 82.1 cases
among unclassified workers, who rank next. The following illustra­
tions will serve to indicate the kinds of injury which befall a common
laborer in an open hearth: Bruises of hand or fingers, 117.9 cases
per 1,000 300-day workers; burns from hot metal, 23.1 cases; crush­
ing injuries of hand or fingers, 7.6 cases; eye injuries, 34.4 cases;
fracture of hand or fingers, 9.9 cases; infections, 14.4 cases.
Tube mills again emphasize the hazard of the common laborer. It
is instructive to compare tube mills with open hearths at some points.
For example, bruises of hand and fingers have a frequency of 117.9
cases per 1,000 300-day workers in open hearths, while in tube mills
the frequency is 197.8 cases. This at once suggests a constant dif­
ference to one familiar with the operations of both departments. The
tube mills require a much larger amount of handling small pieces in
the course of which minor injury to the hands might more frequently
occur. Since these operations can more readily be conducted mechan­
ically in tube mills, this rate suggests a field for possible improvement.
T of hospital records.1
Jse
—In several particulars the records of the
emergency room or hospital are sure to be more precise than reports
made to the safety office. Some points developed by study of such
records may be summarized as follows: (1) It was found, on extend­
ing to a larger amount of material the inquiry of the earlier report
regarding the more rapid decline of minor injury under intensive
safety effort, that this condition is equally evident in the larger
group here available for study. (2) The idea of measuring progress
by average time lost per case is unsound. Since the minor cases
decrease in number more rapidly it is almost always true that the
average time per case will increase when active safety work is under­
taken. (3) The recoveries of the first week are not distributed to the
days in a manner similar to the distribution in successive weeks. In
the weeks there is a regular decline from week to week. In the days
the second, third, and fourth each have a higher per cent of recovery
than the first.
Care of the injured.—Great improvement in methods of transport­
ing injured men and in appliances for their care has characterized




i See pp. 191,192.

SUM M ARY.

45

the period under consideration. Without doubt this has had a great
influence in saving cases which would otherwise have terminated
fatally. The importance of this contribution to a lessened severity
rate has not been given its full value.
Closer cooperation of medical staff, employment office, and safety
department is essential to a satisfying progress.
PROGRESS OF THE SAFETY MOVEMENT IN THE INDUSTRY.1

The course of accident occurrence is traced from 1907 onward.
This covers the entire history of the organized safety movement.
The years 1906 and 1907 were at the climax of a period of intense
industrial activity and in other respects afforded conditions which
probably gave them the highest accident rate that ever occurred
anywhere.
Since those years a far-reaching change has taken place. Then
there were no compensation laws, the study of industry with intent
to make it safe had not begun, and such organization as now char­
acterizes every great plant was unknown. Now compensation laws
are nearly universal, several powerful national organizations are in
the field in a sustained and concentrated effort to spread the gospel
of safety, and plant managers are learning that the effort has eco­
nomic as well as humanitarian advantages.
It is appropriate to inquire whether measurable results have
appeared. In the entire industry from 1910 to 1914 the frequency
of accidents was reduced from 224.0 cases per 1,000 300-day work­
ers to 150.1 cases. At the same time severity declined from 19.9
days per 300-day worker to 11.8 days. In the special plants in which
it was possible to cover the period back to 1907 the changes were in
frequency from 242.4 cases in 1907 to 101.3 cases in 1914; in severity
from 27.1 days in 1907 to 9.6 days in 1914.
Illustrations from individual plants.—While it is not desirable to
attempt comparisons between individual plants, since they are likely
to combine the various hazards in such a manner as to give mislead­
ing results, they afford admirable opportunity for showing the effect
of intensive effort to reduce accidents. For purposes of such com­
parison three charts are introduced. The first of these affords fre­
quency rates from 1900 to 1913. The reduction is from 370 cases per
1,000 300-day workers to 115 cases. The second gives the same
data from 1905 to 1913 and includes severity rates. It affords such
contrasts as a severity rate of 54.3 days per 300-day worker in 1906
and 14.3 days in 1912. The third chart brings together the frequency
rates of the departments of two plants for 1910. In one safety work
had been in progress for some time, in the other it had not begun.




i See Ch. X .

46

SAFETY

M O V E M E N T IN

IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y .

The following figures will illustrate the contrasts: In steel works, 192
cases per 1,000 300-day workers and 929 cases; in rolling mills, 124
cases and 542 cases.
Comparison with other industries.—When the iron and steel indus­
try is compared with others, also recognized as extra hazardous, the
following figures are significant: In the entire iron and steel industry
the fatality frequency rate in the period 1910 to 1914 varies from
1.62 cases per 1,000 300-day. workers to 0.85 case. In blast fur­
naces the range is from 3.46 cases to 1.73 cases. In coal mines, 6.05
cases and 4.67 cases are the limits, while in metal mines the range is
from 4.45 cases to 3.92 cases.
Classes of plants.—In an earlier report plants were shown in three
classes: A, with safety organization well developed; B, in process of
development; C, not developed. At the present time class C has
practically disappeared. It is instructive to compare class A with
the entire industry in the period 1910-1914. Class A had a frequency
rate of 167.1 cases per 1,000 300-day workers while the entire indus­
try in 1910-1914 had 177.7 cases, and in 1914 150.1. That is to say,
the best plants in 1910 had a less satisfactory frequency rate than
the entire industry in 1914.
EXPERIENCE BY DEPARTMENTS AND OCCUPATIONS.1

The trend of events in a complex industry such as the iron and
steel may be quite different from the movement in some of its con­
stituent elements. It accordingly becomes necessary to scrutinize
these elements with care and determine whether they follow the
same course or are at variance with the industry, considered as a
unit.
As a foundation for such a study, 11 of the most important depart­
ments are presented for the periods 1910-1914 and 1907—
1914.
The severity rates vary from 28.7 days per 300-day worker in blast
furnaces to 7.7 days in tube mills in the 1910-1914 period and 31.6
days in blast furnaces to 8.7 days in tube mills in the 1907-1914
period.
Blast furnaces?— Severity rates in blast furnaces decline from 38.4
days per 300-day worker in 1910 to 20.1 days in 1914. The highest
rate is found in 1906, 143.1 days. This was due to an unusual
fatality in that year. It can not, however, be regarded as wholly
abnormal, since the following year, 1907, has a rate of 65.1 days.
From these high points a decline occurred to 19.6 days in 1914.
For the purpose of studying the conditions in occupations, four
groups of blast furnace workers were isolated— cast house men,
common laborers, mechanics, and stockers. Since the volume of
data in each year would be inadequate for reliable rates, the data of




i See Ch. X I.

2See pp. 206 to 211.

47

SU M M ARY.

1905-1914 have been combined. It is found that cast house men
have a severity rate of 72.5 days per 300-day worker, common
laborers 36.8 days, stockers 36.7 days, mechanics 26.3 days; while
the unclassified group has 64.9 days. This latter rate is due in con­
siderable measure to exposure to asphyxiating gas.
Bessemer steel works.1
—The conditions which obtain in such works
make for great irregularity in the rates. While this is true, the
generally downward tendency is clearly marked. The year 1913 is
industrially more strictly comparable with the earlier years of each
of the periods under consideration than any other. It will therefore
be used for comparative purposes, except in cases specially noted.
In 1910 the Bessemer converters had a severity rate of 43.0 days per
300-day worker; in 1913 this had become 28.0 days. In the special
plants the 1907 rate is 19.2 days, changing to 13.1 days in 1913.
The highest rate is 57.9 days in 1908. No satisfactory study of
occupations was possible in the Bessemer department.
Open hearths.2
—In this department the 1910-1914 period varies
from a severity rate of 35.7 days per 300-day worker in 1910 to a
rate of 20.8 days in 1914. The 1907-1914 period shows 52.8 days
in 1907 and 29.8 days in 1913. The occupational rates in open
hearths are as follows: Common labor, 40.8 days per 300-day worker;
pitmen, 15.7 days; pouring platform men, 12.7 days; stocking floor
men, 6.3 days. The unclassified workers include those engaged in
transportation, which accounts in part for their high severity rate
(28.2 days).
Foundries.3—In the 1910-1914 period there is a steady decline in
severity rates from 1911 onward. The rates are 16.0 days per 300day worker in 1911 and 12.8 days in 1913. In the special plants the
rates are very irregular and do not show any tendency to decline.
Neither of the groups above can be analyzed by occupations, but
another considerable foundry group can be so treated. These are
strictly occupational rates: Cleaners, including chippers, 23.0 days
per 300-day worker; molders, 19.4 days; melters, 6.0 days; core
makers, 1.6 days. The high rate among cleaners is largely due to
flying particles striking the eye.
Heavy rolling mills.4
—The mills thus designated include blooming
and slab mills and such structural mills as roll directly from the
ingot. They are almost entirely mechanical in their operation.
The 1910-1914 group shows severity rates of 24.4 days per 300-day
worker in 1910 and of 10.8 days in 1914. The special plants have
rates of 19.4 days in 1907, declining to 7.5 days in 1913.
Plate mills.5
—This group of mills shows over the 1910-1914 period
the most steady and uniform decline of any of the important depart1 See pp. 212,213.
2 See pp. 214 to 218.




3 See pp. 219,220.
4 See pp. 220 to 222.

BSee pp. 223,224.

48

SAFETY M O VEM EN T IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

ments. The rate in 1910 was 24.8 days per 300-day worker. By
1913 this had dropped to 9.5 days. The special plants are much
less regular, but record a decline from 30.7 days in 1907 to 12.4 days
in 1913.
Sheet mills.1
—The rates for these mills are distinctly lower than
those of most of the departments. Consideration of what may be
called their normal hazard would suggest that this lesser rate is not
so pronouncedly different, as it should be. With vigorous attention
to the problems of safety, a better record should be possible. In the
1910-1914 group the rates are 16.5 days per 300-day worker in 1910
and 10.1 days in 1913. The special plants show 13.1 days in 1907
and 8.5 days in 1913. "
The hot mill crews in sheet mills have a severity rate of 6.0 days
per 300-day worker, as against 17.8 days for all other occupations*
Evidently the characteristic occupations of the sheet mill are much
less hazardous than those which are shared with other departments.
Tube mills?—Included in the operations of these mills are many
processes similar to those of the machine shop. The presence of such
processes accounts in part for a comparatively low severity rate. In
the large group 1910-1914 this rate rose in the later years from 5.8
days per 300-day worker in 1910 to 10.0 days in 1913. This hap­
pened in spite of a very notable reduction in frequency rates. These
declined during the period from 167.5 cases per 1,000 300-day workers
in 1910 to 88.5 cases in 1913. In the special plants the severity
rates are irregular but a downward tendency is established by com­
paring four-year periods 1907-1910 and 1911-1914. This compari­
son shows 9.6 days for the earlier period and 7.9 days for the latter.
The occupational severity rates establish that the skilled workers
in these mills have small hazard. The rate of the pipe furnace crews
is 1.1 days per 300-day worker, pipe finishing crews 3.6 days, while
common labor has 23.0 days, and an unclassified group, including
transportation workers, has 11.5 days.
Miscellaneous light rolling mills?—The mills of this class are to a
very considerable extent hand operated. They are characterized by a
high frequency and relatively lower severity when compared with
heavy rolling mills. Their severity rate declined in the 1910-1914
period from 16. 8 days per 300-day worker in 1910 to 14.5 days in
1913. The entire group, including some mills in part of mechanical
operation, had for the period a severity rate of 12.8 days, while bar
mills which are strictly hand operated had a rate of 10.7 days.
Fabricating shops.4
—All such shops exhibit a tendency to high
frequency rates due to the large amount of hand work involved.
When the severity rates are considered they are rather below the
average. In the 1910-1914 period there was a decline from 19.9
i See pp. 225 to 227.




2gee pp. 228 to 230.

* See pp. 230,231.

* See pp. 231 to 233.

49

SUM M ARY.

days per 300-day worker in 1910 to 13.9 days in 1913. In the special
plants the change was from 35.3 days in 1907 to 8.5 days in 1913.
Wire drawing}—The severity rates of this department are influ­
enced a great deal by the prevalence of permanent disabilities due
to loss of fingers from being caught in tangles of wire. This hazard
is practically gone from the best mills and the rate has declined
accordingly. The 1910-1914 period registers a decline from 12.3
days per 300-day worker in 1910 to 8.9 days in 1913.
Electrical department?—This department is the only one whose
rates are not fairly encouraging. In 1910 the severity rate was 15.8
days per 300-day worker, but rose to 35.6 days in 1913. This would
be less serious if confined to a single year, but in 1914 the rate was
still high (34.7). The high death rate, which is the main factor in
this undue severity, demands the most careful consideration of elec­
trical engineers. It does not prevail in the best plants. It is sin­
gularly unfitting that the sponsors of the National Safety Council
permit their own department to fall out of step.
Mechanical department.3—The showing of this department is irreg­
ular. No improvement can be argued from the 1910-1914 period.
The highest rate is in 1913 (18.3 days per 300-day worker) and the
lowest in 1911 (11.4 days). When the longer period (1905-1914) is
considered it becomes evident that there has been a very marked
change for the better from the very high rates of the earlier years.
Such a rate as 26.9 days per 300-day worker in 1908 is not reached
in either group in any later year. However, fatality is much more
frequent in this department than it should be.
Yard department.4—The contrast between the entire industry and
the special plants so far as this department is concerned is very
instructive. The decline in the 1910-1914 period from 26.5 days per
300-day worker in 1910 to 16.3 days in 1914 is considerably marred
by the fact that in 1913 the rate was 25.6 days. The special plants,
however, show a decline from 37.1 days in 1905 to 2.5 days in 1913.
This very low rate is due to the fact that in six large plants having
2,751 300-day yard employees in 1913 there was not a single fatality.
Such records can, and therefore ought to be, much more frequent
than they are.
Erection o f structural steel.5
—So far as known no rates have hitherto
been compiled for this kind of employment. It has been known
that there was extreme hazard, but no definite measure was availa­
ble. Both in frequency and severity rates this’ building and bridge
work shows a higher hazard than any other department examined.
The severity rate of 128.6 days per 300-day worker is equaled only
by one unusual year in blast furnaces when the rate was 143.1 days.
1 See pp. 234, 235.

2 See pp. 236, 237.

12771°— 18— B u ll. 234------- 4




3 See pp. 237, 238.
4 See pp. 240, 241.

6See pp. 242, 243.

50

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

For many reasons this employment presents many difficulties. Not
the least of these are the conditions of haste which are nearly always
present and the temporary expedients which must be adopted for
the conduct of the work. It is not possible to determine whether
this present condition is an improvement upon an earlier one which
was still worse, but it must be suspected that these figures represent
the best phase of a condition which at its worst is no less than a
disgrace to the safety movement.
The period 1910 to 1914 as a standard o f comparison.1
—The years
mentioned afford in several particulars an advantageous standard of
reference. The safety movement had by 1910 spread widely enough
to constitute an important factor. The years themselves are suffi­
ciently varied in the character of the industrial conditions prevalent
that they may fairly be regarded as typical when taken as a unit.
The rates for the several departments are accordingly assembled in
convenient shape so that the manager of any particular type of mill
may readily compare his rates with them and so judge his relation
to a fair standard of past experience.
THE METHODS OF THE SAFETY M A N .2

Safety organization.—Safety organization is now so well established
and so well understood that extended discussion is not deemed
necessary. One of the problems of organization is the maintenance
of an effective degree of interest. If supervisors and workers alike
can be held up to a continuing interest the problem of education is
more than half solved. In view of this fact the present chapter is
devoted to outlining methods which have proved effective in the
practice of the iron and steel industry.
Records and charts.—No safety man proceeds far in his work without
feeling the need of some form of presenting the facts in an impressive
way to his colleagues. The commonest device for this purpose is a
monthly chart. The serious defect of this method is due to the fact
that when several departments are combined for the sake of com­
parison the chart becomes so confused that it is difficult if not impos­
sible to understand it. To obviate this difficulty a method of pre­
paring and plotting smoothed curves is described in detail. This
method involves the use of data for the years ending with each month
from the close of the first year onward. This use of overlapping
periods of a full year eliminates the influence of local and temporary
conditions and affords a smooth and intelligible curve. The method
is applicable both to the presentation of departmental rates and
comparison of causes.
Awards and bonus plans.—Probably no safety man has escaped the
discouragement of realizing that a plan to which he had given careful




i See pp. 244, 245.

2See Ch. X II.

SUM M ARY.

51

and prolonged thought and which had produced satisfactory results
was losing its force. It does not lessen this discouragement to
realize that the more active he may be in using his plans the quicker
they wear out. This has led to a search for some form of interest
producer of more permanent character. This is furnished in the
case of the supervisory men by the steady pressure of the compen­
sation laws. If due care is not exercised in accident prevention
costs begin to rise and unpleasant questions are likely to be asked.
The safety man desires some automatic and permanent influence
which shall exercise the same influence on the work people. He is
apt to seek it in some form of bonus.
No attempt is here made to discuss the propriety of such systems.
It is regarded as sufficient to point out that some successful safety
men do not regard the plan favorably on the ground that its use
tends to diminish the force of the humane motive. To this the
advocates reply that the humane motive is in no way modified but
is effectively supplemented, The fact to be recorded is that exten­
sive experiments are under way in the use of bonuses. The results
must be determined as they develop.
To afford a means of understanding the methods employed in such
plans, a composite plan derived from the experience of a number of
companies is described in detail.
Cooperation with other agencies.—The wise safety man will recognize
that his success is largely a matter of close cooperation with home,
school, church, and other agencies of the community. He has an
opportunity far beyond his plant, which if properly utilized will
return to him in a lowered accident rate.




CHAPTER I.
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT RATES.

The purpose of accident studies is the very practical one of finding
out where and why accidents occur and how they may be prevented.
The first stage in every such study is necessarily the counting and
analysis of the accidents reported. In attempting this, two serious
difficulties present themselves: First, the lack of a uniform definition
of what is to be regarded as an “ accident” ; and, second, a confusion
as to the proper derivation and use of accident rates. Failure to
grasp the importance of these two points has been responsible for
much loose thinking and many false conclusions, and also has been
responsible for the present unsatisfactory character of accident
statistics in this country.
DEFINITION OF “ACCIDENT.”

First, then, what is to be regarded as an industrial accident for
the purposes of statistical study? No definition has as yet been
universally accepted. Some establishments and States attempt to
take account of all injuries, however trivial. Others exclude those
of a minor character and take account only of such as cause a loss of
a specified amount of time. It is evident that the accident showing
of a plant may be completely altered by a change in definition of
accident, and that in the absence of a uniform definition all compari­
sons between the accident data of different plants, industries, or
other groups become almost worthless. The precise definition is
not so important. The important thing is that the same definition
should be everywhere observed.
The most significant step so far taken toward such uniformity in
this country is the recent action of the International Association of
Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions in adopting a definition
of “ tabulatable accidents” —i. e., a definition not necessarily to be
followed in the original reporting of accidents, but to be used in
all statistical tabulations. The definition is substantially the same
as the one long used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in its accident
investigations and employed in the present report:
“ Tabulatable accidents, diseases, and injuries.—All accidents,
diseases, and injuries arising out of employment and resulting in
death, permanent disability, or any loss of time other than the
remainder of the day, shift, or turn in which the injury was incurred,
shall be classified as “ tabulatable accidents, diseases, and injuries,”
52




ACCIDENT RATES.

53

and a report of all such, cases to some State or National authority
shall be required.”
The States which belong to the International Association of Indus­
trial Accident Boards and Commissions are thus committed to a
uniform standard definition of the accidents which are to be tabu­
lated. Some States may at first find it impossible to tabulate all
accidents as required by the definition, but the desirability of doing
so is apparent, and many have already made a beginning.
»

THE MEANING OF ACCIDENT RATES.

The second of the two above-mentioned difficulties— the deter­
mination and use of accurate accident rates—presents a more serious
problem than that involved in the definition of accident. Here it is
necessary not only to have uniformity, but to decide upon a correct
method. In the early attempts at accident statistics, attention was
limited to the number of accidents occurring in a given plant or
group. But mere numbers, of course, meant nothing unless related
to the number of persons exposed to accident. This led to the cus­
tom of expressing accidents in terms of so many per thousand work­
ers, and constituted an approach to a correct method. To say that
a given industry had an accident rate of 100 per thousand workers
does convey a definite idea, and can be compared with a rate of, say,
300 per thousand workers in another industry. But the method was
extremely crude, because the basic figure “ 1,000 workers” was
indefinite and variable. Usually it was derived by rough estimate
as to the number of persons employed, such as averaging the number
employed at different times of the year or averaging the pay rolls of
the year. But no such average could be at all an accurate measure
of what was wanted. The number of days worked vary in different
plants as do also the daily hours of labor. Two plants may have the
same yearly accident rate, say, 200 per “ 1,000 workers,” estimated
on the above basis, but if one worked only 8 hours a day for 250
days and the other worked 12 hours a day for 365 days, it is clear
that the real accident hazard is much higher in the former plant,
in as much as the same number of accidents per 1,000 workers oc­
curred during a much more limited period of time.
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES.

From this weakness, it became evident that in order to get a rate
that would measure real hazard, it is necessary to know not only the
number of men employed, but also the time of their employment.
The only way to obtain this is to ascertain the actual number of
hours worked by all employees for the year. This gives the number
of man-hours, i. e., the theoretical number of men required to pro­




54

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

duce the output of the plant in one hour, or what is the same thing,
the theoretical number of hours required by one man to turn out
the same product. Man-hours so derived constitute the correct basis
upon which to calculate accident rates. But the term is unfamiliar
and for practical purposes it is convenient to convert man-hours
into full-time workers. The full-time worker, as defined by the
joint committee of the International Congress on Social Insurance
and the International Institute of Statistics, is one who works 10
hours per day for 300 days per annum, making a total of 3,000 hours
per annum.
The full-time worker or 300-day worker, so defined, may seem at
first thought to be a mere statistical abstraction. It is true that
the full-time worker, like the average man, is a unit of measure,
not a living, breathing man, but for the purpose of accident statis­
tics a standardized workman to serve as a unit of measure is abso­
lutely essential. Furthermore, the statistical full-time workman who
is assumed to work 10 hours a day for 300 days in the year conforms
very closely in most industries to the actual workman who enjoys
good health and works every day the establishment is running.
Accident statistics, to be comparable, must be stated in terms of a
common unit of measure. The 300-day worker is merely a unit of
measure of the quantity of labor, just as the yard is the unit of
measure for length. The number of 300-day or full-time workers is
obtained by dividing the number of man-hours actually worked in
an establishment by 3,000, the number of hours per annum assumed
to be worked by the 300-day worker.
In those establishments which keep accurate records of the hours
worked by each employee every day, the man-hours worked by the
establishment can easily be obtained from the records and hence the
number of full-time or 300-day workers can easily be computed.
Few small establishments, however, keep any such accurate records of
time worked. For the majority of small plants it is necessary to
compute the number of man-hours worked and the full-time (300day) workers. The method suggested by the conference called by
Commissioner Meeker, which met in Chicago October 12 and 13, 1914,
was as follows: “ If this exact information is not available in this form
in the records, then an approximation should be computed by taking
the number of men at work (or enrolled) on a certain day of each
month in the year and the average of these numbers multiplied by
the number of hours worked by the establishment for the year would
be the number of man-hours measuring the exposure to risk for the
year.”
By the method outlined, true rates are obtained as regards the
risk of accident occurrence or frequency. These rates may be called
accident frequency rates. Thus if the accident frequency rate, so




OCCIDENT RATES.

55

derived, for the steel industry is 114 per 1,000 full-time workers, and
is 118 for the machine building industry, it is correct to conclude that
accidents are less frequent in the steel industry than in machine
building, in the proportion of 114 to 118. All differences in the
hours of labor, number of days worked, etc., in the two industries
have been duly taken into account. Again, if a given plant shows
an accident frequency rate of 100 one year and 90 the next, it is a
correct conclusion that accidents have decreased 10 per cent in
frequency.
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES.

Frequency rates of this character were computed and used in the
report on accidents in the iron and steel industry, issued by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1913. In all the establishments covered
the number of man-hours worked per year was obtained and the work­
ing force then reduced to so many full-time or 300-day workers.
The method was found practicable and, within limits, highly useful.
But it had one serious weakness, namely, that frequency rates, as the
name indicates, measure the frequency of accidents, but take no
account of the severity of the resulting injuries, and experience has
shown that the two things do not necessarily move in the same direc­
tion. The frequency rates may be the same in two plants in the same
industry, and the hazards may be entirely different because one plant
has very few severe accidents, while the other has a large proportion
of serious accidents. To put all industries and all plants on a com­
mon basis a system of computing accident rates must be devised
which will take into account the difference in economic significance
between the accident which bruises the workman’s thumb and the
accident which breaks his back.
In other words, what is needed is some method of weighting inju­
ries according to their severity. Several methods suggest themselves
as possible—compensation paid, wage loss or time loss. A compensa­
tion system necessarily weights the importance of accidents in fixing
a scale of benefits which aims to apportion the payment to the hurt.
But compensation payments do not offer the universal measure
desired because the benefits differ from State to State and are also
subject to change within the same State. Wage loss due to injury
offers perhaps a better measure of severity, but this, too, suffers under
the handicap that wages differ from place to place and from time to
time. Time loss as a measure does not suffer from these objections.
An accident that causes 6 days’ disability is precisely twice as serious
as one causing only 3 days’ disability, and this relation is always and
everywhere the same.




56

SAFETY M O VEM EN T IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The days lost because of injury may thus be taken as the most
satisfactory measure of the true hazards of industry—of the burden
imposed upon'the worker and the community because of industrial
accidents. The only difficulty in its practical application is that in
case of death and permanent injuries the time lost must be estimated.
For temporary disabilities, from which recovery is complete, the time
losses are matters of record—2 days, 10 days, 6 weeks, as the case
may be. But, if the accident results in death, the time loss is not so
clearly measurable. It exists, however, and may be estimated as the
number of working days by which the worker’s life was curtailed.
Similar estimates are possible in case of permanent injuries, such as
loss of hand or foot.
After a study of the available information a table of time losses for
injuries resulting in death, permanent total disability, and permanent
partial disability was determined upon and applied in this report.
The procedure followed was as follows:
FATALITIES.

In case of an injury causing death the time loss to the family and
society is the expectancy of productive working life of the deceased
workman. It is not possible to learn the age of all workmen killed in
industrial accidents; but from estimates made by the Wisconsin
Industrial Commission, from statistics obtained by several compensa­
tion commissions, and from the investigations of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, it seems reasonable to estimate that the average age of vietims of fatal accidents is approximately 30 years. According to the
American life tables, the life expectancy at age 30 is 35 years. This
is for the population as a whole. Workingmen exposed to all the
hazards of illness and accident in industry have a shorter expectancy
of life than the average for the whole population. The expected pro­
ductive life of workers is even shorter than their life expectancy.
Exact data are lacking, but in the light of all obtainable information
it seems fair to estimate the working time lost on the average by
relatives and the community for each workman killed by accident as
30 years, or 9,000 working days, counting 300 working days to the
year. This is admittedly an estimate. A mathematically accurate
measure is obviously impossible. It is also unimportant. The main
thing is to get the best possible approximation and to apply it to
existing accident statistics for the purpose of comparing accident
records plant by plant, industry by industry, and year by year.
PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITIES.

If the loss of working time to families and to the community were
the sole thing to be shown in accident statistics, the same time loss




ACCIDENT RATES.

57

should be fixed for permanent total disabilities as for fatalities.
Permanent total disability is, however, a greater burden to relatives
and the community than death. In recognition of this obvious fact
the time loss for permanent total disability has been fixed at 35
years or 10,500 working days. The relative importance or burden­
someness of permanent total disabilities as compared with fatalities
is thus established rather arbitrarily. After further experience it
may be advisable to change the relative weights. The system of
weighting used does recognize, however, the undeniable fact that
complete permanent incapacity of a worker is a greater burden than
his death; and some recognition, even if unscientific, is better than
ignoring the obvious facts.
PERM ANENT P A R T IA L D ISA B IL IT IE S.

A proper weighting for permanent partial disabilities in terms of
days lost is even more difficult than for death and permanent total
disabilities. An examination of the various compensation acts in
existence, however, gives a clue worth following in the quest for
some method of estimating the severity of permanent partial dis­
abilities in terms of days lost. First, it appears that all compensa­
tion acts agree in fixing the loss of an arm as the most serious injury
less than total disability. Most acts, however, seem illiberal in the
amount of compensation granted for this injury. The New York
act is one of the most liberal. It grants for loss of arm compensa­
tion for 312 weeks, which is equivalent to 1,872 working days. Inas­
much as the New York scale is based on two-thirds of wages it may
be assumed that the entire economic burden was recognized to be
one-half greater than the benefit actually allowed. The loss of an
arm would thus be equivalent to an economic loss of 468 weeks, or
2,808 days. This in turn is equivalent to about 31 per cent of the
allowance fixed above for death (9,000 days) and 27 per cent of the
time loss for permanent total disability (10,500 days). This seemed
a reasonable valuation of the arm in relation to permanent total
disability and death, and was thus adopted for the scale to be used
by the bureau.
Having thus fixed a time value for the arm, it remained to value
the other permanent partial disabilities. There is a striking simi­
larity among the various acts in the relation of compensation benefits
granted for loss of an arm to those granted for the lesser disabilities.




SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

58

The degree of this uniformity is indicated by the following table in
which the loss of an arm is rated at 100:
1 6 . —C O M P A R A T IV E T IM E A L L O W A N C E S F O R S P E C IF IE D D IS A B I L I T I E S U N D E R
T H E L A W S O F V A R IO U S S T A T E S : O T H E R D IS A B I L I T I E S C O M P A R E D W I T H LO SS O F
ARM.

T a b le

Weelcs fo r which compensation is payable.
Loss of—
State.
Arm .

Connecticut1. . .
Illinois 2..............
Indiana1............
Iow a1..................
K en tu ck y1____
Maine 3................
Maryland *........
Massachusetts2
Michigan............
Minnesota1____
M ontana1..........
N evad a2............
N ew Jersey 2. . .
N ew Y o r k 1___
O hio2..................
O klahom a1____
Oregon <.............
Pennsylvania1.
V erm on t1..........
W isconsin1____

208
200
200
200
200
150
200
50
200
200
200
217
200
312
200
250
416
215
170
240

Hand.

156
150
150
150
150
125
150
50
150
150
150
173
150
244
150
200
329
175
140
160

Leg.

182
175
175
175
200
150
175
50
175
175
180
195
175
288
175
175
381
215
170
160

Foot.

E ye.

130
125
125
125
125
125
150
50
125
125
125
152
125
205
125
150
277
150
120
120

104
100
100
100
100
100
100
50
100
100
100
108
100
128
100
100
173
125
100
120

Relative time allowance.
Connecticut----Illinois.................
Indiana...............
Iow a.....................
K entucky..........
Maine...................
Maryland...........
Massachusetts..
Michigan............
Minnesota..........
M ontana.............
N evada...............
N ew Jersey____
N ew Y o r k ..........
O hio.....................
Oklahoma..........
Oregon................
Pennsylvania. .
Verm ont.............
Wisconsin..........

10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
0

75
75
75
75
75
83
75
100
75
75
75
80
75
78
75
80
79
81
82
67

88
88
88
88
100
100
88
100
88
88
90
90
88
92
88
70
92
100
100
67

63
63
63
63
63
83
75
100
63
63
63
70
63
66
63
60 ■
67
70
71
50

50
50
50
50
50
67
50
100
50
50
50
50
50
41
50
40
42
58
59
50

Sec­
One
First ond Third Fourth Great
Thum b. joint of
finger. finger. finger. finger. toe.
thumb.

38
60
60
40
60
50
50
12
60
60
30
65
60
60
60
60
104

19
30
15
20
30
25
25
12
30
30
20
32*
30
30
30
30
52

38
35
30
30
45
30
30
12
35
35
20
39
35
46
35
35
69

30
30
30
25
30
25
25
12
30
30
15
30
30
30
30
30
39

25
20
30
20
20
18
20
12
20
20
12
22
20
25
20
20
35

20
15
30
15
15
15
15
12
15
15
9
17
15
15
15
15
26

38
30
30
25
39
25
25
12
30
39
15
30
30
38
30
30
43

40
40

20
20

25
20

20
15

15
8

10
10

20
20

(Loss o f arm =100.)
18
30
30
20
30
33
25
24
30
30
15
30
30
19
30
24
25

9
15
8
10
15
17
13
24
15
15
10
15
15
10
15
12
13

18
18
15
15
23
20
15
24
18
18
10
18
18
15
18
14
17

14
15
15
13
15
17
13
24
15
15
8
14
15
10
15
12
9

12
10
15
10
10
12
10
24
10
10
6
10
10
8
10
8
8

10
8
15
8
8
10
8
24
8
8
5
8
8
5
8
6
6

18
15
15
13
15
17
13
24
15
15
$
14
15
12
15
12
10

24
17

12
8

15
8

12
6

9
3

6
4

12
8

1 Payments under this schedule are exclusive or in lieu of all other payments.
2 Payments under this schedule are in addition to payments on account of temporary total disability.
3 Payments cover total disability. Partial disability may be compensated at end of periods given for
not over 300 weeks in all.
4 The periods named in this line are to be reduced by any time for which payments on account of
temporary total disability have been made.

Because of the substantial uniformity between the States the scale
of awards of almost any State would have given approximately the
same relative importance to minor dismemberments compared to loss
of arm. The New York scale was adopted as being one of the latest
developed, and also because its system of classification of injuries
was one readily adaptable to the form in which a large part of the
data secured by the bureau was given.




ACCIDENT RATES.

59

As a result of the above procedure permanently disabling injuries,
as well as death itself, were assigned values, expressed in terms of
a common denominator—namely, workdays lost. These values, to
repeat, are necessarily arbitrary, but the fact that they are not,
and can not be, absolutely accurate, in no way diminishes their use­
fulness for the purpose in view.
The following table brings together the time losses for death and
the more common forms of permanent disabilities as finally adopted
for the bureau’s scale. Columns of percentages based on this scale
of time losses are also given, showing, first, the relative importance
of the lesser injuries as compared with the loss of an arm, and, second,
the relative importance of time losses from death and from the lessor
injuries as compared with the time loss from permanent total disa­
bility. Other forms or combinations of disabilities than those shown
in this list, such as minor injuries to the eye, may be assigned inter­
mediate values. This is not done here as the classification is suffi­
ciently fine to cover practically all of the data used in the present
report. If it seems desirable, further elaboration of the table can
easily be made without disturbing the basic scale.
T able 1 7 .— T IM E L O SS E S F I X E D F O R D E A T H A N D P E R M A N E N T D IS A B IL IT IE S .!

Time
losses in
days.

D eath.....................................................
Permanent total disability............
Loss of members:
Arm................................................
H a n d . ! . . . : ...................................
Leg..................................................
Foot................................................
E y e .................................................
Thum b..........................................
One joint of th u m b ..................
First finger...................................
Second finger..............................
Third finger.................................
Fourth finger...............................
Great toe.......................................
One joint of great toe...............

Per cent
of loss of
arm.

9,000
10,500
2,808
2,196
2,592
1,845
1,152
540
270
414
270
225
135
342
171

Per cent of
permanent
total dis­
ability.

85.7
100.0
100.0
78.2
92.3
65.7
41.0
19.2
9.6
14.7
9.6
8.0
4.8
12.2
6.1

26.7
20.9
24.7
17.6
11.0
5.1
2.6
3.9
2.6
2.1
1.3
3.3
1.6

1 For comparison of this scale with that proposed b y the International Association of Industrial
Accident Boards and Commissions see Appendix K .

This schedule supplies a series of constants by which death and
permanent 'injuries may be weighted in terms of a common unit—
time lost in days—which is also the same unit as that used for measur­
ing temporary disabilities. Multiplying the number of deaths and
permanent disabilities by the time loss determined for each and
adding the products to the days lost through temporary disabilities,
a figure is obtained which represents the total days lost from injuries.
Dividing this number, representing total days lost, by the number of
full-time workers gives as a quotient the average number of days
lost per full-time worker. This last figure may be called the acci­




60

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

dent severity rate, since it shows the burdensomeness or seriousness
of the accidents analyzed.
The whole process of working out the accident severity rate may
be illustrated as follows: Plant A operated 4,200,000 man-hours in
1915, requiring 1,400 full-time (300-day, 10-hour-per-day) workers.
During the year, 324 accidents occurred, resulting in 1 death and
the loss of the following members: 2 arms, 1 foot, 5 thumbs, 25 first
fingers, while the 290 temporary disabilities showed a time loss of
2,790 days. Applying the time losses in the above table to these
data, the following results are obtained:
T a b le

1 8 .— T IM E L O S S E S IN O N E P L A N T .

Time loss (in days).

Per case.

1 death.............................................................
2 arm s..............................................................
1 foot................................................................
5 thumbs........................................................
25 first fingers...............................................
290 temporary disabilities.......................

9,000
2,808
1,845
540
414

Total.

9,000
5,616
1,845
2,700
10,350
2,790
32,301

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

The total number of days lost, 32,301, divided by the number
of full-time workers, 1,400, gives an average of 23 days per full­
time worker. This is what is here called the accident severity
rate, expressed in terms of days. The accident frequency rate
for the same group per 1,000 full-time 300-day workers would be
3 2 4 - ^ = 231.
ILLUSTRATIONS OF T H E USE OF SEVER IT Y RATES.

The preceding paragraphs have explained the meaning of accident
severity rates and the method by which they are obtained. The
significance of such rates in their practical application is indicated
in the two following illustrations:
In the table below comparison is made of the accident experience
for a year of the iron and steel industry, as represented by a large
plant, and of the machine-building industry, as represented by a
group of plants. Frequency rates and severity rates are shown in
parallel columns.
T a b le

1 9 .— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN S T E E L M A N U F A C T U R E A N D IN M A C H IN E B U I L D I N G .

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Industry.

Iron and steel (1913).............
Machine building (1 9 1 2 )...




Number
of 300day
workers.

Death.

7,562
115,703

1.9
.3

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Perma­ Tem­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Death.

108.0
114.1

114.5
118.0

16.6
2.9

4.6
3.6

Perma­ Tem­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

2.2
1.6

2.4
1.1

Total.

21.2
5.6

ACCIDENT RATES.

61

Examination of the columns giving total frequency rates and total
severity rates shows that, on the basis of frequency, the machinebuilding plants were more hazardous than the steel plant— the re­
spective rates being 118 as against 114.5 per 1,000 full-time work­
ers. On the basis of severity, however, the steel plant was almost
four times as hazardous as machine building—the days lost per full­
time worker being 21.2 and 5.6, respectively. It is clear that as be­
tween these diametrically opposite showings of the relative hazards
of the two industries, the severity rates offer a decidedly more accu­
rate measure of true hazard. In machine building there is oppor­
tunity for many minor injuries, but the danger of serious injury is
much less than in the steel industry. The severity rate brings out
this fact.
The second illustration shows how, over a period of years, within
the same establishment, accident severity rates may run counter to
accident frequency rates. The next table gives data of this char­
acter. It shows the accident experience of a large steel plant over a
period of four years. The plant is one in which most serious atten­
tion has been devoted to the prevention of accidents. Chart 1
presents the same material, in graphic form.
T a b le

Year.

1910.............
1911.............
1912.............
1913.............

2 0 .— A C C ID E N T E X P E R I E N C E O F A L A R G E S T E E L P L A N T , 1910 T O 1913.

Number
of
300-day
workers.

7,642
5,774
7,396
7,562

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).

Death.

1.7
1.6
.7
1.9

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tempo­
rary dis­
ability.

4.3
3.6
6.5
4.6

127.5
106.6
146.3
108.0

Total.

133.5
111.8
153.5
114.5

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Death.

15.3
14.1
6.0
16.7

Perma­
nent dis­
ability.

Tempo­
rary dis­
ability.

2.4
2.1
5.5
2.2

2.2
2.4
2.8
2.4

Total.

19.9
18.6
14.3
21.3

Limiting attention to the columns showing total rates, it will be
noted that in 1910 the frequency rate was 133.5 per 1,000 300-day
workers and the severity rate was 19.9 days lost per 300-day worker.
The next year, 1911, shows a decrease in both frequency and severity.
In 1912, however, there was a marked increase in frequency—from
111.8 to 153.5—but the severity rate dropped from 18.6 to 14.3. In
other words, accidents had considerably increased in frequency, but
they were less serious in their total results. In 1913 this experience
was reversed. A marked reduction occurred in accident frequency—
from 153.5 to 114.5—while the severity rate jumped from 14.3 to 21.3.
In other words, the year 1913, instead of being a “ good” year, as it
might be assumed to be under the system of frequency rates, was the
worst of the four years covered by the table.
These illustrations bring up certain points which it seems desirable
to emphasize. The first concerns the use of terms. Severity rates




C h art

1.—FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF ACCIDENTS IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of days lost per 300-day worker.

N ME O D
U B R F AYS LO
ST
P R 3 0 D Y WR E
E 0 = A OKR

A ID T FREQU CY RATES
CC EN
EN
PR1 0 3 Q A WRES
E 0 0 0 -0 Y OKR
-1 0
0-

-1 0
5-

-2 0
0-

-2 0
S -.

_L __20__34_40
0

aoo

30 60

70

m /A m m

10
5

20.0

4,5 5
7

17
4

23.7

6.215

U4

19.9

7.642

112

18.0

5.774

153

14.3

9.99$

M
S

21.3

7 6
*5 2

IN D U ST R Y.

7.585

STEEL

38.1

AND

7.494

IRON

54.3

I
N

60
.4 6

19
8

m
"T --- 50— to—50--- SI--- M " T f
O

34.3

214

m

90
0

MOVEMENT

JS
0_

EEI Y UBR
FE S VRT' NME
R
tUNY RT S 3 0 DY
t CC
AE 0 = A
WRES
OKR
r ates

SAFETY




c*

ACCIDENT RATES.

63

derived in the manner explained are expressed for convenience in
terms of workdays lost. For instance, the steel plant referred to
above is represented as having a severity rate, in 1913, of 21.3 days
lost per 300-day worker. The term “ days lost” as thus used is to
some extent a statistical abstraction, but it is close enough to con­
crete fact to permit of its use in its ordinary sense without any con­
siderable degree of error, provided that the weighting scale em­
ployed is a reasonable one. In any case, however, the real signifi­
cance of severity rates is in their use, not as positive amounts, but as
relative amounts, as indicating the relation between groups. Thus,
to recur to the example of the steel plant mentioned, the important
fact is that the severity rate for 1913 shows an increase over that for
1912 in the relation of 21.3 to 14.3.
This leads to a second point which can not be too much emphasized:
The fact that inasmuch as the real significance of severity rates is in
the measurement of relative hazards, the character of the weighting
scale used becomes comparatively unimportant. Thus, by changing
the weights in the scale offered above, the resulting severity rates may
be considerably altered in their positive amounts, but unless the
changes are of a very radical character the relations between the rates
for different groups will remain substantially the same. In other
words, it is desirable to have the scale used as accurate as possible,
but the fact that a completely accurate scale can not be devised does
not impair the value of accident severity rating.
Another fact deserving emphasis is that severity rates have a very
important advantage over frequency rates, in that the effect of errors
in reporting is minimized. Accident reports are probably never
absolutely complete, and, as a rule, the completeness of reporting is in
direct proportion to the seriousness of injury. The more serious the
injury the greater the likelihood of its being reported. Frequently
the reporting of minor injuries is extremely incomplete. Inasmuch
as the accuracy of frequency rates depends upon the completeness of
accident reports, and as all accidents have the same weight, a failure
to report any considerable number of minor accidents renders the
rates obtained of very little value. Such is not the case with severity
rates. Here the disabilities are weighted according to their impor­
tance, and a large group of minor disabilities has comparatively little
effect upon the derived severity rate. Thus, from the material avail­
able concerning the iron and steel industry, it is estimated that the
total exclusion of all disabilities of less than two weeks will rarely
diminish the total severity rate for that industry as much as 1 per
cent, whereas such an exclusion would diminish frequency rates as
much as 60 per cent. In the machine-building industry, according to
data collected by the bureau for that industry, the corresponding
percentages are 7 and 70.




64

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
GROWING RECOGNITION OF T H E IM PORTANCE OF S E V E R IT Y R ATIN G .

It is safe to say that all who have been concerned with accident
studies and accident-prevention work have felt the need of some sys­
tem of severity rating, such as that developed in the present chapter.
The International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and
Commissions has recognized the importance of the subject and through
its committee on statistics has the matter now under consideration.
The committee has unanimously approved the principle of severity
rating. The discussion now concerns simply the scheme of rating to
be adopted. The one worked out and applied in the present report
is believed to meet the necessary tests of a simple, workable system.
It has already been approved and adopted by a number of important
establishments.
USE OF RATES IN THE STUDY OF ACCIDENT CAUSES.

Frequency and severity rates, as above described, may be applied
to the measurement of accident causes. This procedure is logical
and, as carried out in detail in a later chapter, produces interesting
and very valuable results. Inasmuch, however, as the computation
of accident rates.according to causes is somewhat novel, a brief pre­
liminary description of the method used is desirable.
For any plant, department, occupation, or other industrial group
for which the amount of employment and the number of accidents are
known, an accident rate may be computed. This total rate may then
be apportioned among the various causes responsible for the acci­
dents. For example, in a group of blast furnaces, with a total fre­
quency rate of 200 cases per 1,000 full-time workers, it was found
on analysis that 58 of each 200 cases were due to molten metal, 27
to handling tools and objects, leaving 115 as due to miscellaneous
causes. The frequency rate of molten metal as a cause of accident
in these blast furnaces was, therefore, 58 per 1,000 workers; of han­
dling tools, 27 per 1,000 workers, etc.
The value of such rates to the safety man is clearly evident. They
indicate, in the example given, that molten metal was the most im­
portant single cause of accident in blast furnaces, and the one to
which especial attention must be directed.
In the case just cited, the department was taken as the unit, the
rates being based on the total employment for the department. If a
smaller unit, such as the occupation, be used as a basis, the rates
would be based on the amount of employment in the individual occu­
pation. In the case of the above group of blast furnaces it was possi­
ble to isolate certain important occupations, to draw accident rates
for each, and to apportion such rates among the different causes.
Thus it was found that while the frequency rate for the blast-furnace




ACCIDENT RATES.

65

department as a whole was 200 per 1,000 workers, the frequency
rate for the “ cast-house men” was 380 per 1,000 workers employed
in that occupation. Analysis of causes of accidents showed this total
of 380 to be made up of a rate of 201 cases from molten metal, 43 from
falling objects, and 136 from “ miscellaneous causes.”
These occupational cause rates are even more valuable to the safety
man than are the preceding departmental cause rates, as they indi­
cate still more precisely the points of greatest hazard. Unfortunately
it is not often possible to use the occupation as a unit as plants rarely
keep records of employment in such detail, and even if this is done
the number of employees in the occupation is often so small as to be
inconclusive.

These cause rates, whether based on the department, the occupa­
tion, or any other group, are true accident rates, analogous to the
death rates by disease as used in mortality studies. In such studies
it is customary to divide the general death rate for a community into
specific rates for the various diseases causing death. Thus a general
death rate of 20 per 1,000 for a given city may be made up of the
following specific rates—tuberculosis 5, typhoid fever 2, other causes
13. These rates, it may be noted, measure the real prevalence of
the several diseases in a way that percentages can not do. Thus, in
the year noted, deaths from tuberculosis constituted 25 per cent of
all deaths (5 out of 20). Suppose that in the following year a typhoid
epidemic increased the typhoid rate from 2 to 7 and thus caused the
general rate to jump from 20 to 25, the tuberculosis death rate of
5 per 1,000 would remain as before, but expressed in percentages
tuberculosis would have decreased from 25 per cent (5 out of 20) to
20 per cent (5 out of 25) as a cause of death. The percentage change
would suggest a great decrease in the tuberculosis hazard, which,
however, as the rate accurately indicates (5 per 1,000), remained
absolutely stationary* The attempt to study causes of death by
means of percentage figures is thus liable to be entirely misleading.
Rates, on the other hand, offer an absolutely reliable measure. This
is equally true, and for the same reasons, in the study of accident
causes.
The above illustrations of the use of cause rates were limited, for
the sake of simplicity, to frequency rates. Severity rates can, of
course, be applied in precisely the same way and with even more
valuable results, inasmuch as severity rates, as pointed out above,
are a truer measure of accident hazard than are frequency rates.
USE OF RATES

IN THE

STUDY OF NATURE OF INJURY, LABOR RECRUIT­
ING, AND OTHER FACTORS.

Frequency and severity rates may also be applied to the study of
the nature of injury in precisely the same way as they may be applied,
12771°— 18— Bull. 234------ 5




66

SAFETY M O VEM EN T IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

as described above, to the analysis of accident causes. Thus, in a
group of blast furnaces, with a total frequency rate of 191 cases per
1,000 full-time workers, it was found on analysis that 89 out of each
191 cases resulted in bruises and lacerations, 45 cases in burns, 10
cases in fractures, and 47 cases in various other injuries. This
being so, it is quite correct to say that bruises and lacerations in
these blast furnaces had a frequency rate of 89 cases per 1,000
workers, burns a frequency rate of 17 cases, and so on. These are
true rates, with the same superiority to percentages as a measure of
the frequency and severity of injuries of various kinds as was noted
to be true in the case of accident causes.
Moreover, outside the accident field proper, there are many col­
lateral subjects to which the rate method may be very profitably
applied. An important instance of this is the employment of new
men. By relating the number of 300-day workers to the number of
new men hired during a given time, a rate is obtained which may be
referred to as the “ labor recruiting fate.” As is later shown (p. 133),
there is an interesting and important connection between this “ labor
recruiting” rate and the accident rate. Usually, the taking on and
use of new men has a marked tendency to increase the accident occur­
rence of a plant.
In similar manner, rates based on the amount of employment
may be derived for production, labor costs, sickness, and many other
subjects.




CHAPTER II.
THE PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.

It can not be too often repeated that the true object of accident
statistics is to offer practical information for use in the active work
of accident prevention. From this standpoint the exact degree in
which accidents occur is a matter of somewhat subordinate impor­
tance. The important thing is to learn precisely how and why they
occur. This involves primarily the study of accident causes. It is
with these that the safety man is chiefly concerned. The knowledge
that his industry or plant has a high accident rate may be an incentive
to harder work on his part, but has little other practical value,. He
must trace back the high rate to its causes before he can be in a posi­
tion to apply effective remedial measures.
The word ucauses” as here employed refers solely to what may
be called physical causes—that is to say, those incident to machinery,
structure, and mechanical appliances. The workman himself is
sometimes regarded as a cause of accident, but, as usually applied,
this term is an improper one. This subject is discussed in Chapter VII.
In all of this discussion of causes it must be constantly borne in
mind that all comparisons are on the rate basis. The method used
in computing frequency and severity rates was explained in the pre­
ceding chapter, as also was the application of such method to the der­
ivation of cause rates. It is sufficient in this place to repeat that
cause rates so derived are true rates, analogous to disease rates in
mortality studies. Thus, in the next table, hot metal, as a cause of
accident in the steel industry, is spoken of as having a frequency rate
of 20.9 cases per 1,000 workers. This means that for each 1,000
workers employed in the industry there were 20.9 cases of accident
due to hot metal.
The classification of causes used in this report, as in previous
reports of the bureau, had necessarily to be worked out prior to the
recent adoption of a standard classification by the International
Association of Accident Boards and Commissions. The two classifi­
cation schedules, however, are not greatly dissimilar as regards the
major groupings, although the terms used are not always the same.1
PRINCIPAL ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The following two tables show, in condensed form, the relative
importance of the principal causes of accidents in the iron and steel
industry as a whole. Eleven major causes, or rather groups of
1 For the association schedule see Bulletin N o. 201 of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, p. 73.




67

68

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

causes, are listed in Table 21, and where the available material per­
mitted these are further subdivided in Table 22. The data upon which
the tables are based are combined from a large number of plants,
representing a total of 191,846 300-day workers. The accompanying
chart projects most of the information of the tables in graphic form.
T able 2 1 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S F O R T H E P R IN C IP A L G R O U P S O F A C C ID E N T C A U S E S IN
T H E I R O N A N D S T E E L I N D U S T R Y , 1905 T O 1914 C O M B IN E D .
[Based upon an exposure of 191,846 300-day workers.]
Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Cause.
Death.

Perma­ Tem po­
rary
nent
Total.
dis­
dis­
ability. ability.

Boilers and steampipes.............................
Engines and motors...................................
Power transmission...................................
W orking machines.....................................
Cranes and hoists........................................
H ot substances............................................
Falling objects.............................................
Falls of worker.............................................
Handling tools and* objects....................
Power vehicles.............................................
Miscellaneous...............................................
Unclassified and not reported...............

0.01
.01
.08
.29
.30
.17
.16
.02
.21
.15
.02

0.04
.07
.03
.82
.72
.14
.46
.05
.61
.44
.30
.16

0.50
.67
.07
14.43
15.53
20.49
35.67
12.33
34.93
5.92
28.78
5.77

0.54
.75
.10
15.33
16.54
20.93
36.30
12.54
35. 56
6.58
29.23
5.95

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

1.42

3.84

175.16

180.42

Aecident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Death.

Perma­ T em po­
rary
nent
Total.
dis­
dis­
ability. ability.

C
1)
(i)
(i)
0.75
2.63
2.72
1.50
1.45
.19
1.92
1.36
0)
12.86

C
1)
0)
0)
0.44
.35
.19
.19
.05
.32
.39
.29
0)
2.31

0.02
.17
.10
1.40
3.30
3.27
2.23
1. 71
.92
2.44
2.03
.17

C
1)
I1)
C
1)
0.21
.32
.36
.54
.21
.41
.13
.38
C
1)
2.59

17.76

1 N ot computed because the number of cases is too small.
Ch ar t 2.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S F O R P R IN C IP A L A C C ID E N T
ST E E L IN D U S T R Y .

C A U S E S IN T H E I R O N A N D

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means nunaber of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

CAUSES

SEVERITY

FALLING
OBJECTS

R
>
2 .2 3
92

HNL 6
A D IN
M CLA EU
IS E L N O S

Z Z
.O

HOT
SUBSTANCES

3.27

C R AN ES

3.30

A D H IS S
N OT

working

M C IN S
AH E
FLS O
AL F

\.A0

1.71

WORKER

P WR
O E
VH LS
E IC E

2 AA

E G E , EC
N IN S T .

.1
7

B IL R E C
O E S, T .

.02

TR N ISSIO
A SM
N

.10

NOT R EP O R T ED




to

ts

20

2.5

3a

.17
.3 5

69

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.

T a b l e 2 2 .— A C C ID E N T R A T E S F O R T H E S U B D IV IS IO N S O F T H E G R O U P S O F A C C ID E N T
C A U SE S S H O W N IN T A B L E 6.

Cause.

Boilers and steam pipes...................
Fngfnfis and m otors..........................
Power transmission,,. r _
Working machines:
Adjusting.......................................
Operating.......................................
Oiling and cleaning___________
Repairing.......................................
Breakage.........................................
Objects flying from m achine..
Unclassified...................................

Acci­
Acci­
dent
dent
fre­
severity
quency
rates
rates
(days
(per
lost per
1,000
300-day
300-day
work­
work­
er).
ers).

0.54
.75
.10

0.02
.17
.10

.87
7.51
.33
.43
.15
4. 42
1.62

.13
.42
.11
.29
.27
.18

Cause.

Falls of worker:
From ladders................................
From scaffolds............................ .
From vehicles..............................
From structures..........................
From other elevations..............
Into excavations........................ .
Into unguarded openings____
Unclassified (largely insecure
footing)...................................... .
Total............................................

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

15.33
2. 88
.09
.06
.11
.48
2.34
1.89
8. 69

.09
.06
.10
.06
.25
1.04
.28
1. 42

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

16. 54

10
,0 0

08
.6
.54
.69
1. 29

.6
8

.17
1.05

01
.1
.20
.0
1
.65
.22
(1
).16

7.44

.44

12.54

1.71

1.40

Cranes and hoists:
Adjusting loads............................
Operating.......................................
Oiling and cleaning.....................
Repairing.......................................
Breakage.........................................
Falling loads.................................
Hoisting and lowering...............
Unclassified...................................

Acci­
Acci­
dent
dent
fre­
severity
quency
rates
rates
(per
lost per
300-day 300-day
work­
work­
er).
ers).

3. 30

Handling tools and objects:
Tools in hands of worker____
Tools in hands of fellow
worker....................................... .
Sharp objects.............................. .
Loading and unloading............
Lifting........................................... .
Objects flying from tools........ .
Unclassified..................................

95
.a
1.25
8.06
3.06
2. 92
3. 79
7.13

.20
.02

.09
.1 5
.03
.28
.15

Total...........................................
H ot substances:
Corrosives.......................................
Electricity......................................
Explosives.....................................
Flames.............................................
H ot m etal.......................................
H ot metal flying..........................
Unclassified...................................

.18
1.78
.35
1. 79
5. 30
7. 85
3.68

.01
.67
.33
.26
.61
1.11
.28

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

20.93

3.27

Falling objects:
Collapse of scaffolds....................
Stored or piled material............
From trucks, etc..........................
From buildings..........................
Unclassified...................................

.60
2.16
1.67
. 70
31.17

.16
.28
. 19
.06
1.54

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

36.30

35. 56

.92

Power vehicles...................................
Miscellaneous:
Running into objects...............
Poisons..........................................
Flym g objects n. o. s ...............
Doors, windows, etc................
Asphyxiating gas.......................
H e a t...............................................
Cold................................................
Projecting nails..........................
Violence........................................
Moving objects n. o. s..............
Unclassified and not reported

6.58

2.44

10. 45
.27
.81
.74

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

29. 23

2.23

Grand total..............................

4.88

.0
1
.0
1

1. 28
.04
10. 74
5. 95

.06

0).29
.0
1
.81
.20
&1
.0.
.65
.17
2.03
17.76

1 Less than 0.005.

Examination of the rates for the several causes, as listed in Table
22, develops some interesting points of comparison.
In the first place, it is apparent that the production and distribu­
tion of power—represented by the first three items—is of relatively
small importance as a cause of accident, the severity rate for boilers
and steam pipes, engines and motors, and power transmission, com­
bined, being only 0.29 day lost per worker as against 17.76 days for
all causes. Since in modern plants the distribution of power is
largely electrical, a portion of the severity rate of 0.67 day per
worker charged, later in the table, to “ electricity” might properly
be assigned to power distribution. But even with this addition, the
total severity rate for power production and distribution is relatively
very small.




70

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Coming next to “ working machines/’ it will be noted that the
greatest frequency (7.51 cases per 1,000 workers) and the highest
severity (0.42 day per worker) occur in the operation of such
machines. This is mainly due to accidents resulting from the worker’s
being caught by gears or belts or by the moving work. This type of
accident has tended to decrease rapidly in recent years. Injuries
due to “ objects flying from machines” (frequency rate, 4.42 cases
per 1,000 workers; severity rate, 0.27 day per worker) are largely
injuries to the eyes. These are preventable by the use of proper
protective goggles. It may also be pointed out that “ repairing of
machines” is shown to have a rather high severity rate (0.29 day per
worker).
In “ cranes and hoists” the most serious single element is seen to
be the falling load. Since breakage of any part of the crane itself
is shown as a separate item, the group listed as “ falling loads”
includes those cases, first, where chains or cables break, and, second,
the less frequent cases where the load slips from the loop and falls.
The latter type of accident comes about from imperfect adjustment
of the loop or from the fault of the crane operator in improper lifting
or sudden movement, and it can only be prevented by the selection
and instruction of the men. As regards defective chains and cables,
which are responsible for the majority of “ falling loads,” the main
reliance so far has been upon the careful inspection and annealing of
chains. The most recent studies 1 of the matter seem to indicate
that no amount of effort in this regard will prevent serious accidents
unless the greatest care is used in determining and applying rules
regarding safe loads. The high rates for “ falling loads” in the iron
and steel industry add emphasis to those studies. The only other
item under “ cranes and hoists” needing special comment is the
severity rate of 0.25 day per worker for “ breakage.” The size of
this rate suggests the need which existed for such revision in the
specifications for crane construction as has been made in recent
years. Many older types of cranes were seriously lacking in strength
and were often subjected to usage far beyond the stress for which
they were designed.
Next to “ cranes and hoists,” with a total severity rate of 3.30
days per worker, comes “ hot substances,” with a total rate of 3.27
days, as the most serious group of causes. Of this total rate of 3.27
days, “ hot metal” and “ hot metal flying” together contribute 1.72
days. These items, indeed, stand out preeminently as the dis­
tinctive hazards of the industry. The considerable frequency (1.78
cases per 1,000 workers) and the rather high severity (0.67 day per
worker) of accidents due to electricity are also to be noted.
1 See Proceedings of National Safety Council, Fourth Congress, 1915,
1916, p. 501.




p.

613, et seq., and of Fifth Congress,

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.

71

“ Falling objects” shows the highest frequency rate (36.3 per
1,000 workers) of any of the groups, and also ranks high in severity
(2.23 days lost per worker). The high rates of this group are due,
not so much to unusual or serious hazards of any kind as to the multi­
plicity of simple accidents such as the letting fall of objects which
are being handled or carried. These can be reached through better
working methods and thorough instruction of the men. The fall
of stored or piled material contributes an important share of the
total severity rate (0.28 day per worker) and this hazard has been,
and will be still further reduced with the development of standard
specifications for piling material and removing it from the piles.
“ Falls of worker” illustrates forcibly two points: First, the danger
of insecure scaffolds. Falls from these are largely due to some defect
in construction of the scaffords or failure properly to safeguard
them with railings. Second, the hazard of insecure footing on floors,
stairs, and other places. It was not possible to isolate the cases of
the second class, but it is known that a considerable majority of the
cases entered as “ unclassified” were due to the factor of insecure
footing.
The high severity rate of “ falls from structures” (0.65 day per
worker) was very largely due to an extraordinarily large number of
such accidents in blast furnaces. A moment’s consideration of blast
furnace structure, as shown in plate 1, will explain the danger con­
fronting mechanics who are obliged to climb about and work upon
such furnaces. The rate reflects to a considerable degree the earlier
conditions when the safeguards seen in the plate were not installed.
“ Handling tools and objects” stands next in its frequency rate
(35.6 cases per 1,000 workers) to falling objects (36.3 cases) but its
severity rate (0.92 day per worker) is much the lowest of the major
groups, and when it is observed that of the total severity rate of
0.92 day, 0.20 day is due to the worker’s use of his tools and 0.28
day to objects flying from tools it is evident that there are practically
only two important remedies possible, namely, greater care and
skill on the part of the worker and the use of protective goggles,
as a very large part of the severity of accidents due to objects flying
from tools arises from injuries to the eye.
Power vehicles on tracks show the highest severity rate (2.44
days per worker) in proportion to the frequency (6.58 cases per 1,000
workers) of any of the larger cause groups. Comment upon this
fact will be made in a later section.
The miscellaneous group requires no comment except that the
high severity rate of asphyxiating gas (0.81 day per worker) arises
almost wholly from its presence in blast furnaces and that heat
(producing cramps and exhaustion) is an important factor almost
exclusively in open hearths, plate, and sheet mills.




72

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

IMPORTANCE OF PRINCIPAL ACCIDENT CAUSES IN DIFFERENT DEPART­
MENTS.

The preceding tables and discussion brought out, in a broad way,
the relative importance of the various accident causes for the iron
and steel industry as a whole. Each of the 11 cause groups there
listed will now be discussed with reference to its importance in the
different departments of the industry—blast furnaces, Bessemer, etc.
BOILERS AND STEAM PIPES, ENGINES AND MOTORS, AND POWER TRANSMISSION.

Table 23 shows, by departments, the frequency and severity of
accidents due to the first three cause groups listed in the preceding
table— namely, boilers and steam pipes, engines and motors, and
power transmission.
It is to be borne in mind that in this, as in all the following “ cause”
tables, the rates shown are based on the employment in the parti­
cular department concerned. Thus, the frequency rate of 1.8 cases
for boilers and steam pipes in blast furnaces means that of each 1,000
300-day workers in the blast furnaces there were 1.8 cases of injury
due to boilers and steam pipes.
2 3 .—B O IL E R S A N D S TE A M P IP E S , E N G IN E S A N D M O TO R S, A N D P O W E R T R A N S ­
MISSION AS CAUSES O F A C C ID E N TS: F R E Q U E N C Y A N D S E V E R IT Y R A T E S , B Y D E ,
P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

T a b le

Cause.

Blast Open
H eavy
Me­
Besse­ Foun­ Tube rolling Plate Sheet Fabri­ chan­
fur­
Yards.
naces. hearths. m er. dries. m ills. m ills. m ills. mills. cating. ical.
ACCIDENT FREQ UENCY RATES (PER 1 ,00 0 300 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

Boilers and steam
p ip es..........................
Engines and m otors...
Power transmission

1.8
2.2

0.3
.2

1.1
.8

0.1

0.3
.1

0.2
1.0
.3

0.5
.6
.3

0.2
.9
.2

0 .!
.3
.1

1.8
1.6
.2

0.2
.1

ACCIDENT SEV ERITY RATES (D A YS LOST PER 3 00-D A Y W O R K E R ).

Boilers and steam
pipes..........................
Engines and m otors...
Power transmission

.09
.34

Number of 800-day
workers.....................
18,849

.04
.02

.03
C
1)

24,453

6,661

.01

.07
.01

.03
.01
.33

.01
.04
.01

.01
.94
0)

0)
.20
.01

.04
.31
.51

7,938 14,539 87,364 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,332

0)
0)

18,481

1 Less than 0.005.

Inasmuch as the three causes dealt with in the above table are of
relatively small importance in the iron and steel industry, no dis­
cussion of the rates as shown seems to be necessary.
WORKING MACHINES.

The following table shows the frequency and severity of accidents
due to the various “ working-machine” hazards. It seems desirable
again to repeat that the rates shown are, in each case, based on the
employment in the particular department. Thus a total frequency
rate of 3.3 for working machines in blast furnaces means that for
each 1,000 300-day workers in the blast furnaces there were 3.3 cases




73

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.

of injury due to working machines.
table in graphic form.
T a b le

Chart 3 projects the data of this

2 4 . — W O R K IN G M A C H IN E S A S

A CAUSE O F A C C ID E N T S: F R E Q U E N C Y
S E V E R I T Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

Working machines.

Blast
Open
fur­
hearths.
naces.

Besse­ Foun­ Tube
mer.
dries. mills.

H eavy
Plate
rolling
mills.
mills.

accident fr e q u en cy rates

Adjusting work or
machine.......................
Operating.......................
Oiling and cleaning.. .
Repairing.......................
Breakage.........................
Objects flying from
machine.......................
N ot classified.................
Total.....................

0.3
1.3
.7
.3

0.1
1.4
.1
0)

Fabri­ Me­
cat­
chan­ Yards.
ical.
ing.

(per 1,000 300-d a y w o r k e r s ).

2.4

1.1
4.1
.4
1.0
.3

1.3
6.3
.3
.9
.1

1.0
12.1
.7
.9
.2

1.7
23.9
1.0
.1
.5

2.5
13.6
.3
.4

0.1
.9

.1

0.9
.5
. .2
.2

0.3
16.0
.3

.1

.1

.2
.5

.2
.4

.2
.8

2.3
.5

7.8
5.2

1.7
2.9

2.8
2.4

.8
.4

23.0
.3

10.8
1.0

.9
1.0

3.3

2.2

2.6

o.3

29.5

11.6

14.1

16.2

50.5

28.6

2.9

accident sev e r ity rates

Adjusting work or
machine....................... (2)
Operating....................... 0.18
Oiling and cleaning.. .J .69
Repairing.......................
.01
Breakage.........................
Objects flying from
machine.......................
.01
N ot classified.................
*01
Total.....................

Sheet
mills.

AND

.90

Number of 300-day
workers......................... 13,849

0.17
.23

(2)
(2)
(2)

0.10

0.01
1.38
.02

"*.03
(2)

(d a y s lost per 300-d a y w o r k e r ).
0.06
.51
.01
.76
.01

0.04
.39
.03
.75

0.54
.78
.51
.22
(2)

0.04
.56
.05
(2)
.01

.03

.02
.01
.43

0.01

24,453

6,661

1 Less than 0.05.

1.39
.26

.08
.39

.85
.16

.01
.02

.85
(2)

.17

3.06

1.83

2.22

2.08

1.50

0.16
.41
.01
.55
.15
.03 •

0.49
.02
(2)
.01
.02

1.31

.54

7,988 14,539 37,364 14,346 19,119 15, 764 19,332

18,481

2 Less than 0.005.

C h a rt 3.—W O R K IN G M A C H IN E S AS A CAUSE

OF A CC ID E N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




74

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The great variation in rates between departments is in accordance
with the machine activities of each. That fabricating shops (with
50.5 cases per 1,000 workers), tube mills (with 29.5 cases), and the
mechanical department (with 28.6 cases) lead in frequency, and that
tube mills (with 3.06 days lost per worker) lead in severity will appear
appropriate to those familiar with the industry. The high severity
rates for plate mills (2.22 days per worker) and for sheet mills (2.08
days) is perhaps less likely to fit in with preconceived ideas.
Two hazards of particular importance incident to “ working
machines” are “ the operating of the machine” and “ objects flying
from the machine.” The first of these may be met by better safe­
guards and greater skill and care. What better safeguards have done
to reduce accidents in machine operations of all kinds will become
evident when, as is later done, the course of accident rates in a
machine-using department is followed from year to year. As to the
second important hazard— objects flying from machines— the steadily
increasing use of eye protectors in places where flying chips are at all
frequent will doubtless cut the rates toward the vanishing point.
The “ repairing” of machines may be noted as having a relatively
low frequency rate, but with a high severity rate in most departments.
Thus the severity rate for “ repairing” is higher in heavy rolling mills
(0.76 day per worker) than it is for any other cause in this depart­
ment, and a similar situation exists in the case of the mechanical
department.
CRANES AND HOISTS.

The next table (with accompanying chart) shows the frequency
and severity of accidents resulting from the use of cranes and hoists.
T a b le

2 5 . —C R A N E S A N D H O ISTS A S A C AU SE OF A C C ID E N T S: F R E Q U E N C Y
S E V E R I T Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

Cranes and hoists.

Blast
Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube
fur­ hearths. mer. dries. mills.
naces.

H eavy
roll­ Plate
ing
mills.
mills.

AND

Me­
Sheet Fabri­ chani­
cat­
Yards.
mills. ing.
cal.

ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 3 00-D A Y W O R K E R S ).

10.6

1.2
.1

.1
.1
1.1
3.4
4.3
15.7

2.1
0)

.9
.6
.6
4.9

2.3
4.5
.1
.1
.6
.2
.6
2.0 ’ "2 .'0
1.4
1.0
10.8
12.6

.3
1.2
1.0
7.2

1.7
1.4
7.1

.1
.6
4.3
1.5
15.5

.i
.1
.1
1.9
3.1

8.4

21.0

17.0

35.4

11.1

13.0

26.3

6.3

Adjusting loads..........
Operating.....................
Oiling and cleaning...
R epairing.....................
Breakage......................
Falling loads................
Hoisting and lowering
N ot classified...............

0.6
.4
.3

T otal...................




1 Less than 0.05.

4.4

0.8
6.5
.2 ........
.1
.2
9.1
8.7
12.5

1.4
.1
.1
.4
.7
1.6
.7
5.6

1.8
.6
7.7

37.2

10.4

1 2 .0

1.6
.1
.1

.1

75

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.
T a b le 2 5 . —C R A N E S

A N D H O IS T S AS A CAU SE O F A C C ID E N TS: F R E Q U E N C Y A N D
S E V E R I T Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914—Concluded.

Cranes and hoists.

H eavy
Blast
Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube roll­
Plate
fur­
mer. dries. mills.
ing
mills.
naces. hearths.
mills.

Me­
Sheet Fabri­ chani­
cat­
Yards.
mills. ing.
cal.
i

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D AY S LOST PER 300-D A Y W O R K E R ).

Adjusting loads..........
Operating..................... 0.67
Oiling and cleaning... 0 )
Repairing.....................
.02
Breakage......................
Falling loads...............
.66
Hoisting and lowering
.01
N ot classified............... 1.7 2

0.12
.74
.10
.75
.77
.45
1.54

1.53
.02
3.07

T otal................... 3.08

4.47

4.68

24,453

6,661

Number of SOOHay
workers...................... 18,849

0.03

0.42

.01
0)
6.59
.50
2.12

0.04
(0
.02
.48
.49
.03
.02
1.12

0.10
.01
0)

0.06
(0
(0

0)
1.19
1.60
.20
1.43

.04
.03
.64
.22

.25

4.84

9.29

2.20

2.0 2

7,938 14,539 37,864 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,332

18,481

.03

0.03
(0

0.05
.12

0.07

.05
1.34

0)
.01
.08
.03
2.90

.02
(0
.15
1.03
1.16

.96

2.01

3.17

2.54

.31

0.14

...........

(0

1.51
.07
.33

i Less than 0.005.
C h a r t 4.— C R A N E S A N D H O ISTS AS A CAUSE OF ACC IDE N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

FREQUENCY

DEPARTMENTS
| » o

2,0

SO

RATES
*40

5*

BLAST FURNACES [ H I
OPEN

HEARTHS

H

SEVERITY

<
0

*

RATES
%

\o

%
.H
H

I

fcl.O

BESSEMER

| H H I

HO

FOUNDRIES

H H H H I H B

TUBES

W M

HEAVY ROLLING

i H

PLATES

iH H H H

SHEETS

H i

H

H

^ .0

3©
L1

w / M
MECHANICAL
yard s
W M
--------------------------------- 1
—
»«—

.%

m

m

m

M

™

|0‘H

— Jo—

ho

ire ~

tec
H

t»

?

10

This table brings out the fact that the high accident hazards of
cranes and hoists are remarkably uniform for the several depart­
ments. This is true for both frequency rates and severity rates.
The fabricating shops lead in the frequency of accidents from
cranes and hoists, with a total rate of 37.2 cases per 1,000 workers




76

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IEON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

in such shops, and also lead in severity, with a rate of 9.29 days per
worker. The constant use of the crane in every step of the fabri­
cating processes suggests that high accident rates from this cause
are to be expected. But the actual rates, as just quoted, are unduly
in excess of those for the other departments. There is no reason
why they should be so. Safety men in charge of fabricating shops
should examine this situation critically. It ought to be improved.
When the details of the table are examined, it becomes evident
that the excessively high rates of fabricating shops are due mainly
to the item “ falling loads,” which has a frequency of 9.1 cases per
1,000 workers and a severity of 6.59 days per worker. No other
department approaches either this frequency or this severity, though
“ falling loads” stands at the head of the crane hazards listed in a
majority of the departments. As has already been pointed out, the
falling of loads results more frequently from the failure of chains
than from any other single cause, and in this connection reference
may again be made to important recent discussions on the subject.1
The question of safe load for chains intrudes constantly and is far
from settled. Neither can there be said to be well founded opinion
regarding the usefulness of chain annealing, although it may confi­
dently be asserted that some annealing is a danger trap. A false
sense of security is fostered by it and the end is death.
It is probable that substitution of cables for chains wherever
practicable would tend to accident reduction. The cable gives
warning before letting go altogether. A weldless chain of English
manufacture is on the market, which shows tests of such a character
as to make it worthy of consideration.
A very considerable part of crane hazard arises from ill-considered
methods of signaling. In an operation essentially hazardous a
precise coordination between the men engaged is of the utmost
importance. One large company, on looking into this matter of
signals, found that in its plants the same signal was used for
precisely opposite purposes.2 It needs no comment to indicate the
danger arising if a man were transferred from one plant to another.
HOT SUBSTANCES.

The importance of hot substances as causes of accidents in the
several departments is shown in the next table (with accompanying
chart).
1 Proceedings of National Safety Council, 1915, p. 613, et seq., and 1916, p. 501, et seq. See safety code
for hoisting chains, A ppendix A .
2 For details regarding signaling, construction, crane practice, etc., see “ Safe practices,” V ol. I, No. 4
published b y National Safety Council.




PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.
T a b le

2 6 .—H O T

77

SU B STA N C E S A S A CAUSE O F A C C ID E N T S : F R E Q U E N C Y
S E V E R I T Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

H ot substances.

Blast
Bes­ Foun­ Tube H eavy Plate
Open
rolling
fur­
naces. hearths. semer. dries. mills. mills. mills.
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES

Corrosives..................... 0 . 1
E lectricity....................
2.5
1.4
E xplosives...................
5.9
Flumes..........................
H ot m etal..................... 3.8
H ot material fly in g ... 28.6
H ot water and steam
and other.................. 15.8

0.3
1.5

.6
4.4
10 . 1

0.2
.9

6
11.1

0.3

.8

.2
2 .1

2.2
.6
.9
12 .2

1.3

(PE R

0)

2.2

1,000 300-DAY WORKERS).

0.1

3.6
.5 - - - - - - .9
6.8
3.6
3.2
3.3

0 .1
2.2

.8

5.2

.4
3.4*

0.3

2 .1
.1
.9
1.6

0.2
.5
.3
.5
.7

4.8
19.3

3.8

2 .1

6.6

5.1

2.9

3.5

1.6

1.3

1.1

.6

2.5

2.5

43.0

51.0

30.6

19.7

11.7

16.7

8.3

6.7

11.1

6.8

C)

0.03

0.01

1.58
1.44
.09
6.36

.49
.05
1.32
3.79

(2)
1.53
1.42
4.41
3.57

1.81

.12

.11

.05

T otal................... 11.96

5.81

11.05

1.87

24,453

6,661

.01

0.68

1 Less than 0.05.
C h art

0.5
.3
.5

30.5

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST

Number of 300-day
workers......................... 13,8/f9

Sheet Fabri­ Me­
mills. cating. chan­ Yards.
ical.

19.5

Total................... 58.1

Corrosives ...................
Electricity....................
E xnlosives...................
F7
ume^..........................
H ot m etal.....................
H ot metal flying........
H ot water and steam
and other.. . .

AND

0.02

(2)
0.03

( 2)
1.17
.24
.39

.18
.06

.01
.01

PER

(2)
(2)
1.28
1.46
.24
.25 ” '.' 62 ’
1.02
.71
.02
.26

.10

2.08

(2)
(2)

0.01
.01
.06
.02

(2)

0.01
( 2)

.02
.02

.05

3.34

300-DAY WORKER).

(2)
1.43
(2)

.0 1
.02
.04

(2)
0.98
.53
(2)

.0 1

.54

.03

.04

1.53

2 .11

7,938 14,539 37,364 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,332

18,481

.30

.10

.05

2 Less than 0.005.

5.—H O T SU BSTAN CES A S A CAUSE OF A C C ID E N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




78

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Measured by the severity of the injuries inflicted, hot and cor­
rosive substances, as a cause of accidents in the iron and steel in­
dustry, stand a close second to cranes and hoists. But unlike
cranes and hoists, the hazards of which are spread through all depart­
ments, the hazards of hot substances are largely localized in a few
departments, particularly so in the blast furnace (severity rate 11.96
days per worker), Bessemer (11.05 days), and open hearths (5.81
days).
That these three departments should lead in the matter of accidents
from hot and corrosive substances is, of course, to be expected from
the nature of the work. When, at a later page, the course of the
accident rates in these departments is traced from year to year, it
will appear that very important reduction in hot metal injuries has
taken place. But, in spite of this, it remains true that further study
of this hazard should produce greater results than at almost any
other point. Also it may be expected that American surgeons will
make thorough trial of the method of treating burns which seems to
have had such remarkable success in France.
As regards the frequency of accidents from hot and corrosive sub­
stances, foundries, with a rate of 30.6 cases per 1,000 workers, are
exceeded only by blast furnaces and steel works. Therefore, it is of
much interest to note that, in severity, foundries are exceeded also
by heavy rolling mills (with 3.34 days per worker), plate mills
(2.08 days), and yards (2.11 days). The burn has usually been
regarded as the most important foundry injury. As a matter of fact,
it is characteristic but much less important than several others, for
the reason that the hot metal hazard in foundries is present for only
a limited portion of the day.
The low severity rates in sheet mills (0.10 day) and fabricating
shops (0.05 day) are noteworthy.
The prominence of electricity as a cause of accident in the me­
chanical department (frequency rate, 2.1 cases per 1,000 workers,
severity rate, 1.43 days per worker) is the result of the repair work
which is carried on from time to time when the current can not be
turned off. The strictly electrical men, if they could be isolated,
would show still higher rates. The more extended use of various
protective devices now available should improve this condition.
FALLING OBJECTS.

The falling object is among the most frequent causes of accidents
in almost all departments, but the resulting injuries are, on the whole,
less severe than those due to cranes and hoists and to hot substances.
The following table (with accompanying chart) shows the frequency
and severity of accidents due to falling objects of all kinds in each of
the departments:




PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.
T a bl e

79

2 7 . — F A L L IN G

OBJECTS AS A CAUSE OF A C C ID E N TS:
FREQUENCY
S E V E R IT Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

Blast
furFalling objects.

Open
Besse­ Foun­ Tube H eavy Plate
rolling
hearths. mer. dries. mills. mills. mills.

AND

Me­
Sheet Fabri­ chani­
mills. cating. cal. Yards.

ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY -WORKERS).

Collapse of building or
1.8
scaffold......................
Stored or piled mate­
3.3
rial ..........................
From trucks or vehi­
cles.............................. 2.7
From buildings, e t c . . 2 .9
Objects dropped in
handling and other.. 28.0
T otal................... 38.8

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.1

0.3

0.4

0.3

2.1

1.1

2.1

.5

4.6

1.5

2.4

1.2

3.1

.9

4.1

1.1
.7

8.6
1.4

1.9
.3

1.0
.1

.3
.2

.5
.4

1.2

4 .5
1.3

.7
1.1

2.3
.4

37.2

47.1

27.3

25.9

24.8

49.1

13.4

51.3

34.7

21.8

40.4

59.6

30.2

31.8

27.2

52.8

15.7

60.4

39.6

29.3

0.6

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER).

Collapse of building
or sca ffold ................ 0.75
Stored or piled mate­
.05
rial ............................
From trucks or vehi­
cles.............................. .03
.04
From buildings, etc ..
Objects dropped in
handling and other. 2.58
Total................... 3.44
Number of 800-day
workers...................... 18,8^9

0.05

0.01

C
1)

C
1)

0.01

0.02

0.96

0.02

1.12

.03

C
1)

0.11

.30

.72

0.03

0.03

.02

.07

.02
.01

.19
.01

1.22
.01

.25

.01

.02

(*)

.01
.01

...........

.68
.03

.01
.53

.53
.01

C
1)

C
1)

.99

5.04

3 . 97

1.05

1.21

1.46

.23

2.36

1.95

.47

2.19

5.29

5 .21

1.41

1.53

2.22

.28

3 . 10

3 . 47

1.10

24,458

6,661

7,938 14,589 37,364 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,882

18, 481

i Less than 0.005.
C h art

6.—F A L L IN G OBJECTS AS A CAUSE OF A CC ID E N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of




days lost per 300-day worker.]

80

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The table indicates that the fabricating shops have the highest
frequency rate from falling objects (60.4 cases per 1,000 workers)
and that these cases are of considerable severity (3.10 days per
worker). The Bessemer department has the next highest frequency
rate (59.6 cases per 1,000 workers) and the highest severity rate from
this cause of any of the departments (5.29 days per worker). This
is easily understood when it is remembered that during each heat
large masses of scrap are thrown into the converter. Under earlier
conditions no sufficient precautions were taken to prevent these
masses from falling to the floor below and serious injury was dis­
tressingly common.
Somewhat contrary to what might be expected from observation,
foundries (with 5.21 days per worker) rank next to the Bessemer
department in severity. This is due to the shifting and adjusting of
heavy flasks. The mechanical department also shows a higher
severity rate (3.47 days) than does fabricating. This is due to the
difficulties of hurried repair work.
Reference to the detailed cause items under “ falling objects” will
disclose some points of interest. Thus, objects dropped in handling
have much the greatest frequency in every department. In fabri­
cating shops this runs to 51.3 cases per 1,000 workers, and in the
Bessemer department the rate (47.1 cases) is almost as large. The
corresponding severity rates are also very high. It is evident, as
suggested by these rates, that the problem is almost wholly one of
developing better methods of manual manipulation and of training
the men to apply them. It has so far been the general view that
anybody of the necessary physical strength can lift and carry and
needs little training or supervision in order to deal with his simple
task. These seriously high rates indicate the need of a radical
revision of that idea.
The item of “ stored and piled material” shows greatest severity
in open hearths (1.12 days per worker) and plate mills (0.72 day).
Better piling methods are evidently needed.
“ Material falling from trucks and vehicles” causes most severe
accidents in foundries (1.22 days per worker), while fabricating shops
(0.68 day) and yard operations (0.53 day) are next in order.
F A L L S OF W O R K ER .

The frequency and severity of injuries due to the falling of the
worker are shown, for each department separately, in the next table
(with accompanying chart).




PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.
T a b le

81

28.—F A L L S

O F W O R K E R A S A CAUSE OF A C C ID E N T S: F R E Q U E N C Y
S E V E R IT Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

Falls of worker.

Blast
Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube H ea vy Plate Sheet Fabri­ Me­
fur­
rolling
hearths. mer. dries. m ills.
m ills. mills. cating. chan­ Yards.
naces.
mills.
ical.
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES
1.3
1.1
.6
3.8
.8
.1
1.6

1.0
A
1.1
1.6
.5
.1
1.4

0.2
.5
.9
2.1
.9
.5
1.8

0.4
.........
.1
.4
.8

8.3

9.1

7.1

T otal................... 17.6

15.3

13.8

From ladders...............
From scaffolds.............
From vehicles.............
From structures.........
From other elevations
Into excavations.........
Into other openings...
Due to slipping and
other..........................

AND

(PER

1,000 300-DAY

W O R K E R S ).

0.3
.2
.6
.9
.6
.1
.9

0.7
.3
1.0
.5
.6
.3
1.5

0.5
.5
.6
.4
.1
.1
.6

0.9
1.3
.3
1.4
.5

1.1

0.3
.2
.7
.4
2.1
.1
.3

6.6

5.6

6.2

8.6

5.7

13.4

7.0

5.5

9.3

9.8

9.8

13.5

8.4

18.5

13.9

11.0

.7

1.4
1.2
.3
1.9
.6
.3
1.3

0.4
.3
1.2
1.4
.7
.8
.9

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER).
0.02
.96
i1)
2.00
.02
.01
.49

0.49
(l)
.03
.03
.15
.01
.02

.19

.58

.07

1.97

4.08

.79

I
7,988 14,589 37,864 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,332

18,481

0.01
0)
1.36 . . . . . . .
.02
.05
.01
.02
.03
.03
.04 ’ “ . o i ’
‘

From ladders............... 0.05
.02
From scaffolds.............
.03
From vehicles.............
From structures......... 4.04
From other elevations
.03
Into excavations......... V)
.67
Into other openings. . .
Due to slipping and
oth er.......................... 1.44

0.02
.41
.02
.05
.06

.85

.15

.07

6.27

1.80

1.67

.12

24,458

6,660

T otal..................

Number of 300-day
workers...................... 18,489

.39

0.02
C
1)
.03
.01
.67
C
1)
.01

0.01
0.59
.01
.01
.01
.59
.01
.47
.59
(*)
.01 ’ ’ ’ . o i ’
’

0.01
C
1)
.01
.50
.25
C
1)
.02

0.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
i1)
.02

.15

.09

.10

.12

.89

.87

.17

.65

i Less than 0.005.
Ch a r t

7.—F A L L S OF W O R K E R A S A CAU SE OF ACC IDE N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number oi
days lost per 300-day worker.]

12771°— IS— Bull. 234------ 6




82

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The frequency of injuries from falls, as shown by the first part of
the table, exhibits a very great uniformity throughout the depart­
ments, the highest frequency rate being 17.6 cases per 1,000 workers
in blast furnaces and the lowest 8.4 cases in sheet mills.
Severity, on the other hand, shows much greater .variation, the
blast furnaces having the highest severity rate (6.27 days per worker),
with the mechanical department second (4.08 days). In recent
years injuries from falls in blast furnaces have considerably decreased
as a result of the provision of permanent and substantial means for
the hoisting of parts and material for the use of the riggers.
In each department it may be noted that “ slipping” is the most
frequent cause of falls, the fabricating shop leading with a rate of
13.4 cases per 1,000 workers. Much less frequent but decidedly
more severe are “ falls from structures,” blast furnaces leading with
a severity rate of 4.04 days per worker, the mechanical department
next with 2 days, and the fabricating shops third with 0.59 day.
These high rates from “ falls from structures” are, of course, primarily
due to the necessity of working at elevations. The remedy is the
proper provision of stairways, railings, and safety belts.
H A N D LIN G TOOLS AND O B JE C T S.

The following table (with accompanying chatt) shows, by depart­
ments, the frequency and severity of accidents due to the handling
of tools and objects:
T able 2 9 .—H A N D L IN G T O O LS A N D OBJECTS AS A CAUSE O F A C C ID E N T S: F R E ­
Q U E N C Y A N D S E V E R IT Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

Me­
Blast
Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube H ea vy Plate Sheet Fabri­ chan­
Handling tools and fur­
rolling
mer. dries. mills. mills. m ills. mills. cating. ical. Yards.
objects.
naces. hearths.
ACCIDENT F REQ UEN CY RATES (PER 1 ,0 0 0 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

Tools in hands of
w orker.......................
ToolsL n hands of fel­
low w orker...............
Sharp objects...............
Loading and unload­
ing ..............................
L iftin g ..........................
Objects flying from
tools...........................
Not classified...............
T o ta l...................




8 .4

7 .0

9 .3

8 .8

6 .1

1 1 .5

1 0 .7

2 .1

1 5 .6

1 5 .0

6 .9

2 .5
3 .8

2 .2
7 .0

.8
3 .5

1 .5
3 .3

1 .0
1 4 .8

.6
3 .6

.7
1 5 .0

.5
2 6 .0

1 .1
3 .4

2 .2
5 .2

.9
3 .2

2 .5
2 .1

2 .4
3 .8

4 .1
5 .0

.8
3 .0

1 .2
3 .8

2 .7
2 .5

1 .2
4 .9

.1
:6

2 .2

.5
3 .5

6 .1
2 .5

2 .3
5 .2

.9
6 .8

2 .4
5 .9

2 2 .8
9 .2

2 .1
1 3 .0

2 .2
8 .4

2 .2
4 .0

.5
4 .3

1 0 .1
2 1 .9

6 .5
5 .9

2 .1
5 .4

2 6 .8

3 0 .2

3 0 .8

4 9 .4

4 2 .1

3 1 .5

3 8 .7

3 4 .1

5 4 .2

3 9 .0

2 7 .1

83

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.

T able 2 9 .—H A N D L IN G T O O L S A N D OBJECTS AS A CAU SE OF A C C ID E N T S: F R E ­
Q U E N C Y A N D S E V E R IT Y R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914—Concluded.

Handling tools and
objects.

H eavy
Blast
Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube rolling Plate
fur­
mer. dries. mills.
mills.
mills.
naces. hearths.
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES

Tools in hands of
w orker....................... 0.20
Tools in hands of fel­
.04
low w orker...............
Sharp objects...............
.07
Loading and unload­
ing ..............................
.03
L iftin g..........................
.01
Objects flying from
tools...........................
.83
Not classified...............
.11
T otal................... 1.29
N um ber o f
w orkers

(DAYS

LOST PER

Me­
Sheet Fabri- chan­
mills. eating. ical. Yards.
300-DAY

W O R K E R ).

0.12

0.10

0.07

0.11

0.21

0.17

0.05

0.10

0.35

0.60

.02
.08

C
1)
.04

.04
.03

.02
.21

.01
.03

.01
.13

.01
.26

.01
.02

.02
.04

.02
.05

.04
.03

.10
.07

.02
.02

.03
.04

.32
.03

.02
.07

.47
.02

.01

.12
.04

. 14
.03

.14
.16

.70
.10

.61
.12

.02
.20

.21
.22

.11
.06

.07
.11

.58
.28

.43
.09

.10
.13

.59

1.11

.92

.62

1.03

.56

.99

.99

1.09

1.07

24, 453

6,661

300-day

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

13,849

7,938 14, 539 37, 364 14,346 19,119 15, 764 19,332

1 ,4 1
88

1 Less than 0.005.
C h a r t 8 .—

H A N D L IN G OBJECTS A N D T O O L S A S A CAUSE OF A CC ID E N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number o f
days lost per 300-day worker.]

It has already been pointed out that the handling of tools and
objects is a most fertile cause of accident, but that the resulting injuries
are relatively of low severity. This, it will be noted in the table, is
true of all the departments, both frequency and severity rates bqing
quite uniform in the different departments.




84

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

It is important of course that these minor injuries from the handling
of tools and objects should be controlled. But the wise safety man
will not be deluded by possible success here. It may cover up
ghastly failure in some other group of causes of low frequency but
high severity.
Examination of the list of cause items in the table brings out very
clearly some departmental characteristics. The two distinctly toolusing departments— fabricating (with a rate of 15.6 cases per 1,000
workers) and mechanical (with a rate of 15 cases)— exceed all
others in the frequency of accidents due tcwtapls in the hands of the
worker. But when severity is considered another phase of the matter
comes out, the severity rates being for fabrication 0.10 day per worker
and for the mechanical department 0.35 day. With frequency rates
almost identical why should the mechanical department have a
severity rate three times as high? The reply is that in fabrication
the tool using is done under ordinary shop conditions while the me­
chanic doing repair work must often labor under serious handicaps
as to time and place of work.
The “ handling of sharp objects” varies very greatly in the depart­
ments. Sheet mills lead in frequency (26 cases per 1,000 workers),
followed by plate mills (15 cases) and tube mills (14.8 cases). Also
the severity rates are highest in these mills: Sheet mills, 0.26 day per
worker; plate mills, 0.13 day; tube mills, 0.21 day. This fact calls
clearly for better hand protection in this kind of work.
PO W ER V E H IC L E S .

The frequency and severity of injuries due to power vehicles are
shown by departments in the following table (with accompanying
chart):
T able 3 0 .—P O W E R V E H IC L E S AS A CAUSE O F A C C ID E N TS: F R E Q U E N C Y A N D S E V E R IT Y
R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.
Heavy Plate
Blast
Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube
fur­ hearths. mer. dries. mills. rolling mills.
mills.
naces.

Sheet Fabri­ Me­
mills. cating . chan­ Yards.
ical.

ACCIDENT F RE Q UENCY RATES (CASES PER 1 ,0 0 0 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

Power vehicles..........

3 .0

1 0 .3

9 .3

0 .9

1 .5

3 .6

4 .5

3 .2

0 .7

3 .0

2 9 .7

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D A Y S LOST PER 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R ).

Power vehicles..........

4 .2 0

3 .8 3

3 .0 4

Number of 800-day
workers............... .

3,849

24,453

6,661




0 .0 4

0 .7 2

0 .2 3 |

1 .4 1

2 .8 5

0 .6 4

1 .0 2

9 .7 3

7,938 14,589 37,364 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,882

18,481

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.
C h art

85

9 —P O W E R V E H IC L E S A S A CAUSE OF A CC ID E N TS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

Consideration of the table indicates that in all the departments in
which the power vehicle enters as an operative factor it causes
comparatively few injuries but that these injuries are liable to be of
a severe nature. The severity is, naturally, most conspicuous in
transportation activities and the yard operations, the severity rate
there (9.73 days per worker) being exceeded by only one other cause
group— i. e., hot substances in blast furnaces (11.96 days) and in the
Bessemer department (11.05 days).
Further discussion of the power vehicle as a cause of accidents in
yard operations will appear later in the section devoted to accident
control in the yard department.
M ISC ELLA N EO U S C A U SE S.

The next table covers a group of unrelated causes, none of which are
of sufficient importance to warrant separate presentation.




86

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T a b l e 3 1 . — M IS C E L L A N E O U S C A U S E S O F A C C ID E N T S : F R E Q U E N C Y A N D
R A T E S , B Y D E P A R T M E N T S , 1907 TO 1914.

Miscellaneous causes.

Blast
Open
Bes­ Foun­
fur­
hearths. semer. dries.
naces.

Heavy Plate
Tube
rolling
mills.
mills.
mills.

S E V E R IT Y

Me­
Sheet Fabri­
chan­ Yards.
mills. cating.
ical.

ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY WORKERS).

4.7
15.0
.3
.9
.2

2.2
12.6
.2
.3
.2

.3

3 .0

2.5

1.3

6.7

15.7

7.7

7.2

35.3

31.2

24.0

6.7
1.0
.4

7.6

.5
.1
14.4

31.8

28.4

48.3

16.8

3.0
12.1
.2
7.1
.1

3.2
11.6
.1
.4
1.6

1.7
18.3
.5
.8
.2

3.0
12.2
.4

8.5
13.8
.3

.1

.5

1.8
.1
8.3

.8
.1
6.0

.8

2.3

1.2

10.4

8.2

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

32.7

23.8

32.4

26.5

4.1
8.2
.2
.2
.7

7.5
8.0
.4
.6
.1

8.6
11.2
.3
.2
1.6
.1
1.3
.1
25.0

Running into objects.
Flying objects...............
Doors, windows, e tc . .
Gas (asphyxiating). . .
H e a t.................................
Frost.................................
Projecting nails............
Violence...........................
Moving objects.............

1.6

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER).

Running into objects. 0. 04
Flying objects...............
.43
.01
Doors, windows, etc. .
Gas (asphyxiating). . . 10. 54
H e a t.................................
0)
Frost.................................
.02
Projecting nails............
Violence...........................
0)
Moving objects.............
.19

0.03
.27
.36
.38
C
1)

T otal..................... 11.23

Number of 300-day
workers...................... 13,849

0.03
.53
0)

0.15
.18
.01

0.04
.31

0.09
.24

0)

.01

0)
0)

0)

0.06
.30
.01
.01
C)

.03

C
1)
.63

0.07
.01
.02

0.06
.05
0)

8

0.12
.33
0)
.0 1

0.03
.69
0)
0)
0)

0)

.02

.01

.01

.0 1

.02

.0 1

1.62 j

. 15

.13

0)
.01
.65

.95
0)
(l)

1.11

.16

1 .5 4

.63

.16

1.23

2.01

.74

.48

1.04

2.09

1.22

1.67

1.12

.90

24,453

6,661

7,938 14,539 37,364 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,332

18,481

.18

0)

i Less than 0.005.

The most outstanding fact in this table is the importance of asphyx­
iating gas in the blast furnaces (frequency 7.1 cases per 1,000 workers;
severity 10.54 days per worker). This is the highest severity rate
for any single cause covered by this study.
None of the other causes under the miscellaneous group seems to
call for special comment.
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT CAUSES, BY DEPARTMENTS.

The following table shows the accident rates by leading cause
groups and by departments, thus bringing together, the principal
items of the present chapter in one table:




87

PHYSICAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS.

T able J 2 .— A C C ID E N T R A T E S B Y P R IN C IP A L C A U S E G R O U P S A N D B Y D E P A R T M E N T S ,
1905 T O

Cause of accident.

1914.

Blast
Open
Bes­ Foun­ Tube Heavy Plate
fur­
rolling
naces. hearths. semer. dries. mills. mills. mills.

Me­
Sheet Fabri­ chan­
mills. cating. ical. Yards.

ACCIDENT F REQ UEN CY RATES (PER 1 ,0 0 0 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

Boilers and steam
pip es..........................
Engines and m otors..
Power transmission...
W orking machines___
Cranes and hoists........
H ot substafices...........
Falling objects.............
Falls of worker............
Handling tools and
objects.......................
Power vehicles............
All other.......................
T otal...................

2 9 .5
1 1 .1
1 9 .7
3 1 .8
9 .8

0 .2
1 .0
.3
1 1 .6
1 3 .0
1 1 .7
2 7 .2
9 .8

0 .5
.6
.3
1 4 .1 *
2 6 .3
1 6 .7
5 2 .8
1 3 .5

0 .2
.9
.2
1 6 .2
6 .3
8 .3
1 5 .7
8 .4

0 .1
.3
.1
5 0 .5
3 7 .2
6 .7
6 0 .4
1 8 .5

1 .8
1 .6
.2
2 8 .6
1 0 .4
1 1 .1
3 9 .6
1 3 .9

2 .9
1 2 .0
6 .8
2 9 .3
1 1 .0

4 9 .4
.9
3 1 .1

4 2 .1
1 .5
4 2 .9

3 1 .5
3 .6
3 4 .5

3 8 .7
4 .5
5 8 .3

1 3 .2

3 4 .1

1 8 .8

5 4 .2
i.7
3 9 .4

3 9 .0
3 .0
3 8 .6

2 7 .1
2 9 .7
2 8 .3

1 9 2 .4

1 8 8 .9

1 4 4 .5

2 2 6 .3

1 1 2 .4

2 6 8 .2

1 8 7 .5

1 4 7 .3

1 .8
2 .2

0 .3
.2

1 .1
.8

0 .1

0 .3
.1

3 .3
8 .4
5 8 .1
3 8 .8
1 7 .6

2 .2
2 1 .0
4 3 .0
4 0 .4
1 5 .3

2 .6
1 7 .0
5 1 .0
5 9 .6
1 3 .8

5 .3
3 5 .4
3 0 .6
3 0 .2
9 .3

24 0 .2

2 6 .8
3 .0

3 0 .2
1 0 .3
2 9 .4

3 0 .8
9 .3
40. 7

2 0 0 .6

1 9 2 .4

2 2 6 .5

0 .2
.1

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D AY S LOST PER 3 00-D A Y W O R K E R ).

Boilers and steam
pipes..........................
Engines and m o to r s ..
Power transmission
W orking machines___
Cranes and hoists........
H ot substances...........
Falling objects.............
Falls of w orker............
Handling tools and
objects.......................
Power vehicles............
A ll other.......................
T otal...................

0. 09
.3 4

0 .0 4
.0 2

0 .0 3

.9 0
3 .0 8
1 1 .9 6
3 .4 4
6 .2 7

.4 3
4 .4 7
5 .8 1
2 .1 9
1 .8 0

.0 1
4 .6 8
1 1 .0 5
5 .2 9
1 .6 7

.1 7
4. 84
1 .8 7
5 .2 1
.1 2

1 .2 9
4 .2 0
212.00

.5 9
3 .8 3
1 .1 1

1 .1 1
3 .0 4
3 .0 7

43. 54

2 0 .2 9

24,453

Number of 300-day
workers...................... 13,849

3 .0 6
.9 6
.3 0
1 .4 1
.8 9

0 .0 3
.0 2
.3 3
1 .8 3
2 .0 1
3 .3 4
1 .5 3
.8 7

0 .0 1
.0 4
.0 1
4 2 .2 2
3 .1 7
2 .0 8
2 .2 2
.1 7

.9 2
.0 4
.8 4

.6 2
.7 2
.6 1

1 .0 3
.2 3
1 .3 9

2 9. 95

1 4 .0 4

8 .6 5

1 2 .6 1

6,661

0 .0 1

0 .0 7
.0 1

0 .0 1
.9 4
2 .0 8
2 .5 4
.1 0
.2 8
.6 5

( 3)
.2 0
.0 1
1 .5 0
9 .2 9
.0 5
3 .1 0
1 .9 7

0 .0 4
.3 1
.5 1
1 .3 0
2 .2 0
1 .5 3
3 . 47
4 .0 8

.5 6
1 .4 1
2. 23

.9 9
1 2 . 85
1 .2 0

.9 9
1 .6 4
1 .6 9

1 .0 9
1 .0 2
1 .0 1

1 .0 7
9 .7 3
1 .0 5

1 4 .1 2

1 1 .6 4

1 9 .4 4

1 6 .6 3

18. 33

7,938 14,539 37,364 14,346 19,119 15,764 19,332

18,481

( 3)

(3)

( 3)
( 3)
.5 0
2 .0 2
2 .1 1
1 .1 0
.7 5

1 In sheet mills and fabricating, yard operations are included with the rest of the mill, slightly raising
the rates.
2 Includes asphyxiating gas (frequency 7.1, severity 10.5 days).
" 3 Less than 0.005.
4 includes one case of loss of both eyes.

COMPARISON OF CAUSES IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY WITH
THOSE IN MACHINE BUILDING.

An instructive comparison may be made between the iron and steel
industry and machine building by means of the accompanying chart.
This presents six of the important cause groups which are common to
both industries. The black bars represent the rates in iron and
steel, the light bars the rates in machine building plants. The period
covered is that from 1907 to 1914.
On the whole there is remarkable uniformity in the relations dis­
played. With one exception machine building has lower rates both
in frequency and severity than iron and steel. Since machine build­
ing plants are preeminently machine using it is not surprising that
in the case of working machines both frequency rates and severity
rates are in excess for machine building.




88

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

If the comparison were made for a recent year much more improve­
ment would appear in the iron, and steel rates than in those for ma­
chine building. Particularly would this be true in the case of work­
ing machines.
C h art

10.—C O M PA R ISO N OF A C C ID E N T CAU SES IN T H E IR O N A N D S T E E L A N D M A C H IN E
B U IL D IN G IN D U S T R IE S .

[Frequency rate means num ber of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




MACHINE

BUILDING

CHAPTER in .

CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

The preceding chapter gave a brief statement of the more important
accident causes in the iron and steel industry. It is now the purpose
to consider each of the important departments of the industry with
reference to the principal causes in that particular department.
The classification of accident causes already presented will be fol­
lowed as regards the main cause groups. But the subclassifications
will be varied to suit the peculiarities of each department.
Table 33 presents the cause rates for blast furnaces from 1905 to
1914. The rates shown are based upon the total employment in the
department during each year.
T a b le

3 3 .—CAUSES OF ACC ID E N TS IN B L A S T FU R N A C E S , B Y Y E A R S , 1905 TO 1914.
Cause.

1905

1906 | 1907 | 1908

1909 I 1910 | 1911 | 1912

1913

1914

ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-D A Y W O R K E R S ).

Cranes and hoists 1....................
H ot substances:

6.3
15.9

6.2

6.3
9.4

4.0
16.1

1.3
.5 .2

4.3
7.2

2.3
4.6

2.4
6.0

2.6

10.3

12.7

5.1

1.1

3.0

1.7

8.9
2.4
6.1
31.3
14.8
10.2
.6
3.8 ’ ” 3.' 9 ' '*'2*7*
5.7
2.0
16.5
4.7
7.0
6.3

12.6
.7
2.2
1.5
5.2

12.3

14.1

11.8

15.9

Sparks and splashes...........
Spills
.......................
Explosions .... ...................
Furnace slips.......................
Gas flam es............................
H ot water, steam, and
other...............................

3.1
13.5
9.3

ttft. 4
18.2
.8
6.3
13.5
14.3

63.5

29.3

44.1

29.8

Total, hot substances . . .

148. 8

107.8

101.5

69.1

44.4

34.0

Falling objects i.......................... 115.5
Falls of w orker1.......................... 22.9
Handling tools and objects----- 44.7
4.2
Power vehicles............................
6.2
Gas (asphyxiating)....................
68.7
Unclassified 2..............................
7.3
N ot reported................................

64.2
23.8
26.1
4.8
22.2
45.2
15.1

55.6
22.4
32.6
5.7
8.9
56.8
6.4

40.9
25.9
25.9
3.2
3.2
37.7
.8

36.3
14.1
30.3
3.4
6.9
47.1
5.4

42.9
23.6
32.5
5.9
14.0
25.9
1.5

331.2

304.0

222.1

207.9

187.6

T ota l..................................

11.4
47.9

5.7
8.3

424.6

3.6
8.0

.6

.9

15.4

9.7

9.5

39.9

26.5

25.9

17.2

16.6
10.1
28.3
.7
2.9
15.9
.7

20.0
15.9
22.3
1.8
3.4
24.6
2.9

18.7
7.8
16.9
1.2
1.2
10.9

9.5
12.9
12.9

126.8

124.6

91.1

75.0

4’ 2
15.5

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D AY S LOST PER 300-D A Y W O R K E R ).

W orking machines....................
Cranes and hoists.......................
H ot substances:
Breakouts
Sparks and splashes............
Spills.....................................
E x p lo sio n s..........................
Furnace s lip s ......................
Gas flam es............................
H ot water, steam, and
other...............................

7.2
14.6

(3)
18.9
.6
.1
2.6
9.5

0.2
1.6

1.8
.3

0.1
6.5

43.3
1.2
(*)
.1

.3
2.1

.1
.3

12.3
.3

.1
.8

.1
(3)
.1

.9
8.0

( i)

.7
6.5
.1

(3)

0.5
.3
.1
(3)
(3)
.1

0.1
.2
.2
.3
6.6

0.3
.6
.1
(3)

( 3)
5.6

0.2

.2

1.0
.8

(3)
(3)

(3)

.8

7.9

1.2

.8

.3

.3

1.2

.2

1.6

.2

Total, hot substances . . .

32.5

60.8

10.7

2.1

13.0

.7

8.3

.4

1.9

2.0

Falling objects............................
Falls of worker............................
Handling tools and objects___
Power vehicles............................
Gas (asphyxiating)....................
Unclassified2..............................
N ot reported...............................

11.2
(3)
2.2
(3)
9.4
(3)
(3)

15.0
7.5
8.2
14.3
lS. 4
(3)
(3)

.9
11.9
.4
11.8
23.1
3.2
.1

1.4
7.8
.4
.5
14.1
4.0
(3)

7.0
12.3
.3
6.1
12.2
1.1
.1

.7
13.8
1.4
2.1
6.8
1.3
(3)

.3
.4
.5
6.5
6.5
.3

.3
.3
.5
(3)
5.2
.4
.1

.2
5.6
.9
(3)
5.4
.3

.3
.4
.9

T ota l..............................

56.8

143.1

65.1

33.5

58.6

27.3

23.2

8.0

19.9

19.6

1,262

1,566

1,274

1,486

1,353

1,380

1,749

1,658

1,160

Number oj 300-day workers........

m

T

1 Further details under the item w ill be found in Table 103.
8 Less than 0.05.
2 The unclassified group includes all cases not regarded as characteristic of the department.




89

15.5
.2

90

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Table 33 shows how the great reduction in accident rates which
occurred in blast furnaces during the period 1907 to 1914 was
spread among the different accident causes. With few exceptions,
each of the causes listed shows a marked reduction over that period,
but in some instances the reduction is much more noteworthy than
in others. Thus, in the case of cranes and hoists there was an
apparent but gradual and irregular improvement, whereas in the
case of hot substances the rate reduction was very striking—in
severity, from 32.5 days in 1905 and 60.8 days in 1906 to 2.0 days in
1914—and one important early form of “ hot-substance” accident—
breakouts— entirely disappeared in the later years.
The following analysis of the rate changes for each of the causes
listed in the table aims to point out the reasons for the changes.
Where reduction in rates has occurred, the contributing influences,
such as improved operative methods and safety efforts, will be noted.
Where little or no improvement has taken place, the reason for failure
will be indicated as far as possible.
. WORKING MACHINES.

The characteristic machines of the blast-furnace department are
few in number and they are responsible for relatively few accidents.
But in two years, 1906 and 1908, the table shows high severity rates
for machines. The high rate of 1906 (7.2 days) was due to a fatality
occurring at the pig machine. This machine consists essentially of
an endless belt carrying a series of cast-iron pans, into which the
metal is poured at a certain point. As the belt moves forward,
carrying the filled pans, the metal is cooled by water sprays or by
being carried through a water bath. When the belt passes over the
farthest roller and the pans begin the return journey the cooled pigs
of metal drop out, either on a stock pile or sometimes into cars.
At times, however, a pig adheres to the pan and is liable to drop at
a later point. In the case cited there was a passage under the pigmachine trestle, and such a “ sticker” falling caused the death of a
man passing beneath. As a result of the accident this particular
passage has been closed. In other similar cases a guard which will
.catch the falling pig has been put in place.
The high rate of 1908 (1.8 days) was due, in large part, to the loss

of a foot at the mud gun. Plate 1 illustrates this machine and
shows at the place marked “ A ” a funnel-shaped part through which
clay for closing the tap hole is fed. Formerly there was simply an
opening into the barrel of the gun. The man using his foot to push
the clay into the barrel might be caught by the descending piston
and the foot crushed so that it would have to be amputated.
The number of accident cases in connection with machines being
small, all comparisons between years must be made with considerable
reservation.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

91

CRANES AND HOISTS.

The blast furnace has one hoisting apparatus peculiar to itself—
the skip hoist. The accident hazards of the skip, however, are of
small importance. The injuries due to hoisting apparatus, for which
the rates are shown in the table, are from forms of hoists in no waypeculiar to this department.
In 1905, as shown in the table, the frequency of accidents from
this cause was low and the severity of such accidents negligible.
But in the next year, 1906, the rates rose rapidly, due in all prob­
ability to increased industrial activity. Comparing the rates of that
year with those of 1913, which was a year of very similar activity, it
will be noted that a marked reduction had occurred— in frequency,
from 15.9 to 6.0 cases per 1,000 workers, a reduction of 62 per cent;
and in severity, from 14.6 to 5.6 days per worker, a reduction of 62
per cent. These reductions followed the introduction of various
safety methods. One important improvement may be briefly de­
scribed. While the forms of hoisting apparatus used are not peculiar
to blast furnaces, there is an unusually large amount of hoisting
which requires temporary arrangements. For example, whenever
repairs are to be made at the top of the furnace the riggers, who do
the work, must attach their tackle to some part of the furnace top
and make a hoist of possibly more than 100 feet. Under the old
conditions when there were no adequate stairways and platforms
and no permanent points of attachment designed for the purpose
this was necessarily extremely hazardous. This hazard is reflected in
the rates for hoists and also in those for falls of worker.
The complete revision of stairways, railings, platforms, and other
means of safe access affects most importantly the danger incident to
hoisting operations.
HOT SUBSTANCES.

This group of causes stands out as of peculiar importance and
interest in the blast furnace department. Reference to the table
will show a remarkable diminution in their influence during the period
covered. Comparing the years 1906 and 1913, which are closely
similar as regards industrial and labor conditions, the following decline
in the accident rates (due to hot substances) may be noted: In fre­
quency, from 107.8 cases per 1,000 workers in 1906 to 25.9 cases in
1913, a reduction of 76 per cent; and, in severity, from 60.8 days per
worker to 1.9 days, a reduction of 97 per cent. Such striking reduc­
tions in accident hazards constitute a very great triumph for safety
man and blast furnace superintendent.
An examination of the subcauses under the general group of “ hot
substances” will bring out the particular places and conditions in
which the most striking improvements have been effected.




92

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
B R E A K O U T S .1

In the furnaces under consideration breakouts were severe as late
as 1909. Thereafter they were entirely absent. The reason for this
striking change can be given in a few words— increased strength of
construction. The importance of better construction will appear
repeatedly as this discussion progresses.
SP A R E S AND SPLASHES.

The injuries from sparks and splashes are numerous and of sufficient
severity to merit attention. They must be combated by appliances
and personal protection. In drawing off the cinder from the cinder
notch the flying of molten material is frequent. Plate 2 shows how
this may, in a measure, be guarded against. Above the cinder notch
is suspended a shield which can be readily lowered when it is necessary
to open the cinder notch.
But the main danger from this source arises at the tapping hole,
where the metal is drawn off. Plate 3 illustrates the early, unsafe
method by which the tap hole is opened directly by man power. It
is evident that when the molten metal comes pouring out there
is every chance that, in the event of even small explosions/ very
severe burns may ensue. Plate 4 shows how in well-conducted
plants at the present time the crew necessary to carry on the operation
is reduced by the substitution of an air drill for the hand-operated
bar, the tapping hole and adjacent runner are securely covered, and
the men are safeguarded by the use of proper leggings. With one
additional precaution, this arrangement would approach perfection.
Rarely, but often enough to deserve attention, an eye is lost from a
stray spark. The chance that this would happen is so small with
the protection illustrated that the wearing of protective goggles might
seem unnecessary. But when it is noted that for the cast-house men
about 9 per cent of the accidents are accidents to the eye2 the small
trouble of using protectors may seem worth while.
As the metal flows away from the tapping hole along the runners,
there is frequent occasion to direct its course by introducing gates.
Formerly these were shovel-shaped iron affairs, which the helper must
put in position by hand, getting away quickly enough, if possible, to
avoid scorching and splashing metal. In modern practice the gates
are hung above the runner and lowered by a lever or other mechanism
from a safer distance. (See to left of E in plate 5.) This new
arrangement favors safety in another very important way. A very
small quantity of moisture on a gate will produce a very violent
1 For methods of prevention see Bulletin 140 of United States Bureau of Mines.
ards at Blast Furnaces and Accident Prevention, by Frederick H . W ilcox, 1917.
2 See Table 68.




Occupational Haz­




P L A T E 2. —C I N D E R N O T C H , W I T H G U A R D .




P L A T E 3.—OL D , U N S A F E M E T H O D O F D R I L L I N G A T A P P I N G H O L E .




P L A T E 4.— IM P R O V E D M E T H O D O F D R I L L I N G A T A P P I N G H O L E .




P L A T E 5.— P O R T I O N O F C A S T H O U S E F L O O R

P L A T E 7.—A U T O M A T I C C O U P L E R O N C I N D E R L A D L E C AR.







P L A T E 8.—M O D E R N B L A S T F U R N A C E P L A N T , S H O W I N G D U S T C A T C H E R .

CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

93

explosion. When the gate hangs in position above the molten stream
it is always thoroughly dry and may be safely brought in contact
with the metal. It would quite often happen under older conditions
that, in spite of efforts on the part of the helper, some moisture would
remain on the gate and produce an eruption of the metal serious
enough to cause the helper’s death and perhaps injure a number of
other workers.
The possibility of splashing also occurs in the transportation of
molten metal about the yard. Here there are two dangers to be
guarded against: (1) It is sometimes necessary to couple ladle cars
after the hot metal or cinder is placed in them. This presents a very
serious menace if the construction of the car requires the coupling to
be done by hand. Some metal is almost sure to slop over at the
moment of striking. Automatic couplers are in successful use on
such cars (plates 6 and 7). (2) For convenient use the ladles must
be suspended when pouring at a point not much above the center of
gravity. If such U ladle were supported on the car by the trunnion
used in pouring, it would be difficult to block it so that in moving it
might not sway and so discharge some of its contents. The double­
trunnion ladle, illustrated in plate 6, greatly decreases this hazard.
SPILLS AND EXPLOSIONS.

Spills— i. e., where a ladle drops from a crane or upsets on a track—
were not of serious moment in the blast furnaces covered by this
study. As shown in the table the frequency rate was only 0.2 case
per 1,000 workers and the severity rate was negligible.
The “ explosions” listed in the table are those of relatively minor
importance occurring in the hot metal. Sometimes these explosions
have serious consequences, but none such occurred in the furnaces
here covered.
FU RNACE SLIPS.

Furnace slips may cause injury in two ways— by burns from the
hot stock ejected from the furnace and by bruises and crushing in­
juries from the stock falling on a worker. The present section is
chiefly concerned with the former kind of injury—burns— but for con­
venience of treatment the -discussion of furnace slips and their pre­
vention is given here.
The table shows that in the plants covered bums from furnace
slips, while of much importance during the early years, diminished
and then disappeared entirely after 1911. If the accidents due to
crushing injuries from the falling stock be added, the high rates in
the early years and the decline in the latter years would be even
more striking. To indicate at all clearly how, in the best practice,
such an important and serious accident cause as the furnace slip has
been practically eliminated from blast-furnace hazards requires a




94

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

fairly full exposition of blast-furnace operation, including a descrip­
tion of a modern furnace.
The modem furnace.— A furnace consists of (1) the stack or fur­
nace proper; (2) the,biowing engines; (3) the stoves. Plate 8 shows
two stacks with the stoves between them. These elements represent
three steps in the development of furnace practice. At first the fur­
nace consisted of a tower of masonry lined with brick, into which
fuel, ore, and limestone were dumped at the top. From the tower
top the gases generated escaped freely, taking fire and blazing up
like a torch. To this tower a blowing apparatus was later added,
forcing cold air through the burden. Arrangements which were then
made to warm the air have finally developed into the highly effective
stoves of present practice.
A vertical section of the furnace discloses three portions— (1) a
cylindrical portion at the bottom, the hearth; (2) above this an in­
verted truncated cone, the bosh; (3) still above an upright trun­
cated cone, the stack. The shape of the stack p'ermits free down­
ward movement of the burden. When in this movement the zone
of fusion is reached in the bosh, the bulk decreases and the diameter
is lessened proportionately. Around the furnace, near the junction
of the stack and bosh, is a circular pipe— the bustle pipe (PI. 5 “ F ” ).
This carries air forced by the blowing engines through one of the
stoves. A series of smaller pipes extend from the bustle pipe into
the furnace, terminating in the tuyeres. This was originally a sim­
ple apparatus, but in it a very complicated process goes on; and to
govern and control this process mechanisms have been added until,
as a whole, a modern furnace is a most complicated and delicate
construction.
In the illustration, plate 8, there is seen at the right the inclined
hoistway, by which the materials (coke, limestone, and ore) are lifted
and dumped into the top of the stack.
The slip.—The above description will enable the reader unfamiliar
with the blast furnace to understand the nature of the hazard to
which attention is now directed, namely, the furnace slip.
The essential feature of a slip is that the mass of material in the
furnace is checked in its downward movement, and the burning away
of the fuel below this point takes away the support. Then suddenly
the obstruction is overcome and the entire burden drops down to a
new level. When it is remembered that this may be a mass as much
as 20 feet in diameter and 60 feet high, it is obvious that the mechan­
ical effect may be tremendous.
An understanding of the conditions bringing about a slip requires
a somewhat particular statement of the processes within the furnace.
When a furnace is “ blown in,” a mass of fuel in the hearth is ignited,
and upon the burning mass the ingredients of the burden (ore, lime­




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

95

stone, and coke) are gradually placed from the top of the stack. As
the original fuel burns away the coke, coming down with the burden,
takes fire. At some point in this process the tuyeres, are put in place
and a blast of hot air turned into the stack. The burning of the
coke gives rise to carbon monoxide. Carbon dioxide is expelled from
the limestone, leaving lime. This dioxide, in turn, unites with car­
bon and becomes monoxide. These gases and free carbon react on
the iron ore, robbing it of its oxygen and reducing it to a metallic
state. Reaching the “ zone of fusion,” the iron and the lime melt.
The heavy molten iron sinks to the bottom of the hearth, the melted
limestone slag floating on top. As these materials are assorted in
accordance with their weight important chemical reactions take place,
by which substances which would injure the quality of the iron are
taken up by the slag. The slag is drawn off at intervals from the
cinder notch and the iron from the tapping hole, as already iroted.
This process gives rise to comparatively little trouble with ore of
a granular character; but when the great deposits of rich ore were
discovered in the Mesaba region of Minnesota, and at the same time
a tremendous demand for iron and steel arose, factors entered the
situation which have brought about a revolution in construction and
practice. The ores originally used permitted a fairly free passage of
the gases toward the furnace top. With the introduction of earthy,
powdery Mesaba ore the burden became relatively impervious and
the serious troubles of blast-furnace men began.
The readiest method of indicating how a slip comes about is to
follow a hypothetical case. Let it be supposed that the impervious
burden deflects the blast to one side of the stack. The part no
longer supplied with heated gases begins to fall in temperature. The
lower portion, pasty and on the verge of fusion, congeals, and in so
doing adheres to the furnace wall. Thus begins what furnace men
call a “ hang.” Once started, it may extend until it nearly or quite
reaches the opposite wall, becoming a “ scaffold.” The free descent
of the material is checked and all the processes are disturbed. As
combustion proceeds below a scaffold its support is rapidly removed.
To restore the action of the furnace, various expedients are used, such
as rapidly increasing the burden at the top or sudden alternations of
blast pressure. If the hang is slight, the slip may occur in the regular
course of events, with the ejection from the furnace top of dust
only. If it reaches the dimensions of a scaffold, the sudden down­
ward rush may be accompanied by ejection of large masses.
It is probable that under some circumstances explosive compounds
may be formed and the slip be accompanied by an explosion resulting
in.great destruction. This may come about as follows: If an almost
complete scaffold has formed, the carbon below it may be entirely
consumed. When the break comes, the oxygen of the blast is sud­




96

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

denly mixed with the gases above and with incandescent coke dust.
This may give rise to an explosive mixture which will blow out the
entire contents of the furnace, and, of couse, in so doing wreck the
top mechanism and endanger everyone in the vicinity.
This cause of danger is evidently one which might be very serious.
How serious is illustrated by one case of an old type of furnace filled
by men working at the furnace top. Fourteen lost their lives when
an explosion followed a slip. At another furnace the whole stack
was wrecked by the explosion and 12 men died. The methods by
which the hazard has been lessened must therefore be of the keenest
interest.
The solution of the problem of production, as also that of safety,
goes down to the fundamentals of blast-furnace practice.
First must come a rational treatment of the raw materials. Noth­
ing can be done with the ore. The Mesaba product is at once among
the richest and the most easily mined material anywhere available.
The furnace man must use it and develop his methods accordingly.
For satisfactory use coke must be of uniform quality. The impor­
tance of this deserves illustration. A group of furnaces had for some
days been working badly, ejecting 6 to 10 carloads of flue dust, when
under normal conditions 2 carloads was the limit. There seemed no
explanation. Finally the superintendent discovered that the coal
being used in the coke ovens was being crushed to unequal degrees
of fineness. Now, whenever crushed material is manipulated there is
a tendency for the coarse particles to become aggregated in one place
and the fine particles in another. The result of this sorting was, in
the case under consideration, that some of the coke was of finely
crushed material and easily broke down into a powder which tended
to fill in between the other materials of the burden. This would
obstruct the free movement of the gases and so cause trouble. The
portion of the coke made up of the coarser particles was more readily
inflammable and so tended to produce areas of greater heat in some
portions of the furnace. This unequal heating tended to aggravate
the results arising from the stoppage due to the powdering of the
portion of coke made from finer material. Correction of the crushing
process gradually brought the furnaces to normal action.
In another plant the screening apparatus, by which the “ breeze”
was removed from the coke, was out of order and supplies had to be
taken from the cooling beds. In a few hours the furnaces were hang­
ing and slipping seriously.
The substitution of the “ by-product” ovens for the old “ bee hive”
process is not only a great gain in conserving vast amounts of valuable
material formerly thrown away, but makes possible a product which
is much better, both for operation and safety.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

97

The physical condition of the limestone must also have attention.
If the limestone masses are too small, ore and coke breeze will tend
to pack between them and obstruct the blast. On the other hand, if
too large they may descend to the lower levels of the furnace without
being reduced completely to lime. This makes a demand upon the
heat at a critical time, when it is needed for other purposes. This
disturbance may give rise to various difficulties. Fine lime dust is
still more troublesome. It operates to obstruct the blast and tends
to ulime scaffolds/7 very difficult to dislodge. Careful crushing of
limestone and screening to uniform size is well worth while.
With these precautions regarding the physical condition of the coke
and limestone must go precautions in conveying and placing the mate­
rial in the furnace. As has already been suggested, all material con­
sisting of particles of different sizes undergoes in shifting from place
to place a process of sorting by which the large and small particles
become segregated. In order to overcome this tendency, precautions
must be taken at various stages. Where the manipulation is manual,
as loading into barrows with shovel or fork, this tendency to sorting
is in a measure overcome. It is this fact that has kept in use a good
many hand-filled furnaces and led to the building of new ones, in
spite of the hazard involved. The steady reduction in number of
hand-filled furnaces and lessened number of top fillers employed is
a very great gain from a Safety standpoint.
With their disappearance, however, the problem of maintaining a
uniformity in the blast-furnace burden enters a new phase. These
workmen, under competent direction, could put the material into
the furnace in fairly uniform condition. To produce equal uniformity
by mechanical means has taxed the ingenuity of blast-furnace con­
structors. The perfect solution is perhaps not yet reached.
In general it may be said that this sorting of material, tending to
produce a burden not uniform in composition and leading on to most
troublesome results, occurs whenever material slides down an incline
and drops from the edge. In transit from bin to furnace there are
six such points, (1) from bin to larry car, (2) from car to skip, (3)
from skip to hopper, (4) from hopper to little bell, (5) from little bell
to large bell, (6) from large bell to stack. It should be explained
that the top of the stack is closed by two bell-shaped valves, one
above the other. By proper manipulation of these valves the top is
always closed, so that gas can not escape and so is compelled to pass
into the pipes, called “ downcomers” (“ B,” plate 8).
The commonest means of combating this sorting tendency is by
devices at the top. For example, many furnaces are provided with
rotary tops. After each load is dumped from the skip such a top
automatically revolves a certain distance. The loads are thus dis­
charged into the stack from different positions tending to mix them
12771°— 18— Bull. 234------- 7




98

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

in such a way as to provide a more uniform burden. Other construc­
tors have experimented with various positions of the skip when
delivering its load and with the introduction of baffles into the hopper.
After prolonged trial a position and a system of baffles were discovered
which very perfectly attained the desired end.
Still another device involves beginning at an earlier point. The
material is received from the bins into cylindrical buckets, which
rotate as they are filled. These are then carried on larries to the
hoist, where, instead of being emptied into a skip, the bucket itself
is hoisted to the top of the stack. This cylindrical bucket has a
bell-valve bottom and is dumped directly on the small bell of the
furnace.
These illustrations serve to indicate the lines along which inven­
tive genius has worked in solving the problem of handling the huge
quantities of material required for the modern furnace and at the
same time securing the results formerly attained by workmen operat­
ing under supervision.
This revision of structure and method accounts for the major part
of the reduction in the severity rates of “ furnace slips,” as shown by
the table. That frequency suddenly became nil in 1912 is due to
the introduction of an improved valve at the upper end of the upright
pipes seen extending above the furnace top in the illustration. This
effectually prevented the ejection of anything but fine dust, and
from this time onward even annoyance from shps disappeared in
these blast furnaces.
GAS FLAMES.

Reference to the table will show that the severity of injuries from
gas flames was very high in the early years— 9.5 days in 1905 and
8.0 days in 1906. It then practically disappears, except for one
unfortunate year, 1911, when there was a rate of 6.6 days. The high
rates in the early years were due in part to the extensive use of hand
filling at that time. It would sometimes happen that flames would
burst out when there was no slip or explosion, and severe bums,
fatal at times, would result. For the most part, however, the decline
in severity rates is to be attributed to improvements in controlling
valves.
Incidentally a great lessening of danger has come to the stove men
and stove cleaners from the use of washed gas. Great quantities of
flue dust are caught in the “ dust catchers” (shown at “A ,” plate 8).
The dust laden gas enters these catchers, which form practically a
great enlargement of the downcomer, and the current moving more
slowly, the coarser dust falls. There is much, however, almost
impalpable, which passes on. If this is fed directly to the stoves, the
openings between the checker bricks, with which the stove is filled,




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

99

become choked, and this may cause flames to burst out at unexpected
places, causing injury. In modern practice the gas is sent first to a
washer, where the dust is caught by water sprays and the gas goes
on perfectly clean. This freedom from obstructing matter makes
possible more efficient stoves and also safer operation.
It so happened that the plants under consideration did not have,
during the years covered, any gas explosions causing an appreciable
amount of injury, except those already noticed under furnace slips,
but since such cases do occur and can be illustrated from the experi­
ence of other plants, this is an appropriate place to discuss them and
their remedies.
An interesting illustration occurred in the operation of a certain
furnace when on one occasion the blast was cut down. The engines
slacked up but did not stop. Since they remained partly active, it
is difficult to understand how gas from the furnace found its way
back into the air cylinders. However, an explosive mixture was
formed, ignited, and the engine was wrecked, causing the death of
two persons and injury to others.
To understand the remedy devised by this plant to prevent similar
accidents in the future, some description of engines and stoves is
necessary. The main which brings the air from the engines to the
stoves, divides, a branch going to each of the stoves. After passing
the stoves, the air, highly heated, goes to the bustle pipe around the
furnace. There is also a pipe direct from engines to furnace, known
as the cold blast. It is used when it is desired to lower the tempera­
ture of the furnace and at other times it is closed by a valve.
Up to the time of the explosion above noted, this valve was hand
operated in this particular plant, and it seems probable that it was
because the valve was imperfectly closed that the gas was able to make
its way to the air cylinders. The outcome# the explosion was the
of
invention of valves for both the hot blast and cold blast. When
pressure is on, these valves remain open. They can be adjusted to
close at any determined diminution of pressure and would seem to be
a perfect protection against such a disaster as that described above.
A second illustration is that of a furnace which was being dismantled
prior to relining There remained in the lower part a small amount
of burning material. From this there evidently arose a sufficient
amount of carbon monoxide to form an explosive mixture. A gang
of men were carrying some object which required the combined effort
of six or more. In the course of the operation, they were in a line
directly in front of the opening where a tuyere had been removed.
An explosion occurred and a stream of flame was driven through the
opening directly along the line of men. Several were instantly killed
and others seriously burned. It is evident that the combination
which rendered this so serious was extremely unlikely to be repeated;




1 00

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

but the incident forcibly illustrates the need of the utmost care to pre­
vent the formation of such explosive mixtures. Smouldering fires in
confined spaces should be extinguished or the space flooded with
such quantities of air that the proportion of gas may not rise to the
explosion point. In the process of “ blowing in” a furnace there is
danger that the .gases generated may mingle with the air in the upper
part of the. stack or in the mains in explosive proportions. An ex­
cellent safeguard is to fill these spaces with an inert gas. The most
readily available is steam.
Again, it may be noted that whenever pressure is lowered in the
mains there is a tendency for the gases to cool and contract. This
might, if the engines were stopped, produce even a negative pressure.
Since perfect exclusion of air is difficult, if not impossible, it may
filter in and give an explosive mixture. A dust catcher (“ A ,” pi. 8)
twisted into unrecognizable shape proved the possible force of an ex­
plosion so originating. It is very common to build furnaces with a
pair of stacks. It is possible whenever there is more than one to pro­
vide junctions between the mains in such a way that there will be a
constant supply and constant pressure of hot gases in those parts
where cooling and intake of air would otherwise be liable to occur.
This precaution, with arrangements for the use at times of live steam,
gives excellent results.
FALLING OBJECTS.

Tracing the rates for falling objects from year to year, as given in
the table, it appears that a notable decline has occurred in both the
frequency and severity of accidents due to this cause. Comparing
similar industrial years, frequency, in 1906, shows 64.2 cases per
1,000 workers and in 1914 only 18.7 cases, a decline of 71 per cent.
Between the same years severity changed from 15.0 days per worker
to 0.2 day, a decline of 9$ per cent.
The high rates in the earlier years were due primarily to those kinds
of “ falling object” hazards which the blast furnace has in common
with all departments. Those which may be regarded as character­
istic of the blast furnaces— incident to the storage of iron ore, coke,
and limestone— were responsible for only a very small fraction of the
accident rates quoted above, the storage of stock having been de­
prived of its more hazardous features through the substitution of me­
chanical for hand labor. For example, when ore was transferred from
stock pile to skip in hand barrows it would happen from time to time
that the removal of ore from the foot of the pile would cause it to
cave down upon the men. At the present time in most important
plants this transfer is entirely accomplished by mechanical means.
The men who control the apparatus are exposed to comparatively
little danger.1




1 See T a b le 103.

CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

1 01

FALLS OF WORKER.

Of the falls incident to distinctively blast-furnace operations,
those into ore pockets and bins show the greater number. Next
come* falls from the transfer and larry cars.
The bulk of the cases, however, are of a character common to all
departments, blast furnace workers being especially liable to falls
from structures. A glance at plate 8 will show that a furnace has
many points where work must be done and from which a fall would
be serious. The illustration shows the modern installation of stair­
ways, railed walks, and permanent supports for attaching hoisting
apparatus, which have contributed very greatly to reduce such
accidents. Evidently such reduction would have a larger influence
upon the severity rate than upon the frequency rate, as a fall from
such a lofty height almost always means death or serious injury.
Reference to the Table 33 will show fairly high but declining rates in
the period covered. Comparing the years 1906 and 1913, which as
has been noted were industrially very similar, the decreases appear
as follows: Frequency rates, in 1906, 23.8 cases per 1,000 workers,
and in 1913, 7.8 cases, a reduction of 67 per cent; severity rates, in
1906, 7.5 days per worker, and in 1913, 5.6 days, a reduction of 25
per cent.
HANDLING TOOLS AND OBJECTS.

It was thought that in this group the handling of pig iron might
show itself to be a source of serious injury. But such did not prove
to be the case, partly because accidents due to this cause are usually
of minor severity and partly because the handling of pig iron by hand
in the plants under study disappeared almost entirely some years ago.
From year to year, as shown in the table, the rate variations have
been very considerable, but the severity rate was of serious impor­
tance only in 1905, when it was 2.2 days, and in 1906, when it was
8.2 days.
POWER VEHICLES.

The power vehicle hazard in blast furnaces is a rather varied one.
The great quantities of raw material (ore, coke, and limestone)
which must be brought in demand railway operations on a large scale.
The storage and handling of this material introduces the need for
transfer cars to shift it from place to place and of so-called larry cars
to convey the stock to the skip hoists of the furnaces.
As might be expected from the evident importance of the power
vehicle hazard, the early years show rates particularly high in se­
verity, such for instance as a rate of 14.3 days in 1906. The control
of this hazard almost to the point of disappearance in later years has
been almost wholly the result of a practically complete rebuilding




102

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

of the transportation facilities. Much that was formerly done at
grade is now carried upon trestles. Ample clearances have been
provided and the whole system simplified and coordinated to a degree
which can scarcely be appreciated except by one familiar with, both
situations.
The result of these efforts may be seen in the figures of the table.
In frequency rates the decline is from 4.8 cases per 1,000 300-day
workers in 1906 to 1.2 cases in 1913, a reduction of 75 per cent. In
severity rates the decline is from 14.3 days in 1906 to 0.04 days in
1913, a reduction of 99 per cent.
ASPHYXIATING GAS.1

Examination of the table indicates that asphyxiating gas was
during the whole period covered an accident cause of serious impor­
tance. The frequency rates are relatively low but the severity
rates are high and do not show the same marked decline as do the
rates for most of the other causes. Thus, for the five-year period
1905 to 1909 the rate was 15.4 days, whereas for the five-year period
1910 to 1914 it was 7.6 days, a reduction of only 50 per cent; and
the rate for the year 1914 (15.5 days) was as high as for the year
1906 (15.4 days). Also it must be remembered that in addition to its
direct action, asphyxiating gas contributes to many accidents charged
to other causes. This is true in many falls.
Some structural changes have been of much importance in con­
trolling this*cause. Formerly gas mains were carried underground
and were simply bricked in. It was impossible to make them gas
tight in the first place and any flaws which developed later would
not be called to attention unless they became very bad. As a re­
sult there was constant leakage into the porous ground which was
likely to be built up around the furnace. This probably was more
influential in injury to health than in causing asphyxia, but at fre­
quent intervals conditions would favor the accumulation of gas in
some inclosed space and some one would be overcome. The substi­
tution of overhead mains has very much modified this condition for
the better.
An operative rule against going without a companion into inclosed
spaces where gas might possibly accumulate has saved lives.
The disappearance of hand-filled furnaces is of importance-in this
connection, as may be illustrated by the following example: The bell
of a hand-filled furnace had been warped by overheating, allowing
the gas to escape. The wind drove the gas toward the hoist. As a
result men were constantly being overcome. An unusually large
1 For detailed instructions regarding control of asphyxiating gas see A sphyxiation from Blast-Furnace
Gas. Technical paper 106, U. S. Bureau of Mines.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

103

crew were on the top. Part of them, keeping out of the way of the
gas, pulled their unconscious comrades into fresh air and thereupon
took their places. Those who did not immediately recover were sent
down the hoist and others came up. Finally a man was overcome
just as he was emptying his barrow on the bell. He fell against the
bell and was severely burned. The combined effect of gas and burns
caused his death. In trying to rescue him the foreman and several
others were overcome. The effort to keep this furnace operating was
abandoned.
The insidious character of the poison appears from another ex­
ample. The horizontal mains became gradually filled with ffue dust.
It had been the custom to clean this out by sending a gang of shovelers into the main. The main was shut off from the furnace and man­
holes were left open for some time. The foreman of the gang then
went down one manhole and walked to another without experiencing
any ill effects. Believing that the gas was thoroughly out of the main,
he sent in the shovelers and they began work. Apparently much
gas was caught in the dust, for within a few minutes several men
were overcome. In rescue efforts some 30 men went into the pipe.
A majority became unconscious from the gas, including the assistant
superintendent of the plant. Since that time, arrangements have
been made to remove the dust by means of a stream of water.
Still another case will emphasize the extreme care necessary where
this factor enters the situation. In a blast furnace yard was a small
motor house. The only openings into it were such cracks as might
exist around a door and one window, together with the space around
the shaft of the motor where it went through the wall. On a rather
inclement night two men sought shelter in the building between tours
of duty as watchmen. They were found dead from gas in the morn­
ing. Apparently the gas found its way in around the motor shaft,
the wind being in a direction favorable to bringing it there.
vSuch inclosed spaces might often be kept free from danger at the
cost of a ventilating fan and a small amount of electrical current. A
single death outweighs many such provisions.
Finally oxygen helmets (plate 9) and resuscitation apparatus have
materially assisted in preventing asphyxiation and in the restoration
of many who otherwise would very probably have swelled the death
list. There are now available smaller and less expensive oxygen out­
fits which can be used in those cases of repair work where it is prac­
tically impossible to avoid a gas-laden atmosphere.
The results of applying these various methods of control have been
important. They should doubtless be applied both more generally
and more vigorously.




104

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
UNCLASSIFIED CAUSES.

As has been earlier explained, this group of causes, being simply a
storage place for items which do not seem to demand consideration,
has no particular significance. It may be pointed out, however,
that while the frequency rates for this group are high in all the
years, the severity rates are of negligible importance.
COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT CAUSES, 1906 AND 1913.

In the preceding discussion comparison is constantly made between
the rates in 1906 and those in 1913, these two years being selected,
as noted, because of their similarity as regards productive and labor
conditions. The following table brings together, in convenient
form, the data for these years for each of the causes. The frequency
and severity rates are shown, and also the percentage of reduction
which occurred between the two years.
T a b le

3 4 .—CO M PA R ISO N O F A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN B L A S T F U R N A C E S F O R Y E A R S O F
S IM IL A R IN D U S T R IA L A C T IV IT Y , B Y C A U SE S, 1906 A N D 1913.

Accident
frequency rates
(per 1,000 300- Percentage
of reduc­
day workers).
tion, 1906
to 1913.

Cause.

1906

Accident
severity rates
(days lost per
300-day
worker).
1906

1913
2.4
6.0
25.9
18.77.8
16.9
1.2
1.2

62
62
76
71
67
35
75
95

7.2
14.7
60.8
15.0
7.5
8.2
14.3
15.4

331.2

91.1

72

1,262

1,658

W orking m achines..................................................
Cranes and hoists....................................................
H ot substances.........................................................
Falling objects.........................................................
Falls of worker.........................................................
Handling tools and objects...................................
Power vehicles.........................................................
Asphyxiating gas....................................................

6.3
15.9
107.8
64.2
23.8
26.1
4.8
22.2

T otal...............................................................
Number of 800-day workers....................................

Percentage
of reduc­
tion, 1906
to 1913.

1913
0)
5.6
1.9
.2
5.6
.9
0)
5.4

99
62
97
99
25
89
99
65

143.1

19.9

86

1,262

1,658

1 Less, than 0.05.

OCCUPATIONS AND CAUSES.

In the preceding pages the blast furnaces have been treated as a
unit. It is known, however, that the hazard of the different occu­
pations is not uniform. The following table is presented in order to
show these differences and afford some measure of their importance.
This table shows for such occupations as could be isolated the acci­
dent frequency rates by cause groups. It is, to be emphasized that
the rates, in each case, are based upon the number of employees in
the particular occupation.
It was not possible to compute severity rates for these occupations.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN BLAST FURNACES.

105

T able 3 5 .—A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y B A T E S IN B L A S T F U R N A C E S , B Y O C C U PA TIO N S
A N D CAUSES, 1905 TO 1914.

Cause.

Cast
house.1

Labor.

Mechan­
ics.2

Stock­
ers.3

Unclassi­
fied.4
6.3
1.7
42.6
19.0
17.0
12.3
2.0
8.6
29.6

Total.

3.4
8.2
58.0
39.2
17.5
26.7
3.0
7.1
37.4

W orking machines..........................................
Cranes and h oists.............................................
Hot substances.................................................
Falling objects..................................................
Falls of worker..................................................
Handling tools and objects............................
Power vehicles..................................................
Asphyxiating gas.............................................
Unclassified.......................................................

3.7
11.1
201.2
43.5
25.8
50.8
.7
5.9
37.6

2.4
9.5
63.1
59.6
19.5
37.7
5.9
7.3
45.4

3.0
10.9
20.2
25.9
14.2
18.3
.5
6.3
28.9

6.8
19.2
42.9
10.2
12.4
4.5
5.6
55.3

T otal........................................................

380.2

250.5

' 128.1

156.9

139.1

200.6

1,357

4,930

3, 760

886

3,006

13,849

Number of 300-day workers......................

1 Includes bar and clay men, cinder snappers, keepers and helpers, ladle men, etc.
2 Includes blacksmiths, boiler makers, bricklayers, carpenters, handy men, machinists, millwrights,
painters, repair men, riggers, pipe fitters, etc.
3 Includes bottom fillers, cagers, dust men, larry men, skip hoist men, stockers, top fillers, weighers, etc.
4 Includes blowers, crane hookers, cranemen, engineers, firemen, foremen, lever men, loaders, oilers,
pig-machine men, scrap men, stove cleaners, stove tenders, switchmen, washers, and others.

Considering the total line of the table it appears that cast-house
men have much the highest frequency rate (380.2 cases per 1,000
workers). Since the high mortality due to breakouts in the early
years was chiefly among these workers, the severity rate also may be
presumed to be high. Examining the cause rates for cast-house men
it appears that hot substances hold first place with a rate of 201.2.
Cast-house men also show the highest rates from cranes and hoists
(11.1), from falls of worker (25.8), and from handling tools and
objects (50.8).
Common labor shows high rates at all points where it has been
possible to isolate it. The blast furnaces are no exception. Their
rate (250.5) is not so high as in some other departments, but is
gravely important. Laborers suffer most frequently from hot
substances (63.1), though their rate from this cause is much below
that of cast-house men. They have the highest rate (59.6) of any
occupation from falling objects.
Mechanics in blast furnaces do not have a rate (128.1) in excess
of the general mechanical department (187.5),1 but their exposure to
hot metal and asphyxiating gas undoubtedly gives them a higher
severity.
Further light is thrown on the importance of asphyxiating gas as
a cause of injury in blast furnaces by the uniform distribution of the
hazard among all classes of workers as shown by this table. It is
evidently a pervasive factor which touches practically every worker
The highest rate (8.6) is found among the unclassified workers. This
is in some measure due to the inclusion of stove cleaners, stove
tenders, and gas washers in this group. These workers are more
exposed to this hazard than are tHe others.




i See T ab le 108.

C H A P T E R IV .
CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN STEEL WORKS AND FOUNDRIES.
ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE OPEN HEARTH DEPARTMENT.

The open hearth is now the most important of the steel-making
processes. The decline in ore suitable for making Bessemer steel
has been steadily forcing that process into the background. It will
doubtless regain some of its lost importance with the further devel­
opment of the duplex process, in which the Bessemer process is used
for a preliminary purification, the final removal of impurities being
accomplished in an open hearth.
The following table shows the frequency and severity rates for
the principal accident causes in the open hearth department over the
eight-year period 1907 to 1914. The separate causes listed are those
which seem to be most characteristic of this department. General
causes which open hearths have in common with other departments
are grouped under the head of “ unclassified.” The rates shown are
based on the total employment in the open hearths covered by the
table during each year as shown.
T a b le

3 6 .—CAU SES O F A C C ID E N TS IN O P E N H E A R T H S , B Y Y E A R S , 1907 TO 1914.
1907 | 1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1 1914

Cause.
ACCIDENT FRE Q U EN CY RATES (PE R 1,000 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

W orking m achines1...............................
Cranes and h oists1.................................
H ot substances:
Breakouts..........................................
Sparks and splashes........................
Spills..................................................
Explosions, other than in g ot........
Ingot explosions...............................
Gas flames.........................................
Unclassified.......................................
Total, hot substances.................
Handling tools and objects i .................
Power vehicles1.......................................
Unclassified 2...........................................
T ota l...............................................

4.7
38.1

1.4
25.5

3.1
21.5

3.2
22.4

2.2
19.0

1.5
13.9

0.8
12.2

1.2
12.9

11.4.
17.4
1.3
8.4
5.4
4.7
14.4

2.4
16.5

6.6
14.6

.4
14.7

4.3
15.9

3.9
8.9

14.1

.9
3.8
6.6
6.6

4.2
5.2
4.9
13.2

3.2
8.3
.3
3.8
1.9
4.5
14.3

6.2
3.3
15.4

1.1
2.6
3.4
10.8

4.5
3.1
2.2
10.5

2.0
* 2.8
6.0

36.8
63.0
45.2
23.5
16.7
7.6
145.6 • 108.0

48.7
35.5
10.8
111.1

36.3
33.4
8.3
87.6

40.0
24.6
8.1
59.4

38.1
25.2
12.5
65.6

33.1
23.2
14.7
67.4

24.9
22.5
2.5
50.7

202.8

230.7

191.2

153.3

156.7

151.3

115.2

314.3

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D A Y S LOST PER 300-D A Y W O R K E R ).

W or king machines..................................
Cranes and hoists..............'.....................
H ot substances:
Breakouts..........................................
Sparks and splashes........................
Spills
............................
Explosions, other than in g ot........
Ingot explosions...............................
Gas flames.........................................
Unclassified.......................................

3.1
16.6

0)
0.3

0.1
3.5

0.1
6.9

(1 )„
3.7

0)
0.9

(9
0.5

.2
.2
(3)
15.2
.1
(3)
3.6

(3)
.3

.1
.2

.1
.1

(3)
.3

2.6
.3

.1
.5

4.2
.1
.1
.1

.5
.2

.2
.1

(3)
3.4

(3)
.2

.2
(3)
.4

(3)
.1
(3)
.2

5.1
.2
.1
.5

Total, hot substances..................
Handling tools and objects...................
Power vehicles.........................................
U nclassified2...........................................

19.9
.3
11.1
1.4

4.8
.2
.2
2.2

4.4
.4
1.2
5.0

.7
1.0
.4
5.0

.9
.3
3.7
1.2

3.2
.5
4.2
3.7

6.5
.5
6.2
16.0

52.8

7.5

14.6

14. t

9.9

12.6

29.8

11.6

Number of 300-day workers...................

2,987

2,120

2,872

2,138

2,725

3,525

3,603

2,483

(3)

1 Further details under this item will be found in Table 104.
2 The unclassified group includes all cases not regarded as characteristic of £he department.
3 Less than 0.05.

106



0)

0.3
.7
7.2

(3)
(3)

.2

8.1
.7
1.3
1.2




P L A T E 9.—O P E N H E A R T H C H A R G I N G F L O O R , C H A R G I N G C AR IN F O R E G R O U N D .




P L A T E 10.—P I T S I D E O F O P E N H E A R T H , F R O M P O U R I N G P L A T F O R M .




P L A T E 11.—O P E N H E A R T H H O T M E T A L L A D L E , W I T H S A F E T Y L A T C H ON T R U N N I O N .

ra n




P L A T E 12.—S A F E T Y C H A M B E R ON H O T M E T A L C R A N E .

CAUSES 0E ACCIDENTS IN OPEN HEARTHS,

107

Over the eight-year period covered by the table the accident rates
for the open hearth department as a whole show a marked decrease.
The frequency rates declined from 314.3 cases per 1,000 workers in
1907 to 151.3 cases in 1913, which was a year of similar industrial
character to 1907. The severity rates, as between the same years?
declined from 52.8 days to 29.8 days, with all the intermediate years
showing still lower rates.
The rates for most of the individual cause groups also showed a
general decline between the years mentioned, but the character of
the change was by no means the same in all cases. This can best be
brought out by a consideration of the listed causes in order.
W O RK IN G M ACHINES.

The only machine of importance in the open hearth department is
the charging car (see plate 9), by means of which the boxes con­
taining sprap are lifted from the cars in which they are brought
on to the stocking floor and thrust into the furnace. Under former
conditions, the operator of the charging car was often endangered by
uncovered gearing. The covering of this gearing (see “ A,” in plate
9), together with the placing of a fender on the rail wheel, which
otherwise was a frequent cause of injury to the feet of stocking-floor
workers (see “ B ” ), has reduced to a minimum the hazard of the
charging car.
CRANES AND HOISTS.

The main difference between the cranes used in the open hearths
and those found elsewhere is the adaptation of the former to the
handling of hot metal. In early construction the width of the
stocking floor of an open hearth was no greater than necessary to
accommodate the charging car. As a result the hot metal was neces­
sarily carried overhead by the crane. Both the weight and the char­
acter of the load made this objectionable. In later construction a
greater width was given and a track introduced, seen at the right of
the charging car in plate 2. Along this track the ladles of molten
metal are pushed until opposite the furnace to be charged. From
these they are lifted by the crane and carried the comparatively
short distance across the width of the floor.
On the pit side the cranes take the ladles (“ F,” plate 10) from the
furnace and bring them across the pit to the platform “ A,” where the
metal is drawn into the molds, whose tops appear at UC.” It is
obvious that there are two points of danger in this process. While
the ladle is being moved a break or overset may cause a spill of the
metal, or, arrived at the pouring platforms, sparks may fly from the
stream as it falls into the mold. In case of a spill, every one in the
vicinity is endangered by the intense heat. Particularly is this true
of the craneman, exposed by his position and having no easy means
of escape.




108

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Two methods have been used to combat this hazard: (1) Greater
strength and better design of both the crane and ladle; and (2) better
means of escape or protection, particularly to the craneman.
Plate 11 illustrates a ladle undergoing a test. Formerly the hooks
by which the ladles were suspended were made solid. Now many
of them are made of plates bolted together, thus increasing the
strength and lessening the chance of sudden breakage without warn­
ing. At “ A ” is seen a latch falling into a groove in the trunnion.
When this latch is in place an upset from overfilling is nearly
impossible.
A means of escape for the craneman is illustrated in plate 2, at “ B.”
This is a gallery on a level with the crane cage, to which the craneman
can escape if a spill occurs. In plate 12, at “ A, ” is seen a safety cham­
ber into which the craneman can pass in emergency and from which
he can operate the crane. This arrangement has two advantages
which the gallery does Aot' hifve. It can be applied where a gallery
would be impossible, and it permits the craneman to contribute to the
safety of others by controlling the crane. An illustration will enforce
the importance of this. A spill occurred and the craneman was forced
to leave the cage without stopping the travel of the crane. It moved
down the building, the ladle hanging by one hook and dropping metal
constantly. The craneman realized the danger and, running down
the gallery outside the building, succeeded in getting back into the
cage and stopping the crane. It is easy to see that this return might
have been very difficult, even impossible. The safety chamber
would have afforded him protection and opportunity to control the
mechanism.
HOT1STTBSTANCES.

Breakouts.—Breakouts are much less important in open hearths
than in blast furnaces, but from time to time they inflict an amount of
injury which is not to be neglected. Sometimes, indeed, they are
extremely serious. For example, in some open hearths it is still
necessary to have a pit in front of the furnace in order to depress the
ladle sufficiently to receive the metal. In one open hearth of this
type, two men went down into this pit to clean up accumulated mate­
rial. The tap hole of the furnace gave way and the men were covered
by the white hot flood. One plant, to guard against such an occur­
rence, has adapted a clam shell bucket, by the use of which the accum­
ulated rubbish is removed from the pit more quickly and less labori­
ously. This leaves but little to be done manually, and this little can
be accomplished so quickly as to very greatly reduce the hazard.
To prevent the minor injuries which occur at the tapping hole some
form of screen might be devised which would serve the same purpose
as the screens at the cinder notch and tapping hole of a blast furnace.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN OPEN HEARTHS.

109

Sparlcs and splashes.— Sparks and splashes are the cause of a large
number of injuries in the open hearths but, as shown by the table,
these injuries are'usually of slight importance. During the period
covered by the table, the frequency rates for this cause showed a slight
tendency to decrease—from 17.4 cases per 1,000 workers in 1907 to 8.9
cases in 1913, although with a later increase to 14.1 cases in 1914.
The severity rates, during the same period, increased rather markedly
from 0.2 day per worker in 1907 to 0.5 day in 1913 and to 0.7 day in
1914—but these rates at most are too small to be significant.
As a preventive against the dangers from sparks and splashes in
open hearths, two safeguarding methods could be employed much
more extensively than has been done, namely, the use of good shoes
and leggings and the use of eye protectors. Particularly, the use
of goggles on the pouring platform would aid in cutting down the
occasionally serious eye injuries.
Spills.— Since the worst of the spills occur in the operation of
cranes and hoists they have been briefly referred to in the considera­
tion of the latter subject. The occasion for their occurrence is as
follows: The metal coming from the blast furnaces is placed in a mixer,
so called because the product of different furnaces is mixed in it and a
more uniform iron is thus provided for purification in the open hearths.
The mixer is a bowl-shaped container, capable of holding from 250 to
1,000 tons. It is so constructed that it can be tilted to pour out
the metal into the ladles which carry it to the furnaces. It is obvious
that if the controlling mechanism fails, a very serious spill on a very
large scale may take place.
Three methods are in use to prevent such an occurrence: (1) Coun­
terweights at the back of the mixer by which the mixer automatically
returns to a horizontal position if the controlling mechanism fails.
This has the disadvantage of adding very greatly to the dead weight
of the mixer; (2) an electrically operated dog which locks the mixer in
position if the tilting gear goes wrong; and (3) a safety valve in the
hydraulic tilting apparatus, held down by the pressure of the opera­
tor’s foot and put in action by simply removing that pressure. In one
plant a particular type of valve was devised after an accident which
broke the handle by which the operating valves were changed, leaving
the man in charge helpless to prevent continued motion. This special
form of safety valve has so many points of excellence that a description
is justified:

A mixer of hydraulic type is operated by two cylinders placed in
opposition to each other under the bowl-shaped reservoir containing
the metal. These are the pouring cylinder and the righting cylinder.
A valve operated by a lever directs the water into one cylinder or
the other at the will of the operator. If the valve leaks or can not be




110

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

operated for any reason, it may become impossible to prevent the
entrance of water to the pouring cylinder. The tilting will proceed
under such conditions to the limit and the entire charge be spilled.
The safety valve mentioned above meets this difficulty in the following
manner: From the pipe supplying the pouring cylinder a branch pipe
is led off to the sewer. In this branch pipe is a valve, counter­
weighted so that ordinarily it stands open. No pressure can be con­
veyed to the cylinder until the valve is closed. Beside the operator
is a foot plate on the end of a rod, by which, when the foot plate is
depressed, the valve is closed. In order to pour, the operator closes
the valve by placing his foot on the plate. In an emergency, removal
of the foot at once makes further tilting of the mixer impossible.
This device has several points of excellence: (1) It is in constant
and necessary use and so must be kept in good order; (2) its action
is controlled by the operator, but comes about automatically;
(3) the action required is slight and would occur almost instinctively.
Explosions.—In computing the accident rates for explosions, ingot
explosions were separated from all others in order to determine their
real importance. It developed, as shown in the table, that ingot
explosions, while of considerable frequency, have a very low severity
rate. The severity rate, however, has not decreased in the period
covered, and this means that they have been regarded as of too slight
importance to merit adequate attention. This is unfortunate, as
this form of injury can be practically eliminated. Accidents occur
when a cover placed on top of the mold is removed, and can be pre­
vented: (1) By the use of open-top molds without cover. This
causes slightly more waste, but not enough to offset the benefit of
reduction in accidents; (2) by regulations preventing the removal of
cover until cooling has proceeded far enough to render explosion
unlikely; (3) by screens from behind, which the uncapper can work.
Explosions in the open hearth, other than ingot explosions, are
shown by the table to have constituted an extremely important cause
of accidents in the early years. In 1907 the frequency rate was
8.4 cases per 1,000 workers; in 1913 it had decreased to 4.5 cases.
The decrease in severity was from 15.2 days per worker in 1907 to
5.1 days in 1913. These decreases represent reductions of 46 per cent
in frequency and 66 per cent in severity.
This very material reduction in severity is to be attributed almost
wholly to improved methods, and not in any considerable measure to
greater care on the part of the men. The character of the improved
methods may be indicated by an illustration. A steel mill which
produces special ingots of unusual size fills the molds by “ bottom
pouring.” A tube leads down to the bottom of a pit in which the
mold stands, and into this the metal is poured and rises in the mold.
On top of the main mold a smaller mold, held in place by guy rods




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN OPEN HEARTHS.

I ll

tightened by turnbuckles, is placed, the crack between the two molds
being luted with clay and sand. When the metal in the large mold
reaches the top, pouring is suspended and a small ladle of metal is
brought by the crane to fill the small mold from above. This is
usually done slowly, taking 15 to 20 minutes. On one occasion the
ladle developed a “ running stopper,” that is, one which did not
perfectly close the opening in the bottom of the.ladle. This made
perfect control impossible and the small mold was filled too rapidly.
As a result when the small mold was nearly full an explosion occurred,
forcing sheets of molten steel out of the joint and filling a considerable
space with the flame of the gases. The junction of the two molds
was about the height of a man’s shoulder. One worker was instantly
killed by the falling metal and several others inhaled the blazing
gases and died from the pneumonia following the injuries.
Following this accident certain safeguarding methods were intro­
duced which have proved efficacious in accidents of a somewhat
similar character.
More common but less serious than the above are explosions in the
slag and in the metal as it flows or is moved about. These smaller
explosions can be guarded against by proper clothing and eye pro­
tectors. The larger ones must be prevented by better operative
methods. It often happens that, when material is permitted to
accumulate unreasonably, conditions favorable to explosion arise
when prompt removal would prevent it altogether.
Gas flames.— Injury from this cause is fairly frequent but not
severe. Control over it lies almost entirely in better mechanism and
better method of operation. The victim is almost always a man
whose duties call him near the furnace or gas producer, but who has
little or no control over the conditions which endanger him.
Unclassified hot substances.— Hot water and steam are the most
important in the group of unclassified hot substances. Their abate­
ment is almost entirely a problem of structure and operative method.
H AN DLING TOOLS AND OBJECTS.

This cause group, in the open hearths as in other departments,
has high frequency and rather low severity rates. The changes in
rates have been as follows: In frequency a decrease from 45.2 cases
per 1,000 workers in 1907 to 23.2 cases in 1913, a reduction of 49
per cent; in severity, an increase from 0.3 day per worker in 1907
to 0.5 day in 1913.
Because of the very small size of the severity rates, the increase
therein is of no particular significance. The marked reduction in the
frequency rate, however, is interesting, and may be attributable in
large part to the substitution of magnets on cranes for the hand labor
formerly used in handling scrap. It is quite certain that were the




112

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

old hand method used with the greatly increased tonnage handled
in recent years the frequency rate reduction could not have occurred.
PO W ER VEH ICLES.

Power vehicles in open hearths, as reference to the table will show,
had a frequency rate of 16.7 cases per 1,000 workers in 1907 and 14.7
cases in 1913, a reduction of only 12 per cent. The severity rates
were 11.1 days lost per worker in 1907 and 6.2 days in 1913, a reduc­
tion of 44 per cent. Comparing these with the corresponding rates
for blast furnaces, it is interesting to note that those for the open
hearths were very much the greater in both years as regards fre­
quency, and, as regards severity, were about the same as those for
blast furnaces in 1907 but very much higher in 1913.
From this comparison it must be concluded that the power vehicle
problem is more serious in open hearths than in blast furnaces. It
is desirable to inquire the reason. The pi&ohlem is difficult of solution
in proportion to the degree to which railway* operations cross the
other operations of the mill. In no other department is this the case
to the same extent as in the open hearths. For the most part, in
all other departments, the cars bringing and taking away material
come to and depart from the mill without passing into or through it
at places where other operations are in progress. The open hearth
is very different in this respect. On the stocking floor proper, hot
metal cars are moving; next the furnaces are the scrap car trains;
into the storage space, outside the hot metal track, come regular
railway cars with loads of raw material; on the pit side are regular
cars to receive and carry away slag; and the ingot trains are moving
constantly. With this amount of exposure it is scarcely remarkable
that power vehicles are an important factor in accident causation in
open hearths. Here personal care and caution must play a large
part. The operation of these moving units by well trained and com­
petent men is of great significance. Railway experience proves
conclusively that appliances in the form of automatic couplers,
proper steps, and grab irons must be furnished. Open hearth
practice is not yet up to the highest possible standard in these
respects. When it is made so, further reduction of severity from
power vehicles should occur.
TTNCLASSIFIED CAUSES.

This group of causes is responsible for the highest frequency rates
of any of the groups, but its severity rates are relatively low. The
group includes “ falls of worker” and the high severity rates in certain
years usually represent cases of a worker’s falling from some part
of the structure. While this hazard can not be compared with the
similar danger in blast furnaces it is sometimes very important.
The provision of railed walkways for all regular overhead operations,
such as lamp trimming, is suggested as highly desirable.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN OPEN HEARTHS.

113

Open hearths share with plate and sheet mills in having a consider­
able number of cases of heat exhaustion.1 This has become materially
less with the introduction of water cooled doors and jambs. By
this arrangement a constant stream of cool water passes through the
hollow iron door and through the iron jambs at its side. The effec­
tiveness of these provisions appear in a difference of 33° in recorded
temperatures in front of the furnaces in two open hearths, one of
modern pattern and the other of the older type.2 This difference is
reflected in the lowered rate of heat exhaustion and must have a still
more important bearing 011 general health.
ACCIDENT FREQUEN CY, B Y OCCUPATIONS AN D CAUSES.

For certain distinctive occupations in the open hearth depart­
ment, it has been possible to isolate the number of employees, and
thus to compute accident frequency rates by occupations and causes.
These rates are shown in the following table:
T able 3 7 . — A CC ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S IN O P E N H E A R T H S , B Y OCCUPATION S A N D

CAU SES, 1905 TO 1914.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).
Cause.

Common
labor.

Pouring Stocking Unclassi­
P it
platform
side
floor
fied
workers. workers. workers. workers.

Total.

V ork in g m achines..........................................
Ct rnes and hoists..........................................
H ot substances..................................................
Falling objects..................................................
Falls of worker..................................................
Handling tools and ob jects............................
Unclassified ° ....................................................

4.1
6. 8
90.3
104.1
1.6
14. 8
245.9

0.5
2.5
37.5
20.0
.7
.4
33.0

28.3

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

467.7

94.7

75.5

114.9

176.5

192.4

Number of300-day workers..............................

4,851

5,492

954

7,761

5,395

24,453

41.9
5.2

1.5
.5
36.3
29.9
1.2
2.1
43.5

3.7
1.7
41.3
33. 7
2. 8
25.0
69.0

2.2
2.5
48.6
42.3
1.3
9.2
86.3

a The unclassified group contains all cases not regarded as characteristic of this department.

The highest frequency rate (467.7 cases per 1,000 300-day workers)
is found among the common laborers. This is true of a majority of
the individual cause groups as well as for the total. As should be
constantly emphasized, these high frequency rates for common labor
are known to be accompanied by high severity although the exact
severity rates can not be computed. It becomes of the utmost
importance therefore to study with great care the conditions of such
labor. It has been demonstrated that frequency of accident can
be reduced very rapidly by methods which incite foremen to adequate
instruction and oversight and which interest the men in exercising
proper care. But, as regards severity, it must be insisted that
faulty working conditions may very probably still remain and that
these must be remedied to secure maximum results.
1 See Table 31.
2 See Conditions of E m ploym ent in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States (S. Doc. N o 110
62d Cong., 1st sess.), Vol. I l l , p. 310.

32771°— IS— Bull. 234------- S




114

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Considering hot substances, common labor again has the highest
rate (104.1 cases per l r
000 300-day workers), followed by pouring
platform workers (41.9 cases) and pit men (37.5 cases). The-conditions of work would suggest a considerable number of burns at the
pouring platform, but of a less severe character than those suffered
by the pit side workers.
ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE BESSEMER DEPARTMENT.

Much of what has already been said regarding open hearths applies
with equal force to the Bessemer department. This discussion will
therefore be mainly confined to those points in which the Bessemer
process has features of hazard not found in the open hearths.
The next table shows the frequency and severity rates for the
principal accident causes in the Bessemer departments for which
it was possible to obtain data over a series of years.
T able 3 8 .—CAU SES OF A C C ID E N T S IN B E S S E M E R D E P A R T M E N T , B Y Y E A R S , 1907 T01914.

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1932

1913

1914

Cause.
ACCIDENT F RE Q UENCY RATES (PE R 3,000 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

W orking m achines.................................
Cranes and h oists...................................
H ot substances........................................
Handling tools and objects...................
Power vehicles............. „ .........................
U nclassified1...........................................
T ota l...............................................

4.1
24. &
114.8
13.4
14.5
230.6

3.9
19.6
35.2
33.2
13.6
160.4

10.7
36.0
25.3
8.0
114.7

1.3
23.0
31.8
40.8
15.3
139.0

3.0
10.5
20.9
19.4
7.5
77.7

7.6
41.9
6.3
8.9
100.2

2.3
10.3
27.4
19.4
4.6
61.7

J.7
8.7
20.8
5.2

402.3

266.1

194.7

251.3

139.0

164.9

125.7

65.9

29.5

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D A Y S LOST PER 3 00-D A Y W O R K E R ).

0.2
1.8
.&
2.0

W orking m achines.................................
Cranes and h oists...................................
H at substances.........................................
Handling tools and ob jects...................
Power vehicles.........................................
Unclassified 1...........................................

0.1
1.0
4.4
.3
.4
13.1

0.1
35.3
.7
.3
.8
20.6

0.1
.9
.4
.3
26.2

(2)
0.8
23.5
.6
.4
14.1

(2)
0.3
.6
5.5
.2
1.2

0.3
.6
.1
.4
3.6

0.1
.4
.6
.2
10.4
1.3

17.6

T otal................... ...........................

19.3

58.0

28..0

39.5

7.7

5.0

13.0

22.5

Number of SOOrday morkers....................

967

511

750

784

669

788

875~

576

1 The unclassified group contains all cases n ot regarded as characteristic o f this department.
2 Less than CLQ5.

The irregularity in the severity rates may be due in considerable
part to the small exposure upon which they are based. It has been
the general practice of this report not to compute rates when the
exposure obtainable is less than 1,000 300-day workers. This practice
is departed from here because of the interest that attaches to this
department.
In addition to such irregularity as may be due to the rather small
basic exposure, it is also true that the hazards of the Bessemer
department are essentially fluctuating. Events which can not be
anticipated, sueh as explosions, are mom common than in other




115

CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN THE BESSEMER DEPARTMENT.

departments. Improved structure has done and is doing a great
deal but it still remains true that the Bessemer is what the safety
men call a “ bad actor.”
Working machines are an almost negligible factor in this depart­
ment. The converters themselves are not included as machines,
since the accidents directly connected with them are nearly all
properly placed under other heads, such as hot substances, falling
bodies, etc.
C ran es

and

h o is ts

appear

as

usual

of

h ig h

im p o r ta n c e ,

b o th

in

fr e q u e n c y a n d s e v e r ity .

Hot substances have very high frequency rates, but the severity
rates are high in only a few years. The high frequency arises from
the small particles of molten metal projected from the converters
during a “ blow.” The decline in frequency to be noted is partly
due to greater care in the clothing worn by the workmen but more to
changed methods of operation which make it needless to work in
certain localities when these particles are falling. The very high
severity rate of 1910 (23.5 days) was due to a bad spill which caused
two deaths.
The unclassified group includes falling objects, falls of worker, and
several other causes. Of these, falling objects is of considerable
importance in the Bessemer department but could not be conven­
iently isolated.
Formerly a rather frequent cause of serious accident from hot
metal was the failure of the hydraulic hoisting apparatus. In plate
13 the ladle is shown above the mold (“ B ” ). If, when in that posi­
tion, leakage occurred from the hoisting cylinder the crane arm
would sag down, the bottom of the ladle would catch on the top of
the mold, and the ladle would be completely overturned. Such an
occurrence is entirely prevented by the application of an automatic
catch at point “ A .” The catch is so arranged that when in the
position shown it engages with a lug on the pillar, having the form of
an arc of a circle. When the crane is swung in either direction the
catch remains engaged with the lug until the ladle is entirely clear
of the molds. It then releases and the ladle can be lowered if neces­
sary.
I t h a s a lr e a d y b e e n in d ic a te d
is c a lle d

a

“ r u n n in g

s t o p p e r .”

th a t m u ch
T h is

is

a

d a n g e r r e s u lts fr o m
sto p p e r

w a y s o t h a t it w ill n o t p e r fe c t ly fit th e o p e n in g in
la d le a n d p r e v e n t t h e o u t flo w

d e fe c tiv e

w h at

in

som e

th e b o tto m

o f th e m e ta l b e tw e e n p o u rs.

A

o f th e
s im p le

in s ta lla t io n in o n e B e s s e m e r p la n t p r o v e d v e r y e ffe c t iv e in m in im iz in g
th is d a n g e r .
fo r m .

T w o

a ir h o is ts w e r e in s ta lle d

Im m e d ia te ly

u p on

th e s to p p e r w a s h o is te d
c o n d itio n

it

r e m a in e d




th e

ou t.

c o m p le tio n
If, o n

su spen ded

above
of

th e

th e

p o u r in g

p o u r in g

of

in s p e c t io n , it a p p e a r e d

u n til

th e

c o m p le tio n

of

p la t­

a

la d le

in

g ood

a n oth er

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

116

pouring and was then restored. If its condition was unsatisfactory
the stopper was lowered to the platform and replaced by a fresh
one kept constantly in reserve. This procedure had two advantages:
(1) An inspection after each heat, and (2) the stopper, having a
chance to cool before being restored, lasts longer than when in con­
tinuous service.
Under conditions formerly prevalent the scrap and pig thrown
into the converter (to cool the metal before tilting the converter to
discharge the heat into the ladle) was thrown directly into the con­
verter from a platform. This exposed the men engaged to very
severe heat and made it very likely that scrap would fall to the
floor below. Many severe injuries arose from this cause. In the
best recent construction the “ scrappers ” work behind a water-cooled
screen and deliver the material into a chute, which effectually prevents
its falling to the pit floor.
ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE FOUNDRY DEPARTMENT.

The foundries included here are limited to those which form parts
of large steel plants, the foundry data being accumulated somewhat
incidentally along with the data for the more important departments.
The following table shows, by years, the frequency and severity
rates for the more characteristic accident causes in these foundries:
T a b le

3 9 .—CAU SES O F A C C ID E N TS IN F O U N D R IE S , B Y Y E A R S , 1907 TO 1914.
1907

1908 | 1909

1910

1911

1912

| 1913

1914

Cause.
ACCIDENT FRE Q U EN CY RATES (PE R 1 ,000 3 00 -D A Y W O R K E R S ).

W orking machines.................................
Cranes and hoists....................................
H ot substances........................................
Handling tools and objects...................
Power vehicles.........................................
Unclassified1............................................

54.3

T otal...............................................

190.6

7.5
34.1
42.6
52.2

6.7
32.8
35.3
49.6
.8
95.9

2.3
22.9
27.4
61.7

48.7

6.1
59.9
39.6
54.8
2.0
71.1

168.3

233.5

221.2

2.8
25.0
36.2
55.6

70.9

7.5
47.3
23.7
61.6
.9
82.4

3.0
19.2
24.2
43.4
2.0
57.6

185.1

223.5

149.5

!

5 .1

27.4
10.3
35.9
1.7
47.9
128.2

ACCIDENT SEV ERITY RATES (D A Y S LOST PER 3 00-D A Y W O R K E R ).

W orking machines.................................
Cranes and hoists....................................
H ot substances........................................
Handling tools and objects...................
Power vehicles___
Unclassified1............................................

0.4
.8
.8
.6

(2)
0.6
.8
.4

10.9

.6

T otal...............................................

13.6

2.5

Number of 300-day workers....................

939

719

0.1
1.7
.9
.5
(2)

(2)
1.0
.6
.4
(2)

0.2
10.7
.4
2 .2

0.7
19.4
1.4
.7
(2)
1.0

(2)
0.5
9.6
1.5
(2)
1.2

(2)
0.3
.2
2.6
.1
.4

2 .2

11.5

5.5

4.4

24.9

23.1

12.8

3.7

985

1,189

875

1,056

990

585

2 .2

1 The unclassified group contains all cases not regarded as characteristic of this department.
2 Less than 0.05.

As was noted to be the case with the Bessemer department, the
yearly cause rates for foundries, shown in this table, are not based
upon sufficient exposure to assure their being typical. But the body
of material is sufficiently large to render the rates of very consider­
able interest.




CH APTER V.
C A U S E S O F A C C ID E N T S IN

R O L L IN G M IL L S .

ACCIDENT CAUSES IN HEAVY BOLLING MILLS.

Accident rates,^by principal causes,, in the heavy rolling mills are
shown in the following table for the period 1907 to 1914:
T a b le

4 0 .—CAUSES OF A CC ID E N TS IN H E A V Y R O L L IN G M ILLS, B Y Y E A R S , 1907 T O 1914.

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

Cause.
ACCIDENT FREQ UEN CY RATES (PER 1,000 300-D A Y W O R K E R S ).

W orking machines1...............................
Cranes and hoists....................................
H ot substances1......................................
Power vehicles.........................................
Unclassified2............................................

16.7
18.9
16.0
5.0
139.1

12.0
14.3
11.9
2.2
130.4

13.3
21.6
14.4
6.1
129.5

9.9
12. 5
11.9
3.9
102.9

11.4
13.1
10.1
2.9
101.8

8.1
8.8
11.2
3.4
101.6

9.2
6.1
8.9
3.2
72.0

35.4

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

195.8

170.8

184.9

141.1

139.3

133.1

99.4

57.3

7.3
6 3
7.4

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (D AYS LOST PER 300-D AY W O R K E R ).

W orking machines.................................
Cranes and hoists....................................
H ot substances........................................
Bpwer vehicles........................................
Unclassified2............................................

2.5
6.4
2.2
.1
8.2

3.3
.4
.4
.1
6.1

2.5
4.7
4.5
.2
6.5

4.4
.9
2.0
.2
8.1

1.4
3.1
2.3
.1
7.6

0.4
.4
2.1
.5
2.4

0.4
.1
5.2
.1
1.6

0.4
.2
3.0
.3
1.6

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

19.4

10.3

18.4

15.5

14.4

5.6

7.5

5.4

Number of 300-day workers.....................

4, ■
556

3,135

4,210

4,886

4,195

5,226

5,287

3,504

1 Further details under this item will be found in Table 105,
2 The unclassified group contains all cases not regarded as characteristic of the department.

Examination of the table brings out an interesting fact as regards
the importance of the unclassified cause group. This group, which
includes those general causes which the rolhng mills share with other
departments, contributes more than one-half of the total frequency
rate in each of the years. But in the case of the severity rates this
situation is reversed, the unclassified group contributing the minor
part of the total rate in almost all of the years and very much the
minor part in the later years.
Tracing the course of the rates over the years shown, it will be
noted that there has been a marked tendency to decline. The fre­
quency rates for each of the cause groups is notably lower in 1913
than in 1907. This is also true of the severity rates, with the excep­
tion of the hot substance group, for which the rates were only 2.2




117

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

118

days lost per worker in 1907 as compared with 5.2 days in 1913 and
with 3 days in 1914. Hot substances as a cause of severe accident
have thus apparently been increasing in importance in the heavy
rolling mills, while all other causes have been decreasing.
C a r e fu l s t u d y

o f th e

m a c h in e r y

t h a t th e a c c id e n ts in c o n n e c t io n
th e

m ore

sta n t

nu m erous

d u r in g

cau sed

m u ch

A ccessory

a c c id e n ts

th a t

th e y

a n u m b e r o f y e a r s .1

in ju r y

years.

and

o f th e h e a v y r o llin g

w ith

th a n

any

t h e in ju r ie s f r o m

m ore

of

have

th e

r e m a in e d

O b je c t s

fr e q u e n tly

m a c h in e s

used

m ill in d ic a te s

th e r o lls th e m s e lv e s

in

fly in g fr o m

th e

abou t

c h a r a c te r is t ic

th e

e a r lie r t h a n

th e

m ills

r o llin g

a re a m o n g

p r a c t ic a lly

g iv e

con ­

m a c h in e s

in

th e

la te r

r is e

to

m ore

m a c h in e s ,

a lth o u g h

t h e fo r m e r s o u r c e a r e m u c h le s s s e v e r e in c h a r a c t e r .

W h e n h o t s u b s ta n c e s a re c o n s id e r e d , it a p p e a r s th a t d u r in g m a n ip ­
u la tio n

of

a c c id e n ts

th e

ste e l

a r is e

in

th e

u s u a lly

a fte r it h a s p a sse d

on

ro lls

b e fo re

to

in ju r ie s

th e

a re

n ot

h o t ste e l h as

n u m erou s.

reach ed

th e

S u ch
ro lls

or

th e h o t b e d s.

T h is d e p a r t m e n t d o e s n o t a p p e a r t o p r e s e n t p a r t ic u la r p o in t s u p o n
w h ic h

s a fe ty

e ffe cte d
of

e ffo r t

appears

g e n e r a lly

to

a ccep ted

m e th o d o r stru ctu re .
good

in

th e

m ay
have

be

ce n te re d .

been

s a fe ty

due

T he

ra th er

m e th o d s

to

th a n

im p r o v e m e n t
th e
to

ste a d y
s p e c ific

th u s

fa r

a p p lic a t io n
ch an ges

in

I t is t o b e n o t e d t h a t t h e r e c o r d i s p a r t i c u l a r l y

case o f cran es

and

h o is ts .

In all heavy rolling the roll and transfer table have large gears
(pi. 14) which when uncovered are a serious menace. In plate 14 a
heavy iron cover is shown removed and lying on the floor. Below
the gears is a cast-iron guard so molded as to form a reservoir for oil
for each pair of gears. When the cover is in place, a complete inclosure
is formed. The gears revolving in a bath of oil need attention in the
matter of lubrication only at considerable intervals. Some millmen
object to such guards on the ground that they interfere with inspection
and repair. It is probable that the longer life of the gears, protected
completely from dust and grit, more than offsets the extra time
involved in removing the cover for inspection.
Those who object to the inclosing cover prefer a guard such as is
shown at “ B,” plate 15. The side of this is hinged to the horizontal
portion and can be turned back, exposing the gears for oiling, inspec­
tion, and repair.
Plate 15 also shows at “A ” a bridge over the transfer tables.
Before such bridges were provided even the necessary crossing from
side to side of the tables was seriously dangerous for the experienced
man, while the new or inexperienced man who had occasion to cross
it was taking his life in his hand. Such means of transit can be very
properly increased in many places.
1 See T able 105 for th e analysis of the frequency rates of machines in heavy rolling mills.







P L A T E 15. —T R A N S F E R T A B L E W I T H G U A R D F O R G E A R S A N D W I T H B R I D G E .







P L A T E 17.—S H I E L D S O V E R R O L L W A B B L E R S .




P L A T E 18.—F O R M E R P O S I T I O N O F S C R E W - D O W N P U L P I T IN P L A T E MI L L .




P L A T E 19.— N E W P O S I T I O N O F S C R E W - D O W N P U L P I T IN P L A T E MI L L .




P L A T E 20. — M E T A L P L A N E R , WI T H S A F E T Y P L A T E S C L O S I N G O P E N I N G IN B E D .

119

CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN H EAVY ROLLING M ILLS.

Plate 16 shows at “ A ” a sign so placed that a man coming through
the passageway is not likely to disregard it and step out upon the
track. A further safeguard is the bell at “ B ” which rings auto­
matically whenever the bloom car moves.
Plate 17 illustrates a feature which is now quite generally incor­
porated in the design of roll housings. At “ A ” are guards which
screen the revolving roll wabblers.
ACCIDENT CAUSES IN TUBE MILLS.

The rates for the principal accident causes in the tube mills, for
the years 1907 to 1914, are as follows:
Table 41.—
CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN TUBE MILLS, BY YEARS, 1 0 TO 1 1 .
97
94
C
ause.

1
9 1 10 99 4
9
91 9
913 1 14 1907to 111to
1907 1 08 1909 1910 1 1 1 12 1
1
9
A C E TF E U N YR T S(P R1 0 3 0 A W R E S).
C IDN R Q E C A E E ,0 0 0 -D Y O K R

W
orking m
achines i............
Cranes and hoists...............
Hot substances..................
...........
Pow vehicles
er
U
nclassified2....................
Total......................

48.8
22.9
42.4
.5
174.4
289.0

44.8
12.4
20.7
139.2
217.1

43.6
16.0
23.2
1.1
170.4
254.3

31.8
13.4
17.9
165.2
228.2

35.5
9.3
24.5
156.1
225.4

19.7 10.5 2.6 42.3 17.3
7.0 5.2 3.3 16.6
6.3
15.0 4.8 5.2 26.8 12.3
.4
126.7 58.1 34.1 163.8 ” *9 .’2
5
168.4 78.6 45.2 249.9 131.1

A C E TSE E IT R T S(D Y L S P R3 0 A W R E ).
C IDN V R Y A E A S OT E 0 -D Y O K R
W
orking machines1............ 1.8 1.0 8.1 5.9
.4
.5
.5
Cranes and hoists...............
.6
.4
.4
H substances..................
ot
.1
Pow vehicles................
er
(3 ‘” 2*7’ 3.7 j 3.1
)
U
nclassified 2.................... 7.5
Total...................... 10.4 4.5 12.7 | 9.9
N um ber of 300-day w ork ers ..... 2,007 1,451 | 1,813 , 1,702

0.6 5.7 0.2
.1 4.3
.1
.2
.5
.1
2.7 1.7 10.2
3.9 11.8 10.6
1J 1 7

2,131

2,101

0.3
.6
(3
)
2.2
3.1
1,527

4.3
.5
.4
(3
)
4.4
9.6
7,063

1.0
1.4
.2
4.4
7.9
7,476

1 F u rth er details u nd er this item w ill be fou nd in T ab le 105.
2 T h e unclassified group in clu d es all cases n ot regarded as characteristic of the d ep artm en t.
3 Less th an 0.05.

This department offers a striking illustration of the weakness of
the frequency rate alone as a measure of hazard. The operation of
tube mills gives opportunity for a large number of minor injuries,
while severe injuries are comparatively rare. As shown in the
table, the earlier years have high frequency rates with relatively
low severity rates. From year to year the frequency rates drop,
toward the last of the period with extraordinary rapidity. During
the same time severity shows much fluctuation without much decline.
In fact a reduction in severity is hardly detectable, except by com­
paring the rates for the earlier four years combined with those for
the later four years. This is done in the last two columns of Table
41, which show the cause .rates for 1907 to 1910 in comparison with
those for 1911 to 1914.




120

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IEON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

It will be noted that, between the two periods, the frequency rates
for machine operation declined 59 per cent (from 42.3 to 17.3 cases),
while severity rates declined 56 per cent (from 4.3 to 1.9 days). In
this instance the reductions in frequency and severity are unusually
close together. In contrast, it may be noted that cranes and hoists
decline in frequency 62 per cent (from 16.6 to 6.3 cases), but rise in
severity 180 per cent (from 0.5 to 1.4 (lays). This rise in severity,
however, is mainly due to an unusually high severity in one year of
the later four years. Aside from that year, the later period has dis­
tinctly lower severity.
Hot and corrosive substances decline in frequency 54 per cent (from
26.8 to 12.3 cases), and in severity 50 per cent (from 0.4 to 0.2 day).
The miscellaneous group of other causes declines in frequency 42 per
cent (from 163.8 to 95.2 cases), but in severity remains unchanged (at
4.4 days).
The total for all causes shows a decline in frequency of 47 per
cent (from 249.9 to 131.1 cases), and in severity a decline of only 18
per cent (from 9.6 to 7.9 days).
These comparisons show clearly that a very definitely improved
condition prevailed in the later of the four-year periods. It is
equally clear that appeal to the frequency rates only would give a
wrong idea regarding the nature and extent of the improvement.
The unclassified cause group is in need of special attention. Here,
notwithstanding a very considerable drop in frequency, severity has
maintained a nearly constant level. Table 42 reveals the fact that
common labor has an extremely high frequency from these miscel­
laneous causes. Probably attention to certain phases of the working
condition of such labor might produce desirable results.
A detailed analysis of the accidents resulting from machines in
tube mills showed that the pipe threading and cutting machines con­
tribute the largest number of injuries.1 The pushers, by which the
skelp is introduced into the furnace, also have a high frequency rate.
Accidents at the rolls, while quite frequent in early years, had en­
tirely disappeared by 1913 and 1914.
ACC ID ENT F REQU ENCY, B Y OCCUPATIONS AN D CAUSES.

For a few important occupational groups in the tube mills it has
been possible to compute occupational rates by causes. These are
shown in the following table. It was not possible to make similar
computation for severity rates.
i See T a b le 105 for an an alysis o f freq u en cy rates for m achine accidents in th e tu b e m ills.




CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN TUBE M ILLS.
T able

4 2 .— A C C ID E N T

FREQUENCY

RATES

IN

TUBE

C A U S E S , 1907 T O

M IL L S , B Y

121

O C C U P A T IO N S

AND

1914.

A ccid en t frequency rates (per

1 , 000300-d a y workers).

Cause.
C om m on
labor.

Finishing
crew s.2

Furnace
crew s.1

O ther occu­
pation s.3

T o ta l.

W o r k in g m a ch in es...............
Cranes and h o ists..................
H o t su bstances.......................
Pow er ve h ic les........................
U n classified ..............................

61 .7
56 .0
69.7
.5
473.4

12.7
1 .6
13 .7

17.3
.2
.7

35 .6
7 .7
16 .9
.4
113.6

32 .3

4 3 .2

T o ta l................................

661.3

60.3

60 .5

174.2

188.9

Number of 300-day workers

2,123

3,066

4,150

5,200

14,539

29 .4
11.3
19.3
.2
128.6

1 Includes bailers, bar pullers, benders, heaters, hook runners, pushers, rollers, tong m en , take-offs, tu rn d ow ns, welders, etc.
2 Includes bundiers, pipe threaders, pipe testers, w eighers, etc.
3 Includes crane hookers, cranem en, m echanics, workers in socket and galvanizing sh o ps, etc.

This occupational table does not demand special comment. But
attention may be called to the very high frequency rates amqjig com­
mon laborers. This might be of small significance were it not known,
although exact data is lacking, that the severity rates among such
labor are also high.
ACCIDENT CAUSES IN PLATE MILLS.

The accident rates in plate mills, by causes and by years, are as
follows :
Table 4 3 . — C A U S E S O F A C C I D E N T S I N P L A T E M I L L S , B Y Y E A R S , 1907 T O 1914.
Cause.

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

A C E TF E U N YR T S (P R 1,0 0 3 0 A W R E S).
C IDN R Q E C A E E 0 0 -D Y O K R
W o rk in g m achines 1......................................
Cranes and h o ists............................................
H o t substances 1.............................................
Power vehicles.................................................
Unclassified 2....................................................

20.9
40 .7
20 .9
5 .2
253.3

17.1
19.6
17.1
1.7
174.8

12.9
32 .4
2 0 .2
6 .7
180.5

14 .4
34 .7
16.0
5 .3
147.4

14.6
21.3
14 .0
3 .6
134.9

11.5
29.1
16 .6
5 .5
165.7

9 .9
17 .9
16.4
5 .0
130.1

4 .4
1 0.2
7 .3
.7
6 6 .0

T o ta l.........................................................

341.0

230.2

252.8

217.9

188.4

228.4

179.3

88 .5

A C E T S V R YR T S (D Y L S P R 3 0 A W R E ).
C IDN E E IT A E A S OT E 0 -D Y O K R
W ork ing m a chines........................................
Cranes and h o ists............................................
H o t substances................................................
Pow er vehicles.................................................
U nclassified 2....................................................

7 .4
.9
14 .3
.3
7 .7

0 .5
.7
.2
( 3)
9 .8

0 .3
6 .0
.2
.1
2 .5

1 .0
10 .6
.2
5 .0
3 .6

0 .2
.3
.2
.1
3 .6

1 .7
1 .1
.2
.1
7 .5

0 .6
5 .1
.3
4 .6
1 .9

0 .1
.3
.1
( 3)
1 .6

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

3 0 .7

11 .2

9 .1

20 .5

4 .4

10 .6

12.5

2 .1

Number of 300-day workers......................

1,915

1,173

1,634

1,872

1,645

1,992

2,013

1,379

1 Fu rth er details under this item w ill be found in T ab le 105.
2 T h e unclassified group includes all cases n ot regarded as characteristic of the d ep artm en t.
e Less th an 0.05.




122

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Working machines show from 1907 to 1913 a decline in frequency
rates of 53 per cent (from 20.9 to 9.9 cases), and in severity a decline
of 92 per cent (from 7.4 to 0.6 days). Between the same years cranes
and hoists decline 56 per cent in frequency (from 40.7 to 17.9 cases)
but rise in severity from 0.9 day to 5.1 days from the earlier to the
later year, although, if the experience is considered in four-year
periods, the earlier four years show much greater severity than the
later four. Hot substances have lower rates in 1913 than in 1907—
in frequency by 22 per cent (20.9 as against 16.4 cases), in severity by
98 per cent (14.3 as against 0.3 days). Power vehicles have about
the same frequency rate in 1913 as in 1907, and while the severity
rate is higher in 1913 than in 1907, the average for the later four-year
period is just about the same as for the first four years, The unclassi­
fied cause group shows a marked reduction in. both frequency and
severity rates.1
The most promising field for safety study in the plate mills appears
to be tlie operation of shears and the protection from flying objects
which are largely due to shears.
It has elsewhere been noted that plate mills-show rather frequent
cases of exhaustion produced by heat. This is due to the extended
area of radiation presented by the plates. The most important
safeguard is a supply of water of good quality and of not too low a
temperature for drinking purposes. Besides this, attention can be
given to the position of the workers, to shielding them by means of
water-cooled or other screens, and to furnishing them with a supply
of fresh air. This latter serves both for the relief of the men and to
carry away heated air. The plates (18 and 19) show a rearrangement
in one mill which contributed greatly to the comfort of the man in
the “ pulpit,” increased his efficiency, and doubtless conserved his
health. Originally his “ pulpit” was almost directly over the roll
table along which the red-hot plates were constantly passing (PI. 18).
In the rearrangement of the mill he was shifted to a position removed
from the table and a fan was installed, driving its air current from
the man toward the heated plates (PI. 19). The improvement was
very marked.
i A further analysis of frequency rates for m achines and h o t substances in p late m ills is given in T a b le 105.




123

CAUSES- OF ACCIDENTS IK SHEET M ILLS.

ACCIDENT CAUSES IN SHEET MILLS.

The accident rates for sheet mills are shown, by principal causes
and by years, in the following table:
T able

4 4 .—CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN SHEET MILLS, B Y Y E A R S , 1907 TO 1914.
1907

1908

1909

1910 j 1911
I

1912

1913

1914

Cause.
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY" RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY WORKERS).
Working machines1...............................
Hot substances1.....................................
Handling tools and objects1................
Heat...........................................................
Unclassified 2.............. .............................

13.1
21.7
39.3
60.2

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

134.3

55.4

11.0
8.5
31.7
1.7
49.5

12.9
4.9
14.0
2.7
37.9

19.3
4.5
30.8
3.7
50.6

17.8
7.5
55.7
1.0
65.3

120.5

102.3

72.4

108.9

147.4

15.9
11.3
37.9

19.7
3.0
37.5
.7
53.5

18.4
6.4
18.4
1.6
48.3

1X4.5 |

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER).
Working machines.................................
Hot substances.............. - .......................
Handling tools and objects...................
Heat...........................................................
Unclassified *...........................................

0.4
.2
.3

0.3
.1
.3

12.3

Total...............................................
Number of 800-day workers.....................

2.1

4.4
.1
.6
(3)
13.5

1.6
.1
.6
3.4
11.4

4.0
.1
.5
3.7
8.8

1.7
.1
.8
(3
)
4,7

2.8
.1
.6
(3)
5.0

13.2

2.8

18.5

17.2

17.0

7.5

8.5

6.5

%,2il

1,951

2,366

2,637

2,433

2,92 j

2,691

1,905

0.6
.1
.2
<*)

5.6

1 Further details under this item will be found in Table 105.
2 The unclassified group includes all cases not regarded as characteristic of the department.
3 Less than 0.05.

Table 44 shows that these mills have relatively low rates, both fre­
quency and severity. As a whole, they present the very unusual
condition of a tendency to rising frequency rates while severity rates
are declining. This situation is of sufficient interest to justify par­
ticular attention.
Reference to Table 45 will show that the hot-mill crews have a
frequency rate very nearly the same as the remainder of the workers.
The accidents to hot-mill men will very largely occur in connection
with the characteristic machines of the mills. On the other hand,
the miscellaneous employees will furnish nearly all the cases which
fall into the unclassified group of causes.
An examination, therefore, of the experience for working machines
and unclassified causes will give a fair idea of the trend of events in
the two occupational groups.
From the rates given in Table 44 it will be seen that working
machines— operated by the hot-mill crew—show for the entire period
a definite tendency to rise both in frequency rates and in severity
rates. A t the same time the rates for the unclassified group of
causes— contributed to most largely by the miscellaneous employees—




124

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

go down as definitely. The combination of these opposing tendencies
produces the total result, referred to earlier as unusual, of rising fre­
quency rates and decreasing severity rates.
How has it happened that an important group of workers have
had actually rising rates during this period of general accident reduc­
tion ? It may be replied that the rates, being relatively low as com­
pared with other mills making different products, have not attracted
the attention which they deserved. Further, the hot-mill crew~ hav­
ing a rising rate was combined with a group of workers having a
somewhat declining rate and the real condition was obscured by this
combination, sheet mills as a whole showing a declining rate for the
five years 1910 to 1914. Also, it is not possible to disconnect this
definite rise in the accident rate of hot-mill crews as represented by
these mills from the great increase in tonnage which has occurred
T
since 1909. Accident rates, both frequency and severity, rising par­
allel with this growing tonnage force the conclusion that this in­
creased product has been secured at some cost of increasing hazard.
Whether the increase is of serious moment can only be determined
by further study. It certainly deserves the most careful considera­
tion of safety men who have charge of such mills.
The following table shows the frequency rates, by causes, for two
occupational groups in the sheet mills—the hot-mill crew on the one
hand, and all other workers on the other hand. The importance of
this separation has already been pointed out.
T a bl e 4 5 . — A C C I D E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S I N S H E E T M I L L S , B Y O C C U P A T I O N S A N D




C A U S E S , 1907 T O

Cause.

W o r k in g m a c h in e s..........................
H o t su b sta n c e s..................................
H a n d lin g tools an d o b je c ts ____
H e a t .........................................................
U n classified .........................................

1914.

H o t-m ill
crew s.

23 .1
3 .3
3 9 .0
3 .3
37 .1

Other
occupa­
tions.

13.7
6 .6
2 8 .3
.3
60 .6

T o ta l.

1 7 .6
5 .2
3 2 .7
1 .5
50 .9

T o ta l...........................................

105.8

109.5

107.9

Number of 200-day ivorlcers..........

5,200

7,391

12,591

CHAPTER VI.
CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN THE MECHANICAL, FABRICATING, AND YARD
DEPARTMENTS.
ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE MECHANICAL DEPARTMENT.

The accident rates for the mechanical department, by principal
causes and years, are as follows:
Table 4 6 . — C A U S E S

O F A C C ID E N T S

IN

THE

M E C H A N IC A L

DEPARTM ENT, BY YEARS,

1907 T O 1914.

Cause.

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

A C E T F E U N Y R T S (P R 1 0 3 0 A Y R E S).
C IDN R Q E C A E E ,0 0 0 -D Y /O K R
W o r k in g m achines 1......................................
Cranes and h o is ts ............................................
H o t substances.................................................
U n cla ssified 2.....................................................

4 4 .5
16.9
13.4
177.4

4 0 .8
13.6
7 .4
212.5

4 4 .0
10 .1
8 .1
168.4

30.1
12.1
9 .9
132.7

3 0 .8
6 .5
14.9
93 .3

2 5 .4
4 .7
8 .9
* 83 .8

10.1
5 .1
10.-5
8 4 .5

1 3 .2
6 .0
5 .4
8 1 .8

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

25 2.2

274.2

230. 7

184.9

145.5

122.8

11 0.2

106.5

A C E TSE E IT R T S (D Y L S P R3 0 A W R E ).
C IDN V R Y A E A S OT E 0 -D Y O K R
W o rk in g m a c h in e s 1......................................
Cranes an d h o is ts ............................................
H o t su bstances.................................................
U n cla ssifie d 2 .....................................................

1 .0
.4
.2
10 .4

1 .6
5 .9
5 .7
13 .8

1 .1
.1
4 .6
13 .3

T o ta l..........................................................

1 1 .9

2 7 .0

19.1

Number of 300-day workers.........................

2,542

1,619

1,977

0 .6
.2
.1
14 .3
1 5 .3 |

0 .7
.2
.1
9 .9
1 1 .0

2,223 | * , m

1 .1
.3
.1
5 .9

0 .2
.2
3 .7
9 .1

1 .0
1 .6
.1
2 .1

7 .3

1 3 .2

4 .7

2,362

2,569

1,662

1 F u rth er d etails u nd er th is ite m w ill be found in T a b le 106.
2 T h e unclassified group in clu des all cases not regarded as characteristic of th e dep artm en t.

The characteristic hazard of mechanical departments is the work­
ing machine and it is particularly desirable to determine its impor­
tance as compared with other causes. Inspection of the various
years covered by the table shows that both the frequency rates and
the severity rates for working machines are much less than the rates
of the unclassified group which contains causes common to this and
other departments. This indicates clearly that the working machine
is not, even in the department where it is characteristic, a hazard in
any degree equal to the common dangers of industry. It is such
facts as these which have given rise to the idea that “ mechanical
safeguarding” is a relatively unimportant matter. If attention is
directed solely to working machines the idea is correct. When, how­
ever, the question of physical conditions is considered on a broader
basis, as is later done (Chapter VIII), a much modified conclusion
will be found to be necessary.




125

126

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE FABRICATING SHOPS.

The accident rates for fabricating, by principal causes and years,
are shown in the following table:
T a b l e 4 7 . — C A U S E S O F A C C I D E N T S I N T H E F A B R I C A T I N G S H O P S , B Y Y E A R S , 1907 T O 1914.

Cause.

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

A C E T F E U N Y R T S (P R 1,000 3 0 A W R E S).
C IDN R Q E C A E E
0 -D Y O K R

'
W o r k in g m a c h in e s 1.......................................
Cranes and h o is ts ............................................
H o t su bstances..................................................
U n cla ssifie d 2 .....................................................
T o t a l.........................................................

4 2 .3
3 6 .0
5 .8
198.9

2 9 .0
3 0 .1
3 .4
121.7

4 8 .0
4 9 .7
2 .3
169.5

4 8 .2
3 9 .5
6 .3
190.0

58 .1
2 9 .5
7 .7
20 2.0

74 .7
37 .1
1 0 .6
191.9

6 3 .6
4 3 .5
8 .8
174.1

3 7 .0
2 9 .0
3 .4
129.1

283. 0

18 4.3

26 9.5

2 8 4 .0

297.3

3 1 4.4

J 29 0.0

198.4

A C E TSE E IT B T S (D Y L S P P 3 0 A W R E ).
C IDN V R Y A E A S OT E . 0 -D Y O K R
W o r k in g m a ch in es.........................................
Cranes and h o is ts ............................................
H o t substances.................................................
U n cla ssified 2. . ............ i .................................

1 .4
13.8
( 3)
2 0 .3

5 .6
7 .4
( 3>
3 .8

0 .8
16 .0
( 3)
11 .7

1 .3
14 .0
( 3)
1 1 .2

0.6

5 .7
( 3)
2 .4

1 .2
10 .8
.2
8 .7

1 .1
.8
.1
6 .5

0 .5
6 .2
( 3)
2 .9

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

3 5 .4

16 .7

2 8 .5

2 6 .5

8 .8

2 0 .8

8 .5

9 .7

Number of300-day workers.........................

2,081

1,758

1,770

2,074

2,203

2,074

2,045

1,759

1 F u rth er d etails u n d er th is item, w ill b e found in T a b le 106.

2 T h e unclassified group in clu d es all eases n ot regarded as characteristic of th e d ep artm en t.
® L ess th a n 0 .0 5 .

The working machine in this, as in the mechanical department,
is a characteristic hazard, and it is slightly more important in fabri­
cating, as comparison of the severity rates of this with the preceding
table will show. This is due to the greater use of reamers, riveters,
and punches, whose hazard exceeds that, for example, of lathes and
planers. But the more serious dangers of fabrication are related to
the constant use of the crane and to the common hazards which it
shares with other departments. So frequent is thfc use of the crane
in connection with the processes of fabrication that it might almost
be regarded as one of the productive machines.
Working machines do not exhibit any tendency to declining rates
in these shops, but cranes and unclassified causes show a steady de­
cline.
In Table 106 will be found frequency rates for the individual
machines used in the mechanical and fabricating departments.
ACCIDENT REDUCTION METHODS AMONG MECHANICS AND FABRI­
CATORS.

The relatively rather slight importance of working machines in
both the mechanical and fabricating shops has been pointed out.
While as part of the general danger of the shops such machines are of
small significance, it must not hastily be assumed that the individual




P L A T E 22. —S H I E L D O V E R R E V O L V I N G K N I F E O F W O O D P L A N E R .




SP E C IA L

FO RM S

OF H OOKS

U SE D

W IT H

C R A N E S.

P L A T E 23. —C L A M P H O O K S F O R C A R R Y I N G P L A T E S .

P L A T E 2 4 . —C L A M P F O R H A N D L I N G
P L A T E S IN V E R T I C A L P O S I T I O N .




P L A T E 25. — H O O K W I T H S O L I D
HANDLE.

P L A T E 26. — L O C K I N G S A F E T Y H O O K S .

FO RGED

ACCIDENT REDUCTION METHODS IN FABRICATING SHOPS.

127

operator is not exposed to a considerable degree of danger, although,
unfortunately, occupational rates which would definitely determine
this point can not yet be prepared.
Among working machines of various kinds, the punches, reamers,
and riveters contribute most to the accident hazard. In this connec­
tion the improvement which promises most is an electrically actuated
reamer. Heretofore compressed air has been the motive power. A
reamer so actuated is very likely to become unmanageable and may
cause serious injury. The electrically propelled reamer runs steadily
and without the jerks and jars inseparable from the older type.
Numerous attempts have been made to devise a safety chuck for
drills which would hold the drill rigid only when actually pressing
against the work. Some of these devices are very promising, but
have not yet come into general use. The avoidance of drill accidents
remains a matter of personal care.
Lathes as now furnished by the makers—with gears entirely in­
closed and with changes of speed accomplished by gear shifting or,
when cone pulleys are employed, by a proper belt shifter—present
few points of danger.
Grinding wheels are now nearly all inclosed in hoods which hold
the fragments if they explode. With goggles or eye screens to pro­
tect the eyes such wheels should be comparatively harmless.
The only working machine which has a record of a number of deaths
is the metal planer. These deaths, as far as could be ascertained,
arose from failure to close the openings in the bed of the machine on
which the platform moves back and forth. The cause of all deaths
recorded is similar to that in the following example: A workman
reaching for a tool in the space in the bed slipped and fell forward into
the opening. He was caught and crushed by the moving platform.
Plate 20 (“ A ” ) shows a simple method of closing these openings, a
precaution which would have prevented the accident cited. There
seems no reason why this particular death hazard should anywhere
remain.
In collateral branches of the mechanical and fabricating shops,
such as carpenter and pattern shops, it is still possible to find saws
and wood planers not provided with any of the safeguards which have
proved effective. Plates 21 and 22 illustrate some of these devices.
Cranes and hoists show an accident rate reduction in both mechan­
ical and fabricating shops, but are still contributing serious injuries
frequently enough to demand further attention. Adequate strength
of chains and operating rules tending to prevent overstrain have not
yet been sufficiently considered. It is probable that safety hooks of
various types (plates 23, 24, 25, and 26) deserve a very much wider
use than has thus far been accorded them.




128

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

ACCIDENT CAUSES IN THE YARD DEPARTMENT.

The accident rates for the yard department, computed for principal
causes and by years, are as follows:
Table 4 8 . — C A U S E S

O F A C C I D E N T S I N Y A R D D E P A R T M E N T , B Y Y E A R S , 1907 T O 1911.

1907

1908

1S
09

1910

1911

1$12

1913

1914

C ause.

A C E TF E U N YR T S (P R1 0 3 0 A W R E S).
C IDN R Q E C A E E ,0 0 0 -D Y O K R
Cranes and h o is ts ............................................
H o t su bstances.................................................
F a llin g o b je cts..................................................
Pow er vehicles 1...............................................
U n cla ssifie d 2.....................................................

19.5
8.4
31.7
41.3
99.3

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

20
0 .2

19.7
14.5
46.6
15.8
95.3
191.9

17.5

1 .2
2
2 7 .5
2 3 .3

105.8
186.1

7 .0
5. 6
3 2 .8
3 7 .0

62.8

145.3

5 .5
5 .0
2 4 .9
2 3 .8

1 .0
2
4 .3
2 .2
0

6

.5
3 .3
1 0 .9

5 .2
1 .5

49.7

3 3 .7
5 1 .5

2 .0
0

8
.1
2 .1
2

3 1 .3

3 5 .4

108.8

11
2 .8

72 .0

72 .3

A C E TSE E IT R T S(D Y, L S P R3 0 A W R E ).
C IDN V R Y A E A S OT E 0 -D Y O K R
Cranes and h o is ts ............................................
H o t substances.................................................
F a llin g o b je cts..................................................
P ow er vehicles..................................................
U n cla ssified 2.....................................................

1 .5
3 .6
4 .0
8 .9
8 .4

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

26.3

Number of SOO-day workers........................

2,618

0 .5
.9

6.7
1.4

2.2
1 .8
1
1,522

0.2

5 .2
.3
.5
2 4 .4
1 .9

.4
.5
9 .9

2.2

32 .3

13.1

1,891

2,134

0.2
.1

5 .3

1.4

.1
1.0
4.1
.8

1 .8
2

11.4

.7
10 .5

1,810

2,078

0
.1
(8
).2
1.4
.8
2
.6
2,751

0 .7
(3>. 4

1
.1
7 .3

9 .5

1,356

1 F urther details under this ite m w ill be found in T a b le 107.

2 T h e unclassified group includes all cases not regarded as characteristic of the d ep artm en t.
3 L ess than 0.05.

Of the cause groups isolated for this department none seems to
call for particular comment except the “ power vehicle” group. The
“ unclassified” and “ falling objects” groups both have much higher
frequency rates, but the severity rate for power vehicles is very much
higher than any of the others in almost all of the years covered.
Comparing 1907 with 1913, frequency from power vehicles declined
51 per cent (from 41.3 to 20 cases per 1,000 workers), and severity
declined 84 per cent (from 8.9 to 1.4 days per worker). Possibly a
fairer comparison is by four-year periods, i. e., of the years 1907 to
1910 with the years 1911 to 1914. This shows frequency declining
15 per cent and severity 61 per cent. Both these methods of com­
parison are distinctly reassuring since they show that the main hazard
of yard operations, the operation of locomotives and cars, has been
brought under control to a very considerable degree. This is the
more cheering inasmuch as in the earlier report on accidents in the
iron and steel industry, published in 1913, it was found that no appre­
ciable improvement in the yard department had occurred up to that
time.1
Among the accidents due to power vehicles, the coupling and
uncoupling of cars was the immediate cause of the largest number
i Conditions of E m p lo y m e n t in th e Iron and Steel In d u s tr y in th e U n ite d States (S . D o c. N o . 110, 62d
C ong., 1st sess.), V o l. I V , p . 98.







PLAT E 2 7 . - Y A R D T R E S T L E , WI TH V A R I O U S S A F E T Y DE VI CE S .




P L A T E 28.—S A F E T Y G A T E F O R C R O S S I N G O F T R A C K S .

P L A T E 30.—T A R G E T S I G N A L , U S A B L E D A Y O R N I G H T .




P L A T E 32. —G A N T R Y C R A N E , W I T H W H E E L F E N D E R S , G E A R G U A R D S , A N D R A I L
CLAMPS.







PLATE 3 3 . - L O C O M O T I V E CRANE, WITH S A F ET Y DEVI CES .




P L A T E 35. —G U A R D F O R T U R N T A B L E P I T .

CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IN YAKD DEPARTMENT.

129

of injuries. But the most significant cause of serious injury was that
of being run oyer by moving cars and engines. There was one
fatality in connection with coupling while there were five due to
being run over. Since four of the five fatalities occurred during the
earlier four-year period, it is evident that a considerable part of the
reduction in the severity rates of power vehicles, as shown in the
above table, is due to improved conditions in the yard operations
which reduced the number of cases of workers being run down.
An analysis of the accidents due to power vehicles is contained in
Table 107.
SAFETY METHODS IN YARDS.

It is evident from the above data that yard operations are being
brought under the influence of safety activity to a very considerable
degree in the mills here represented. There is no reason why this
improvement should not extend to the entire industry.
The great, and to a considerable extent unavoidable, hazard of
yard operation is the grade crossing. This must be treated whenever
possible as the same problem is being met in city transportation. A
well-guarded yard trestle (pi. 27) when usable is a very great safety
factor. Next in importance and much more generally available is
eonvenient and permanent signal apparatus. A signal which must
be sought out and put in place by the switchman is very much less
desirable than one located at the point of danger and needing only
to be adjusted. (PI. 28). There are, of course, numerous cases where
signals are necessarily located temporarily. These should be of
some standard form and provided with satisfactory means of attach­
ing them so that they can be moved only by intent and effort. (Pis.
29 and 30.)
Having abolished grade crossings as fully as possible, established
clearances, and adopted some permanent scheme of signaling, the
safety man will turn his attention to automatic couplers and the
adequate equipment of his overhead (pi. 31), gantry (pi. 32), and
locomotive cranes (pi. 33).
The locomotive crane (pi. 33) may be considered as a type of
yard apparatus which has received attention from the safety man and
which is now being produced with many of his ideas incorporated in
the design. As a traveling machine, this apparatus has some of the
dangers arising from ordinary engines. For example, if it is not
provided with an automatic coupler (“ E ” )> but is coupled by ordi­
nary link and pin, it may add to the large group of cases due to
coupling and uncoupling. Without a proper grab iron (“ H ” ) the
craneman may get a serious fall in attempting to enter his cab. It
is, however, chiefly as a hoisting apparatus that danger arises. This
12771°— 18— B ull. 234------- 9




130

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

comes more often than in any other way from an effort to hoist
beyond capacity, thus causing the machine to tip over. At “ B” is a
plate on which, in letters which can not be effaced, the capacity of
the crane is shown. At “ A ” is an indicator from which the crane­
man may read safe loads in varying positions of the boom. In addi­
tion a device may be applied which rings an alarm if tipping should
begin. All these means of safe operation have developed under the
stress of experience. These or equivalent safeguards are now very
generally embodied in the crane designs offered by the best makers.
After attention to these items of yard apparatus the guarding of
frogs and turntable pits, as shown in plates 34 and 35, would be proper
to undertake. If the switches are of the old type with a heavy ball
on the end of a lever operating at right angles to the track they
should be replaced by a type in which the lever operates parallel
with the track, since cases arising from switches are numerous enough
to need serious attention.




CHAPTER VII.
THE HUMAN FACTOR IN ACCIDENT OCCURRENCE.

The discussion of accident causes in the preceding chapters has
been limited to what may be called the physical causes, i. e., the
machine, the structure, the impersonal thing which is immediately
responsible for the injury to the worker. Attention will now be
turned to the personal factor—the worker himself—as a contributing
element in accident occurrence. '
The worker, just because he is an ordinary human being, is subject
to certain influences which may seriously increase the likelihood of
his being injured. This human factor is manifested in many ways.
It manifests itself principally perhaps in the higher accident rates of
the inexperienced worker—the worker who, either through youth or
through recent entrance into industry, is lacking in the training which
teaches him control and caution. It also shows itself in the higher
accident rates of men working under unfavorable conditions, such
as at night, or when physically unfit, or in extremes of heat and cold.
Thus, the worker, through some lack or defect or through the
influence of unfavorable surroundings, may contribute to the acci­
dent which causes him injury, and as such may be regarded himself
as a cause. But, as will appear in Chapter VIII, he is rarely more
than a contributing cause. Very often, and especially so in the case
of the more serious accidents, there is some defect of machine or
structure or operative method without which the accident would
not have occurred, notwithstanding the actions of the man.
INFLUENCE OF INEXPERIENCE UPON ACCIDENTS.

The fact that the inexperienced man is especially subject to acci­
dent may be demonstrated from a number of sources. The following
table, showing accident rates according to length of service, is of par­
ticular interest upon this point.
T ab le 4 9 .— ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES ACCORDING TO PERIOD OF WORKERS’
EMPLOYMENT IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT.
[Based ondata for January-M 1916.]
ay,
Length of service.
6m
onths and under.............................
O 6m
ver onths and not over 1year...........
O 1year and not over 3years..............
ver
O 3yeazrs and.notover 5 years.............
ver
O 5years and not over 1 years............
ver
0
O 10years aaidnot over 1 years...........
ver
5
O 1 years......................................
ver 5
Total........................................




A
ccident
Num of Cases of frequency
ber
rates
300-day accident. per 1,000
w
orkeirs.
300-day
w
orkers.
512
278
37
5
637
814
470
459
3,527

5
7
2
9
3
1
2
7
1
6
4

111.3
104.3
86.8
42.4
19.7
8.5

14
6

46.5
131

132

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The table indicates clearly an extremely rapid decline in accident
frequency with increased experience on the part of the worker. For
those who had been employed 6 months or less the frequency rate was
111.3 cases per 1,000 workers. This dropped to 104.3 cases for those
with 6 months’ to 1 year’s experience. Thereafter the rate declined
very rapidly, and among those who had been employed more than 15
years no accidents occurred during the period covered.
These figures are so striking that, notwithstanding the compara­
tively small number of workers concerned, they would seem to be con­
clusive as to the close relationship between inexperience and high
accident rates. This conclusion, moreover, is supported by other
tabulations, presented later, based on the age of the worker and the
degree of his ability to speak English.
That the “ green” man is particularly subject to accident has been
recognized to some extent and in a number of plants special efforts
have been made to train and caution him. But the full effect of this
factor has not been perceived. Careful analysis indicates that inex­
perience plays a very important part in accident occurrence and sug­
gests that it may be an extremely influential factor in the increase in
accident rates which almost invariably accompanies an increase in
business activity.
That accident rates do increase in periods of business activity is
evidenced by numerous tabulations in this report. Thus the recovery
from the industrial depression of 1908 was accompanied in practically
all plants covered by this study by a marked rise in accident rates.
This experience occurred so regularly that there is clearly some close
Connection between increased activity and increasing accident rates.
What is this connection? Why should increasing plant activity
mean higher accident rates? Two possible reasons suggest them­
selves. The first is that the rising accident rates may be due to
“ speeding up” —i. e., to the greater intensity and stress of the work
placed upon the individual workman. The evidence of laboratory
test and mill experience is to the effect that sudden increments of
speed are accompanied by greater accident frequency. That such
speeding up may have occurred in the steel plants covered during
periods of business^ activity is suggested by the fact that at such
periods the output per worker employed shows an increase. But
increased per capita output does not absolutely prove increased indi­
vidual exertion, as the output increase might be due to modifications
of equipment and methods which would tend to lessen rather than
increase the individual's effort. But even granting that speeding up
does occur in a period of plant activity, and it is probable that it does
occur in some degree, it is still questionable whether it is sufficient to
account for the sharply rising accident rates.




IN FLUENCE OF INEXPERIENCE.

133

The second reason which suggests itself as possibly a cause of the
rising accident rates in times of increasing business activity is the
influence of the new men added to the working force. At such a
time the working force is necessarily added to, a process which may
be referred to a§ “ labor recruiting.” Among those recruited there
is necessarily a more or less considerable element of inexperienced
men. Because of their inexperience these men are, as has been
noted above, especially subject to accident, and their presence in
the plant would 'tend in itself to swell the accident frequency rate.
This factor could easily be one of very great importance. Indeed,
careful analysis of the experience of several plants leads to the
belief that it is this factor of inexperience, introduced into a plant
at a time of heavy labor recruiting, which is primarily responsible
for the rising accident rates following a period of depression.
The results of the present studies of this subject can best be shown
in chart form. The three charts submitted (charts 11, 12, 13) have
been prepared from the records of important steel plants.1 They
constitute a basis for extremely interesting deductions, although *
not necessarily final ones, regarding the relationship of industrial
activity and accident occurrence.
Chart 11 shows for one large plant (Plant A) the course of (1)
accident frequency rates, (2) labor recruiting rates, (3) total em­
ployment, and (4) output per worker over a period of six years.
The importance of understanding clearly the significance of these
terms justifies a repetition of their definitions:
(1) Accident frequency rates, as earlier explained, represent the
number of accident cases per 1,000 300-day workers employed dur­
ing a given period, which period in the case of these charts is a full
year.
(2) Labor recruiting rates, in similar fashion, represent the num­
ber of cases of new men hired during the year per each 1,000 300day workers employed during that year. Thus if the total em­
ployment of a plant during a year was 10,000 300-day workers, and
during that period 2,000 new men had been taken on, the labor
recruiting rate would be 200 per 1,000 workers. It would be of
especial interest to isolate the entirely inexperienced men among
those taken on, but this is impractical and it is not necessary for
the present purpose, as any group of new men always includes a
proportion of entirely inexperienced workers.
1The data upon w these charts are based appear in Appendix J.
hich




AND

OUTPUT

TO

ACCID T OCCURRENCE,
EN

134

1908 TO 1914 : PLANT A.
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U STRY.




CHART11.— RELATION OF LABO
R R C U IN , EMPLOYMENT,
E R IT G

1908 T 1 1 ! P A T a
O 94 L N

L B R RECRU
AO
ITIN .
G
135




CHART 12.- RELATION OF LABO RECRU
R
ITIN , EM
G
PLOYM
ENT, AND OUTPUT TO ACCIDENT OCCURRENCE,

A C E T O C R E C , 1 1 T 1 1 sPLA T C.
C ID N C U R N E 9 2 O 9 6
N

oo
05
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U STRY,




CH
ART 13- R L T N O L B R R C U IN , E P O M N , A D OU T TO
E A IO F A O E R IT G M L Y E T N
TPU

LABOR RECRUITING.

137

(3) Total employment represents the total number of 300-day
workers employed during the year. This item may be taken as
indicating fairly closely the course of industrial activity. Almost
always when business increases employment increases, and when
business decreases employment decreases.
(4) Output per worker represents the average output per 300-day
worker, and is obtained by dividing total product by total employ­
ment. Increase in output per worker means either speeding up or
the introduction of more productive methods, usually the former,
inasmuch as productive methods ordinarily change very slowly.
The course of each of these four items over a period of some six
years is plotted on the chart in a series of relative numbers, the
year ending December, 1908, being taken as 100. In order to avoid
the violent fluctuations which occur when the month is taken as a
base, the curves have been “ smoothed.” The points in each column
represent the data not for the individual month, but for the year
ending with the month indicated at the head of the column. The
“ smoothing” process here used is described in full in Chapter X II.
All the curves are drawn on the same scale.
With these explanations in mind the meaning of the chart may
now be examined. The first point to be noted is that, as indicated
by the course of the employment curve, the years covered include
two periods of industrial activity, in 1910 and 1913, respectively,
with corresponding periods of relative depression. The other three
curves follow, in a general way, the employment curves, but the
movements are by no means the same. Especially to be noted is
the fact that the labor recruiting curve and the accident curve
parallel each other with striking closeness. As one changes the other
changes at, or almost at, the same time. The curves of employ­
ment and per capita product, on the other hand, change in their
upward and downward swings at distinctly later times than do those
for labor recruiting and accidents.
These facts would seem to indicate very clearly that, for the plant
and period covered, the element of inexperience as measured by the
labor recruiting rate had a much greater influence upon accident
rates than did any speeding up of the worker that may be suggested
by increased output per capita. The falling accident rate, with in­
creasing output per capita (such as occurs, for instance, in the years
ending in May and June, 1910, and January to June, 1913), might,
indeed, be interpreted as meaning that increased intensity of labor
has no tendency to increase accident rates. But such a conclusion
is not warranted, sitice it is obvious that without the rising output
per capita accident rates might have declined more rapidly than they
did. The effect of increased speed of labor upon accident occurrence
must be determined by studies in other directions.




138

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

An interesting sidelight is thrown on the relationship of inex­
perience and accident rates, as disclosed in this chart, by tracing
the accident curve in its two upward swings. It will be noted that
the upward swing in the second period, beginning in June, 1911, is
much sharper and more nearly parallel to the labor recruiting curve
than is the first upward swing beginning in 1909. Examination of
Table 38, shdwing the character of the labor force as regards their
familiarity with the English language, offers a possible explanation
of this difference. It appears from these tables that the earlier
period of labor recruiting represented a much larger proportion of
English speaking workmen, who it may be inferred were of greater
industrial experience, though new to the establishment, than were
the non-English speakers. The second period of labor recruiting
included a larger proportion of non-English speakers, who, relatively
less experienced, would contribute more to the accident rate. This
fact would seem to explain the different behavior of the accident
curve at the two periods mentioned. But all such variations should
be interpreted with considerable caution. In other words, the degree
in which coincidence implies causal relation can be determined only
after full knowledge and careful critical examination of the facts.
The data upon which chart 11 is based are shown in Table 110
except the monthly production, which was furnished as confidential
and can not be published.
The experience of a second large steel plant (Plant B) is projected
in chart 12, in the same form and for the same six-year period as
that for Plant A in chart 11.
It will be noted here, as in chart 11, that the years covered represent
two distinct periods of plant activity.
At the crest of the first upward movement (occurring in the year
ending April, 1910), labor recruiting, product, and accident frequency
reach their zenith together. At the succeeding period of depression
(roughly the year 1911) there is a considerable period in which the
curves for recruiting, employment, and accident frequency run an
almost parallel course. During this period the product curve was
rising rather rapidly, but this is known to be related to changes in
the equipment of the mill rather than to any increase in personal
activity.
When in the latter part of 1911 labor recruiting begins to go up
there is a sharp but temporary rise in accident frequency. When
labor recruiting reaches its highest point (in the year ending with
December, 1912) there is a further slight upward tendency of accident
frequency. During this second period of increasing activity the
curves for employment and product reach their high points much
later than accidents and labor recruiting.




LABOR RECRUITING.

139

This experience is in its essentials in substantial agreement with
that shown for Plant A in chart 11. It is, however, much less
emphatic in relating labor recruiting with accident frequency.
When, as at the first period of activity, two possible factors of accident
increase— i. e., product per capita and labor recruiting—culminate
together, it is impossible to determine which may have been the
more influential. During the second period of activity, while labor
recruiting is apparently the dominant factor, its influence upon the
accident curve is much less marked than during the first period and
during both periods shown in chart 11. There seems to be a per­
fectly good reason for this. At almost the. same time that labor
recruiting in Plant B increased so rapidly in the early part of 1912,
special efforts at accident prevention were inaugurated, including
the award of a bonus to each foreman who improved his accident
record (March, 1912). The effect of this special effort, particularly
the bonus to the foreman, was to induce great care in the instruc­
tion of new men regarding the dangers of their occupations and the
proper way of avoiding them. The foremen were also led to give
unusual attention to the distribution of these men, putting a new
man along with a more experienced worker and so gradually intro­
ducing him to the responsibilities of his job. The result of this was
shortly to check the rise in accident rates, which began in January,
1912, at the same time that labor recruiting began to increase.
The possibility here indicated of controlling the tendency to in­
creased accident rates with rising labor recruiting is most important.
Instead of regarding the increase as an inevitable exhibition of the
laws of nature, the safety man must learn to intensify his efforts in
proportion to the influx of inexperienced workmen. It would be
too much to say that the record made by this plant can always be
duplicated, but it may be said with entire confidence that similar
intensification of effort will produce definite results.
Table 111 shows the data on which chart 12 is based, except the
monthly production, which was furnished as confidential and can
not be published.
The experience of a third large plant (Plant C) for a four-year
period, 1912 to 1916, is projected in chart 13.1 The general form of
this chart is the same as the two preceding, but the character of the
material available necessitated some slight changes in presentation.
First, the records for this plant were on a quarterly instead of a
monthly basis and this division, had to be followed in the chart.
Second, no record of output could be obtained. Third, labor recruit­
ing rates could be traced for only about half the period covered.
On the other hand, this plant had a full record of nondisabling
i The data upon w this chart is based appear in Table 11 .
hich
2




140

SAFETY M O VEM EN T 11T IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
S

accidents as well as of those causing disablement, and the presenta­
tion of these by separate curves offers some interesting comparisons.
In the plant represented by this chart the early portion of the
period covered discloses a declining employment and a declining
accident frequency rate for disabling cases. At the same time the
rate for nondisabling cases was rising, due, in all probability, not to
any actual increase in such cases but to increasing insistence upon
the reporting and care of slight injuries.
It was not possible to trace labor recruiting back of the year ending
with March, 1915. At about that time active recruiting began.
Immediately the rate. for nondisabling accidents showed a very
marked increase, and shortly the rate for disabling accidents began
to show the same tendency.
The rapidity of the rise in accident rates drew the attention of the
plant executives, and various special efforts at control were inaugu­
rated. These were having some degree of success before the end of
the period in spite of the fact that labor recruiting was still proceed­
ing with scarcely diminished activity.
SELECTIVE D ISCHARGE.

The lessened accident rates of periods of depression have been
attributed above to the decrease in the introduction of new men,
together, perhaps, with lessened industrial tension. There is another
factor operative to which it is desirable to call attention. It may be
called “ selective discharge.” Whenever depression sets in all the
men are naturally desirous of retaining their jobs. The employer
therefore exercises selection in deciding whom he will let go. The
skillful and mature man will naturally be retained while the younger,
less skillful, and less experienced man will be laid off. The effect
of this process is to raise the average quality of the working force
and thus to influence favorably the accident rate.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION" AS A POSSIBLE FACTO R.

Comparison of the accident rates of different plants reveals the
fact that some, in which safety work of the highest quality is being
done, have constantly higher rates than others in which the safety
work is apparently of a lower quality. A probable explanation of
this is that the high rates of the former plants may be influenced by
the fact that they are so located geographically as to constitute ports
of entry, as it were, for new immigrant labor. Their records indi­
cated a higher proportion of men entirely without experience in the
industry, although in some cases their labor turnover was less than
in other plants which had attained to lower accident rates.
If this indication should prove upon closer scrutiny to be constant,
it would afford an explanation of the striking contradiction noted




141

LABOR RECRUITING.

above. At present such an explanation can not be established con­
clusively, but it may be suggested as possible and in justice to some
very efficient safety men who may be doing their work under an
extra handicap.1
INFLUENCE OF AGE UPON ACCIDENTS.

It is very difficult to determine the influence of the worker’s age
upon accident occurrence because of the fact that the work done by
persons of different age groups may not be uniform. If the work
done is not uniform, a higher accident rate for those of one age group
may be due not at all to the factor of age but simply to the higher
hazards of their particular tasks. The information available upon
this subject is not conclusive, but an analysis of such as could be
obtained brings out some points of interest.
An important body of data regarding age as related to accident
frequency was presented in the earlier report of the bureau upon
accidents in the iron and steel industry.2 The table is reproduced,
in substance, below. It shows the accident frequency rates over a
period of five yegrs for a total of 33,511 300-day workers employed
in a large steel plant. In this case it was not possible to compute
severity rates.
‘ Table 5 0 .— FREQUENCY OF ACCIDENTS IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT ACCORDING TO
AGE GROUPS, 1906 TO 1910, BY YEARS.
A groups.
ge
Num of 300-day w
ber
orkers:
Under 20years............................
20to 29years..............................
30to 39years..............................
40years and over.........................
Total.....................................
N ber of accident cases:
um
Under 20years............................
20to 29years..............................
30to 39years..............................
40years and over.........................
Total.....................................
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 3 0
0day w
orkers):
Under 20years............................
20to 29years..............................
30to 39years..............................
40years and over.........................
Total.....................................

19 6
0

10
97

47
5
3,875
2,047
1,097
7,494

34
8
3,810
2,256
1,135
7,585

5
2
70
6
38
2
16
5
1,350
109.5
196.1
186.1
142.2
181.1

.1908

Total
(5years).

10
99

1 10
9

19
8
2,214
1,242
91
2
4,575

26
1
3,343
1,697
94
1
6,215

390
3,264
2,271
1,717
7,642

1,708
16,506
9,513
5,784
33,511

5
6
64
9
34
7
10
7
1,294

8
34
6
13
8
8
9
64
4

3
0
57
7
34
0
13
4
1,054

27
57
2
2
98
15
1
9
67

13
7
2,922
1 51
4
63
7
5,309

145.8
182.2
15 8
6.
149.8
170.6

40.4
164.4
147,3
96.6
140.8

114.9
172.6
179.1
156.5
169.6

69.2
161.5
131.2
70.0
126.5

101.3
177.0
162.0
116.4
158.4

The first point to be noted in the table is that the decline in acci­
dent frequency rates which took place between the beginning and
1For racial distribution of steel w
orkers see Report onConditions of Em
ploym inthe Ironand Steel
ent
Industry inthe U
nited States, (S. D N 1 0 62dC 1st sess.) V Ill, p. 8 et seq.
oc. o. 1 ,
ong.,
ol.
3
2Report on Conditions of Em
ploym in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States (S. D
ent
oc.
N 11 , GdC 1st sess.), V IV, p. 1 9
o. 0 2 ong.,
ol.
5.




142

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

end of the period covered occurred in each of the age groups as well
as in the total.
The second point to be noted is that for the combined five-year
period, and also for each of the individual years, except 1909, the
age group 20 to 29 showed the highest accident frequency. Next
highest to the 20 to 29 age group in accident frequency is the 30 to
39 group, with the 40 and over group next in order and the under 20
group lowest of the four. In order to understand the significance
of this order it is necessary to consider the occupational status of
each of the age groups. The group under 20 is that engaged in the
least hazardous work. Most of those who belong to it are door boys
and lever operators. Those of 40 and over have to a certain
degree passed out of the danger zone. Many of those who have
passed but little over the boundary line are still to be found in the
dangerous occupations, and probably on this account the accident
rate is higher than that for those under 20. But the differences
which exist in the work of these two groups are so considerable that
it is impossible to judge whether the factor of age is at all a signifi­
cant one. If the groups could be placed under nearly identical occu­
pational conditions, the rates might be changed, or even reversed.
The two age groups, 20 to 29 and 30 to 39, include by far the larger
proportion of the steel workers. From statistics showing the age
distribution in the various departments 1%nd from careful observa­
tion the dangers to men in the older age group appear to be as great
as those encountered by the younger. In fact inquiry shows that
those who are particularly exposed to the special hazards, such as
arise in the moving of molten metal, have very commonly reached
their present position by a prolonged apprenticeship and axe very
apt to be men above 30. It is a reasonable conclusion therefore that
danger in the younger age group is not greater than in the older.
It appears that the 20 to 29 age group has the higher rate in each
year except one, and that for the whole period the rate is decidedly
higher for this group.
It becomes, then, appropriate to inquire the reason for this higher
rate, since apparently it can not be attributed to more dangerous
occupations. The probable causes may be summed up as inexperi­
ence and immaturity. The stream of immigration which largely
furnishes the working force for the steel mills is most largely young
men between 20 and 30. Such immigrant youth as come under the
age of 20 do not as a rule get into the steel mills, the places open to
persons of that age being largely monopolized by the American bom.
If the immigrant does not at once upon his arrival find his way into
i Report on Conditions of Em
ploym in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States (S. D
ent
oc.
N 110, 62d C 1st sess.), V Ill, p. 9
o.
ong.,
ol.
9.




143

IN FLU ENCE OF AGE.

a steel mill he is not likely to do so at a later period. This decade,
20 to 29, is then the great recruiting period for the steel industry.
Those of the group 30 to 39 are relatively experienced men who en­
tered the works earlier or, in the rare instances where they are
recently arrived immigrants, they have a degree of maturity which
is not true of those between 20 and 29. The great factor is undoubt­
edly that of inexperience. These young men come directly from an
agricultural life and are exposed upon their entrance into the activi­
ties of the steel mill to afl the dangers which inevitably beset be­
ginners.
The experience of a second large steel plant, as regards the relation
of age and accident, is given in the next table. In this, as in the
plant just discussed, the accident reduction which had taken place
over a period of years had affected all age groups. But as it does
not seem necessary further to establish this point, the data for the
several years are combined in order to get as large an exposure as
possible. Accident severity rates, as well as frequency rates, are
given in detail.
Table 5 1 .

—
FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF ACCIDENTS IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT,
ACCORDING TO AGE GROUPS, 1 0 TO 1 1 .
97
94

A group.
ge

Under 20.......................
20to 29..........................
30to39..........................
40and over.....................
Total.....................

ccident severityrates (days lost
A
ccident frequencyrates (per A
per 300-dayw
orker).
1,000300-dayw
orkers).
Num
­
ber of
300-day
Perm Tem
a­ po­
Perm Tem
a­ po­
w
ork­
ers. Death. nent rary Total. Death. nent rary Total.
dis­ dis­
dis­ dis­
ability. ability.
ability. ability.
99
4
16,443
14,417
11,124
42,933

1.1
.7
.7
.5
.7

7.4
3.4
2.4
2.8 :
3.0

554.3
230.1
175.6
128.5
192.6

562.8
234.2
178.7
131.8
196.3

9.5
6.0
6.2
4.9
5.9

3.4
1.8
.9
1-2
1.4

7.7
3.5
2.9
2.6
3.1

20.6
11.3
10.0
8.7
10.4

The accident rates of this table conform very closely to those of the
preceding table with the exception of the rates for the age group
under 20. For this group the accident rates are here extremely high,
in sharp contrast with the experience shown in the first table. This
is due, in part, to the practice of this plant of employing young men
along with older men in occupations likely to produce many cases of
short-term disability. But at best the group is of too small size
(949 300-day workers) to permit of conclusive deductions. Its
smallness of size would be reflected especially in the severity rate,
since, in small groups, a single fatality influences the severity rate
materially. More significant is the fact that this group has the
highest severity rate for both permanent and temporary disability.
Clearly, when such youths do engage in the same work as more
experienced workers, their hazards are very serious.




144

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

It is very possible that the workers under 20, being a small group
among a much larger group of older workers, and furnishing only a
limited number of accidents, have never had their high accident
rates observed. The condition disclosed by this tabulation, there­
fore, suggests the desirability of every plant’s making, from time to
time, a critical examination of the working force by age groups.
The next table presents the accident experience of a tube mill by
age groups. The age group under 20 is omitted, as the number of
persons therein was too small to justify the computation of rates.
52.—
FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF ACCIDENTS IN A TUBE MILL, ACCORD­
ING TO AGE GROUPS, 1907 TO 1914.
[Em
ployees under 20years of age are not included; because the num is too sm to justify com
ber
all
puta­
tion of rates.]

T ab le

A group.
ge

Accident frequencyrates (per Accident severityrates (days lost
1,000300-dayw
orkers).
per 300-dayw
orker).
Num­
ber of
300-day
Perm Tem
a­ po­
Perm Tem
a­ po­
w
ork­
ers. Death. nent rary Total. Death. nent rary Total.
dis­ dis­
dis­ dis­
ability. ability.
ability. ability.

20to 29.......................... 6,351
30to 39..-...................... 4,977
40and over..................... 2 ,965
Total..................... 14,293

0.3
.2
1.0
.4

3.1
2.2
1.7
2.5

207.2
10 7
5.
101.9
165.7

210.6
153.1
104.6
168.6

2.8
1.8
9.1
3.8

1.7
1.0
.9
1.3

3.1
2.4
1.9
2.6

8.2
5.2
11.9
7.7

The relations of these age groups as regards accident frequency,
it will be noted, are the same as in the two preceding tables. As
regards severity, however, age group 40 and over has the leading
place, due entirely to the high death rate.
INABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH, AS RELATED TO ACCIDENTS.

Of all inexperienced workers the man most handicapped would
seem to be the one who is not only without knowledge of his task, but
is unable to communicate freely with those who direct him. When
one large company began to study carefully their working conditions
they found it not infrequently the case that a foreman was in charge
of a gang with no member of which could he communicate either
directly or by an interpreter. Still more common was it to find
individual men who were thus barred from communication with
their immediate superior. This was at once recognized as a dangerous
condition and the rule was issued that gangs should be formed in
such a manner that each man should be able to communicate with
his foreman directly or by interpreter.
The following table contrasts accident rates of (1) American-born
workers, (2) English-speaking foreign-born workers, and (3) nonEnglish-speaking foreign-born workers, over a period of 8 years,
1906 to 1913, in the only plant for which full data could be obtained:




145

IN ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH.
T a b le 5 3 .—

INABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH AS RELATED TOACCIDENTS: EXPERIENCE
OF A LARGE STEEL PLANT, 1906 TO 1913.
Accident frequency rates A
ccident severity rates (days
(per 1,000300-day w
orkers). lost per 300-dayw
orker).
G
roup.

1906.
A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
N
cn-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................
10.
97
Am
ericanborn.......................
English speaking foreignborn.....
N
on-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................
19 8
0.
A ericanborn........................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
N
on-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................
10.
99
A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
Non-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................
1
910.
A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
Non-Englishspeaking foreignborn.
Total............................
m 191 .
1
A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
Non-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................
1912.
A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
N
on-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................
11.
93
A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
Non-Englishspeakingforeignborn.
Total............................

Num
­
ber of
300-day
w
ork­
ers. Death.

Per­
m
a­
nent
dis­
abil­
ity.

Tem
­
Per- Tem
­
rn
a- po­
po­
rary Total. Death. nant rary Total.
dis­
dis­ dis­
abil­
abil­ abil­
ity. ity.
ity.

1,370
1,906
4,218
7,494

5.8
6.8
4.3
5.2

5.8
5.8
5.7
5.7

143.1
109.7
233.0
185.2

154.7
122.3
243.0
196.6

52.6
61.4
38.4
46.8

5.0
2.3
3.2
4.3

2.1
1.9
3.5
2.9

59.7
65.6
45.1
54.0

1,719
2,267
3,599
7,858

3.5
3.1
3.3
3.2

2.3
4.0
7.5
5.1

111.1
155.7
204.5
162.9

116.9
162.8
215.3
171.2

31.4
27.8
30.0
28.6

2.5
7.0
5.5
6.2

2.1
2.8
4.3
3.2

36.0
37.6
39.8
38.0

1,188
1,689
1,698
4,575

.8
3.0
3.5
2.6

5.1
4.7
7.1
5.7

77.4
94.1
182.6
122.6

83.3
101.8
193.2
130.9

7.6
26.6
31.8
23.6

2.3
2.6
6.4
3.9

1.4
1.7
3.7
2.4

11.3
30.9
41.9
29.9

1,453
2,027
2,735
6,215

1.4
3.5
1.5
2.1

.7
3.9
2.6
2.6

95.7
123.3
200.0
150.6

97.8
130.7
204.1
155.3

12.4
31.1
13.2
18.8

.1
1.9
3.2
2.1

1.5
3.0
3.2
2.7

14.0
36.0
19.6
23.6

1,843
3,283
2,516
7,642

1.1
.6
3.2
1.6

.5 67.3 68.9
1.8 49.0 51.4
9.1 224.6 236.9
3.9 111.1 116.6

9.8
5.5
28.6
14.1

.6
1.5
4.2
3.2

1.0
.7
4.1
1.9

11.4
7.7
36.9
19.2

1,369
2,446
1,959
5,774

2.9
1.6
.5
1.6

2.9
3.3
4.6
3.6

71.6
80.1
157.7
104.4

77.4
85.0
162.8
109.6

26.3
14.7
4.6
14.0

1.2
3.5
4.2
2.5

1.2
2.4
3.2
2.0

28.7
20.6
12.0
18.5

1,863
2,656
2,877
7,396

.4
1.4
.7

3.2
7.2
8.0
6.5

8 2
3.
81.3
240.2
142.6

86.4
88.9
249.6
149.8

3.4
12.5
6.1

1.7
5.9
7.1
5.3

1.5
1.8
4.4
2.7

3.2
11.1
24.0
14.1

1,782
2,472
2,877
7,562

1.7
2.0
1.4
1.9

2.8
2.0
8.0
4.6

52.1
76.9
240.2
106.3

56.6
80.9
249.6
112.8

15.2
18.2
12.5
16.7

.7
1.7
7.1
2.2

1.1
1.4
4.4
2.3

17.0
21.3
24.0
21.2

12,587
18,746
22,910
54,243

2.1
2.3
2.6
2.4

2.8
3.9
6.5
4.8

85.8
92.5
203.5
137.8

90.7
98.7
212.6
145.0

18.6
21.1
23.2
21.4

1.7
3.3
3.5
3.2

1.5
2.0
2.8
2.6

21.8
26.4
29.5
27.2

TOTAL OF 8 YEARS.

A ericanborn.......................
m
English speaking foreignborn.....
N
on-Engishspeaking foreignborn.
Total............................

It is very noteworthy that in all the years covered by this table
the non-English speakers not only had the highest frequency rate
but show little, if any, improvement from year to year. As regards
12771°— IS— Bull. 234-------10




146

safety

m ovem ent

in

ik o n

and

steel

in d u s t r y .

severity, the non-English speakers show the highest rates in 5 years
out of the 8 covered, and show much less degree of improvement
over the period than do the English speakers.
Examining the combined data for the 8 years, it will be noted that
the non-English speakers have a frequency rate 2.3 times that of the
American born (212.6, as against 90.7 cases per 1,000 300-day workers)
and a severity rate 1.4 times as high as that of the American bom
(29.5 against 21.8 days lost per worker).
DAY AND NIGHT ACCIDENT RATES.

The impression that the night turn is less dangerous than the day
turn has been quite prevalent among safety men. This impression
has been the result apparently of limiting attention to the comparative
number of accidents rather than to comparative accident rates. The
number of accidents on the night turn is almost invariably much the
smaller, because very much fewer men are employed by night than
by day.
As a matter of fact, the question as to the comparative hazards
of night and day employment is still undetermined. But in the iron
and steel industry there is a definite tendency toward higher acci­
dent rates at night. The following statement summarizes all the
material upon this subject obtained in the course of the present
investigation, together with such data as are available from other
sources:
Higher rates at night have been found to exist in the following cases:
United States. Steel plant with average employment of............... 8,000
United States. Steel plant with average employment of............... 5, 000
United States. Machine building plant with average employment 9
of................................................................................................................ 15,000
United States. Plant producing electrical apparatus, with average
employment of........................................................................................17,000
Germany. Iron and steel industries in Dusseldorf district, with
average employment of.........................................................................61, 719
Germany. Machine building in Dusseldorf district, with average
employment of........................................................................................3,546
Higher rates by day have been found to exist in the following cases:
United States. Steel plant with average employment of............... 6,000
Germany. Miscellaneous industries in Dusseldorf district, with
average employment of.........................................................................24,022

There are several factors bearing on the subject of night accident
hazards, some operating in one direction, some in the other. They
may be stated as follows:
(a) Tending to lower the rates at night—
(1) Smaller proportion of relatively inexperienced and
unskilled men.
(2) Less congestion.
(3) Less transportation of material.
(4) Tendency not to undertake difficult repairs.




DAY AND N IG H T ACCIDENT RATES.

147

(5) Tending to raise the rates at night—
(1) Imperfect lighting.
(2) Unsatisfactory physical and mental condition of the
worker.
(3) Less rigorous supervision.
Apparently up to the present time the forces tending to higher
rates hare had the greater influence. As illustrations are offered it
will become evident that in the progress of time the disparity between
night and day rates has become less and that in some cases a condition
of lower rates at night has been reached.
Of the factors tending to high night rates imperfect lighting has
naturally received the larger share of attention. This is a matter of
efficient operation and illuminating engineers are showing very con­
clusively that adequate provision in this respect will immediately
return more than its cost in greater output.
Undoubtedly the most difficult problem is that of the worker’s con­
dition at night. This is related in no small measure to the difficulty
of securing adequate recuperation by proper sleep. The experience
of British munition factories shows that continuous night work seri­
ously impairs the efficiency of the workers.1 The light and noise of
daytime and the heat of summer conspire to render sleep in day
hours unrefreshing. This discomfort may easily lead to efforts for
relief in themselves injurious.
EXAM P LES OF NIGH T AND D A Y R A T E S—P L A N T A .

The experience of a large steel plant is shown in the following
charts. These give separately, for the day turn and the night turn,
the frequency and severity rates over a period of years and by
departments.
In the years studied in this plant the frequency rates for night
were in excess in each year and the rates for severity in excess in
each year but one. The night rates decrease more rapidly than those
for the day. This gradual approximation is more regular in the
severity rates than in those for frequency. Improved lighting has
been suggested as a cause. This must have had great influence but
can hardly be the complete explanation. The improvements in
lighting were made at particular periods with intervals of uniformity
between. If lighting were the controlling factor it would naturally
be expected that some rather pronounced change would appear at
the time of lighting improvement. Since the decline in rates is fairly
constant some constant cause may be suspected. The use of alcohol
as a possible influence is discussed later in this chapter.
When the experience of this plant is considered from a depart­
mental standpoint some interesting deductions are possible. The
iH
ealth of M
unition W
orkers Com ittee (M
m
inistry of M
unitions). Interimreport on Industrial Effi­
ciency and Fatigue. (1917) pp. 26, et seq.




148
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U STRY,




Chart 1 NIGHT A D DAY RATES IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT, BY YEARS.
4.—
N
[Frequencyrate m num ofaccidents per 1 300-dayw
eans ber
,000
orkers; severity rate m num of days lost per 300-dayw
eans ber
orker.]
BH NH(6PMO AM
I T . .T 6 . )
G
1 Z DY(6A . T 6PK
2 3 A .M O . .)

D
AY
AND
NIGHT
ACCIDENT
RATES.
149




C A T15—
HK
NIGHT AN DAY ACCIDENT RATES IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT, BY DEPARTMENTS.
D
[Frequencyrate m num ofaccidents per 1 0 300-dayw
eans ber
,0 0
orkers; severity rate m num of days lost per 300-dayw
eans ber
orker.]
H i N H(6P .T 6A .)
I T .MO .M
G
£ 2 DY(6A . T 6Ptt.)
2 3 A .M O .

150

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

mechanical and yard departments call for particular notice in this
respect. The high frequency rates at night among mechanics is
doubtless the result of two factors: (1) The night force is almost
entirely engaged in what is called field work. Shop work on lathe
and planer is not undertaken as a rule at night, except in cases of
extreme urgency. The force is kept on duty mainly for imperative
repairs needed to keep the mills running, and consequently demand­
ing all possible speed. (2) The lighting factor. Often the repairs
must be made in places which do not call for careful lighting on
operative grounds. Some hurriedly improvised lighting must be
supplied. The probability that it will be unsatisfactory is very great.
This need for emergency lighting may be a point to which lighting
engineers should give further attention.
The extremely high night accident rates in yard operations must
be very largely due to the difference in lighting. The moving of
cars, the loading and unloading, and the shifting of materials which
go on at night must be very much dependent for their safety upon
lighting which enables the worker to avoid the obstacle over which he
may stumble and to place properly the objects which he handles.
EXAMPLES OF NIGHT AND DAY RATES—PLANT B.

The following table shows, by years, the night and day accident
rates of a large steel plant:

Table 54.—
NIGHT AND DAY ACCIDENT RATES IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT, 1907 TO 1914,
BY YEARS.

Period,

1907:
Night.......................
Day........................
1908:
Night.......................
Day........................
1909:
Night.......................
Day........................
1910:
Night.......................
Day........................
1911:
Night.......................
Day........................
1912:
Night.......................
Day........................
1913:
Night.......................
„ nay........................
1914:
Night......................
Day........................
1907to 1914:
Night.......................
Day........................




A
ccident frequencyrates (per Accident severity rates (days
1,000300-dayw
orkers).
lost per 300-dayw
orker).
Num
­
ber of
Per­ Tem­
Per­ Tem
300-day
­
m
a­
m
a­
w
ork­
ers. Death. nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
disa­
disa­
disa­ bility.
disa­ bility.
bility.
bility.
2,079
4,036
1,435
2,786
1,883
3,644
1,857
3,604’
1,703
3,618
1,902
3,863
2,012
4,086
1,416
3,009
14,287
28,646

1.4
.2
.7
1.6
1.4
.5
1.1
.6
1.1
1.3 :
.5
.7
.7
.8

2.9
1.7
6.3
3.2
6.9
3.8
4.3
5.5
1.8
1.9
4.2
1.3
1.0
2.2
2.1
3.3
3.6
2.8

285.7
285.1
170.7
202.4
232.6
255.8
196.0
229.5
182.0
185.7
159.3
133.8
82.0
63.6
41.0
39.5
173.3
179.5

290.0
287.0
177.0
206.3
241.1
261.0
200.8
236.1
183.8
188.2
164.6
136.4
83.5
66.5
43.1
42.8
177.6
183.1

13.0
2.2
6.5
14.3
12.3
4.8
10.0
5.0
9.5
11.6
4.5
6.6
6.3
6.9

1.4
1.0
1.1
1.5
2.5
1.7
1.6
2.0
.4
1.2
1.1
1.0
.3
1.1
1.6
2 .2
1.2
1.5

5.4
4.7
3.3
3.8
4.0
4.0
3.8
3.8
2.4
2.6
2.5
1.9
1.2
1,1
1.1
L0
3.0
2.9

19.8
7.9
4.4
11.8
20.8
18.0
10.2
15.8
2.8
8^8
13.1
14.5
6.0
8.8
27
3.2
10.5
11.3

151

DAY AND N IG H T ACCIDENT RATES.

This plant presents, quite constantly from year to year, relations
at variance with those disclosed by Plant A, and also by other plants.
In 5 of the 8 years the day has higher frequency rates than the night,
and 6 out of 8 years show higher severity rates in the day.
Only one of the important departments in this plant could be
separately considered. The experience shown by it is in accord
with the departmental experience of Plant A. During the 8 years
there were in this department 5,752 300-day workers by night and
8,787 by day. The frequency rates were: Night, 167.7 cases per
1,000 300-day workers; day, 162.9 cases. The severity rates were:
Night, 8.6 days lost per worker; day, 6.9 days lost per worker.
Evidently while the instances cited establish a strong tendency to
high rates at night the rule is subject to notable exceptions which
would well repay further and more intensive study.
EXPER IEN CE IN TH E DUSSELDORF D IST R IC T , GERM ANY.

In the Archiv fur Soziale Hygiene (Leipsic, 1910. Band VI,
Heft 1, p. 87) Dr. Walter Abelsdorff presents the following table in
regard to accident rates for the Dusseldorf district of Germany:
Table 55.—
DAY AND NIGHT ACCIDENT RATES FOR SPECIFIED INDUSTRY GROUPS IN
THE DUSSELDORF DISTRICT, GERM
ANY.

Industry group.

M
ining, blast furnaces, steel works.............
Q
uarrying and excavating.......................
M w
etal orking......................................
M
achinebuilding, tools, etc....................
Chem industries...............................
ical
By-products fromtimber.......................
Paper making......................................
Food products......................................
Total.........................................

Frequency
Plants Num of
ber
Num of
ber
rates (per
oper­ w people.
ork
accidents.
1,000300-day
ating
w
orkers).
day
and
night
shifts. Day. Night. Day. N
ight. Day. N
ight.
92
54
1
5
1
4
3
1
50
9
1
8
283

45,062
2,951
3,692
2,849
8,865
1,810
776
536
66,541

16,657 8,609 3,522
1,317 244
57
1,658 66
1
11
8
697 542 1 3
4
1,410 465 1 9
1
460 16
7
33
1
1
72
338
7
209
27
22,746 10,787 4,073

11
9
83
180
19
0
52
92
9
3
50
16
2

21
1
43
19
0
211
84
72
32
3
3
17
9

A comparison of rates in this table with those in the preceding
table is not possible since the definition of accident used in the
German experience is not the same as that used in this report.
The iron and steel industry and mining taken together show a
higher rate at night. In the text of the article from which the table
is taken it is stated that in large iron and steel works the night rates
exceed the day rates in the proportion of 218 to 188. A comment is
quoted from a Dusseldorff official to the following effect: “ Large
iron and steel works lead in respect to special risks to night workers.”
His explanation is insufficient illumination and less rigorous super­
vision.




152

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

A comparatively small group of machine builders shows the same
tendency to higher night rates as do also the chemical workers.
For the main industrial groups presented this German experience
is like that of the majority of the American plants examined.
CONJUGAL CONDITION AS INFLUENCING ACCIDENTS.

The question sometimes arises as to whether marriage and the
having of dependents have any influence upon the worker in making
him more careful in the avoidance of accidents.
No special study of this subject was made in the course of the
present investigation. But, as still pertinent, the results of a study
presented in the earlier report on accidents in the iron and steel
industry is reproduced below in tabular form.1 The table contrasts,
over a series of years, the accident frequency rates of married and
single men. The information was obtained from a large steel plant
having records on this point, and was limited to persons in the age
group 30 to 39 years in order that assurance might be had that the
hazards were substantially the same for all of those included.
Table 5G.—
FREQUENCY OF ACCIDENT OCCURRENCE IN A LARGE STEEL PLANT, BY
CONJUGAL CONDITION, 1906 TO 1 1 , BY YEARS.
90

Year.

frequency
N ber of 300-day Num of acci­ Accident(per 1.000
um
ber
rates
w
orkers.
dent cases.
300-day w
orkers).
M
arried. Single. M
arried. Single. M
arried. Single.

1906..............................................
1907..............................................
1908..............................................
1909......................... ....................
1910..............................................
Total.....................................

1,590
1,827
82
8
1,350
1,895
7,544

47
5
49
2
360
347
376
1,969

299
2
88
.149
24
2
25
3
1,195

7
6
80
3
1
60
4
1
288

188.1
157.6
168.9
165,9
124.0
158.4

166.3
186.5
86.1
172.9
109.0
146.3

The number of single men in each of the years is rather small,
but the constancy of the accident rates indicates that such rates
may be accepted as fairly typical. The rates for the married men,
it will be noted, are higher in three of the five years and also slightly
higher for the combined period— 158.4 as against 146.3 cases per
1,000 300-day workers. But these differences are not sufficient to
afford ground for concluding that either group is possessed of con­
stant characteristics tending to give it a different rate from the
other.
1 Report on Conditions of Em
ploym in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States (S. D
ent
oc.
N 1 0 62d C 1st sess.), V IV, p. 16 .
o. 1 ,
ong.,
ol.
8




153

POSSIBLE IN FLU ENCE OF ALCOHOL.

POSSIBLE INFLUENCE OF USE OF ALCOHOL UPON ACCIDENTS.

Safety men. are thoroughly convinced of the importance of alcohol
as a contributing cause of accidents. To this conviction the reso­
lutions which they have adopted and the propaganda they have
started bear emphatic witness.1 In the present study an earnest
effort was made to get at the ground of this conviction and to learn
whether there was a substantial basis for its existence. But infor­
mation of any value on this subject was obtainable in only one
plant. In this plant the night accident rates were found to be higher
than those of the day. The superintendents, without exception,
were of the opinion that alcoholic excess was partly responsible.
The points of their argument w^ere these: (1) The smuggling of liquor
into the plant is more possible by night than by day; (2) a workman
quitting the day turn will, if he uses liquor, be apt to do so in the
evening before going to bed; (3) on the other hand, a man who uses
liquor, quitting in the morning, will be likely to get to sleep quite
promptly, and then, waking some hours before his turn begins, will
drink at that time, and so come to the mill under whatever imme­
diate effect it may have. The superintendents regarded the frequent
appearance of high rates in the early night hours as confirmatory of
their views.
It will be recognized that the determination of the influence of
alcohol upon accidents is exceedingly difficult. In a given injury
the mechanical elements, such as tools or falling objects, can be
determined, but the relation of personal condition to the occurrence
is very complex and practically impossible of exact determination*
The most that can be done is to establish coincidence of facts.
In the case of the plant now under consideration the supervisor
of labor suggested that the records of disciplinary action, kept in
detail in this plant, might shed some light upon the question whether
alcoholic use was or Was not more prevalent on the night turn.
Thereupon these records were tabulated, with the following result:
Table 57.—
DISCIPLINE IN ALARGE STEEL PLANT FOR USE OF ALCOHOLIC
INTOXICANTS.
Year.

ber
iscipline rates (per
N ber of 300-day Num of cases D
um
w
orkers.
of discipline. 1,000300-dayw
orkers).
N
ight.

1907............................................
1908............................................
1909............................................
1910............................................
1911............................................
1912............................................
1913.......................*...................
Total...................................

1,897
1,129
1,647
1,998
1,559
2,094
2,003
12,326

Day.
5,688
3,446
4,568
5,644
4,215
5,302
5,559
34,422

Night.
4
1
44
40
47
4
3
28
33
276

Day.
26
1
1
6
12
18
28
19
120

1 See Proceedings of National Safety Council, 1914, p p . 158, 159, 221.




Night.
21.4
3a 1
24.3
23.5
27.6
13.5
16.5
22.4

Day.
4.6
3.2
1.3
2.1
4.3
5.3
3.4
3.5

154

SAFETY M OVEM ENT

IN IRON AND

STEEL INDUSTRY. *

The above table shows very clearly that in cases of rules violations
sufficiently pronounced to be detected and disciplined the night rate
was very much in excess of that for the day. Since the same dili­
gence of enforcement was observed by the management by day as
by night, there can hardly be any other deduction than that rules
violations were of greater prevalence at night. This is not, it may
be noted, an inference regarding relative quantities of alcohol con­
sumed by day and night, but simply one regarding the time of con­
sumption and its possible effect on the accident rate.
There is another feature worth noting. For the day turn the dis­
cipline rates remain about the same throughout the period, but for
the night rates there had occurred a marked reduction—from 21.4
cases in 1907 to 16.5 cases in 1913. If this decline in rates of disci­
pline represents a reduction in the use of alcohol, it may in part
account for the fact of the more rapid reduction of night accident
rates which took place in this plant.
DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS AND PRODUCTION THROUGH THE
WORKING HOURS.

The study of distribution was primarily undertaken with the idea
of discovering its possible relation to the problem of fatigue and so
contributing to the determination of the length of a reasonable
working day.
It is not possible to show that fatigue is anywhere distinctly regis­
tered in the curves which have been plotted. The chief practical
outcome of the study has been to call attention to the prevalence of
high rates at night and to emphasize the necessity of adequate light­
ing and other measures tending to greater safety in night work.
The characteristic form of distribution shown by the great major­
ity of the curves for accidents so far plotted may be summarily stated
as follows: (1) A greater number of accidents in the morning than
in the afternoon, (2) peaks of accident occurrence at about 10'o’clock
in the morning and 3 o’clock in the afternoon, (3) a gradual rise to
and decline from these high points. These characteristics appear so
constantly that the curve showing them may fairly be termed a
typical curve.
When an attempt is made to interpret these curves a difficulty
at once arises from the fact that the possible influence of two factors
can not yet be determined. These factors are (1) The distribution
of employment through the hours, and (2) some possible constant
errors in reporting the hour when the accident occurred.
Regarding distribution of employment, it may be said that it i3
entirely possible that it reaches a high point at the same hours when




DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH THE DAY.

155

accidents appear to be most numerous, and that the greater number
of accidents at those hours is simply a response to a greater amount
of work being done. The determination of this point is possible only
by a very extensive and laborious study of the records of some plant
which registers hours of arrival and departure with exactness and
from which the accident records are available.
Excellent reasons can be advanced for believing that in the iron
and steel industry employment is substantially uniform. For
example, records of consumption of electric power show a sharp rise
in the majority of cases during the first hour, a constant level to the
last hour, and then a sharp decline. Further, no reason, can be
assigned for employment reaching a high point in the afternoon in
different relation to the time of beginning than in the morning.
These arguments are not entirely conclusive.
Regarding constant errors in reporting the hour of occurrence,
such errors in certain cases are known to exist. For example, in a
compilation of some 1,600 cases by 5-minute intervals, it was found
that 52 per cent were set down as occurring exactly at the hour and
26 per cent at 30 minutes past the hour. That is, for an indetermi­
nate period before and after the hour the tendency of those reporting
is strong to give the nearest hour. This tendency would not materi­
ally alter the distribution to 8 points in the ordinary working day,
namely, those having a half hour of activity both before and after.
Such points are 8, 9, 10, and 11 in the forenoon, and 2, 3, 4, and 5 in
the afternoon. When such points are considered the curve is not
changed in its essential form from that produced by tabulating all
the accidents. When, therefore, the experience of concerns where the
reporting is known to be reasonably prompt, and especially where the
racord is made at an emergency ropm immediately upon the arrival of
the patient as well as by the foreman to the safety office, is considered,
such constant errors would not disturb the distribution curve. This,
however, does not apply to the extensive accumulations made by
official bureaus. It may be that in such reporting a sufficient number
of cases are turned in on the basis of memory, considerably after the
fact, to materially modify the curve. It will be easily seen that in
making return from memory the occurrence might be located with
some degree of accuracy, as morning or afternoon. The hour would
be often a matter of pure guess and the tendency would undoubtedly
be to place it somewhere in the middle of the period.
Until these two points can be more rigorously examined than has
hitherto been possible, final conclusions regarding the significance of
distribution curves are not possible.




156

SAFETY MOVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

In view of these considerations, it is now proposed to show as
briefly and summarily as possible the records which have been accu­
mulated in connection with the study and to offer a suggestion
regarding a possible explanation of the form of the distribution
curves.
The following table brings together the experience of the iron and
steel industry and of a large machine building plant for both day and
night turns:
58.—
DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
AND IN M
ACHINE BUILDING THROUGH THE HOURS OF THE W
ORKING DAY.

table

Large Large M
1 1 sm 122large com
6 all
achine
pany,
plants plants 4plants plants building Total.
(2years). (2years). (2 years). (6 years). plant.

H ending atour
D YT R .
A UN
7

.

8
9
.
10
1 ..............................
1
1 ..............................
2
Total, forenoon...........
1
................................
2...............................
3
4
5
6
.
Total, afternoon........ .
Total, day turn..........
N H TR.
IG T U N
7
8
9
10
1 ..............................
1
1 .............................
2
Total, first half night
1...............................
2...............................
3
4
5
6
Total, second half night
Tctal, night turn.......
G total..............
rand

7
5
10
9
25
2
300
23
2
14
5

1,042
2,236

369
m
11
,1 1
1,309
1,109
650
5,294
54
2
959
1,076
10
,0 0
78
0
4
32
4,771
10,065

34
7

3
55
48
0
31
6
375
2
40
2,155

13
2
21
2
23
2
240
13
5

416

7
9
14
5
21
0
244
13
9
17
0
1,032
17
1
17
8
20
2
18
8
14
4
10
5
91
6
1,993
9
7
13
0
12
0
99
6
4
570

107

104

99
276
8
1
90
21
5
24
5
85
262
6
2
51
2
2 3 1,546
4
61 | 3,701 I 1,091
7
2,853 13,766 3,084

19
8
40
6
43
0
489
16
5
24
9
239
508
523
472
385
219
2,346
4,610

39
419
61
0
787
63
9
44
9
3,0
fi3
34
0
517
617
522
362
19
0
2,461
5,524

228
25
4
23
2
21
7
18
8

808
890
850
71
9
51
7
4,816
906

19
3
22
1
269
14
9
19
7
17
6
2,526
7,136

71
5
2,036
2,595
3,029
2,674
1,762
12,847
1,307
2.422
3,659
2.422
1,824
947
11,581
21,428

704

6,074

6
16
582
54
5
3,669
8,485
32,913

In the effort to determine the effect of such changes as those
brought about by the safety movement, the following table was pre­
pared. It shows that the accident reduction which occurred in this
plant did not in any material degree modify the form of the curves.




157

DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH THE DAY.

Table 59.— PARISON OF NIGHT AND DAY ACCIDENT RATES IN A STEEL PLANT
COM
FOR THE PERIODS 1905 TO 1907 AND 1908 TO 1
910.
A
ccident frequency rates (per 1,000
300-day workers).'

Num of accidents.
ber
H beginning at—
our

19 5to 1
0 907.
N
ight.

6........................
7........................
8........................
9........................
10................... .
11.......................
Total...........
12.......................
1........................
2........................
3........................
4........................
5........................
G total__
rand
N um ber- o f 300-day
w orkers

.........

Day.

19
3
18
4
13
6
13
7
19
2
17
1
89
0
9
9
10
3
13
7
14
4
10
2
17
1
73
8
1,652
5 ,W

15
1
23
9
23
6
30
7
26
8
11
7
1,381
15
5
3
05
31
0
29
2
228
15
4
1,426
2,807
16/243

Night.
8
9
8
7
7
9
8
3
88
7
1
47
9
40
82
9
6
5
0
5
9
50
37
7
84
7
4,774

1 0 to 1
9 8 910.

19 to 19
05 07.

1 08to 1910.
9
Day.

Night.

7
4
17
6
17
6
12
8
10
7
13
2
83
8
8
4
23
0
22
2
10
8
17
5
7
4
920
1,803

26.5
28.2
31.1
33.0
24.6
22.3
165.7
18.9
24.8
33.0
27.5
22.9
22.3
149.4
315.1

Day.

Night.

7.1
14.7
16.2
18.9
17.6
10.5
85.0
9.5
18.8
18.5
18.0
14.0
8.9
87.7
172.8

13} 65S

Day.

18.7
18.2
16.6
17.4
18.4
14.9
104.2
8.4
17.2
20.1
10.5
12.4
10.5
79.1 j
183.2 |

5.4
12.2
12.2
13.3
12.4
S.O
61.5
6.2
14.9
16.3
13.2
U.5
5.4
67.5
132.0

1

In.attempting to discover the relation of production and accident
the experience of press hands was assembled. The table and chart
show that production, rose pretty steadily throughout the working
period, while accidents rise to a peak and then decline.
T able 6 0 . —

RELATION OF PRODUCTION AND ACCIDENTS AM N PRESS HANDS.
OG
Period.

H
our.
First. Second. Third. Fourth.

Total.

Pieces form
ed:
Forenoon........ ........ 38,744 40,029 40,259 41,275 160,307
Afternoon................ 39,874 40,925 40,815 41.191 1 805
62;
Accidents to press hands:
Forenoon.................
15 23 21
9
3
1
15 74
4
8
Afternoon................
05 2
22 1 5 7 7
175 2
6
6




158
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U S




159

DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH THE DAY.

In the further study of production from hour to hour the records
of several rolling mills and of a Bessemer plant were assembled.
The results are embodied in the following table and chart. They
show a rising tendency in product throughout each turn, while acci­
dents appear to rise and then decline.

PER CENT OF TOTAL PRODUCTION OF DAY TURNS ACCOM
PLISHED DUR­
ING EACH SPECIFIED HOUR OF EMPLOYMENT IN NINE MILLS OF A STEEL PLANT,
SEPTEMBER, 1912, TO APRIL, 1913.

T a bl e 6 1 . —

H ending at—
our
8a. m...........................
9a. m... ..................
1 a. m..........................
0
1 a. m..........................
1
1 a. m......
2
1p. m (lunchhour)..........
.
2p. m...........................
3p. m...........................
4p. m...........................
5p. m...........................

Struc­ Struc­
Besse­ Bloom Bloom Slab­
m
er ing ­ ing ­
Rail tural tural Plate Plate
con­ m A. m B. bing m
ill. iron iron m A. m B.
ill
ill
ill
m
ill.
verter. ill
m A. m B.
ill
ill
8.14
8.22
8.18
8.15
8.34
8.44
8.50
8.41
8.78

6.37
8.02
8.31
8.58
8.65
8.92
8.96
9.36
9.35

6.43
8.20
8.62
8.85
8.69
8.53
8.67
9.14
9.56

6.97
8.10
8.07
8.36
8.23
8.61
8.62
8.68
9.18

8.21
7.82
8.36
8.54
8.11
8.85
8.02
8. 7
7
9.18

6.74
6.96
8.24
8.02
8.39
8.70
8.67
9.41
9.41

5.78
7.25
7.99
8.65
9.05
8.50
9.00
9.37
9.19

8.18
8.24
8.11
8.20
8.23
8.64
8.72
8.69
9.08

8.23
8.50
8.39
7.97
8.08
8.41
8.44
8.76
9.02

It must be clearly understood that these tabulations represent the
records as they exist. Their interpretation is necessarily limited by
the lack of knowledge specified earlier. Until that lack is supplied
any explanation must be regarded as of an entirely provisional
character.
If substantially uniform employment and essentially reliable record
of the hour of occurrence be assumed, the following explanation
seems to accord with the facts. It is offered in the hope that it will
lead to further inquiries which, if they do not serve a directly prac­
tical purpose, may serve to prevent the expenditure of time upon
statistical compilations essentially lacking in secure foundations.
A PROVISIONAL E X P L A N A T IO N .

For purposes of further study the following explanation of the
form and relation of the curves of accident and production throughout
the day is proposed.
If the case were the simple one of rising accident rate with increased
speed, the results already attained in the laboratory would afford a
sufficient explanation. There is, however, the apparently contra­
dictory situation of product rising and accident responding for a
time, while later, with still rising product, accidents decline. If these
indications are reliable, some change must occur in the worker in the
course of his work.
The suggested explanation is as follows: At the outset of any effort
there is a certain lack of harmony between the will and the nervous
and muscular agents by which results are attained; the coordination




160
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IR N
O
AND
STEEL
INDUSTRY,




CHAET 17.—H O U R LY ACCIDENT RATES AND H O U R L Y PRODUCTION.

DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH THE DAY.

161

is not perfect. If along with this imperfect coordination there is
some motive, of whatever character, leading to effort for increased
speed the results shown by the curves will ensue, the product will
rise, and the accident curve will rise more rapidly. As effort con­
tinues coordination improves until finally product may be rising
while accident rate is falling. In practice the effects of imperfect
coordination appear not to be overcome until about 10 o’clock in
the morning. About that time comes the turning point, accident
appears to go down, due, possibly, to the progressively better co­
ordination, but the product continues to rise.
The.afternoon repeats the morning experience with this important
difference: (1) The period of adjustment is shorter; (2) the period of
relatively good coordination is longer and naturally the afternoon
product is larger.
In this connection the following quotation from a paper1 by
Prof. A. F. Stanley Kent on “ The 6
Monday Effect’ in Industry” is
in point:
Thus the evidence points to the real cause of the inefficient work
on Monday and in the first working period of any particular day,
being traceable, not to any injurious influences acting on the worker,
but rather to abstention from work resulting in operations which—
as a result of practice— are ordinarily performed quickly and well,
being to some extent forgotten, and to that extent having to be
relearnt before the old efficiency can be regained. It is in fact a
matter of loss of coordination rather than of actual fatigue.
EX TR E M E IN EXPER IEN CE .

Since the explanation offered above involves the idea that a rapidly
rising accident rate at the beginning of employment may be due to
the condition in which the worker begins his task it is of interest to
inquire whether the extremely inexperienced worker gives indication
of being unusually influenced by this condition.
It should first be emphasized that such a worker has an extraor­
dinarily high accident rate. Since press hands are used for illustrative
purposes the following table, drawn from “ Women in the Metal
Trades,” 2 is significant.
1Journal of Physiology, vol. 50.
2 Report on condition of w en and child w
om
age-earners. Vol. XI. Em
ploym of W en in the
ent
om
M Trades. S. D N 645, 61st Cong., 2d sess.
etal
oc. o.
12771°— 18— Bull. 234-------11




162

SAFETY M O VEM EN T IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Table 63—
AVERAGE NUMBER OF PRESS HANDS AND OF EMPLOYEES IN OTHER O ­
CCU
PATIONS INJURED PER DAY AFTER BEGINNING W
ORK O M
N ACHINE, BY SEX.
Average num injured per day.
ber
O
ccupation.

1st day.

Press hands:
M
ales..........................................
Females.......................................
Total........................................
O occupations:
ther
M
ales..........................................
Females.......................................
Total........................................
All occupations:
M
ales..........................................
Fem
ales.......................................
Total........................................

2d day to 2dw to 2d m
onth 7thm
eek
onth
end 1
to end 6 to end 1
end 1
onths.
w
eek.
m
onth. m
year.

7
7
252
3
29

1
3
3
3
46

3
4
7

0.78
.71
1.49

02
.1
.26
.47

8
9
42
11
3

2
5
1
2
3
7

8
2
1
0

3
.69
3.69

1
.32
1.32

•166
24
9
40
6

3
8
4
5
8
3

1
1
6
1
7

3
1
4

1
.57
1.57

This table shows a very great excess of accident occurrence on the
first day on the machine. If this could be placed on a rate basis, it
would be still more striking.
In connection with the study from which the table above is taken
435 cases of accident to press hands during the first day of employ­
ment on the press and 537 cases of metal workers injured after a year
or more of experience were recorded for which the hour of injury was
known. A tabulation of these cases follows:
T ab le 6 3 .— ACCIDENTS TO INEXPERIENCED PRESS HANDS AND TO EXPERIENCED
METAL W
ORKERS BY HOUR OF THE DAY.
A
ccidents in each Percentageineach
hour.
hour.
H ending at—
ours

8a. m................
9a. m................
1 a. m................
0
1 a. m................
1
1 m..................
2
Total forenoon..
2p . m................
3p. m.................
4p . m.................
5p. m.................
6p. m.................
Total afternoon.
G total.....
rand

M
etal
M
etal
orkers—
Press w
orkers— Press w
hands— after 1 hands— after 1
1st dayof year or 1stdayof year or
ploy­ m of
ore
em
ploy­ m of em
ore
ploy­
ent. em
ploy­ m
m
ent. em
m
ent.
m
ent.
38
50
6
6
58
4
1
23
5
4
6
52
4
4
3
0
1
0
12
8
43
5

42
6
5
6
7
78
40
292
46
6
5
6
6
5
0
18
25
4
537

8.74
7.82
1 . 49 12.10
1
15.17
12.48
13.33 U . 52
7.44
9.42
4 6
5 .1
8 -6 5 . 3
1.5
07
8.57
11.95
12.10
10.11 12.29
6.90
9.31
2.30
3.35
41.85 45.64
100.00 100.00

A comparison of the distribution through the day of the accidents
to these two classes discloses that the morning rise is greater with




DISTRIBUTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH THE DAY.

163

the beginner. His reaction to the conditions is decidedly more pro­
nounced than that of his more seasoned fellow worker. There is
abundant reason why this should be so. The beginner is more
likely to be influenced by motives leading to efforts at speed. The
holding of the new and probably more profitable job is almost sure
to be regarded by the beginner as depending on his speed record.
On the other hand hisi coordination with his work is necessarily much
more imperfect than that of the experienced worker who returns to a
familiar sort of work after a brief interval.
It is evident that even if the experienced worker showed a uniform
distribution through the day the effect of the presence of beginners
with their high accident rate would determine the form of the curve
for all workers. The table, however, indicates that the same form of
curve, in its essential particulars, occurs for the experienced as for
the inexperienced. The difference is one of degree, not of kind. The
experienced worker has (1) a lower accident rate; (2) a more nearly
uniform distribution.
The condition of incoordination and unpreparedness is perfectly
well known to everyone who works. It consciously affects his
initial efforts and is consciously overcome as time goes on. It is
naturally more noticeable in the case of highly specialized efforts
such as musical performance. A noted musician is quoted as saying
“ If I omit practice one day I notice the effect; if two days, my friends
•notice; if three days, the public.”
An excellent illustration of the proposition offered above is afforded
by the experience of a physician who is an expert operator of the
typewriter. For a considerable period, occupied with other duties,
he did not use the machine. He then had occasion to prepare a
paper hurriedly. At intervals he made a count of the pages produced,
not exact, but sufficient to show that the speed of production in­
creased steadily. When the errors were corrected it appeared that
for a time they increased from page to page, then a turning point was
reached and errors began to decline. Toward the end when speed
was highest there were no errors. Such an illustration is of peculiar
force. The conditions are manifestly such that nothing disturbing
the “ natural affective behavior” of the subject is present. The
conformity to the experience of press hands and steel mill workers is
noteworthy.
The fatigue factor can not be identified in these curves. It does
not follow that it has no influence. While not capable of demonstra­
tion it may be strongly suspected that its influence is more or less
serious during the period of recoordination in the morning. The
worker who is not given a sufficient period for recuperation may very
likely approximate the much higher rate throughout the day and the
form of curve of extreme inexperience.




164

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

CHAPTER Vffl.
WHAT ARE THE LIMITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION?

Perhaps the most interesting inquiry regarding industrial acci­
dents concerns the extent to which they may be prevented. Is it
reasonable to look forward to a time when accidents will be so few
as to be negligible, or must we contemplate .always having a huge
yearly toll of deaths and injuries in industry ?
The prevailing belief is that it is hopeless to think of anything
like the elimination of accidents, at least within a measurable time.
But the results of the present study of accident causes in the iron and
steel industry, as presented in the preceding chapters, pointedly
suggest that the current belief may be erroneous— that, while it may
not be possible to do away with accidents, it is quite practicable to
make industry so safe that fatal accidents and other serious accidents
will be of exceptional occurrence.
This conclusion is the result of a careful analysis of the accident
experience of the iron and steel industry, but in a broad way it would
seem applicable to all industries. The premises upon which the con­
clusion is based may be summarized as follows:
1.
Up to very recently emphasis has been placed primarily upon
the frequency of accidents rather than upon their severity. The vast
majority of accidents occurring in the iron and steel industry are of
a minor character. Thus, even when injuries of under a day’s dura-^
tion are excluded, more than 50 per cent of all the injuries reported
caused disabilities terminating in less than one w
reek. But from the
standpoint of time lost these minor injuries were much less important
than the small percentage of more serious injuries. The accidents
resulting in death, although constituting only about 1.5 per cent of
the total number of accidents, caused a total loss of time amounting
to more than 65 per cent of the total time losses caused by accidental
injuries. In order to arrive at the amount of time lost it is necessary
to express fatal injuries and permanent disabilities, as well as tem­
porary disabilities, in terms of workdays lost. This is done by valuing
a fatal injury (assuming the employee killed of an average age'of 30
years) as equivalent to the loss of 30 years’ work time— 9,000 days.
Permanent total disability is placed at 35 years, or 10,500 workdays,
such disability involving a greater burden to relatives and the com­
munity than death. Lesser permanent injuries—such as loss of hand
or foot— are credited with lower time losses in proportion to their
probable effect upon earning capacity—2,196 days for a hand, 1,845
days for a foot, etc. The severity rate is the number of days lost
per annum per 300-day worker—that is, one who works 300 days a
year, 10 hours per day, or 3,000 hours per annum.




THE LIM ITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

165

2. The safety movement .has dwelt unduly upon the carelessness
of the worker and has stressed too little the importance of safe tools,
safe machines, safe practices, and safe construction. Carelessness
and ignorance on the part of the worker are undoubtedly responsible
for many accidents but chiefly for the accidents of a minor character.
It is this fact that places definite limitation upon the safety organi­
zation idea as usually practised. With its committees, its publicity
methods, its quickening of foremen and workmen to an active in­
terest, safety organization has been tremendously effective in the
reduction of minor accidents.
Because the success of organization methods in reducing accident
frequency was so great, it came to be regarded as the explanation
not only of the decrease in frequency of accidents but also as account­
ing directly, by immediate effect on the workmen, for the decrease
in fatal and serious accidents. This belief took root the more readily
since the idea that accident is largely due to the reckless behavior
of the workman is an ingrained notion inherited from the days
when the slightest “ contributory negligence” barred the victim
from recovery. It may be said that if personal carelessness could
be entirely eliminated the effect upon the number of fatal and serious
accidents would not be great so long as the engineering defects are
left unchanged.
3. Fatal accidents and serious accidents, as appears from the
present study, are primarily due to fundamental engineering or
structural defects in which the workman has no part. The reduction
in the rates of death and severe injury has been due primarily to
engineering revision of structure and practice, and it is in that
direction that real progress lies.
In thus using the term “ engineering revision of structure and
practice” as expressive of the fundamental remedy for severe acci­
dent, the meaning of the term must be clearly understood. By
“ engineering revision” is meant much more than “ mechanical safeguardingo” The term is intended to suggest the widest application
of engineering skill to industrial plants. The design and location
of the buildings, the arrangement of the transportation facilities,
the means of access to every point where a worker must go, the
introduction of adequate lighting, the removal of hazardous con­
ditions, the guarding or replacement of dangerous machines— all
these must have adequate attention. Safety men are themselves
hardly aware how great are the changes which have taken place in
their own plants in these particulars. The changes have come about
gradually, and to the man who has been in contact with the slow
modification the contrast is much less striking than to one who
returns after an interval and notes the transformation.




166

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The first attack of the safety movement was upon unguarded
machines. Exposed gears were covered, belts were fenced, and other
things of similar character done. This came to be known as “ me­
chanical safeguarding.” Its results were rather disappointing. The
machine when closely studied did not prove to be as important in
causing accident as it had been supposed to be. At the same time
that “ mechanical safeguarding” was being tried and found some­
what wanting, the committee system was inaugurated, and the system
now known as “ safety organization” was coming into being. This
appealed strongly to the human factor. The success in reducing
accident frequency was immediate and extraordinary. The natural
result was to concentrate attention upon organization as the chief
factor in accident prevention. The contribution from what is here
called “ engineering revision” fell somewhat into the background.
“ Mechanical safeguarding” was given an extension of meaning to
include in many minds these broader engineering problems. Since
such “ safeguarding” had not realized the returns which were
expected from it, the results of the application of engineering skill
were somewhat clouded by the idea that they rested upon nothing
more than a form of “ mechanical safeguarding.” This presentation
is designed to show that the appeal to the human factor is not suffi­
cient for the control of serious accidents. For that, reliance must
be upon adequate “ engineering revision.”
A considerable body of facts in support of the above line of reason­
ing has been presented in the preceding chapters. Evidence of par­
ticular importance is offered in the following analyses of (1) the
accident causes in several departments of the iron and steel industry
over a period of years, (2) the accidents causing death, and (3) the
nature of the injuries causing death.
ACCIDENT CAUSES BY DEPARTMENTS OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS.
BLAST FtJRNACES.

A careful examination of the course of accident rates in certain
blast furnaces from 1905 to 1914 indicates that the major part of the
reduction in severity rates which took place was due to structural
and mechanical improvements in the department. (See Table 33.)
Thus, hot metal “ breakouts” contributed far more than any other
cause to the severity rates. From 1910 onward this cause disappears.
Its disappearance was due to the completion of structural improve­
ments which increased the resistance of the furnaces to such an
extent as to eliminate the breakouts.
Second in importance as a cause of serious accident in the earlier
years was asphyxiating gas, breakouts and gas together furnishing
56 per cent of the severity rate of 1906. The danger from gas has
also been controlled mainly by structural improvements, such as




THE LIM ITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

1 67

carrying the gas mains high in the air and providing more effective
control by means of improved valves. In addition, the introduction
of protective devices such as oxygen helmets and of resuscitation ap­
paratus must be credited with a considerable portion of the reduction
in the severity rate.
When examination is made of the accident rates for those causes
which are more affected by personal care on the part of the worker,
it is evident that while accident reduction of great importance has
occurred, it does not approach in significance that arising from the
control of the causes above mentioned, which must be met by engi­
neering revision. For example, falls of worker may be regarded as
greatly influenced by personal care. In these blast furnaces the
severity rate reduction was 1.9 days (i. e., from 7.5 to 5.6 days lost
per 300-day worker) between 1906 and 1913. This may be compared
with a reduction of 58.9 days lost in the case of injuries due to hot
substances (i. e., from 60.8 to 1.9 days) and a reduction of 10 days
lost (i. e., from 15.4 to 5.4 days) in the case of injuries due to
asphyxiating gas.
Even these statements do not present the case fully. In the early
days there were one or two deaths annually from falls of painters
engaged upon the stacks or stoves. The provision of a suitable sling
and seat for painters has entirely eliminated such deaths. Even in
injuries due to falls of worker, depending, as suggested, a good deal
upon personal care, a considerable portion of the reduction of 1.9
days lost was due to mechanical contrivances, such as safe ladders,
and to the elimination of structural defects which made accident in­
evitable. Reducing injuries due to the handling of tools and objects
is largely dependent upon personal care. The reduction in the
severity rate from this cause was only 7.3 days between 1906 and
1913, an amount of relatively small importance when compared with
the rate of reductions for injuries due to hot substances and gas. No
inconsiderable part of this reduction must, however, be credited to
better tools and greater care by the shop management in furnishing
safer tools and keeping them in proper condition.
In the blast furnaces studied, therefore, striking success in reduc­
ing the severity of accidents is found in those causes to which engi­
neering revision has been applied. Their experience strongly
suggests the overwhelming importance of fundamental improvements
in physical conditions.
OPEN HEARTH FURNACES.
In the open hearth department, injuries caused by cranes and hoists
show high severity rates in the earlier years, particularly in 1907 (see
Table 36}. This was due almost entirely to the structural defects
then prevalent, such as absence of footwalks, poor access to the crane




168

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

cage, overhung gears, and others. By 1911 these defects had been
largely corrected in the mills studied and from that time severity rates
dropped markedly and continuously.
In injuries caused by hot substances, explosions other than ingot
are the main cause of the early high severity rates. It is obvious
that the carefulness of the individual workman can do little to pre­
vent such explosions. When they occur some workmen are inevitably
killed or injured more or less severely. Theje is rarely any warning
to enable those exposed to escape. The lessened severity rate of
recent years is mainly due to revisions in structure and in method
which were primarily introduced to favor production. They both
lessen the likelihood of explosion and protect the worker when
explosion comes. These structural revisions have not been rated at
their true value from a safety standpoint because, as stated above,
they are almost all related to production.
The reduction of the severity rate for injuries due to power vehi­
cles must be largely attributed to improved transportation facilities
and improved methods of operation.
The cause groups noted above—cranes and hoists, hot substances,
and power vehicles— are clearly influenced largely by engineering
revision. The result of the application of engineering methods is
seen in the figures which follow. These cause groups combined
declined in severity from 47.5 days per 300-day worker in 1907 to
8.3 days in 1912, a reduction of 83 per cent. In cause groups in which
personal care is a larger factor the decline was only 13 per cent. In
fact in one such group, “ handling tools and objects/’ the severity
rate actually increased.
If frequency is considered the showing is very different. The
cause groups dependent upon engineering improvement declined in
frequency rates from 117.8 cases per one thousand 300-day workers
in 1907 to 64.5 cases in 1912, 45 per cent, while “ handling tools and
objects” declined from 195.5 cases to 92.3 cases, 53 per cent. On the
basis of frequency personal care has decidedly the better record.
How completely this record is reversed when severity is considered
is emphasized when it is remembered, as noted above, that while
“ handling tools and objects” was making the marked decline of 53
per cent in frequency, the severity increased 17 per cent.
ROLLING MILLS.
In heavy rolling mills the only cause of injury about which it is
possible to make a positive statement is cranes and hoists. (See
Table 40.) The reduction in severity rates recorded is very largely
due to better cranes, better chains, and improved methods of
operation.
Of tube mills it may be said that the lessened severity rates may
very properly be attributed in large measure to the effects of increased




THE LIM ITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

169

personal care. The operations of such mills afford many opportuni­
ties to eliminate moderately severe accidents by that means. The
occurrence of fatality is so rare that conclusions regarding its occur­
rence are not warranted.
MISCELLANEOUS D EPAR TM EN TS.

In plate and sheet mills (see Tables 43 and 44), in the mechanical
department (see Table 46), and in the fabricating shops (see Table
47), it is difficult to decide which factor—personal care or engineering
revision—has the greater importance. Since many of the operations
are of a personal and manual nature it is fair to attribute much
importance to individual care. Making due allowance for this it
still appears that in cases of high severity rates due to fatality these
fatalities are almost invariably the result of some structural defect
admitting of remedy.
YARDS.

In the yard department injuries caused by hot substances show a
remarkable decline in severity rates. (See Table 48.) Nearly all of
this is attributable to improved methods of transporting hot metal.
When the power vehicle as a cause of accident is studied it becomes
evident that the introduction of automatic couplers, the provision of
adequate clearances, improved loading methods such as the use of
magnets, better signaling systems, and elimination of grade crossings
have influenced the severity rates at least equally with and pro'bably
more than increased personal care.
IM PORTANCE OF ORGANIZATION.

This review of the several departments sustains very decidedly
the contention that the effect of personal care appears mainly in
reduced frequency rates and that engineering revision is reflected
more largely in the decline of the severity rate. There must be no
misunderstanding of this contention. It does not diminish the
importance of organization. In an important respect it increases it
materially. Organization and the interest it evokes lead to the
discovery and remedy of structural defects. Without organization
the revision so far accomplished would never have occurred. The
facts here pointed out regarding experience in the various depart­
ments emphasize the importance of directing organization more
vigorously to the discovery of faulty structure. Open and obvious
faults have been noted, and it is becoming constantly more and more
a matter of the most intensive engineering study to discover and
remedy the less obvious faults. This goes beyond the province of
many safety men. They should demand with increasing insistence
the help of the best engineering skill.
ANALYSIS OF CAUSES OF FATAL INJURIES.

Becajise of the extreme seriousness of fatal accidents from the
economic standpoint it is of particular importance to examine their




170

SAFETY M OVEM ENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

causes with the view of placing the responsibility for their occur­
rence. Data for this purpose were available for 372 cases of death.
These occurred in plants having a total exposure of 247,038 300-day
workers, the fatality rate thus being 1.51 per 1,000 300-day workers.
As the fatality rate for the whole industry for the years 1910 to
1914 was 1.20 cases per 1,000 300-day workers, it is evident that the
plants here concerned were in no way exceptional. The following
table lists these 372 death cases by causes:
Causes o f 372 cases o f fatal injury in the iron and steel industry, 1910 to 1914.
Engines, motors, etc......................................................................................................... .........3
Transmission gear.............................................................................................................. .........3
Working machines:
Adjusting...............................................................................................................................2
Operating..............................................................................................................................2
Oiling and cleaning.............................................................................................................2
Repairing................................................................. •
.................................................. ......... 5
Objects flying............................................................................................................. .........4
Miscellaneous.......................................................................................................................2
Total.......................................................................................................................... ..

17

Cranes and hoists:
Operating...................................................................................................................
Oiling and cleaning....................................................................................................
Repairing.....................................................................................................................
Breakage......................................................................................................................
Falling loads...............................................................................................................
Hoisting and lowering..............................................................................................
- Miscellaneous..............................................................................................................

1
3
3
7
23
8
32

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

77

Hot substances:
Electricity....................................................................................... ...........................
Explosions...................................................................................................................
Hot metal.....................................................................................................................
Hot metal flying.........................................................................................................
Flames...........................................................................................................................
Miscellaneous................................................................................ - ...........................
Total..........................................................................................................................
Falling objects:
Collapse of building, etc...........................................................................................
Stored or piled materials..........................................................................................
From trucks or vehicles............................................................................................
From buildingfe, scaffolds, etc.................................................................................
Miscellaneous..............................................................................................................

Total.




16
12
15
25
5
3
76
9
7
3
4
27
50

THE LIM ITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

171

Fattfs of worker:
From ladders...............................................................................................................
From scaffolds.............................................................................................................
From vehicles.............................................................................................................
From structures..........................................................................................................
From other elevations.............................................................................................
Into other openings...................................................................................................
Miscellaneous.............................................................................................................

5
6
1
20
4
3
6

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

45

Handling tools and objects:
Tools in hands of worker.......................................................................................... ......... 1
Loading and unloading............................................................................................ ......... 3
Objects from flying tools................................................................................................... 1
Total..........................................................................................................................

5

Power vehicles...................................................................................................................

57

Miscellaneous:
Flying objects not otherwise specified.................................................................
Asphyxiating gas.......................................................................................................
Heat..............................................................................................................................
Moving objects hot otherwise specified.................................................................
Miscellaneous.............................................................................................................

4
19
4
6
6

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

39

Grand total..............................................................................................................

372

It is necessary to state the principles upon which the following
interpretation of these death cases rests:
First. It is assumed that it is the primary duty of the safety man
to make conditions safe rather than to educate the men to avoid
unsafe conditions over which they have no control. In considering
any given case, if it appears that the immediate cause of the accident
was some weakness in an appliance, or faulty construction, or poor
arrangement, which, if remedied, would have prevented the injury,
no amount of so-called “ contributory negligence” on the part of the
man is considered sufficient to transfer the responsibility to him.
Second. The fact that an apparatus can be used with entire safety
by the exercise of special care is not regarded as excusing the failure
to provide safer apparatus. For example, a ladder without safety
feet may be used on a hard floor by taking certain precautions. If
a man fell and was killed under such circumstances the unsafe appa­
ratus is regarded as the point to be considered rather than the failure
to take the possible precautions.
Third. The costliness of remedying structural defects, even to the
extent of entirely reconstructing a mill, should not bar its considera­




172

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

tion. An illustration of the principle may be drawn from the case
of the wood planer. In the old type of this machine a revolving
cutter was used which would sometimes take off an entire hand.
This has now been replaced by a cutter which may inflict a painful,
but can not inflict a serious wound. This is a notable advance, but
it is possible to go further, since an automatic feed has been devised
for such planers which makes injury impossible. The expression
“ prohibitive cost” is heard from time to time in the discussions of
safety men. It is the contention in this discussion that if this ele­
ment of cost is entirely disregarded serious and fatal injury can be
very largely eliminated. The objection will be raised that this is an
ideal impossible of attainment. The condition urged is ideal, but
not unattainable. If an industry or plant can be made safe only by
prohibitive expenditure, in reconstruction, it is a question whether
that industry or plant*should be permitted to continue maiming and
killing workmen in order that profits may continue.
The cause groups of the table will now be followed and commented
upon in the order in which they appear:
Engines and motors caused three deaths. Two of these could have
been avoided by the guarding or removal of projections on the mov­
ing parts.
Transmission gear caused three deaths. Two of these were due
to projecting set screws on shafts.
In working machines, 9 out of 17 deaths were due to mechanical
or other conditions which should have been remedied and over which
the operator had little or no control.
Cranes and hoists were the cause of the largest number of fatali­
ties— 77. One which occurred in operating a crane was due to some
defect in the electrical control of the crane. Three which were of
oilers were attributable to the necessity of approaching moving
parts not properly guarded. Seven due to breakage were all pre­
ventable by proper design or greater strength. Of 23 due to falling
loads, some weakness in the crane, imperfect chains, faulty signals,
or some other condition which the management should have im­
proved was a factor in all but one case. Some of these involved
an element of contributory negligence, but if this had not been com­
bined with mechanical defects no accident would have occurred.
Miscellaneous causes incident to cranes and hoists contributed 32
cases, of which 10 were clearly due to defects such as absence of foot
walks and of proper means for reaching the crane cage. To sum up,
43 out of 77 cases in the operation of cranes and hoists could have
been prevented by better design in the crane and such operating
methods as now prevail. It may be strongly suspected that into the
other 34 causes there entered not infrequently elements of unsafe
practice or imperfect structure for whose presence the workers were
not responsible and which no education of them could remove.




THE LIMITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

173

Hot substances caused 76 fatalities. Sixteen of these were due to
electric burns, and of these 13 were preventable by the kind of con­
struction now in common use in electrical installation. Of 12 deaths
due to explosions, 7 were of a kind which could scarcely occur at
present with the improved modern practices/ Hot metal caused 15
deaths, and in 14 of these bad method or imperfect structure had a
part. For each condition under which these 14 cases occurred an
effective remedy has been found. Of 25 deaths due to hot metal
flying, 18 would probably not have occurred under the latest im­
proved practice. It should be emphasized that this does not mean
teaching the men caution. It means a correction of faults in the
apparatus and in methods of using it. Not less, therefore, than 52
out of the 76 deaths due to hot substances presented problems of
revision of structure and methods.
Of 50 deaths due to falling objects 29 were preventable by appro­
priate structural changes.
Falls of worker caused 45 deaths. Of these 22 might have been
prevented by better scaffolds, stairs, platforms, railings, and other
structural provisions which are now regarded as a matter of course.
Of 57 deaths due to power vehicles 34 were the result of causes
such as the following: Failure to install automatic couplers, inade­
quate clearance between cars and buildings, grade crossings upon
which men could come without being able to see the approaching
locomotive, bad signal systems which permitted cars to be shunted
down upon standing cars under which men were at work, and absence
of proper grab irons for getting on and off cars. None of these pre­
sent any insuperable difficulties to the engineer.
There were 19 deaths from asphyxia. All of these were related
to imperfect gas mains, unventilated inclosed spaces, leaky valves,
and other conditions involving changes in the apparatus.
To summarize this examination, 212 out of 372 deaths, i. e., 57 per
cent, could have been prevented by some engineering revision. This
can be said without qualification. It can not be said that all the
other 43 per cent would have been amenable to educational methods
in response to which caution would insure safety. In only about 10
per cent of these deaths would it be safe to say positively that the
man’s own carelessness clearly appears as the major factor. In the
remainder either no conclusion is justified by the record or there is a
mixture of contributory negligence with possible structural imper­
fection impossible to untangle.
The above compilation of fatal injury cases represents a combina­
tion of data for the years 1910 to 1914. It is of interest to compare
with it a body of material, recently received by the bureau, for a
group of plants for the year 1916, that year being one of extraordi­
nary activity in the industry. In this group of mills, with 84,305
300-day workers, 72 deaths occurred. This is at a rate of 0.86 case




174

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

per 1,000 workers as against the rate of 1.51 for the preceding group
for the years 1910 to 1914. This lower fatality rate represents a
distinct improvement, the probable result of very extensive struc­
tural revision made by these plants. In spite of this improvement,
however, an analysis of the 72 death cases indicates that at>least 58
per cent of them involve elements of structural defect or improper
operative methods.
ANALYSIS OF THE NATURE OF INJURY IN FATAL CASES.

Further light upon the possibility of reducing the number of seri­
ous accidents may be derived from a study of the nature of the in­
jury causing death. This is desirable also because the consideration
of rates and distribution from year to year comes to have a rather
formal interest and fails to give due emphasis to the vital importance
of these cases.
The nature of the injury causing death was available in 956 cases.
In the following table they are distributed according to the nature
of the injury and the part of the body affected:
T a b l e 6 4 . — N A T U R E A N D A N A T O M IC A L L O C A T IO N

O F IN J U R IE S C A U S IN G D E A T H IN
956 CASE S IN T H E IR O N A N D S T E E L I N D U S T R Y , 1905 T O 1914.

Anatomical location of injury.
Nature of injury.
Head,
general.

Bruises, cuts, lacerations, and
punctures.......................................
Bruises, etc., with infection........
Burns and scalds.............................
Concussions.......................................
Dislocations.......................................
Fractures............................................
Traumatic dismerg.berm.ent........

i 13

Scalp.

Neck.

Face.

Back.

i 4

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

Skull.

3
1

1
1

1
1

6

Chest.

2
1
8

5
1
74

13

220

24

300

5
218

1
20

3

i
218

6

5

23

Anatomical location of injury.
Nature of injury.
'Abdo­
men.

Bruises, cuts, lacerations, and punc­
tures .............................................................
Bruises, etc., with infection...................
Burns and scalds.........................................
Burns, etc., with infection......................
Concussions...................................................
Dislocations...................................................
Fractures.......................................................
Fractures, with infection.........................
Traumatic dismemberment...................
A sphyxia........................................................
Electrocution...............................................
Heat exhaustion.........................................
Miscellaneous.............................................
T otal....................................................

Pelvis.

Arm .

Hand.

Leg.

Foot.

N ot
located. Total.

26
1
2

26

4
1

33

6
1
6

1

16

6

65
1
39

26

7

1

3
55

2
19
1

33

1

1
71
23
7
39

398

12

2 147

4

1 Includes 2 cases of decapitation caused by hot rod.
2 Includes 4 cases of cremation by falling into a furnace or being covered by molten metal*
3 Includes 1 case of dismemberment caused by hot rod.




37
18
136
2
5
1
585
3
24
71
23
7
44
956

THE LIMITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

175

The largest group in the table is that of fractures. When severe
enough to cause death these involve nearly always an element of
crushing injury. When the cases are closely studied there is found
to be in a majority of them—it is impossible to determine the exact
number—some indication of faulty structure which might have been
remedied. For example, a man’s life is crushed out between a mov­
ing car and a post beside the track. What was needed to make him
safe ? Six inches more of space—easy, almost costless, to give at the
time of building, but looking so difficult and costly after construction
is finished that it is not provided until after the man is killed.
Next in importance to fractures are burns and scalds, with 136
cases. Of these the most striking are 4 cases of cremation, 1 due
to falling into a furnace, 3 to being overwhelmed by molten metal.
In the cremation cases due to molten metal, rearrangements were
worked out after the catastrophe which tend to lessen very much
the chance of a recurrence of such an accident. In a large proportion
of the less striking cases some structural improvement, lessening the
danger, has been made subsequent to the accident.
The fact that infection was formerly a very serious menace is
attested by the fact that 23 deaths occurred in which without this
complication there would very likely have been recovery. None of
the injuries in which it figured were in themselves of sufficient seri­
ousness to cause death. This emphasizes very strongly the great
value as a life saver of adequate emergency treatment with sufficient
insistence upon it to secure prompt report of even slight injury.
The 23 cases of eloctrocution were largely needless. They repre­
sent faulty installation or a method of doing work which should not
be tolerated. The same statement is, in a measure, to be made
regarding 71 cases of asphyxia. Sufficient care in construction and
in methods of work would do away almost entirely with this death
hazard.
Finally, 24 cases are presented which afford a startling climax to
this presentation. These are cases of traumatic dismemberment, in
which arms, legs, or heads were burned, sheared, or forcibly torn
from the body. Of the nine cases of legs so lost one leg was burned
off by a hot rod in a rod mill. The feet lost were ground off in the
exposed gearing of the transfer tables of rolling mills. Four de­
capitations are recorded. Of these, two were due to being caught
by the hot rod loop in the rod mills; the other two were the result
of power vehicle accidents.
The question of the reasonableness of the costliest efforts to render
such events impossible can scarcely be debated. It is but just to say
that in many cases efforts have been made with small regard to cost
and that usually such efforts have been successful. The larger pro­




1 76

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

portion of the striking cases in the table above belong to the earlier
portion of the period included in the survey.
E X A M P L E S OF SO-CALLED “ CARELESSNESS.”

The wide prevalence of the view- which attributes the accident
largely to the worker, when he is at best but a contributing cause,
is illustrated in numerous safety manuals and safety directions. The
following are taken from recent publications. The cases listed were
all cited as illustrations of carelessness on the part of the worker.
Case 1.—A workman in a foundry was wheeling a barrow, and while
passing under a heavy flask being carried by a crane the chain broke,
the load dropped on him and he was killed. This case is listed under
the heading “ disobeying safety orders.”
The man clearly contributed to his death by disobeying a rule
which forbade him to walk under moving loads, and, in one view,
the remedy would clearly be a renewed insistence on the rule. There
is, however, another view. What was the matter with the chain?
This question is the really fundamental one. The man’s disobedience
endangered himself only. The faulty chain endangered many men,
men who were blamelessly doing their appointed tasks. It may be
urged that it is not possible to produce a perfectly safe chain. In
reply it may be said that recent investigation shows conclusively that
there are defects in structure and in use of chains which can be re­
moved by engineering attention. Until that is done the chain prob­
lem is the fundamental problem in all such cases as the one here
listed.
Case 2.—At a point where the clearance between railway track and
wall was too small for a man to stand safely, there was located an
outlet for water. It was intended for no other purpose than the
flushing of an adjacent gutter and the men were forbidden to get sup­
plies from it. In spite of the order it was used from time to time
because of its more convenient location instead of the more distant
faucet provided. Finally a man was caught and killed. A clearer
case of personal negligence could hardly be imagined. Is there any­
thing more to say ? At a slight additional expense the outlet could
have been located in a safe place. No amount of negligence on the
part of the men excuses a trap in which even a violator of rules
may be caught.
Case 3.—An oiler was caught on a smooth shaft by some loose por­
tion of his clothing. He had been expressly and personally forbid­
den to wear such clothing. It is possible to equip all shafts with




THE LIMITS OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION.
b e a r in g s

w h ic h

ren der

ap proach

w h ile

th e

177

m a c h in e r y

is

in

m o tio n

w h o lly u n n e c e s s a r y .
4 -— A

C a se
u s in g

th e

m a c h in is t

open

bed

w ho

o p e ra te d

o f h is p la n e r to

a

o f an ord er to

th e c o n tr a r y h e c o n tin u e d

r e a c h in g

in to

th e

p la tfo r m

and

w o u ld

h ave

th a t an

sp ace,

he

w a s fa ta lly

c lo s e d

th e

s lip p e d

a c c id e n t o f th is k in d

T h e

in

th e

w o u ld

tic u la r c a s e s h a v e b e e n
fe c tio n
cases
T h e

is s o

as

p e r fe c tly

soon

as

rem ed y

c le a r .

th is

w as

ch osen

w as

s t r in g e n t r u le s a n d s p u r u p
T h is

is

b y

to

th e

o b s c u r it y , r u le s m a y

In

of

s p ite

th e

m o v in g

o f a fe w

in

su ch

d o lla r s

a

m an n er

e n tir e ly im p o s s ib le .
T h ese p a r­

even

to

im p e r ­

d is m is s s u c h

r e a s o n a b ly
o b v io u s .

su g g e ste d .

M ake

m ore

th e fo r e m e n r e g a r d in g th e ir e n fo r c e m e n t.
In

reach ed

or

h a b it

e le m e n t o f h u m a n

e n tir e ly

T h e

be

of

a lm o s t in d e fin ite ly .

be

e n g in e e r in g r e m e d y .

m u s t n o t b e p e r m itte d
o n ly

th e

F in a lly , w h ile

fr o n t

ten d e n cy h as b een

u s e fu l b u t s u p e r fic ia l.

o b v io u s

in

p la n e r b e d

e s ta b lis h e d
to

in

to o ls .

e x p e n d itu r e

b eca u se th e

T h e

th o u g h t

fe ll

h ave been

S u c h illu s tr a tio n s c a n b e e x t e n d e d

w as

o f h is

th e p r a c tic e .

and

cru sh ed .

o p e n in g s

p la n e r

sto re so m e

each

case

c ite d

above

th e re

is

c o n sta n t p resen ce o f h u m a n

o b sc u r e th e fu n d a m e n ta l c a u se s w h ic h
r e fo r m a tio n

m u ltip ly

and

of

m en

w ron g

c o n d itio n s .

an

fa u lt

In

can
such

s t ill d ie .

EXTENT OF ACCIDENT REDUCTION.
S u m m in g

up

th is

su rv ey,

th e

fo llo w in g

p o in ts

d eserve

s p e c ia l

e m p h a s is :
T h e s t a t e m e n t t h a t “ a c c id e n ts c a n n o t b e e n tir e ly p r e v e n t e d ” r e s ts
to a c o n s id e r a b le d e g r e e u p o n t h e c o n v ic t io n t h a t a c c id e n t o c c u r r e n c e
is d u e i n

th e m a in

to

th e h u m a n fa c to r .

n o t y e t in s ig h t i t is u r g e d
not

be

e x p e cte d .

m u m ”
If,
d e n ts

A c c o r d in g ly

th e

o f a c c id e n t o c c u r r e n c e h a s

as

ap pears

is

hum an

to

in flu e n c e d
p e r fe c tio n

d iffe r e n t

and

be

in d ic a te d

m u ch

th e

m u ch

m ore

p r o b le m
m ore

S in c e a p e r fe c t h u m a n it y is

t h a t r e s u lts w h ic h

dem and

e x p r e s s io n

“ an

a p p ea re d fro m

b y

th is

b y

tim e to

e n g in e e r in g

o f c u ttin g

s o lv a b le .

stu d y ,

th e

dow n

th e

of

p o s s ib le

m oney.

Spend

a tta in m e n t, b u t

enough

upon

th e

one

W h a t

is

th e

lim it

of

r e d u c tio n

p o s s ib ilitie s

o f im p r o v e m e n t in

ite d .

p o s s ib le

It

is

to

of

stro n g ,

th o u g h t

e n g in e e r in g

a n d f a t a l a c c id e n t s w ill b e v e r y la r g e ly
in

absen ce n o w

1 2 7 7 1 ° — 1 8 — B u l l . 2 3 4 --------- 1 2




does.

b y

q u ite

so

tim e

and

w e ll

and

s e r io u s

e lim in a te d .
severe

and

in d u s tr y

fa ta l

cases?

T h e

a re a lm o s t u n lim ­

c o n d u c te d

under

tio n s s o s a f e t h a t t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f s e v e r e i n ju r y w ill e x c it e
s u r p r is e t h a t its

is

I t is n o t a

and

p r o b le m s

p h y s ic a l c o n d itio n s

c o n c e iv e

a c c i­

t h a t t h e y c a n n o t fa il, e x c e p t

s o r a r e ly t h a t fa ilu r e is n e g lig ib le , a r e p o s s ib le , a t a p r ic e .
q u e s tio n

of

th a n

s e v e r ity

so

can

m in i­

tim e .

s e v e r ity

p e r fe c tio n

S tru ctu re s

d e s ig n e d , th e ir m a t e r ia l s o w e ll s e le c t e d

p e r fe c tio n

ir r e d u c ib le

c o n d i­

th e sa m e

C H A P T E R IXc

NATURE OF INJURY.

From the accident-prevention standpoint the subject of nature of
injury is of much leos importance than is that of cause of accident.
Nevertheless, an analysis of the injuries according to their nature is
not without value in accident-prevention work and especially so
because protective devices must sometimes be placed upon the
worker himself rather than upon the machine.
The proper classification of nature of injury has been a matter of
considerable discussion. In the present study it has seemed that
the most useful classification is one which maLos the pathological
condition (burns, crushing injuries, fractures, etc.) the basis and then
subdivides according to the anatomical region affected—head, hands,
etc.1 If this is supplemented by information showing the resulting
permanent injury, if any (such as loss of hand, lo~s of sight), a very
complete picture of the nature of the injury is offered. Thus, a par­
ticular injury would be listed as follows: A crushing injury (patho­
logical) to the hand (anatomical region) causes the ultimate loss of
the hand (result).
The following table gives a general analysis of the nature of the
injuries which occurred in a large number of iron and steel plants
over a period of several years, and represents a total of 37,261 injuries
occurring among a total of 207,803 300-day workers. A further
analysis of these injuries, by anatomical region affected, is shown, on
the basis of frequency rates, in Table 108, the amount of the material
not being sufficient to justify a similar analysis on a basis of severity.
For convenience of comparison there is added to the table the cor­
responding accident rates for the machine-building industry, taken
from the recent report of the bureau on accidents and accident pre­
vention in that industry.2
1 For classification adopted b y the International Association of Accident Boards and Commissions, in
M ay, 1916, see Bulletin of U . S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, N o. 201. The tabulation of the present report
had progressed too far to permit the application to it of this classification. The two system s, however.
are not very different.
2 Bulletin N o. 216, U . S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

178




N A TU R E OF IN JU R Y

179

T able 6 5 . — N A T U R E O F I N J U R Y IN T H E IR O N A N D S T E E L I N D U S T R Y A N D IN M A C H IN E
B U I L D I N G F O R T H E P E R IO D 1905 T O 1914.
[Number of 300-day workers included: Iron and steel, 207,803; machine building, 179,956.]

Iron and steel industry.

Nature of injury.
Total
cases.

Accident
frequency
Total
rates (per
days lost.
1,000
300-day
workers).

Machine builders.

Accident
severity
rates
(days
lost per
300-day
worker).

A sp hyxia.................................................................
Bruises, cuts, and lacerations..........................
B u m s.........................................................................
Crushing injuries...................................................
Dislocations and sprains....................................
Electric shock.........................................................
E ye injuries.............................................................
Fractures....................... ..........................................
Heat prostration...................................................
Infections.............................................................
Unclassified.............................................................

146,070
138
359,023
22,168
564,088
3,810
1,083 1,364,405
2,454
33,220
9
80,936
136,261
3,698
2,537
823,150
38,476
136
43,592
990
194,528
238

0 .7
106.7
18.3
5.2
11.8
0)
17.8
12.2
.6
4.8
1.1

0.7
1.7
2.7
6.6
.2
.4
.7
4.0
.2
.2
.9

T o ta l..,.........................................................

37,261 3,783,749

179.3

18.2

Accident Accident
frequency severity
rates
rates (per
(days
1,000
lost per
300-day
workers). 300-day
worker).

51.4
4.2
3.0
4.8

1.3
.7
2.1
.1

8.3
6.2

.4
1.4

1.3

.9

78.9

6.7

i Less than 0.05.

It will b© noted from this table that the frequency of particular
kinds of injuries affords no measure of the severity of such injuries.
Thus, in the iron and steel industry, “ bruises, cuts, and lacerations”
show by far the highest frequency rate (106.7 cases per 1,000 300-day
workers) but have a relatively low severity rate (1.7 days lost per
worker), whereas “ crushing injuries,” with a low frequency rate
(5.2 cases) have the highest severity rate (6.6 days).
NATURE OF INJURY, BY DEPARTMENTS.

Further analysis of nature of injury, and one of greater practical
usefulness, is made in the next table, which shows frequency and
severity rates by departments. The rates given are based, in every
case, upon the amount of employment in the particular department.
Table 108 in Appendix H shows in greater detail the frequency
rates for these departments, by nature of injury.




1 80

SA FETY M O V E M E N T IN IRO N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y .

T able 6 6 .— F R E Q U EN C Y AND S E V E R IT Y OF ACCIDENTS, B Y N A T U R E OF IN JU R Y AN D
B Y DEPARTM EN TS.

Nature of injury.

Blast
Bes­
Heavy
Fab­
Open
Foun­ Tube
Plate Sheet
fur­
se­
rolling
ricat­
hearths.
dries. mills.
mills. mills.
naces.
mer.
ing.
mills.

Me­
chan­
ical.

Yards.

ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY WORKERS).
Asphyxia...... ..................„. .
Bruises, cuts, and lacera­
tions ................................
B u m s .....................................
Crushing injuries...............
risiocation.3 and sprains.
Electric shock.....................
Eye injuries.........................
Fractures..............................
Heat prostration................
Infections..............................
Unclassified injuries.........

88.9
44.6
4.8
11.1
.1
16.5
10.2
.1
8 .0
*1.6

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

190.5

4.8

0.3

0.7

104.4 138.2
38.1
50.3
7.1
6 .5
11.0 21.3
12.6
12.8
1.5
4.7
.8

27.6
13.5
.1
7.1
1.8

0.2
85.0 102.9
17. 7 15.3
6.5
4.3
6 .2
13.6
32.5
9.1
.2
2 .3
.8

22.1
6 .2
.4
15.0
2.0

192.8 265. 7 160.3 181.8
1

0.2

0.8

0.3

78,0
8.1
7.2
6.7

168.9
4.0
5.8
12.6

116.7
9.8
2.3
14.2

3. 4
6 .0
1.6
.6
.7

38.8
35.2
.6
.7
1.5

27.9
9.8
.1
4.4
1.4

97.3
6. i
4.5
12.9
.1
10.7
10.1
.2
3.7
1.0

144.1 |22G S 112.4 | 268.2
.

187.5

91.6 153.4
9.4
14.6
4.3
6.0
10.5 1-7.8
.1
.1
11.6 13.0
11. 7 13.3
.3
1. 6
3. 5
5.2
.9
1.0

147.3
I

ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY Y/ORKER).

0.98
Asphyxia........ ......................
Bruises, cuts, and lacera­
2.41
tions.......................... .*____
B urns.....................................
9.61
Crushing injuries.............
10.72
.18
Fislocations and sprains .
Electric shock...................
.46
E ye injuries.........................
1.15
8.70
Fractures...............................
Heat prostrations..............
0)
.60
Infections..............................
2.35
U nclassified.........................
Total...........................

43.17

Number of300-day workers 19,486

0.38

1

0.01

1.12
1.96
6.36 10. 44
7.64 7.95
.26
.11

0)

1.71
1.78
6.15
.06

1. 75
.32
3.94
.22

.70
.81
0)
.05
.03

.33
2.48
.01
.28
.66

' 20.84 32.56 11.29

9.98

.89
3.13
.42
.40
.39

26,011

1.13
9.43
0)
.12
1.26

2.04
1.36
2.59
.12
1.20
.63
a 68
’0 )
.28
.74

2.47
1. 14
7. 75
.18
.63
.36
.60
.63
.05
.02

!

C
1)

C
1)

0.83
.10
8.54
.12

1.22
.04
12.62
.10

1. 71
1.08
2.91
.22

.09
.76
.93
.04
.02

.92
3.85
0)
.01
.60

.97
6.31
0)
.11
3.2V

12.65 14.13 11.43 | 19.38

13. 59 1

7,829 IS,710 16,448 87,464 14,846 19,498 j16,164 19,884
■ 1

0)
2.15
.61
6.90
.31
.97
.23
6.07
( ,,.07
1.00
18. S3
18,481

i Less than 0.005.

The most noteworthy facts brought out in this table may best be
shown by a brief discussion of each of the more important classes
of injury as listed. Attention will be limited, for the most part, to
the severity rates, as given in the second part of the table, inasmuch
a3 severity rates are a much truer measure of hazard than are fre­
quency rates.
Asphyxia, as will be noted, is a serious matter only in blast fur­
naces. The remedy, as has been pointed out in the discussion of
accident causes in blast furnaces, lies in engineering reconstruction
and in the adoption of respiration apparatus where applicable.
Bruises, cuts, and lacerations show greatest severity in blast
furnaces (2.41 days lost per worker), blooming mills (2.04 days), plate
mills (2.47 days), and yards (2.15 days). The great majority cf these
injuries occur to the feet and hands of the workers 1 and are evidently
reducible by better training and equipment of the men and by the
development of improved methods of handling, especially the substi­
tution of mechanical for manual means. A striking example is found




i See Table 108.

NATURE OF INJURY.

181

in some plate mills where magnets were introduced for moving plates
which had before been manipulated by hand. The highest frequency
of bruises to the hands is naturally in fabricating shops where the tools
used and the material handled conduce to this result. The intro­
duction of improved apparatus, such as the electric reamer, affects
this hazard favorably.
Burns have greatest severity (10.44 days per worker) in the Besse­
mer department. This arises, no doubt, from the frequency of injuries
due to hot metal (49.5 cases per 1,000 workers). In the operation
of the Bessemer converter the “ blow” throws out particles of metal
which are at times capable of causing disabling burns. The emptying
of slag into cars or on the pit floor adds to the danger. Proper
clothing and eye protection are large factors in reducing these hazards.
Blastfurnaces (9.61 days) and open hearths (6.36 days) have the next
highest severity in injuries from burns. Here the hazards are of
similar character and the same remedies are applicable as in the
Bessemer department.
Crushing injuries show the greatest severity in the fabricating shops
(12.62 days), followed by blast furnaces (10.72 days), sheet mills (8.54
days), Bessemer converters (7.95 days), plate mills (7.75 days), open
hearths (7.64 days), and yards (6.90 days)» The large number of such
injuries is due mainly to injuries to the feet and hands. But their high
severity rates are attributable to those injuries, comparatively few in
number, which occur to the abdomen, chest, head, and legs, and which
arise very largely in connection with the transportation problems of
these departments. The very high severity shown for fabricating
shops is not due so much to transportation proper as to "shifting by
cranes. The large girders and other articles which must constantly
be moved afford many chances for injury. Crane construction,
methods of operation, and particularly the care of chains, in the mat­
ter of safe loads and the substitution of cables, need close attention.
The rate for yard operations, as above given, is probably too low, as
not infrequently an injury due to yard operations is credited to some
other department, because the man injured belongs to the force of that
department.
Dislocation and sprains, while quite numerous, have such low
severity rates as to call for little comment. The yards show the
highest rate (0.31 day), followed closely by Bessemer converters (0.26
day), tube mills (0.22 day), and the mechanical department (0.22
day). It is very probable that plant cleanliness is here an important
remedial measure, but the main stress must be laid upon the exercise
of proper care on the. part of the men.
Eye injuries do not show severity proportional to their number, bu*t
are of much importance in spite of that fact. This hazard is most




182

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

serious in blast furnaces (1.15 days). Bessemer converters (1.13
days), mechanical departments (0.97 day), fabricating departments
(0.92 day), and open hearths (0.89 day) follow in order.
Fractures, closely related to crushing injury and often difficult to
distinguish separately, show very high severity rates. The highest
occurs in the Bessemer department (9.43 days), followed by blast
furnaces (8.70 days), mechanical departments (6.31 days), and yards
(6.07 days). These departments doubtless owe their preeminence in
this respect to the combination of transportation hazards with those
due to their own departmental dangers. Mechanics suffer such acci­
dents largely through their work on difficult repair jobs. Much can
be done to modify this condition for the better by provision of better
apparatus, such as ladders and trestles for temporary purposes. It
is often necessary to employ makeshift devices, but they can be con­
structed of adequate strength and approved design, and can often
be replaced by permanent adjustable apparatus of much greater
safety.
Heat prostration shows severity rates of significance in only three
departments—sheet mills (0.93 day), plate mills (0.63 day), and open
hearths (0.42 day). This will appear as normal to those familiar
with the conditions formerly prevalent in these departments. In
sheet mills the beat hazard can be greatly reduced by the changes
already introduced in the better plants. By the use of water-cooled
floor plates or entire water-cooled floors in the vicinity of rolls and
furnaces, a contributory cause of prostration can be removed. The
installation of ventilating fans, so that a stream of air can be delivered
both to relieve the men and to carry off surplus heat, is important.
Most important is the provision of a supply of good drinking water
properly cooled. The common symptom of heat exhaustion is vio­
lent cramps. These have often been attributed to drinking water of
a too low temperature. It is doubtful if this is the real cause. The
cramps are apparently due to a depletion of the watery element of
the blood such as occurs in profuse perspiration, and having the
drinking water too cold may lead to the use of an insufficient quan­
tity, since the cold gives a mistaken sense of satisfaction. The water
should be of such a temperature as to be agreeable and to encourage
the drinking of a sufficient quantity to keep the blood of proper con­
sistency. Where water must be cooled artificially, it is best accom­
plished by a refrigerating system by which the temperature can be
properly regulated and from which the water can be forced around
the circuit and delivered at all points at a uniform temperature.
The lessening of heat prostration and improved health in other
respects upon the introduction of such arrangements have been very
marked.




NATURE OF INJURY.

183

Infections show fairly uniform frequency rates as between depart­
ments, but with much the higher severity rates in those departments
where burns are frequent—blast furnaces having a severity rate of
0.60 day per worker from infections, and open hearths a rate of 0.40
day. This is because a burn often presents an extended surface liable
to infection and proper protection is a matter of greater difficulty
than it is in the case of a laceration or cut.
Since infections are almost entirely preventable if proper care is
taken, special effort was made to study the frequency of such cases
from year to year in order to determine whether they are decreasing
at a more rapid rate than would result from the general decline in
accident rates. The results are presented in the following table,
which shows for five departments, over a period of years, the course
of frequency rates for infected cases of injury in contrast with the
rates for other cases of injury, all of which are, of course, potentially
subject to infection. The data for blast furnaces were available as
early as 1905; for the other departments, only from 1907.’
table

6 7 . — A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S F O R I N F E C T E D A N D
I N J U R Y IN F I V E D E P A R T M E N T S , B Y Y E A R S .

O T H E R CASES O F

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).

Department.

Per
cent of
de­
crease
from
earli­
est
year to
1914.

1905

Blast furnaces:
Infected cases..........
Other..........................
Open hearths:
Infected cases..........
Other..........................
Rolling mills:
Infected cases..........
Other..........................
Tube mills:
Infected cases..........
Other..........................
Mechanical:
Infected cases..........
Other..........................

1906

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

32.3
392.3

15.4
315.8

8.9
295.1

3.9
218.2

8.7
178.3

10.3
176.7

5.8
121.2

3.4
121.2

•3.6
87.5

2.6
72.4

92
82

C
1)
C
1)

0)
0)

7.7
305.7

3.3
199.6

7.7
223.1

4.8
186.4

6.2
142.8

4.0
146.1

5.0
146.3

2.4
112.8

69
63

0)
C
1)

(})
0)

3.3
192.5

2.2
168.8

5.7
179.4

4.3
136.9

1.7
137.5

2.3
130.9

2.6
96.7

1.4
55.7

58
71

(!)
0)

(x)
(x)

22.4
266.6

18.6
129.5

19.3
235.1

12.3
216.0

24.5
199.7

22.1
146.3

3.3
75.3

2.0
43.2

91
84

0)
C
1)

(*)
0)

4.7
247.4

7.4
266.7

5.6
225.1

7.6
177.2

3.0
1 .9 “
143.6 119.8

1.2
109.9

1.8
104.7

62
58

1914

1 Data not available.

The table indicates that improved care in the treatment of wounds
has had a considerable effect upon the frequency of infection. In
each department, except rolling mills, the decline in infected cases
exceeds the decline in other cases. In blast furnaces, where it was
possible to go back as far as 1905, the prevalence of infection in the
early years is most striking. If the other departments could be fol­
lowed to the same point somewhat similar conditions would prob­
ably be disclosed. It is extremely probable that the data for 1907
do not show the full frequency of infection in those other depart-




184

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

ments since the recording of infected cases was somewhat imperfect
at that time.
The control of infection rests upon prompt reporting of infectable
cases to the emergency room and upon adequate skill and equipment
at that point. Emergency rooms and emergency methods of a
character tending to spread infection rather than check it are still
in use. In one large plant where special effort was being made to
secure reports of all infectable cases, disabling accidents showed a
constant decline in frequency, while at the same time jiondisabling
accidents showed a steadily increasing rate.1 This was not due to
an increasing number of nondisabling injuries occurring, but to the
gradual response on the part of the work people to the urgent request
that they have slight injuries properly treated. This fuller report­
ing of minor cases was accompanied by an equally steady reduction
in infections.
The importance of this matter may be illustrated by the following
experience. Some years ago a large steel plant was visited in which
cases of serious injury were cared for by a local hospital. Two
wards were assigned to the patients from the steel works. One ward
had noninfected cases, the other had infected cases. At the time of
the visit the ward for infected cases had the larger number of pa­
tients. This situation provoked inquiry. It was found that the
company had provided emergency outfits throughout the works,
had given training in their use to foremen of the different mills and
shops, and that unless a man’s condition became serious enough to
call for hospital care, this emergency treatment was last aid as well
as first aid. Later the company equipped an emergency hospital
with physician and nurse. Infection dropped almost out of sight
immediately.2
NATTJBE OF INJUBY AND OCCUPATION.

Some very important conclusions are to be derived from a study
of the relations between occupational groups and the nature of the
injuries occurring therein. Accordingly, special effort was made to
determine rates by occupations wherever the employment of an
occupational group could be ascertained and was sufficiently large
to permit the computation of reliable rates. In the present case,
this was possible for the more important characteristic occupations
of the blast furnaces, the open hearths, and the tube mills.
B LAST FU RNACES.

Four occupational groups have been isolated in this department,
namely, cast-house men, common labor, mechanics, and stocking
labor. These cover the characteristic operations of the blast fur­
1 See chart 13.

2 The introduction of the Carrel-Darkin methods of treating infectible and infected wounds

still further improve the situation.




NATXJBE OF INJURY.

185

nace. Their frequency rates, by nature of injury, are shown in the
following table:
T a b l e 6 8 . — A C C ID E N T

F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S IN B L A S T FU R N A C E S, B Y
I N J U R Y A N D O C C U P A T IO N , 1905 T O 1914.

NATURE

OF

Frequency rates (oases per 1,000 300-day workers).
Nature of injury.

Casthouse
men.

Common
labor.

Mechan­
ics.

Stocking
labor.

Other
occupa­
tions.

Total.

A sp hyxia.................................................................
Bruises, cuts, and lacerations:
Of abdomen....................................................
Of arm or arms..............................................
Of trunk. . . . . . .
___
O f foot or toes................................................
O f hand nr finpftfS___ ____ . . , . T. _. .
O f head or neck...................•
.........................
0 f leg or legs...................................................
Unclassified.......... . „............................. ..

4.4

6 .5

5.2

3.4

7.3

6 .6

7.4
4.4
30.2
37. 0
18.4
15.5
4.4

.6
5.5
9.9
31.6
31.2
26.6
15.2
4.9

.8
3.8
6.8
13.1
16.3
9.5
7.6
4.4

1.1
5.6
38.4
13.5
10.2
13.5

.7
2.3
5.0
11.3
15.6
9.3
5.3
2.0

.6
4.3
7.2
22.6
23.4
16.4
11.0
3.8

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

117.9

125.6

62.3

82.4

51.6

89.2

2. 2
97.3
10.3
60.4

.2
4.9
21.5
4.1
21.7

.5
2.5
2.2
4.9
8.4

2.3
1.1
2.3
3.4
11.3

2.7
5.0
8.6
4.7
17.6

.9
3.8
19.9
5.0
20.4

170.2

52.3

18.5

20.3

38.9

50.0

1.1
1.1

.3
.3
3 .0

.1
.6
2.0
.1
.1
.2

3.6

3.3

2.7
1.0
.3

4 .5
2.6
.2
.2
.4
1.2
.4
1.9
.1

B u m s:
By
By
By
By

electricity.................................................
gas...............................................................
hot m etal..................................................
hot wfl,to,r and
. .... ..............

Total..............................................................
Crushing injuries:
Of abdomen....................................................
O f arm or arms. .
...................
0 f trunk...........................................................
Of foot or toes................................................
O f hand or fingers........ ...............................
Of head.............................................................
Of leg or legs...................................................
Unclassified.................... ..........................
Total....... ......................................................
Dislocations and sprains:
Of ankle...........................................................
Of back.............................................................
Of elbow...........................................................
Of foot or toes................................................
Of hand or fingers.............. ..........................
O f knee.............................................................
O f shoulder....................................................
Of wrist............................................................
Unclassified...................... ..............................
T otal................... ..........................................
Electric shock................
. .
E ye injuries............................................................
Fractures:
Of arm..............................................................
Of both a r m s...
.
...
Of collar bone.
..............................
Of face...............................................................
Of foot or toes.................... ............................
Of hand or fingers,......................................
Of leg.................................................................
Of both legs.
.............................
O f pelvis..
.........................
Of ribs ...............................................................
Of skull.............................................................
Unclassified..........................

.1

.3
1.5
2 .9

.6
1.8
.2

4 .4

2.6

.5
1.6
.3
.3
.5
3.5

1.1
3.3
\

4.1
1.9
.3
.3

5.6

1.5
.7
3.7

5.9
3.4
.2
.2
.8
1.2
.4
2.8

.5
.3
1.4
.3

2.3
1.1

.7
1.3
.3
1.0

16.2

15,0

9.0

10.2

7.3

11.5

34.6

.2
24.3

15.0

7.9

11.3

.1
18.8

.7

.8

1.1

3 .4

1.3

1.2

1.0

.2
.2
1.7
3.6
1.7
.i

3 .7
6.6

1.5
2.9
1.5
.7

1.5
1.5

.2
1.6
3 .7
1.4
.2

i .i

.8
2.5
2.5

2.3
6.8
3.4

2.0
5.0
1.3

.6
1.0

.5
1.4
.3

2.3
2.3

.3
2.3
.3

.6
1.5
.1

T o ta l.................... .......................... .

mo

9.3

9.0

20,3

13.6

10.9

Heat exhaustion.................................................
Infections.................................................................
Unclassified.................................................... ..

o7
20.6
1.5

13.2
1.4

3.8
1.6

6.8
2 .2

4.3
2.0

.1
9.1
1.7

.......... „ . . . . ..................

380.3

%
250-5

128.1

156= 9

139.1

200.6

Jtfumber o f 800-day workers................................

1,857

4,980

8,670

886

3,006

13,849

Grand total. .




186

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Contrary to experience elsewhere the common labor here does not
have the highest frequency. The cast house men (with a frequency
rate of 380.3 cases per 1,000 workers) considerably exceed common
laborers (with a rate of 250.5 cases). Upon consideration of details
it becomes evident that this excess is due largely to burns and to
infections which, as has been pointed out, are very apt to arise in
cases of burning. Cast house men show a frequency rate of 170.2
cases per 1,000 workers in burns against 52.3 cases for common
labor. Hot metal (cast house 97.3, laborers 21.5) naturally furnishes
the major share of the burns.
Considering the items of the classification in order, the following
points are especially to be noted:
Asphyxia most frequently affects men in the .unclassified group.
This arises from the exposure of stove tenders, gas washers, and
others who, while characteristic blast furnace workers, are not numer­
ous enough to justify separate treatment. Common labor (6.5 cases per
1,000 workers) has the next highest rate, followed in order by mechan­
ics (5.2 cases), cast house men (4.4 cases), and stockers (3.4 cases).
The most impressive thing in this connection is that all classes of
workers are evidently subject to the hazard of asphyxiation. Since
it is known that death often results, the importance of using all the
preventive measures earlier suggested receives a new emphasis.
Under “ bruises, cuts, and lacerations,” it may be noted that
common labor has the highest rate (125.6 cases per 1,000 workers),
with cast house men a close second (117.9 cases). With the excep­
tion of burns (170.2) among cast house men, the rates for bruises,
cuts, and lacerations are markedly higher in each occupational group
than for any other kind of injury. Naturally the hands and feet
suffer most in all occupational groups. This suggests the importance
of well-designed shoes and hand protectors. In one large plant shoes
with a stout and rigid box over the toes and hand leathers of a stand­
ard pattern with handy and durable fastenings exercised a remarka­
ble influence upon the seriousness of foot and hand injuries.
Cast house men suffer crushing injuries more frequently (4.4 cases)
than other occupations. In injuries involving crushing of the hand
or fingers cast house men (2.9 cases) are exceeded slightly by the
unclassified workers (3.0 cases). This is due to the fact that the
latter group include switchmen who have the coupling and uncoup­
ling of cars.
In dislocations and sprains cast house men (16.2 cases) and com­
mon labor (15.0 cases) differ but little in the frequency of their
injuries. Back and wrist suffer most. This is due to heavy lifting,
which is required often in both occupations. The substitution of
magnets in the handling of pig iron has reduced such injuries among
laborers and in addition has done away with a very laborious process.




NATURE OF INJURY.

187

Eye injuries are frequent in all of the occupations listed, cast
house men leading with a rate of 34.6 cases per 1,000 workers, and
laborers coming second with a rate of 24.3 cases. As repeatedly
indicated, this type of injury can and should be nearly eliminated.
Fractures bring another occupational group into prominence— the
stockers with a frequency rate of 20.3 cases per 1,000 workers. These
are followed by cast house men with a rate of *10.0 cases, laborers
with a rate of 9.3 cases, and mechanics with a rate of 9.0 cases. The
prevalence of this form of injury among stockers is due to their work
on the ore piles, bins, and trestles which serve to hold and handle
the raw material. The great improvements of recent years in these
structures have had a very important effect upon the reduction of
accidents.
OPEN H E A R T H S .

For the open hearth department, four occupational groups were
separated from the total— common labor, pit side furnace workers,
pouring platform workers, and stocking floor workers. The follow­
ing table shows the frequency rates for these occupations by nature
of injury:
T

able

8 9 . — A C C ID E N T

F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S IN O P E N H E A R T H S , B Y
I N J U R Y A N D O C C U P A T IO N , 1907 TO 1914.

NATURE

OF

Frequency rates (cases per 1,000 300-day workers).
Nature of injury*
Common
labor.

Pouring Stocking
Pit side
Not
floor.
furnaces. platform.
classified.

0,6

0.3

0.7

0.4

1.6

.5

1.1

1.0

13.4
19.1
5 .8
6.7
2.4

4.1
4.3
17.2
32.1
10.9
8.5
3.9

.7
4.5
5 .2
23.9
39.6
16.4
9.4
4.0

22.0

53.6

82.1

103.8

2.1

.4
3.6
18.9
.1
7 .7

20.2
2.6
8.0

29.3

30.7

39.3

A sp hyxia........ ............- ........................................ Bruises, cuts, and lacerations:
Of abdom en....................................................
O f arm or arms ..............................................
Of trunk...........................................................
Of loot or toes.............................. ..................
O f hand or fingers.. . .................................
O f head or neck.............................................
O f leg or legs..................................................
Unclassified....... .......................... ..................

11.5
14.2
70.1
117.9
51.1
22.5
10.3

7.8
12.9
8. 2
3.5
1.5

T o ta l..............................................................

299.3

37, 5

B u m s:
B y electricity. . .............................................
B y gas...............................................................i
B y hot m etal..................................................
B y hot water and steam ........................... !
Unclassified....... ............................................ !
T o ta l..............................................................
Crush ing inj uries:
O f abdom en....................................................
Of arm or arm s.............................................
Of trunk...........................................................
O f foot or toes................................................
O f hand or fingers........................................
Of head.............................................................
Of leg or legs...................................................
Unclassified.....................................................
Total..... ........................................................




Total.

1.8
1.8

1.0
3.1
5.2
5.2
3.1
3.1

1.0
6.4
23.1
5 .2
16.5

.3
23.7
1.3
11.5

52.2

36.9

1.0
26.2

2.8
2.8

2 .5
7.6

o2
.4
1.5

4.0
21.4
1.9

10.1
38.2

.2
0)

o5

2.0

1 L ess th a n 0.05.

.8
2.1

.4
2.4
5.0
.9

.4

3.6

9 .3

6.0

.3

1.0

o2

11.8

.8

6.3

.6

.4

.2
.8

2.2

1.0

.4
1.4
3. 6

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

188
T able

6 9 _ A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S I N O P E N H E A R T H S , B Y
_
I N J U R Y A N D O C C U P A T IO N , 1907 TO 1914— Concluded.

NATURE

OF

Frequency rates (cases per 1,000 300-day workers).
Nature of injury.
Common Pit side Pouring Stocking
N ot
floor.
labor.
classified.
furnaces. platform.

Total.

Dislocations and sprains:
2 .0
2 .2

Unclassified.....................................................

6 .8
6 .8
.4
.8
.8
1.4
.2
2.3
.2

T otal..............................................................

19.7

O f elbow ...........................................................
Of foot or toes.................................................
O f hand or fingers. _ _____ ____________
Of shoulder.....................................................

Electric shock........................................................
Eye injuries............................................................
Fractures:
Of arm ...............................................................
Of both arm s..................................................
Of collar bone.................................................
Of face...............................................................
Of foot or toes................................................
O f band or fingers.........................................
O f leg.................................................................
O f both legs....................................................
O f pelvis...........................................................
O f ribs...............................................................
Of skull.............................................................
Unclassified.....................................................

1.0

1.7
4 .5
.5
.4
.3
.5
.5
.4
.3

5,0
3 .2
.2
.9
.2
.6
.2
1.5

3.5
4.0
.3
.6
.3
.6
.4
1. 2
.2

7.1

1.0

9 .0

11.7

11.0

34.4

3 .5

11.5

7.7

10.9

12.9

1.9

.5

2.1

A

1.9

1.1

1.0

.1
.1
2 .2
1.5
.3

.6
.2
3.9
6.1
2 .6
.2

.3
.3
3.4
4.2
1.9
.1
.1
.8
.5
.1

.6
.4
8 .2
9.9
5.4

.4
.2
.2
.5
1.5
.2

.5
o9
1.5
.7
.2

.2
2 .5
.8
.4

.2
.7

T o ta l..............................................................

30.3

5.3

Heat exhaustion................................................. .
Infections.................................................
Unclassified.............................................................

3.3
14.4
1.6

.5
1.6
.2

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

.1
.3

7.3

5 .0

16.9

12.8

2.1
1.0

1.3
3 .0
.6

1.9
3 .0
.7

1.6
4.9
.7

.6
.9

Grand total.................................................

467.7

94.7

75.4

114.9

176.5

192.4

Number of800-day workers.................................

4,861

5,492

954

7,761

6,395

24,463

In this table common labor resumes its usual position as the occu­
pation having the highest frequency rate—467.7 cases per 1,000
workers.
Asphyxia is, as regards frequency, of slight importance, but the
fact that fatal cases do occur from time to time about open hearths
makes it a factor to be considered. It usually occurs in some more
or less confined space where workmen at times have occasion to go.
It would probably be difficult if not impossible to apply any venti­
lating devices which would insure that the harmful gas would not
stagnate in such places, though sometimes this would be a simple
and effective practice. Thorough instruction of the men regarding
the danger, and very careful study of the plant to determine places
where accumulation might occur, must be the foundation of preven­
tion. When the men know the danger and the safety department
knows where it is likely to arise, suitable warnings can be posted.
Bruises, cuts, and lacerations, especially to feet and hands, pre­
dominate very greatly among laborers.,




NATURE OF INJURY.

189

Burns are more evenly distributed among the occupations, those
from hot metal being of almost uniform frequency among the groups.
The pouring platform has the highest rate (26.2 cases per 1,000 work­
men), but it is doubtful if it involves as great severity as some of the
other occupations.
Crushing injuries are relatively most frequent among laborers (11.8
cases per 1,000 workers). As has been pointed out, this is undoubt­
edly connected with transportation problems which actually invade
the mill in the open hearths more than in any other department.
Only close and studious attention to transportation methods can
possibly modify this hazard in a really material way.
Dislocations and sprains are not a monopoly of the common la­
borer, but his frequency rates for these injuries (19.7 cases) exceed
the corresponding rates for the other occupations. In blast furnaces
it was noted that the back and wrist suffered most from dislocations
and sprains; in the open hearths the back shows the highest rate
(4 cases), with the ankle second (3.5 cases), and the wrist third
(1.2 cases); and in each of these instances the common laborer is
the chief sufferer. The workers on the stocking floor are also par­
ticularly liable to injuries of this tind.
In eye injuries the common laborer has much the highest fre­
quency rate—34.4 cases per 1,000 workers as against 11.5 cases on
the pouring platform.
The frequency of leg fractures (5.4 cases per 1,000 workers) among
laborers is important, inasmuch as such injuries are always very
serious*
The entire table bears witness to the fact that the unskilled and
inexperienced man bears the brunt of industrial hazard. Since this
is true, too great emphasis can not be placed on the obligation to
save him wherever possible and to give him adequate relief when
misfortune overtakes him. Carelessness is a very undescriptive term
for the untrained and ignorant. The word implies that he might
take care if he really wished to. This is very far from the truth.
He does the best that he can. His will is good, but with the equip­
ment given him by industrial methods he has hitherto been entirely
unable to escape the swarm of dangers around him. If safety effort
does not bring better conditions to common labor, it must be regarded
as a dismal failure. The situation is improving, but not so fast nor
so thoroughly as it should.
T U BE MILLS.

For the tube mills it has been possible to distinguish three occu­
pational groups—the finishing crew, furnace crew, and common labor.
The following table shows the frequency rates for these occupations
by nature of injury.




SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

190
T able

7 0 . — A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S IN T U B E M IL L S , B Y N A T U R E O F I N J U R Y
A N D O C C U P A T IO N , 1907 TO 1914.

Frequency rates (cases per 1,000 300-day workers).
Nature of injury.
Finishing
crew.

Furnace
crew.

Other
occupa­
tions.

Common

labor.

Total.

A s p h y x ia ................................................................
Bruises, cuts, and lacerations:
Of abdomen....................................................
Of arm or a r m s .. . . . . .
..........................
Of trun k...........................................................
Of foot or toes...................................................
B y band or fingp.rs.............. .. ............
Oi head or neck.............................................
Of leg or legs...................................................
Unclassified.....................................................

1.2
.5
4.9
20.4
1.5
1.7
.5

0.3
.7
.3
4.2
9.8
1.6
4.6
1.0

2.8
17.8
11.7
86.5
197.8
46.5
34.8
8.5

0.6
5.1
2.9
18.9
50.0
7.8
5.7
2.9

0 .7
5.0
3.0
21.7
54.8
10.4
8.6
2.6

T o ta l...............................................................

30.7

22.5

406.4

93.8

106.8

.3
10.4
.3
.7

4.2
2.3
44.6
5.2
3.8

1.7
1.7
6.3
1.0
1.1

1.4
1.0
11.0
1.2
1.1

11.7

60.2

11.8

15.6

.2

.1

.7
1.3

1.4
8.9

1.0
3.1
.2

Burns:
B y electricity.................................................
B y gas .............................................................
B y hot m e t a l.................................................
B y hot water and s t e a m ...........................
Unclassified.....................................................
T otal...............................................................
Crushing injuries:
Of abdomen....................................................
Of arm or arm s..............................................
Of trunk............................................................
Of foot or toes...................................................
Of hand or fingers...........................................
Of head.............................................................
Of leg or legs...................................................
Unclassified............................... ......................
To ta l...............................................................
Dislocations and sprains:
Of ankle............................................................
Of back.............................................................
Of elbow...........................................................
Of foot or toes.................................................
Of hand or fingers.........................................
Of knee.............................................................
Of shoulder.....................................................
Of wrist.............................................................
Unclassified.....................................................
T o t a l .......... •
.................................................
Electric shock.........................................................
E y e injuries.............................................................
Fractures:
Of arm ...............................................................
Of both arm s..................................................
Of collar bone.................................................
Of face...............................................................
Of foot or toes.................................................
Of hand or fingers.........................................
Of leg.................................................................
Of both legs.....................................................
Of pelvis...........................................................
Of ribs...............................................................
Of skull.............................................................
Unclassified.....................................................
T o ta l...............................................................
Heat exhaustion.
Infections...............
Unclassified............

.2

.2

1.0
.2

.4

.8
3.0
.1
.1
.3

1.2

2.0

12.2

4.8

4.3

.7
1.2
.5

1.6

.5
.2

.3
1.3
.7

5.0
4.2
.6
.2
1.7
.6
1.1
3.6
.8

3.9
3.6
.6
.3
1.2
.8

1.0

10.3
11.7
.9
1.4
2.3
3.3
1.4
7.5
2.3

3.0
.8

4.1

4.2

41.4

17.7

14.5

19.3

23.5

.9
.9

.3

I
17.5

11.1

.2

63.0
1.4

.3

5.2
5.6
2.3

1.7
3.1
.4

.1
1.7
2.2
.5

.5
.9
1.9

.2
1.0
.8

.5
.6

1.3

18.0

7.1

5.9

1.0
6.5

1.4
55.0
1.9

.2
15.0
3.2

15.5
2.3

.3
1.2
.2

1.7
4.9
•7

1.0

Grand to ta l......................

61.0

60.3

N ber of300-day w
um
orkers.

4,110

3,066




.6

172. <

2,128

.1

188.8

14,539

NATURE OF INJURY.

191

The above table adds further emphasis to what has just been said
regarding the hazards of the common laborer His frequency rate in
the tube mills is no less than 659.3 cases per 1,000 workers as against
61.0 cases for the finishing crew and 60.3 cases for the furnace crew.
It is not yet possible to follow adequately the laborer's experience
from year to year. When this can be done it will appear that he has
shared in the general downward movement of accident rates, but not
to the extent of his skilled associates. Needing it more, he has re­
ceived it less. No blame attaches to safety men or employers that this
is so. Common labor is a difficult problem from other standpoints
than this. When what has been accomplished in accident prevention
is considered, the further radical improvement of his condition should
not be regarded as impossible.
In the frequency of bruises, cuts, and lacerations, as shown by the
table, laborers are very far in the lead—406.4 cases per 1,000 workers.
Of this total rate, no less than 197.8 is found in injuries to the hands
and 86.5 to the feet. Better methods in handling, better hand pro­
tectors, and better shoes are the points worth much study.
In bums, while laborers also have the highest frequency rate (60*2
cases), a rather high rate occurs among the furnace crews (llo7)o
These skilled men are associated directly with the operation of the
furnaces where the hot material is coming and going constantly, yet
they suffer less than laborers who have the moving of hot pipe after
the formative operations are completed.
High frequency among laborers of dislocations and sprains (par­
ticularly of the back and ankle), fractures, and infections are other
interesting facts brought out in this table.
USE OF HOSPITAL RECORDS.

The study of the nature of injury necessarily involves consideration
of the hospital records of the accident cases treated. These records,
as contained in the original memoranda of the surgeon in charge, are
usually quite full, and it becomes a question as to the extent to which
it is profitable to subject them to tabulation and analysis. A few
of the important conclusions which may be derived from such
analysis may be considered briefly in this place.
T H E MORE R APID DECLINE OF SH O R T-TE RM D ISAB ILITIES.

In the first report on accidents in the iron and steel industry the
fact was brought out that minor disabilities were decreasing more
rapidly than the more serious disabilities. The accuracy of the
figures is confirmed by the much greater amount of material accumu­
lated for the present report. It was found that, for a large group of
plants, frequency rates for temporary disabilities declined 33 per cent
from 1910 to 1914 while severity rates declined only 28 per cent.1




1 These data are given in detail in Table 71.

192

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

This can be explained only on the ground that the short-term dis­
abilities were decreasing more rapidly than those of longer duration.
As illustrating the same point, it may also be noted that the severity
rates for cases terminating from the first to the fifth week declined
32 per cent during the same period, 1910 to 1914, while the severity
rates for cases terminating in the sixth and later weeks showed only
a 20 per cent decline. This difference in rate of decline indicates
directly the more rapid elimination of minor injuries.
AVER AG E TIME LOST IS NOT A MEASURE OF PROGRESS.

Some safety men have endeavored to draw conclusions regarding
their progress from the changes in lost time per accident. If the
time loss per accident was decreasing it was thought to indicate
improvement.
A very striking illustration of the essential unsoundness of this
conclusion is furnished by the fact that as safety activity has increased
loss per accident has steadily increased, and by the fact that loss per
accident in plants having at the present time the lowest rates may be
as much as 22 days per accident while in plants having a high rate
it may be about 14 days.1
D IST R IB U T IO N OF ACC ID EN T CASES DURING TH E F IR ST W E E K .

It has sometimes been assumed that recoveries in the first week
should have a distribution similar to that found in successive weeks.
For example, of 232,909 cases tabulated, 52 per cent returned to
work in 7 days or less, 22 per cent in from 8 to 14 days. Observing
this distribution, it has been argued that those returning after 1 day
of disability should outnumber those returning after 2 days. This,
however, is not what actually occurs. Study of 22,829 cases having
1 to 7 days disability disclosed the fact that 13 per cent had 1 day
disability, 18 per cent 2 days, 18 per cent 3 days, 15 per cent 4 days,
14 per cent 5 days, 12 per cent 6 days, and 10 per cent 7 days. That
is to say, disabilities for each of the periods 2 to 5 days were in excess
of those for 1 day.
There is a perfectly sound surgical reason for this distribution.
A great number of the injuries are cuts and lacerations which must
have from two days upward to heal sufficiently to permit the return
of the men to work. These cases which from the nature of the injury
can not return under two days properly increase the percentages as
far as the fifth day.
CARE OF THE INJURY.

The development of medical and surgical care is not always given
its full due as a safety factor. Ultimately it must come to exercise
a more important influence than it does now. Medical advice before
1 N o new studies have been made on loss per accident in connection with the preparation of this report.
For earlier study of this subject b y the Bureau, see Report on Conditions of Em ploym ent in the Iron and
Steel Industry in the United States (S. Doc. N o. 110, G2d Cong., 1st sess.), V o l. I V , pp. 52, et seq.




CARE OF THE INJURY.

193

encountering the danger will become the rule and much liability to
serious disability will be removed by proper treatment of the injury
immediately upon its occurrence. No attempt is made in this report
to discuss with fullness the subject of hospital conditions and medical
care. It is intended merely to touch upon a few points which relate
to recent progress in this field.
The most important step of recent years undoubtedly has been the
relegation of first-aid appliances to their proper place. The misfor­
tune of first-aid instruction and installation has been in giving the
idea that it was ever safely final. Kept strictly to its legitimate
sphere, great good can be accomplished and much suffering avoided.
But it should never be assumed that it can take the place of nurse and
physician.
A second striking improvement has been in the means and methods
of getting the injured man from the point at which he was injured to
the dispensary or hospital. A number of instances are on record
when life has been saved by the possibility of prompt and careful
movement supplied by the improved ambulance service.
The place to which a patient is removed has no small importance.
Special emergency rooms with proper equipment are gradually becom­
ing universal in the industry. The possibilities of surgical cleanli­
ness thereby afforded are of the highest importance in saving from
infection and bringing about rapid recovery.
There is a growing tendency not to rely upon those having only
the training of a nurse but to insist upon the wider knowledge and
greater skill of a fully equipped physician. There can be no doubt
that the lessened death rate of recent years is in considerable measure
due to this fact.
The problem of adequate care must be worked out for each company
according to local circumstances. But, especially with the advent
of accident compensation laws, it would appear advantageous that the
large companies should provide their own hospital accommodations.
A most serious need of most plants at the present time is a closer
and more cordial cooperation of three agencies—the employment
department, the safety department, and the medical staff. If acci­
dent prevention is to progress still further, a program of cooperative
effort between these departments is seriously needed. Nowhere has
complete cooperation to the full extent of the possibilities been
observed, and in some instances a condition of ‘ ‘ armed neutrality?9
has been very evident.
12771°— 18— B ull. 234------- 13




CHAPTER X.

PROGRESS OF SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

The present report carries the accident history of the iron and steel
industry back to the year 1907—back, that is to say, to the infancy of
the safety movement. Before that time some plants had begun to
devote serious thought to preventive work, but the number was small
and their efforts were not very effective. There was no such thing as
safety engineering and no such thing as what is now called the organ­
ized safety movement.
In the years since 1907 a great change has taken place. A wide­
spread organized safety movement has come into existence. Almost
every steel plant is engaged in serious preventive work. The safety
engineer and the safety man have established themselves as members
of a recognized profession.
These activities have met with different degrees of success in dif­
ferent plants. But in practically every one there has been some
measure of success, and the accident rates for the combined industry
show a vacillating but definite progress downwards. This downward
movement is still under way, and there is no reason why it should not
continue. Indeed, as has been pointed out earlier (Chapter VIII),
safety men must compromise on no lesser goal than the elimination of
all serious accidents.
The course of the safety movement from 1907 to 1914 will be
traced in this chapter. The whole body of material accumulated for
this report is available for such a review. This material falls into the
two general groups listed below:
First. Detailed data regarding employment and accidents from
over 400 plants, employing about 90 per cent of all the workers in
the industry and including every important steel plant in the country,
with three exceptions. The data cover a period of five years, from
1910 to 1914.
The number of 300-day workers concerned ranges
from 202,157 to 319,919 per year, and the total number of accident
cases for all five years was 232,909.
Second. Similar data for 6 important plants for the 8 years from
1907 to 1914. This special compilation was made in order to carry
the yearly comparisons of accident experience back to the beginning
of the safety movement. It was impracticable to do this for all of
the 400-odd plants referred to above, but the 6 for which such a
course was possible represented an annual employment of from
19,481 to 29,766 300-day workers and were, as regards operative
activities, entirely typical of the industry.
194




PROGRESS OF SAFETY MOVEMENT.

195

ACCIDENT RATES OVER A SERIES OF YEARS.

The following table shows the number of 300-day workers, the
number of accident cases, and the resulting accident rates for the
iron and steel industry in each of the years for which data were ob­
tained. The first part of the table covers the experience of the
industry as a whole from 1910 to 1914; the second part covers the
experience of the special group of 6 plants from which information
was obtainable as early as 1907. The accompanying chart (chart 18)
reproduces the data of the table in graphic form.
Ch ar t

18.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN T H E

IR O N A N D
OF Y E A R S .

ST E E L IN D U S T R Y

O V E R A S E R IE S

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




PART I

PART II

ALL

SPECIAL

PLANTS

1 9 1 0 -1 9 1 4

GROUP OF PLAHTS

t9 0 7 - J9I4

196

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
T a b l e 7 1 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S O V E R A S E R IE S O F Y E A R S .

P R I.—A L P A T 1910 T 1914.
AT
L L N S,
O
Accident frequency rates
(per 1,000 300-day work­
ers).

Num ber of cases.

Year.

1910...........
m i ...........
1912...........
1913...........
1914...........

Number
of 300day
workers.

Per­
Tem ­
ma­ porary
Death. nent
disa­
disa­
bility.
bility.

Total.

44,108
34,676
54,575
55,556
37,390

45,283
35,811
56,164
57,182
38,869

202,157
231,544
300,992
319,919
256,299

327
848
204
931
348 1,241
426 1,200
219
860

Total. 1,310,911

1,524 5,080

226,305 232,909

Per­
ma­
nent
Death.
disa­
bil­
ity.

Accident severity rates
(days lost per 300-day
worker).

Per­
Tem ­
Tem ­
ma­
po­
nent po­ To­
rary Total. Death.
rary
disa­
tal.
disa­
bil­ disa­
bility.
bility.
ity.

1.6
.9
1.2
1.3
.9

4.2
4 .0
4.1
3.8
3.4

218.2
149.8
181.3
173.7
145.9

224.0
154.7
186.6
178.7
150.1

14.6
7.9
10.4
12.0
7.7

2.9
2.5
2.6
2.2
2 .2

2.5
1.9
2.3
2 .2
1.8

19.9
12.3
15.3
16.4
11.8

1.2

3.9 172.6 177.7

10.5

2.5

2.1

15.1

PART H.—SPECIAL GROUP OF 6 PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.
1907...........
1J0J...........
130 J...........
1910...........
1911...........
1912...........
1313...........
1914...........

27,632
19,481
24,543
27,144
24,519
28,922
29, 766
20,241

61
18
43
42
24
19
37
13

106
67
79
124
68
126
93
81

6,530
3,656
4,757
4,691
3,901
4,685
3,646
1,957

6,697
3,741
4,879
4,857
3,993
4,830
3,776
2,051

2 .2
.9
1.8
1.5
1.0
.7
1.2
.6

3 .8
3.4
3 .2
4.6
2.8
4.4
3.1
4 .0

236.3
187.7
193. 8
172.8
159.1
162.0
122.5
97.7

242.4
192.0
198.8
178.9
162.8
167.0
126.9
101.3

19.9
8.3
15.8
13.9
8.8
5 .9
11.1
5.8

4.0
2 .2
1.4
2.1
1.6
2.5
1.4
2 .1

3 .2
2 .6
2.7
2 .6
2. 4
2.4
2.0
1.7

27.1
13.1
19.9
18.6
12.8
10.8
14.5
9.6

Total.

202,248

257

744

33,823

34,824

1.3

3.7

167.2 172.1

11.4

2.2

2.5

16.1

The accident rates, as here presented, despite certain irregularities,
show a marked tendency to decline over the period 1910 to 1914, and
even more so over the longer period 1907 to 1914. This is clearly
brought out in the chart, although the small scale on which the chart
is necessarily drawn makes the tendency appear less emphatic than
it really is.
The frequency rates decline for the industry as a whole from 224.0
cases per 1,000 full-time workers in 1910 to 150.1 in 1914. In the
special group of plants the decline during the same period is from
178.9 to 101.3 cases per 1,000 workers, and for the longer period, 1907
to 1914, it is from 242.4 to 101.3. Similarly, the severity rates for
the whole industry decreased from 19.9 days per worker in 1910 to
11.8 days in 1914, and for the special group of plants during the
same period from 18.6 days to 9.6 days. A reduction in severity
rates of almost one-half during a period of 5 years is a matter
of much significance. That the reduction in rates is more marked
in the special group of 6 plants than in all plants combined is trace­
able to the fact that the 6 plants, with records running back to 1907,
are all of larger size, and the accident prevention movement began
with the larger organizations.
The fact that the rates show considerable fluctuations, with such a
marked upward movement as occurs in 1913, does not nullify in any
way the gain made during the whole course of the period covered.
The increases were apparently only temporary, due to the intensified




PROGRESS OF SAFETY MOVEMENT.

1 97

industrial activity of particular years. The speeding up of produc­
tion almost invariably results in increased accident rates.1
Special attention should be called to the fact, indicated in the
above tables, that the lessened severity rate of recent years is very
largely due to a decrease in the fatality rate. This is very significant.
The importance of cutting down the minor disabilities must be con­
stantly insisted upon, but the real success of safety efforts must be
judged ultimately by their influence in reducing the more serious
injuries.
ACCIDENT BATES ACCORDING TO RESULTS OE INJURY OVER A SERIES
OF YEARS.

In the preceding section it was noted that the general downward
tendency in the accident rates of the iron and steel industry was par­
ticularly well marked in the case of fatal injuries.* But it is also of
interest to note that the improvement was fairly regular for all
kinds of injuries as measured by their results. This is brought out
in Tables 72 and 73, which classify injuries according to results and
show the accident rates for each class. Table 72 applies to the whole
industry for the 5-year period, 1910 to 1914, and gives both frequency
and severity rates.
Accident frequency rates by results of injury are shown for indi­
vidual departments in Table 109.
T a b l e 7 2 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S , B Y R E S U L T S O F I N J U R Y , A L L P L A N T S , 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day
workers).

Accident severity rates (days lost per
300-day worker).

Result of injury.
1910

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




1912

1913

1914

1910

Total.

1.16 14.56

.027
.007
.017

.031
.009
.023

.023
.007
.012

.029
.008
.018

.001
.183
.052
.449
.052
.040
.059

.004
.127

.007
.144

.190

.005
.257
.035
.215

.065
.058

.065
.055

.081
.052

.005
.187
.041
.121
.041
.038
.056

.005
.182
.024
.210
.016
.060
.056

.161
.164
.060
.042
.026
.117

.167
.120
.049
.031
.023
.185

.145
.108
.035
.027
.017
.146

.167

.184
.170
.044
.026
.016
.228
.045
.109

.205

.140

.513
.104
.485

.448
.091
.591

.425
.035
.682

.360
.131
.531

.077
.123
.369
.041
.583

.167
.165
.047
.030
.020
.168
.008
.134
.024
.421
.080
.579

2.89

2. 46

2.60

2.22

2.23

2.46

0.85

.10
.03
.08

.10
.06
.16

.08
.04
.12

.09
.05
.16

.07
.04
.09

.09
.05
.12

.09
.07
.08
.14
(2)
.08 ‘ ' ” .*05

.06

.186
.303
.045
.017
.014
.174

1.02
.40
.22
.19
.19
.05

1.06
.29
.18
.14
.17
.08

.92
.26
.13
.12
.13
.07

.00

1.16
.41
.16
.12
.12
.10
(2)
.04

.07

.05

.45
.01
.54

.39
.01
.66

.37
(2)
.76

.31
.01
.59

.03
.01
.34
(2)
.65

1.06
.40
.18
.13
.15
.08
(2)
.05
(2)
.37
.01
.64

4.19

4.02

4.12

3.75

3.36

3.87

1.18
.73
.17
.07
.10
.08

1 See Chapter VII.

O

.15
.19

.21

1914 Total.

.032
.011
.022

1.33

.12
.2 0

1913

.034
.005
.012

1.16

.07
.10
(2)
.05
(2)
.07
.21

1912

7.96 10.46

0.88

.05
.02
.06
.10
(2)
.17 ” *’ *07
(2)
.i 2
.07
.22
.22

1911

7.93 10.41 11.98

1.62

11 G
— O

D eath..............................
Permanent disability:
Loss of—
Great toe................
1 joint great toe..
Other toe or toes..
1 j oint other toe
or toes.................
F o ot.........................
Both feet ............
L e g ...........................
Both legs................
T h u m b ..................
1 joint th u m b___
1 joint finger or
fingers.................
1st finger................
2d finger.................
3d finger.................
4th finger...............
H an d .......................
B oth hands
A r m .........................
B oth arms
E y e ..........................
Both eyes...............
O ther.......................

1911

2 Less than 0.005.

.138

198

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T able 72.—ACCIDENT RATES, B Y RESULTS OF IN JU R Y, A L L PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914—
Concluded.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day Accident severity rates (days lost per
workers).
300-day worker).
Result of injury.

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

Total.

114.93
49.86
20.47
10.90
7.
12.16

78.66
32.90
14.21
7.33
4.75
8.57

96.68
38.29
17.14
9.17
5.60
10.00

37.10
17.48
9.92
5.60
9.60

74.42
32.90
14.33
7.99
4.76
8.50

1.32
1.22

2.10
1.23

2.45
1.98

2.44
2.23

1.74
1.25

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914 Total.

T em p o ra ry d is a b ility :

Terminating in—
1st w eek..................
2d week..................
3d week..................
4th week.................
5th week.................
6th-13th w eeks. . .
14th week and
later...................
Unknown............ .

90.18 0.402 a 275 0.338] 0.344 0.260 0.316
.474 .313 .364
37.
.352 .313
.359
16.67 .317 .220 .266
.270 .222 .258
S. 06 .234 .158 .197 .213
.171
.195
5.55 .201 .131 .154 .154 .131
.153
9.67
.471 .550 .523
.467 .532
2.07
1.65

.189
.021
!.51

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

218.19 149. 76 181.32 173.66 145.8

172.63

Grand total___

224. (jp 154.65

177.67 19. S

186.60 178.73 150.

.302
.021

.352
.034
2.26

.251
.021

.028

1.84

.352
.038

2.14

12.28 15.27 16.42 11.76

The most important single item in this table is, of course, the
decline in the death rates of almost one-half between 1910 and 1914.
But the changes in the severity rate for the other two main classes—
i. e., permanent disabilities and temporary disabilities—are also of
much interest. They have been irregular, but the tendency has been
distinctly downward.
The smaller classes of the table present some interesting compari­
sons, although they are for the most part too small to permit the
tracing of definite tendencies.
Similar data to those given above for the results of injury in the
entire industry for the period 1910 to 1914 are given in the following
table for the special group of 6 plants over the 8-year period, 1907 to
1914. Only severity rates are given, these being the more important
as an index of conditions.
T a b l e 7 3 .— A C C ID E N T S E V E R I T Y R A T E S , B Y R E S U L T S

OF

I N J U R Y , S P E C IA L G R O U P

O F 6 P L A N T S , 1907 T O 1914.

Accident severity rates (days lost per 300-day worker).
Result of injury.
1907

D eath .............................................
Permanent disability: Loss
of—
Great toe...............................
1 joint great toe..................
Other too or toes................
1 joint other toe or toes —
Foot.......................................... J
Both feet................................ '
Leg............................................
Both legs.................................
T h um b....................................
1 joint thu m b........................
1 joint finger or fingers___
1st finger.................................
2d finger..................................




1908

1909

1910

13.9

1911

1912

1913

Total

8 .8

5.9

11.1

5.8

11.4

.06

.04

.0 4
.01

.01
.01
.01

.05
.01
.01
0)
.16

.13

24

.19

.02
.01
.02
C
1)
.06

.19

.18

.12

.04
.10
.29
.24
.06

(l)
15
53

1914

.19
.10
.13
.30
.10

.11
.05
.17
.10
.05

.01
.01
C
1)
.14

1 Less than 0.005.

8

.20
.20
.04

07
.06

,19

20

.04

PROGRESS OF SAFETY MOVEMENT.

199

T a b l e 7 3 .— A C C ID E N T S E V E R I T Y R A T E S , B Y R E S U L T S O F IN J U R Y , S P E C IA L G R O U P
OF 6 P L A N T S , 1907 TO 1914— Concluded.

Accident severity rates (days lost per 300-day worker).
Result of injury.
1907

Permanent disability: Loss
of— Concluded.
3d finger................................
4th finger..............................
H and......................................
Both hands..........................
A r m ........................................
Both arms............................
E y e .........................................
Both eyes.............................
Other......................................

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

1909

0.02
.40
.37
.20
.54
.38
.20

0.01
.11

0.01

.41

.23

.28

0.02
.02
.16

1911

0.01

0.02
.03

1913

0.02
.04
.15

0.01
.02
.15
.05
.11

.63

. 56

2.1

1.6

.33

.0
1

18.6

12.8 j

.46
.05
.27

.15
.19
.17
.14
.15
.45
. 45
.01

.34
.27
.22
.18
.68
.46
.0 2

2.5

.2
0
.22
.22
.16
.15
.60
.43
.01

.20
.18
.45

2.4

* r ,M

Total.

0.01
.02

.11
.55

3.2

24,543

1914

785'

'".’ is

.37
.32
.27
.17
.63
.52
.02

1.4

.43
.43
.35
.26
.24
.86
.58

19,481

1912

".20

Grand total......................
Number of 800-day workers...

1910

.11

2.2

T o ta l.

Temporary disability termi­
nating in—
1st week................................
2d week.................................
3d week.................................
4th week................................
5th week................................
6th-13th weeks...................
14th week and later..........
U nknow n.............................

1908

2.4

2.0

1.7

2.5

10.8

14.5

9.6

16.1

20,241

'2,248

24,519 j 28,922

Following the items of this table onward from. 1907, a very definite
downward trend is discernible, even in most of the minor items. To
illustrate, take so important a permanent injury as loss of the foot.
The severity rates are: 1907, 0.40 day; 1908, 0.19 day; 1909, 0.15 day;
1910, 0.14 day; 1911, 0.15 day; 1912, 0.19 day; 1913, 0.06 day. In
1914 no injury of this kind occurred. There are exceptions but the
illustration is in accord with the general tendency.
When the total column for the eight years is examined it appears
that loss of the eye entails the greatest severity of any of the per­
manent injuries—0.46 day. This high severity is found in each of
the years. Loss of the eye stands at the head in each year but one,
and no material improvement is to be noted. In fact, 1914 is
markedly higher than any other year.
ILLUSTRATIONS OF PROGRESS IN ACCIDENT PREVENTION.

It may be said in general that the comparison of accident rates
by individual plants is not desirable. Plants may combine depart­
mental activities in unequal proportion so that when rates are pre­
sented for whole plants comparisons are invited which can not be
exact and may be misleading. For this reason most of the material




200

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

herein contained is assembled on a departmental basis and indi­
vidual plants do not appear.
But, while plant rates may not afford a sound basis for comparison
between plants, they do afford excellent opportunity for tracing
experience from year to year. Progress in an industry may be slow;
in a plant where intensive effort is applied it may be very rapid.
Such cases give illustrations of possibilities which can not be secured
when attention is confined to the average condition prevalent in an
industry or department.
The following charts afford the readiest means of grasping at a
glance what has been accomplished in such special cases.
Chart 19 gives the experience of a large plant for a period of 14
years. The first period, 1900 to 1904, shows the gradual effect of
such effort at accident reduction as this and many other companies
made before the beginning of intensive safety work, and a part of
even that slow decrease was due, not to direct accident prevention
efforts but to reconstruction and improved methods intended pri­
marily to increase production. An immediate and very considerable
fall in accident frequency attended the beginnings of serious pre­
ventive activity in 1906, and the decline continued during the succeed­
ing years.
The experience of this same plant for both severity and frequency
rates is shown in chart 1 (see chapter 1), from 1905 onward, it being
impossible to determine severity rates prior to 1905. The steady
decline of the severity rates as shown in that chart, from 54.3 days
in 1906 to 14.3 days in 1912, is very noteworthy. The rise in 1913
has a special explanation not necessary to enter into here. This
steady reduction in severity constitutes one of the most striking
achievements of a consistently pursued accident prevention policy.
Chart 20 contrasts conditions in 1910 for the departments of a
poorly organized plant with those of a plant having a well-organized
accident prevention system. Comparing this with the previous chart
it will appear that conditions in the unorganized plant were similar
to those of the earlier years of the plant there presented, the frequency
ranging on the whole considerably higher.
COMPARISON

OF THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY WITH
INDUSTRIES.

OTHER

Because of the absence of the necessary data, the accident hazards
incident to iron and steel making can be compared with other indus­
tries in only three cases—coal mining, metal mining, and machine
building. In coal and metal mining the comparison must be limited
to fatality rates.




[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers.]

PROGRESS
O
P
SAFETY
MOVEMENT.
201




C h a r t 19.— R E S U L T S O F S A F E T Y A C T IV IT Y IN A L A R G E S T E E L P L A N T : A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S , 1900 TO 1913.

202

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.




PROGRESS OP SAFETY MOVEMENT.

203

The following table shows the fatality frequency rate for the entire
iron and steel industry, for the especially hazardous departments of
that industry, and for the industries of coal mining and metal mining:
T

able

7 4»— F A T A L I T Y F R E Q U E N C Y R A T E S (P E R 1,000 300-D A Y W O R K E R S ) IN I R O N A N D
S T E E L , C O A L M IN E S , A N D M E T A L M IN E S .

Entire iron
and steel
industry.

Blast fur­
naces.

1914.....................................................

1.62
.88
1.16
1.33
.85

3.46
2.42
2.72
2.66
1.73

3.02
1.68
2.65
1.70
1.09

3.94
1.16
1.38
2.32
1.12

6.05
5.67
4.98
5.37
4.67

4.45
4.09
3.72
3.92

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

1.16

2.60

1.98

1.99

5.83

4.03

Year.

1910.....................................................
1011.....................................................
1912.....................................................

Open
hearths.

Bessemer
converters.

Coal
mines.1

Metal
mines.2

1 Computed from rates in report of United States Bureau of Mines: Coal-mine Fatalities in the United
States, 1915.
2 From report of United States Bureau of Mines: Metal Mine Accidents in the United States: 1912, p. 16;
1913, p. 18; 1914, p. 59. These rates are upon a 300-day basis, not taking account of unequal hours. If
placed upon a strict 3,000-hour year they would be slightly higher.

The coal and metal mines exhibit the same downward tendency in
fatality rates as does the iron and steel industry, but the level of these
rates is constantly lower in the latter industry.
It is impossible to carry the above data as a whole farther back
than 1910. But for a typical group of blast furnaces and for the coal­
mining industry, information is available as early as 1907. At that
date, the fatality frequency rate for coal mines was 7.31 per 1,000
workers, while for the group of blast furnaces it was 5.75. The
reductions which occurred between 1907 and 1914 were as follows:
In coal mines, from 7.31 to 4.67; in blast furnaces, from 5.75 to 1.73.
Thus the fatality hazard is seen to have declined much more rapidly
in blast furnaces than in coal mines. It is extremely probable, how­
ever, that the dangers incident to blast furnaces are more easily
controlled than those of coal mining.
EFFJECT OF ORGANIZED SAFETY WORK IN REDUCING ACCIDENTS.

In the first report of this bureau upon accidents in the iron and
steel industry,1 the success of organized safety work was strikingly
shown by a comparison of the rates in plants which had safety
organizations with the rates in plants which had done little in that
direction. The comparison was for the year 1910, a time when
safety organization, already well developed in some few plants, was
beginning to spread throughout the industry» For the purpose of this
comparison only such plants were included as were fairly comparable
as regards size, character of product, and operating conditions.
These were divided into three classes, according to the degree in which
i Conditions of Employment in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States (S. D oe. N o. 110,
62d Cong., 1st sess.), Vol. I V .




204

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

safety systems had been developed. In class A were placed those
plants in which safety systems were well developed; in class B, those
in which such systems were in process of development; and in class C,
the plants in which safety activities were not at all well developed.
Accident frequency rates were then computed for each of these plants
and groups, and it was found that without exception the plants
having the better safety systems had the lower accident rates. The
detailed results were shown in a table, a summary of which is
reproduced below:
T a b l e 7 5 .— C O M P A R IS O N O F A C C ID E N T R A T E S I N P L A N T S C L A S S I F I E D A C C O R D IN G

TO D E G R E E O F D E V E L O P M E N T O F S A F E T Y S Y S T E M S , Y E A R E N D I N G J U N E 30,1910.

Plants ha vine; safety systems of
specified class.

Num ber
of 300day
workers.

Accident
Num ber frequency
rates (per
of
acci­
1,000
dents.
300-day
workers).

A . System well developed: '
Plant N o. 1 ..................................
Plant N o. 2...................................
Plant No. 3...................................
Plant No. 4...................................
Plant No. 5...................................
Plant No. 6...................................

975
6,137
6,225
7,642
1,084
2,348

113
881
1,000
1,287
241
557

115.9
143.5
160.6
168.4
222.3
237.2

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

24,411

4,079

167.1

B . System in process of de­
velopment:
Plant No. 7...................................
Plant No. 8...................................
Plant No. 9...................................
Plant No. 10.................................
Plant No. 11.................................

5,572
8,109
4,185
6,833
4,131

1,335
2,115
1,173
1,980
1,249

239.6
260. 8
280. 3
289 8
302.3

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

28,830

7,852

272.4

C. System not developed:
Plant No. 12................................
Plant N o. 13.................................
Plant N o. 14.................................
Plant N o. 15................................
Plant N o. 16.................................

1,491
1,131
1,272
9,726
1,296

601
481
552
5,144
798

403.1
425.3
434. 0
528. 9
615. 7

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

14,916

7,576

507.9

It will be seen from this table that, while class A had a frequency
rate of only 167.1, the rate for class B was 272.4, and for class C no
less than 507.9 cases per 1,000 300-day workers. Similarly striking
differences in the accident rates of the groups were shown to exist
when the classification was made by departments instead of by whole
plants.
The above comparisons apply, as noted, to the year 1910. Since
that time class C has practically disappeared, due to the rapid growth
of the safety movement, aided by the development of workmen’s
compensation laws. It is very probable that without the steady
pressure of compensation legislation the movement would neither
have assumed its present proportions nor have sustained itself so
satisfactorily.




C H A P T E R X I.

ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE, BY DEPARTMENTS AND OCCUPATIONS.

The preceding chapter has traced, in somewhat broad lines, the
progress of accident prevention in the iron and steel industry as a
whole over a period of years. The steel industry, however, is com­
posed of a number of departments—blast furnace, Bessemer, rolling
mills, etc.—each with its distinctive activities and its distinctive
hazards. That these hazards are by no means uniform is brought
out in the following table, which shows the accident rates for the
more important departments, the data for each department being a
combination of several years7 experience. The first part of the
table includes all plants covered for the 5-year period 1910 to 1914;
and the second part, the special group of 6 plants for the 8-year
period 1907 to 1914.
T able 7 6 . — A C C ID E N T

RATES, B Y

DEPARTM EN TS.

PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

N um ber

of

Department.1

300-day
workers.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

TotaL

28,101
108,538
71,293
95,917
97,162
124,636
128,423
55,932
21,711
67,663
73,338

2.0
.9
2 .0
.9
1.1
2.6
.7
2 .0
.9
1.1
.5

5.2
3 .9
4.6
4.7
4.0
2.9
2.6
4.4
4.8
3 .9
3.4

262.1
235.0
218.4
185.2
183.1
181.1
150.0
145.8
144.1
133.1
117.6

269.3
239.7
224.9
190.8
188.2
187.6
153.3
152.1
149. 8
138.0
121.5

18.0
7.8
17.8
7.9
9.5
23.4
6.1
18.0
7 .9
9.4
4.5

3.1
2 .2
3 .0
2.6
2.5
2.8
1.4
3.1
3 .0
2.2
1.7

3 .8
2.4
2.9
2 .2
2.3
2.5
1.7
1.9
2 .0
1 .9
1.5

24.8
12.4
23.7
12.7
14.2
28.7
9 .2
23.0
12.9
13.5
7.7

872,714

Bessemer...................................
Fabricating..............................
Open hearths..........................
Foundries.................................
Mechanical...............................
Blast furnaces.........................
Sheet m ills...............................
Ya rds.........................................
Plate mills................................
H eavy rolling mills...............
Tube mills................................
T otal...............................

Death.

1.3

3 .8

177.3

182.4

11.6

2.6

2 .0

16.2

i

PART II.—SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

Plate m ills...............................
H eavy rolling mills............ ..
{Pabe m ills...............................

5,920
15,764
23,453
7,338
17,098
11,626
19,119
16,160
13,625
34,999
14,539

1.9
1.5
1.6
.8
1.1
2.8
.9
1.2
.9
.9
.5

3.4
4.8
3.9
3.1
2.7
4.0
4.6
3 .5
4.3
3.1
3 .0

204.1
261.9
183.3
192.7
172.5
161.0
106.9
132.9
214.5
136.1
185. 4

209.4
268.2
188.8
196.6
176.3
167.8
112.4
137.6
219.7
140.1
188.9

16.7
13.7
14.6
7.4
9 .5
25.5
8.0
11.1
7 .9
8 .2
4 .3

1.9
3.1
2.6
1 .5
1.5
3 .2
2.2
2 .7
2 .6
1.5
1 .5

4.0
2.6
2 .7
2 .9
2.4
2 .9
1.4
2 .2
2 .8
2 .3
2 .9

22.6
19.4
19.9
11.8
13.4
31.6
11.6
16.0
13.3
12.0
8 .7

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

179,642

1.2

3.7

171.4

176.3

10.9

2.1

2 .5

15.5

Bessemer...................................
Fabricating..............................
Open hearths...........................
Foundries.................................
Mechanical...............................
B last furnaces.........................
Sheet m ills...............................

Yards.....................................




i For miscellaneous departments not shown here see Table 99.

205

206

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Table 76 does no more than offer a general comparison between
the accident rates of the more important departments. The experi­
ence of each of these departments over a series of years is presented
below.
In addition, an analysis of the department into its constituent
occupations is made wherever the necessary material is available.
This could not be done for individual years because of the limited
amount of data.
The value of occupational rates such as those offered can not be
too much emphasized.1 They isolate the hazards of particular kinds
of work, and thus permit preventive work to be concentrated most
effectively. From the standpoint of the safety man, indeed, occu­
pational rates may be said to constitute the ultimate goal of accident
statistics.
Unfortunately, however, such rates are, as a rule, extremely
difficult to determine, partly because the groups are often too small
to permit of conclusive deductions, partly because records of em­
ployment are seldom kept by occupations. The former difficulty—
the small size of certain occupations—can be overcome to some
extent by combining occupations of closely associated hazards.
This method has been followed in this study.
The second difficulty—determination of occupational employ­
ment—was more serious. In no case was it possible to obtain exact
employment for an occupation. The desired information, therefore,
had to be approximated. This was done as follows: At intervals
during the period under review the number of men in each of the
occupational groups was determined for each department. From
these determinations an average percentage distribution was com­
puted and the resulting percentages applied to the employment for
the entire period. This method does not produce precise results, as
it takes no account of the differing lengths of the working days in
different occupations. Thus the rates for common labor tend to be
somewhat lower than they should be, as their working day is usually
longer than that of the more skilled employees. But, on the whole,
the method described does produce rates of sufficient accuracy to
make them of very material value in the study of accident problems.
BLAST FURNACE DEPARTMENT.

The following table, with accompanying chart, shows the course of
accident rates in blast furnaces, the first part covering all plants for
the 5 years 1910 to 1914, the second part covering the special group
i In Chapters I II, I V , and V occupational frequency rates for certain important occupations were pre­
sented hy causes.




A CCID EN T EXPERIEN C E— B L A S T FU R N ACES.

207

of plants for the 10 years 1905 to 1914. For the blast furnaces,
data for the special group of plants were available for the years 1905
and 1906, and such data are here presented, although in most of the
other departments the earliest year available was 1907.
C h a rt 21.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN B L A S T F U R N A C E S O V E R A S E R IE S

OF Y E A R S .

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.J




PART I

PART II

ALL

SPECIAL

PLANTS

1 9 1 0 -1 9 1 4

GROUP OF PLANTS

1907 - 1914

208

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T abl e 7 7 . — A C C ID E N T R A T F S IN B L A S T

F U R N A C E S O V E R A S E R IE S O F Y E A R S .

PART I.—ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
nent
porary
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

1910..............................................
1911..............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914..............................................

19,389
21,479
27,154
31,988
26,572

3.5
2.4
2.7
2.7
1.7

3 .5
2.5
3 .2
2.5
2.9

256.4
153.8
176.4
174.4
148.1

263.3
158.8
182.3
179.5
152.6

31.1
21.8
24.5
23.9
15.6

4 .4
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.5

2.9
2.3
2.5
2.6
2.0

38.4
26.5
29.5
29.1
20.1

T otal...............................

124,636

2.6

2.9

181.1

186.7

23.4

2.8

2.5

28.7

56.8
143.3
64.1
32.5
58.7
27.4
23.2
7.9
20.0
19.6
43.5

PABT n .— SPECIAL GBOTJP OF PLANTS, 1905 TO 1914.

1905..............................................
1906..............................................
1907..............................................
1908..............................................
1909..............................................
1910..............................................
1911..............................................
1912..............................................
1913..............................................
1914..............................................

961
1,262
1,566
1,274
1,486
1,353
1,380
1,749
1,658
1,160

5.2
15.1
5.8
2 .4
6.1
2.2
2.2
.6
1.8
1.7

6 .2
6.3
7.0
6.3
2.7
4.4
5.1
2.3
2.4
2.6

413.1
309.8
291.2
213.5
199.2
180.3
119.6
121.8
86.9
70.7

-424.6
331.3
304.0
222.1
207.9
187.0
126.8
124.6
91.1
75.0

46.8
135.5
51.7
21.2
54.5
20.0
19.6
5.1
16.3
15.5

4 .8
2.8
6 .9
.9
4 .2
1.4
1.1
2.2
2.5

5.2
5.0
5.5
4.8
3.3
3.2
2.2
1.7
1.5
1.6

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

13,849

4.1

4.4

192.1

200.6

37.0

3.2

3.3

6.5

The severity rates of the blast furnaces very considerably exceed
those of any other department of the industry, with a rate of 28.7
days per worker for the five-year period 1910 to 1914 and a rate of
43.5 days in the special group of plants over a 10-year period. Par­
ticularly noteworthy are the high rates in the years 1905 and 1906
^nd the manner in which frequency and severity rates between these
years moved in opposite directions, frequency declining from 424.6
to 331.3 cases per 1,000 workers, while severity rose from 56.8 to
143.3 days per worker. This latter severity rate is by far the highest
found in the course of this study and was the result of a very large
number of fatal accidents in the year concerned. In the earlier
discussion of causes of injury (Ch. Ill) it appeared that the high
severity hazard of blast furnaces was largely due to the effects of
asphyxiating gas.
For the whole period covered by the table, the blast furnaces show
a definite and satisfactory improvement. The accident rates fluc­
tuate irregularly but the tendency has been very definitely down­
ward, both the frequency and severity of accidents being from 40 to
50 per cent lower in 1914 than in 1910.
Occupational rates.—Some of the hazards of the blast furnace
department are peculiar to that department; others it shares with
other departments. The importance of the peculiarly blast furnace
hazards is brought out in the following table, which gives accident




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----BLAST FURNACES.

209

rates by certain important occupational groups. The method of
grouping used and the method of computing occupational rates were
described above. The group listed as “ unclassified” contains those
occupations which the blast furnace has in common with other de­
partments, or which are not especially important. In considering
this and similar tables it seems desirable to repeat that the general
practice has been to compute rates for groups of less than 1;000
300-day workers only when unavoidable jtnd then always with a
caution that the small groups may not give typical rates.
T a b l e 7 8 ___O C C U P A T IO N A L A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN B L A S T F U R N A C E S , F O R T H E P E R IO D

1905 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Occupational group.

Number
of 300-day
workers.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Cast-house m e n 1...................
Common labor........................
Mechanics2...............................
Stockers3..................................
Unclassifiedi ...........................

1,357
4,930
3,670
886
3,006

6.6
3.4
2.5
3.4
6.3

6 .6
3.2
4.1
2.3
6.3

367.1
243.8
121.5
151.2
126.4

380.3
250.5
128.1
156.9
139.1

59.7
31.0
22.1
30.5
56.9

6.5
1.8
2.4
3.5
5.0

6.3
4.0
1.8
2.7
2.4

72.5
36.8
26.3
36.7
64.9

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

13,849

4.2

4.4

192.1

200.6

37.0

3.2

3.3

43.5

1 Includes bar and clay men, cinder snappers, keepers and helpers, ladle men, etc.
2 Includes blacksmiths, boilermakers, carpenters, machinists, millwrights, pipe fitters, riggers, etc.
3 Includes cagers, bottom fillers, larry men, stockers, top fillers, etc.
* Includes crane hookers, cranemen, switchmen, etc.

Among the groups listed the cast-house men are nearest to uniform
hazard. This group includes bar and clay men, cinder snappers,
keepers and their helpers, and ladle men. All these occupations are
engaged upon the operations necessary to preparing the cast-house
floor, getting ladles ready when they are used, and tapping off the
cinder and iron. In the study of accident causes (Ch. Ill), it
appeared that the molten iron and slag were the great sources of
danger to these men. Other occupations have a higher frequency
(380.3 cases per 1,000 300-day workers), but no group has greater
severity (72.5 days per worker) except switchmen in yard operations.
In the blast furnace, as everywhere, common labor has both high
frequency (250.5 cases per 1,000 workers) and high severity (36.8
days per worker). As noted in Chapter VII, this condition is very
largely a result of ignorance and inexperience among the new men
whom it is necessary constantly to introduce. The significance of
this as pointing out a most important field of accident prevention
effort must be repeatedly emphasized,
12771°— 18— B u ll. 234------- 14




210
SAFETY

Chart 22—OCCUPATIONAL ACCIDENT RATES IN BLAST FURNACES.

OCCU­
FREQUENCY

RATES

SEVERITY

RATES

I
N

CAST HOUSE

IR N
O

cm " ¥ Sbor

AD
N

MECHANICS

STEEL

STOCKERS

15

3 0

4 5

6 0

INDUSTRY.

UNCLASSI­
FIED




MOVEMENT

PATION

ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----BLAST FURNACES,
T h e

o c c u p a tio n s

a s s e m b le d

a n d a ll o th e r s w h o s e
S in c e

th e

m a te r ia l

c o m p o s itio n
change

regarded
fo llo w
th e

as

d u r in g

ty p ic a l

of

an d

m e th o d s

th e

gen eral

d e c lin e

th e

p e r io d

p resen t

th e s e o c c u p a tio n s fr o m

dow n w ard

u n d e r s to c k in g in c lu d e

d u tie s a re r e la te d to

sto ck ers p ro p e r

th e s to c k in g o f th e fu r n a c e .
th is

covered,

c o n d itio n s .

y e a r to

s to c k in g

of

211

grou p
th e
If

h ave
ra te s

it

w ere

u n dergon e
can

n o t

be

p o s s ib le

to

y e a r it w o u ld b e fo u n d

crew

w o u ld

h ave

th e

t h a t in

m ost

r a p id

cu rve.

It is worthy of note that the mechanics employed about the blast
furnaces have a severity of 26.3 days, while the general mechanical
department, including the same occupations and for the same
period, has one of 16.5 days. This higher severity in blast furnaces
is associated with a lower frequency— 128.1 cases per 1,000 full-time
workers as against 187.5 among the workers in the mechanical
department. The reasons for this discrepancy are not far to seek.
The general mechanical department performs much shop work
giving rise to a considerable number of short-term disabilities. For
example, the frequency rates for the disabilities terminating in the
first week are: General mechanical department, 99; blast furnace
mechanics, 56 cases per 1,000 workers; but the fatality frequency
rates are: General mechanical department, 1.3; blast furnace
mechanics, 2.5. In the blast furnaces the shop work is at a mini­
mum. In fact, when the furnaces are associated with other depart­
ments the blast-furnace shop work is likely to be done in the general
shop. The blast-furnace mechanic is almost exclusively engaged in
what is called field work—repairing and replacing parts involving
the hoisting of heavy masses or working about the furnace where he
is liable to the effects of gas.
The high severity rate of the unclassified group— 64.9 days per
worker— arises largely from its containing the operators of cranes
and railways. As has been explained, the effort has been to include
among the unclassified of a department those occupations which the
department has more or less in common with all others or which were
not specially important. The size of this group emphasizes constantly
that the iron and steel industry has throughout common dangers,
having everywhere the same possible remedies. What these are
and how they should be met was indicated in the chapter on accident
causes.




212

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
BESSEMER DEPARTMENT.

The following table, with accompanying chart, shows the accident
rates in the Bessemer departments for all plants from 1910 to 1914
and for the special group of plants from 1907 to 1914:
Chart 23.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S I N T H E

BESSEM ER D E P A R T M E N T
YEAR S.

O V E R A S E R IE S O F

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




p art

MU*T II

i

a ll

SPECIAL

P la n ts

1910-1914

GROUP OP PLANTS

190 7 - I f 14

ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----BESSEMER DEPARTMENT.
T a bl e 7 9 .— A C C ID E N T

RATES

IN

B ESSEM ER D E P A R TM E N T S
YEARS.

OVER

A

213
S E R IE S

OF

PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

5,070
5,155
6,521
6,885
4,470

T otal...............................

3.9
1.2
1.4
2.3
1.1

3.6
4.7
5.7
6.1
5.4

383.2
239.8
290.1
233.8
153.2

390.7
245.6
297.2
242.3
159.7

35.5
10.5
12.4
20.9
10.1

2.6
3.0
2.9
3.3
3.3

4.9
3.3
4.4
3.7
2.6

43.0
16. S
19.7
28.0
15.9

28,101

1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................

2.0

5.2

262.1

269.3

17.9

3.1

3.8

24.8

19.2
57.9
28.0
39.4
7.7
5.1
13.1
22.5
22.6

[
PART II.— SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

1907.............................................
1908.............................................
1909.............................................
1910..............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................

967
511
750
784
669
788
875
576

1.0
5.9
2.7
3.8

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

5,920

5.0
2.0

1.1
1.7

402.1
9.3
266.2
52.8
194.7
24.0
251.3
34.4
139.0
165.0 .........*2*
125.7
10.3
65.9
15.6

2.6
.3

2.6
4.5
5.1
2.3
5.2

396.1
258.3
192.0
244.9
134.5
159.9
122.3
59.0

.4
5.2
2.4
.4
4.3

7.3
4.8
4.0
4.6
2.5
2.7
2.4
2.6

1.9

3.4

204.1

209.4

1.9

4.0

16.7

The Bessemer rates show a very great irregularity from year to
year. In the case of the special group of plants from 1907 to 1914,
this is due in part to the rather small amount of employment in
each yeare But, in addition, extremely fluctuating accident rates
seem to be rather normal to the Bessemer department.
On the whole, it would appear from the above figures that the
accident hazards have been much better controlled since 1910 than
had previously been the case, although in the intervening years
since 1911 there has certainly been no marked tendency to further
decline.
Examination of the severity rates in detail will show that the irregu­
larity of these rates is almost entirely due to the uneven distribution
of fatality. This, in groups no larger than those for the years 1910
to 1914, would be sufficient to produce considerable irregularity of
movemento Its effect would be still more pronounced in the small
group of plants for 1907 to 1914. In temporary disability, which is
the .only class to present a somewhat uniform experience, there is a
definite improvement when earlier years are compared with later.
From 1910 to 1914, for example, the severity rate for temporary
disability declined from 4,9 days to 2.6 days per worker. For the
special group of plants the decline is from 7.3 in 1907 to 2.6 days in
1914. This would seem to indicate that in the plants covered it
was possible to bring about a material improvement in temporary




214

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

d is a b ilitie s w h ile
to h a v e b e e n

th e p r o b le m

I t w a s n o t p o s s ib le
m e n t fr o m

o f fa ta lity

a n d p e r m a n e n t in ju r y se e m s

c o n tr o lle d le s s s a t is fa c t o r ily .
to

m a k e a n y a rra n g e m e n t o f B e s s e m e r e m p lo y ­

a n o c c u p a tio n a l s ta n d p o in t.

OPEN HEARTH DEPARTMENT.
T h e
in

a c c id e n t

ra te s

fo r

th e fo llo w in g

ta b le

and

th e

open

h e a rth

d e p a rtm e n t

are

p re se n te d

c h a rt:

Ch ar t 24.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN O P E N H E A R T H S O V E R A S E R IE S

OF Y E A R S .

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

PART I

PART II

YEARS

ALL

SPECIAL

FREQUENCY

PLANTS

1 9 1 0 -1 9 1 4

GROUP OP PLANTS

>907 - 1 * t4

RATES

SEVERITY
I/O

30

RATES
N
O

SO

1 907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914




11$

»o

i,o

*©

M
o

ffo

ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----OPEN HEARTHS.
T a b l e 8 0 ___A C C ID E N T

R A T E S IN

OPEN H EA R T H S

OVER A

215

S E R IE S

OF

YEARS.

PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ T e m ­
nent
porary
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................

9,739
10, 718
17,355
20,604
12,877

3.0
1.7
2.7
1.7
1.1

5.4
4.2
5.7
4.6
3.2

310.9
176.3
232.7
212.0
192.9

319.3
182.1
241.0
218.3
197.2

27.1
15.1
23.9
15.3
9.8

4.4
2.1
3.6
2.5
2.7

4.1
2.6
2.9
2.9
2.3

35.7
19.7
30.3
20.8
14.9

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

71,293

2.0

4.6

218.4

224.9

17.8

3.0

2.9

23.7

PART I I — SPECIAL GROUP OF 6 PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

1907.............................................
1908.............................................
1909.............................................
1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................
Total...............................

2,987
2,120
2,872
3,138
2,725
3,525
3,603
2,483
23,453 !
1
I

4.7
.5
1.0
1.0
.7
.9
2.8
.8

4.7
1.9
3.1
5.7
2.6
5.7
2.8
4.0

304.0
200.5
226.7
184.5
149.0
150.1
145. 7
110.4

313.4
202.9
230.8
191.2
152.3
156.7
151.3
115.2

42.2
4.2
9.4
8.6
6.6
7.7
25.0
7.2

7.4
1.1 j
|
2.0
2.6 1
.6
2.7
1.7
2.6

3 .2
2.2
3.2
2.9
2.7
2.2 :
3.1
i .8 |

52.8
7.5
14.6
14.1
9.9
12 6
29.8
11.6

1.6

3.9 | 183.3

188.8

14.6

2.6

2.7 !
|

19.9

The open hearths show a quite steady downward movement in
accident frequency. Severity is, as is to be expected, much more
variable, although all the later years are lower than the initial year.
When the extremes are compared the contrast is quite marked, the
whole industry from 1910 to 1914 showing a decline from 35.7 days
to 14.9 days per worker, while the special group of plants declined
from 52.8 days in 1907 to 11.6 days in 1914.
One phase of rate variation is so forcibly illustrated by these
tables that it deserves a repetition of some comment which was
earlier made. The year 1907 represents in its very high rates (fre­
quency 313.4 cases, severity 52.8 days) the condition nearly uni­
versal throughout the iron and steel industry in that year and
earlier. As has been elsewhere pointed out it is very possible that
this and the preceding year, 1906, constitute, as it were, a climax
to the earlier serious conditions. Even granting this, these years
remain fairly typical of the period from the introduction of the
Bessemer steel making process down to that time. It was the tre­
mendous expansion of the industry due to the introduction of this
and the open hearth processes, without adequate provision for safe
operation, that gave the industry in the United States its sanguinary
reputation.
In 1908 there was a remarkable drop in accident rates, frequency
coming down to 202.9 cases per 1,000 workers, while severity touched
its lowest point. This drop was undoubtedly in part due to safety




216

SAFE TY M O V E M E N T IN’ IR O N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

efforts inaugurated in tliat year, but was much more largely due to
the almost complete cessation of the introduction of new and inex­
perienced men which marked that year. In proportion to the
severity of an industrial depression, labor recruiting will fall off
and may cease entirely. With this may go, when the depression is
serious, the laying off and discharge of old employees. This is a
selective process. Recent and therefore relatively inexperienced
employees are the first to go. The average experience of the force
is thus improved and accident rates drop. The direct effect of
slackened industrial activity is of some influence in this reduction
of rates but must be regarded as secondary.
To determine, therefore, whether accident prevention effort is
really effective, appeal can rarely be made to the years immediately
following such a depression. They are apt to be years of gradual
recovery, with a fluctuating and somewhat rising accident rate.
This rise by no means proves the failure of the effort.
To get a clear view of what has been accomplished it is necessary
to observe a year of similar activity when labor recruiting again
becomes active and large numbers of the inexperienced are being
introduced. In the case under consideration, 1913 was such a year.
Its accident frequency was slightly below that of 1912, and only
about half that of 1907. In severity there is a marked increase
over 1912, but the rate is much below 1907. This is a true test of
efficiency. If under similar conditions the rates can be kept down
well below the earlier level the effort may be regarded as successful.
But this is not the full measure of success. Until the tendency to
rise with renewed industrial activity can be controlled better than
it now is, safety officials can not rest content.
In all comparisons such as these it must not be forgotten that
while the figures may represent the facts with perfect mathematical
accuracy they can not in the nature of the case make known the
underlying industrial conditions controlling the facts. The figures
may therefore appear arbitrary and lawless because it is impossible
many times to make evident the presence and influence of some most
important factors.




Chart 25.—OCCUPATIONAL ACCIDENT RATES IN OPEN HEARTHS.

OCCU­
P A T IO N

FREQUENCY

S E V E R IT Y

RATES

IO

2 2 5

COMMON
LA B O R

A6& m

w

2 0

M

3 0

m

RATES
4 -0

m

A 0 .8

PJTM CN

95

1 5 .7

P O U R IN G
*1. A T FO RM

76

f 2 .7

1 15

6 .5

S T O C K IN G
FLOOR




176 m
&

.S . .

m

m

IQ

2 0

2 8 .2

,
3 0

A G

218
T able

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
8 1 ___O C C U P A T IO N A L A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN O P E N H E A R T H S F O R T H E
1905 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Occupational group.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

P E R IO D

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Permar Tem ­
nent porary
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

1
Common labor........................ !
P itm e n 1...................................
Pouring platform men 2___
Stocking floor man 3.............
Unclassified4...........................
Total...... ........................

4,851
5,492
954
7,761
5,395

3.3
1.5
1.0
.4
2 .2

10.1
.9
2.1
1.9
5.9

454.3
92.3
72.3
112.6
168.3

467.7
94.7
75.5
114.9
176.4

29.7
13.2
9.4
3 .5
20.0

5.4
.6
.5
1.1
5 .7

5.7
1.9
2 .8
1.7
2 .5

40.8
15.7
12.7
6.3
28.2

24,453

1.6

4.2

188.6

192.4

14.7

2 .8

2.8

20.3

1 Includes cinder men, ladle liners, ladle men, pitmen, stopper setters, etc.
2 Includes mold cappers, steel pourers and helpers, etc.
s Includes charging car operators, door operators, melters and helpers, etc.
4 Includes crane hookers, cranemen, engineers, firemen, foremen, ingot strippers, mixer men, oilers,
stopper makers, switchmen, weighers, etc.

Occupational rates.—For the open hearths it was possible to com­
pute accident rates for certain important occupational groups.
These rates are presented in Table 81. The method used in com­
puting them was explained earlier in this chapter. Also, it is to
be repeated, that the “ unclassified” group includes such occupations
as were in no way peculiar to the open hearth department or which
were of no special importance.
Of the occupational groups listed common labor shows much the
highest accident rate, both as regards frequency (467.7 cases per
1,000 workers) and severity (40.8 days per worker). Hie unclassi­
fied group is next, including, as in blast furnaces, those occupied
with the hazardous work of cranes and transportation. Their rates
are: Frequency, 176.4 cases, and severity, 28.2 days. The workers
on what is called the pit side of the furnace, although in modern
open hearths there is no longer what can properly be called a pit,
have a frequency rate of 94.7 cases, and a severity rate of 15.7 days.
The men on the pouring platform are skilled men or directly under
the charge of a skilled man. The rates are: Frequency, 75.5 cases,
and severity, 12.7 days.
The men of greatest responsibility, the melters and their helpers,
are found on the stocking floor. It will be noticed that while the
frequency rate is here very high (114.9 cases per 1,000 workers) the
severity rate (6.3 days) is one of the lowest found anywhere.
CRUCIBLE MELTING DEPARTMENT.

In this department the details could not be secured conveniently
for a careful discussion. All the information available was in the
form of tabulations of results not giving specific facts about each




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----CRUCIBLE MELTING DEPARTMENT.

219

case. Relatively low rates prevail in this department during the
period covered (frequency, 103.5; severity, 7.3 days).
FOUNDRIES.

The foundries covered by this study are largely such as are asso­
ciated with other departments and produce castings exclusively for
those departments, as, for example, the production of ingot molds for
the steel works. In the former report on accidents in the iron and
steel industry,1 however, a number of independent foundries were
included on the ground that they were steel makers, and these have
been retained in the present tabulation.
The following table gives the accident rates of steel foundries:
T able 8 2 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN F O U N D R IE S O V E R A S E R I E S O F Y E A R S .
PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

N um ber
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ T em ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
nent
porary
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

T o ta l.

1910.............................................
1911......................... ....................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................

16,885
13,499
28,294
24,605
17,634

0.4
1.3
1 .0
.9
.8

4.6
4.2
5.8
4.8
3 .5

154.9
145.9
193.7
212.8
194.6

160.0
151.4
200.6
218.5
198.9

3 .7
12.0
9 .3
7.7
7.1

2 .2
2 .2
3.4
2.7
2.3

1 .7
1.9
2.5
2.4
2.1

7.6
16.0
15.1
12.8
11.5

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

95,917

.9

4.7

185.2

m s

7 .9

2.6

2 .2

12.7

0.8
L7
1.4
1.7
2 .8
1.3
2 .0

3.1
2.5
3 .8
.3.0
2.6
3.3
2.4
1.7

13.5
2 .5
5 .5
4.4
24.9
23.1
12.8
3 .7

1.5

2.9

11.8

PART n.— SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.
190 7
190 8
1909.............................................
1910.............................................
191 1
191 2
191 3
191 4

939
719
985
1,189
875
1,056
990
585

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

7,338

1.1

2 .3
1.9
1.0
.8

3.2
4.1
2.5
3.4
6.6
2.0
1.7

190.6
168.3
233.5
221.1
185.1
223.5
149.5
128.2

194.9
168.3
237.6
223.6
190.8
232.0
152.5
129.9

3.1

192.7

196.6

9.6

20.6
17.0
9.1
7.4

Foundry accident rates are thus seen to fluctuate greatly and with­
out evidence of any very marked improvement. The larger group of
plants, with data from 1910 to 1914, does show a steadily declining se­
verity rate from 1911 onward, dropping from 16.0 days in 1911 to 11.5
days in 1914. This may represent a growing control over foundry ac­
cidents, the very low rate of 1910 (7.6 days) being due perhaps to
exceptional conditions in that year. In the special group of plants,
1 Report on Conditions of Em ploym ent in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States (S . Doc. No.
110, 62d Cong., 1st sess.), Vol. I V .




SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

220

with data from 1907 to 1914, the number of workers concerned is
almost too small to produce satisfactory rates.
It was not possible to apportion foundry employment according to
occupations for either of the two groups of plants as a whole. But
for part of the plants of the 1910-1914 group the data were reported
in such a manner as to afford almost exact occupational rates. In
the case of these plants the precise time of employment— that is to
say, the number of “ man hours” —was available for each occupation
covered. The resulting occupational rates are presented in the next
table:
T able

8 3 — O C C U P A T IO N A L A C C ID E N T R A T E S I N F O U N D R IE S , F O R T H E P E R IO D 191Q
TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers),.
Occupation.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total*

Death.

513.1
189.3
174.5
309.7

528.4
190.1
180.8
320.9

8.6

353.9

304.9

Cleaners.....................................
Core makers.............................
Melters and helpers...............
Molders and helpers.............

4,196
1,273
1,261
5,266

i.o

14.3
.8
6.3
10.3

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

11,996

.8

10.2

1.0

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

8.5

9.0
.1
4 .2
6 .8

4.7
1.5
1.8
3.3

22.3
1.6
6.0
18.7

6.8

6.6

3.4

16.8

i

The rates for the cleaners are noteworthy, being no less than, 528.4
cases per 1,000 workers in frequency and 22.3 days per worker in
severity. An unusual proportion of this high severity rate is due
to permanent partial disabilities, the most common being the loss of
the eye.
The core makers show the lowest rates, melters coming next.
Molders have a severity rate of 18„7 days, almost as high as that for
cleaners, their chief hazards being incident to their work with molten
metal, though the fall of heavy flasks and castings is also an important
cause of accident in this occupation.
HEAVY ROLLING MILLS.

The term “ heavy rolling mills” is here used to include blooming
and slab mills and such rail and structural mills as roll heavy work
direct from the ingot. These mills are all mechanically operated.
The division, undertaken in the earlier report,1 into mechanically
operated mills and hand operated mills did not prove very satisfactory
and is not followed in this study. A comparison of somewhat similar
character is offered in the contrast of the rates given below for heavy
i Report on Conditions of Em ploym ent in the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States ( S. Doc. No.
1 10,62d Cong. 1st Sess.), Vol. I V .




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----HEAVY ROLLING MILLS.

221

rolling mills, which are largely mechanically operated, with those given
later (Table 90) for miscellaneous rolling mills which are to a consid­
erable degree hand operated. Such a comparison shows the mechan­
ically operated heavy rolling mills to have the higher severity rate
(13.5 against 12.8 days) but the lower frequency (138 against 220
cases per 1,000 full-time workers).
Ch ar t

26.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN H E A V Y R O L L IN G M IL L S O V E R A S E R I E S O F Y E A R S .

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




PART tt

SPECIAL

GROUP OF PLANTS

1907 - S9I4

222

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T a b l e .8 4 .—

A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN H E A V Y R O L L IN G M IL L S O V E R A S E R IE S 0*F Y E A R S .
PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

1914.............................................

9,442
12,409
16,258
17,569
11,985

2.0
.7
1.2
.9
.8

6.0
3.9
2.5
3.4
4.6

229.5
131.8
147.3
108.7
75.0

237.6
136.4
150.9
112.9
80.4

18.1
6.5
10.5
7.7
6.8

3.5
2.1
2.1
1.4
2.4

2.8
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.3

24.4
10.7
14.6
10.8
10.4

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

67,663

,1.1

3.9

133.1

138.0

9.4

2.2

1.9

13.5

1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................

PART II. —SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

1914.............................................

4,556
3,135
4,210
4,886
4,195
5,226
5,287
3,504

1.8
.6
1.7
1.2
1.0
.2
.6
.3

2.2
4 .8
1.7
4.3
3.8
2.3
3.2
2.9

191.8
165.6
181. 7
135.7
134. 4
130.7
95.5
53.9

195.8
171.0
185.1
141.2
139.2
133.2
99.3
57.1

15.8
5.7
15.0
11.1
8.6
1.7
5.1
2 .6

0.7
2.3
.6
2.1
3.2
1.6
.6
1.4

2 .9
2.3
2 .8
2.3
2.6
2.3
1.8
1.4

19.4
10.3
18.4
15.5
14.4
5.6
7.5
5.4

To ta l...............................

34,999

.9

3.1

136.1

140.1

8.2

1.5

2.3

13.0

1907.............................................
1908.............................................
1909.............................................
1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................

The accident rates for these hea^vy rolling mills show a constant
decline in both frequency and severity, the degree of decline being
more pronounced in the case of accident frequency. The irregulari­
ties observable are due to variations in industrial activity, the in­
fluence of which is constantly to be expected unless some effective
check can be devised to meet it. From 1910 to 1914 the frequency
rate for the whole industry dropped from 237.6 to 80.4 cases per
1,000 full-time workers, the severity rate from 24.4 days to 10.4
days per worker. For the special group of plants the frequency
rate dropped from 195.8 in 1907 to 57.1 in 1914, the severity rate
during the same period declining from 19.4 days to 5.4 days. On
the whole, these mills may be regarded as making a very satisfactory
showing in steadiness and regularity of improvement.




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----PLATE MILLS.

223

PLATE MILLS.

The accident rates of the plate mills are exhibited in the following
chart and table:
C h a r t 27.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN P L A T E M IL L S O V E R A S E R I E S O F Y E A R S .
[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




PART i

PART II

ALL

SPECIAL

PLANTS

4910*1914

GROUP OF PLANTS

1907 - !» 1 4

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

224
T able

85.—
ACCIDENT RATES IN PLATE MILLS OVER A SERIES OF YEARS.
PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

A
ccident frequency rates (per Accident severity rates (days
1,000300-day w
orkers).
lost per 300-dayw
orker).
Year.

1910...........................
1911...........................
1912...........................
1913...........................
1914...........................
Total..................

Num
ber
of 300-day
w
orkers.
3,287
4,390
5,128
5,430
3,476
21,711

­
Perm Tem
a­
Death. nent porary Total. ]Death.
disa­ disa­
bility. bility.
'2.1
1.1
.4
.6
.6
.9

8.2
3.4
4.9
4.6
3.7
4.8

183.2
134.4
174.1
133.5
91.8
144.1 ,

13 5 1
9.
139.0 1
179.4
138.7
96.1
149.9 j

19.2
10.3
3.5
5.0
5.2
,»

­
Perm Tem
a­
nent porary Total.
disa­ disa­
bility. bility.
3.6
2.1
4.3
2.7
2.1
3.0

2.0
1.9
2.3
1.8
1.4
2.0

24.8
14.2
10.2
9.5
8.7
12.9

8.2
.8
.4
3.7
1.6
3.0
.9
.6
2.6

3.7
2.6
3.1
2.7
2.8
3.0
2.6
1.5
2.8

30.7
11.1
9.0
20.8
4.4
10.5
12.4
2.1
13.3

PART II— SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

1907 ..........................
1908...........................
1909...........................
1910...........................
1 1 ..........................
91
1912...........................
1913...........................
1914...........................
Total..................

1,915
1,173
1,634
1,872
1,645
1,992
2,015
1,379
13,625

2.1
.9
.6
1.6
.5
1.0
.9

6.3
2.6
3.1
8.5
2.4
4.0
3.5
2.1
4.3

32 6
3.
226.8
249.1
207.8
186.0
223.9
174.7
86.3
214.5

341.1
230.3
252.8
217.9
188.4
228.4
179.2
88.4
219.7

18.8
7.7
5.5
14.4
4.5
8.9
7.9

No department of the iron and steel industry shows, over thQ
period 1910 to 1914; a more consistent decline in severity rates than
do the plate mills. The steps in the progress are worth emphasizing.
A severity rate of 24.8 days was reduced to 14.2 days in 1911, to 10.2
days in 1912, to 9.5 days in 1913, and to 8.7 days in 1914.
The special group of plants for 1907 to 1914 shows much greater
irregularity, but the reduction in severity rates is clearly defined. In
1914 the severity rate for this group touches the very low mark
of 2.1 days, a mark not reached by any other department.
PUDBLE MILLS.

Under puddle mills are included the puddling process by which
the iron is refined and also the rolling of the resulting blooms into
muck bars.
It is probable that the puddling process itself is less hazardous
than any of the other refining methods, although the heat and phys­
ical labor involved in the work demand unusual bodily vigor. In
any case the combination of the relatively nonhazardous puddling
process with the rolling of the resulting blooms gives to puddle mills
as a unit a frequency rate of only 136.7 cases per 1,000 workers,
which is lower than that for any other of the rolling mills except tube
mills, where the inclusion of other than strictly rolling occupations
modifies the rate. The severity rate of the puddle mills is 10 days
per worker, a rate closely similar to the severity rates for other mills
for which the range is from 8 days in tube mills to 14 days in heavy
rolling mills.




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----PUDDLE MILLS.

225

The rates quoted in the preceding paragraph are shown in Table
109. It has^not been possible to compute satisfactorily accident
rates for puddle mills by individual years.
BOD MILLS.

Accident rates by individual years could not be satisfactorily
shown for rod mills. Probably there are included under the term
mills of quite different hazard. In continuous rod rolling the amount
of hand manipulation is much reduced, whereas in the Garret loop­
ing mill the shift from stand to stand is largely accomplished by the
workers with tongs. It has not proved feasible to separate these
processes. It is probable that hand manipulation is here, as often
elsewhere, associated with a relatively high accident frequency while
the more mechanical processes may have a higher accident severity.
In frequency rod mills, with a rate of 159.9 cases per 1,000;workers,
are next to unclassified rolling mills, with a rate of 219.9 and in which
the proportion of hand manipulation is still greater. In severity
the rod mills, with a rate of 11.5 days per worker, are only exceeded,
among the rolling mills, by heavy rolling mills (13.5 days) and by
plate mills (12.9 days).
SHEET MILLS.

The accident rates for sheet mills over a series of years are shown
in the following table with accompanying chart:
T able

8 6 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN S H E E T M IL L S O V E R A S E R I E S O F Y E A R S .
PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913..............................................
1914.............................................

18,501
29.710
32,087
25,938
22,187

1.5
.3
.6
.8
.5

2.8
2.4
2.1
2.6
2.3

178.9
122.0
171.3
143.3
140.3

183.1
124.7
174.0
146.7
143.0

13.1
3.0
5.3
7.3
4.1

1.7
1.5
1.6
1.2
1.2

1.7
1.3
2.1
1.7
1.7

16.5
5.9
9.0
10.1
6.9

To ta l...............................

128,423

.7

2.6

150.0

153.3

6.1

1.4

1.7

9.2

PART II.— SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

1907.............................................
1908.............................................
1909.............................................
1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................

2,211
1,951
2,366
2,637
2,433
2,925
2,691
1,905

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

19,119

‘ i .Y
1.5
1.6
.3
.4
.5

3 .6
1.5
5.9
4.9
3.7
5.8
7.1
2.1

129.8
118.9
94.7
66.0
103.6
141.2
107.0
90.8

134.3
120.4
102.3
72.4
108.9
147.3
114.5
93.4

15.2
13.7
14.8
3.1
3.3
4.7

3.8
1.5
2.0
2.4
.8
2.4
3.5
.3

1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.5
2 .0
1.7
1.4

13.1
2.7
18.5
17.5
17.1
7.5
8.5
6.4

.9

4.6

106.9

112.4

8.0

2.2

1.4

11.6

0.9
"

12771°— 18— B ull. 234------- 15




8.1

226

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

These mills have distinctly lower accident rates than have other
rolling mills, but hardly so much lower as might be expected from the
known conditions of work.
C h a r t 2 8 .—

A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN S H E E T M IL L S O V E R A S E R IE S O F Y E A R S .

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

PART I

PART II

ALL

SPECIAL

PLANTS

1 9 1 0 -1 9 1 4

GROUP OF PLANTS

1 9 0 7 - 1914

The frequency rate in plate mills, for example, is 149.8 cases per
1,000 workers in the period 191Q to 1914 and 219.7 in the period
1907 to 1914, while in sheet mills it is 153.3 in 1910 to 1914 and 112.4
in 1907 to 1914. When severity is considered, the sheet mills, with
severity rates of 9.2 days in 1910 to 1914 and 11.6 in 1907 to 1914




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE--- SHEET MILLS.

227

have little advantage over plate mills, with rates of 12.8 days in
1910 to 1914 and 13.3 days in 1907 to 1914.
From this showing it may reasonably be concluded that the sheet
mills, having less hazardous conditions to contend with, have not
been led to study the safety problem as closely as some other de­
partments. At all events the improvement shown by the tables is
neither constant nor considerable.
Accident rates by occupational groups could be made in the case
of sheet mills only for the special group of plants over the period
1910 to 1914. And the only occupational group that could be set
off with reasonable exactness was the hot mill crew, which includes
catchers, doublers, heaters, matchers, openers, rollers, roll hands,
roughers, etc. Since this is the characteristic group of sheet mill
workers its rates will give a definite idea of sheet mill hazards.
T able 8 7 .—

O C C U P A T IO N A L A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN S H E E T M IL L S F O R T H E P E R IO D 1910
TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Occupational group.

N umber
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ T em ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Hot mill crew s1.....................
Other occupations.................

5,200
7,391

0.4
1.2

1.3
7.4

104.0
100.9

105.8
109.5

3.5
13.4

0.8
2.9

1.7
1.5

6.0
17.8

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

12,591

.9

4 .9

102.1

107.9

7.9

2.0

1.5

11.4

i I n c lu d e s c a t c h e r s , d o u b le r s , h e a t e r s , o p e n e r s , r o lle r s , s c r e w b o y s , a n d s h e a r m e n .

The average frequency rate of the hot mill crews for the five years
is 105.8 cases per 1,000 workers, while severity is 6.0 days per worker.
The rates for all other workers for the same period are: Frequency,
109.5 cases; severity, 17.8 days. Thus, the hot mill crews have in­
juries nearly as often as those employed in other operations of the
plant but of a severity only one-third as great. This contrast rein­
forces what was said above. The large group of sheet mill workers
is relatively little exposed to hazards producing serious injury, and
the frequency of accidents does not seem excessive when compared
with other departments. There is reason to believe that a treatment
as vigorous as has been applied in more hazardous departments
would further decrease these rates % a very material degree.
o




228

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
TUBE MILLS.

The next table presents the accident rates for the tube mills:
T a b l e 8 8 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN T U B E M IL L S O V E R A S E R IE S O F Y E A R S .
PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers"
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................

9; 767
13,670
17,080
18,909
13,906

0.3
.1
.6
.8
.5

2.6
3.9
3.5
3 .8
2.8

164.6
152.1
126.1
83.9
85.9

167.5
156.0
130.1
88.5
89.2

2.8
.7
5.8
7.1
4 .5

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

73,338

.5

3.4

117.6

121.5

4 .5

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

1.0
1.9
1.9
1.7
1.4
1

Total.

2.1
1.6
1.5
1.2
1.2

5.8
4.2
9.2
10.0
7.2

1.5

7.7

1.5
.8
4.0
1.1
.8
1.1
.9
1.9

4.6
3. 7
3.6
3.7
3.1
2.3
1.2
1.1

10.6
4.5
12.6
9.8
3.9
11.8
10.7
3.0

1.5

2.9

8.7

1,7

PART n. —SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1907 TO 1914.

2,007
1,451
1,813
1,792
1,717
2,131
2,101
1,527

T o ta l...............................

0.5

14,539

1907.............................................
1908.............................................
1909................... ..........................
1910<...........................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914..............................................

.5

.6
.6
.9
1.0

2.1
4.8
6.1
3.9
1.2
2.3
1.4
2.6

286.4
212.3
247. 7
223.8
224.2
165.2
76.2
42.6

289.0
217.1
254.4
228.3
225.4
168.4
78.6
45.2

3.0

185.4

188.9

4.5
5.0
5.0
8." 4*
8.6
4.3

I
1

The severity rate of the tube mills is seen to be 7.7 days per worker
for the entire industry for the period 1910 to 1914, and 8.7 days for
the special group of plants for the period 1907 to 1914. These are
the lowest severity rates of any productive department, with the
exception of crucible melting, which had a rate of only 7.3 days for
the period 1910 to 1914,
On the other hand, the operations of these mills afford opportunity
for a great number of minor injuries. These have been reduced in a
most notable manner as is attested by the general frequency rates
from year to year, and still more emphatically by the frequency of
temporary disability.
There might be some tendency to feel that such a reduction of
minor injuries, which in themselves are not serious enough materially
to affect the severity rates, is of little significance. This would be
a serious mistake. The reduction in frequency is an index of an
important effort applied to the accident problem. The frequency
rate may in time doubtless reach a somewhat static condition, but
this is some time in the future.
One caution is necessary. A company achieving a marked success
in reducing frequency and having rather low severity might be led




ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----TUBE MILLS.

229

to give less vigorous attention to serious eases than should be given.
It might well happen that under such circumstances a severity rate
which could be further reduced by proper attention would remain
C h a r t 29.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN T U B E M IL L S O V E R A S E R IE S OF Y E A R S .
[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

PART I

PART fl

ALL

SPECIAL

PLANTS

1 9 1 0 -1 9 1 4

GROUP OF PLANTS

1 9 0 7 -1 9 1 4

stationary or even rise. Success in one field should not be permitted
to divert attention from another even more important.
Occupational accident rates were computable for certain important
occupational groups jn the tube mills for the special group of plants
for the period 1907 to 1914, These are as follows:




230

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T able 8 9 . — O C C U P A T IO N A L A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN T U B E M IL L S F O R T H E P E R IO D 1907
T O 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Occupational group.

Num ber
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
nent
porary
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Common labor........................
Pipe furnace crews1.............
Pipe finishing crews2...........
Unclassified3...........................

2,123
3,066
4,110
5,240

0.9
.3
.8

7.1
.9
1.2
3.8

653.3
59.4
59.0
168.3

661.3
60.3
60.5
172.9

2.2
6.9

3.8
.2
.4
2.2

10.7
.9
1.0
2.4

23.0
1.1
3.6
11.5

T otal...............................

14,539

.5

3.0

185.4

188.9

4.3

1.5

2 .9

8.7

8.5

1 Includes bailers, bar pullers, benders, heaters, hook runners, pushers, take-offs, tongmen, turndowns,
welders, etc.
2 Includes bundlers, pipe threaders, pipe testers, weighers, etc.
8 Includes crane hookers, cranemen, mechanics, galvanizers, switchmen, etc.

The very high frequency among common labor is a notable feature
of the above table, and illustrates very forcibly the class of accidents
prevalent in such mills. It is instructive to compare the rates given
with those in blast furnaces (Table 78), which show for commoR
labor a frequency of 250.5 cases per 1,000 workers, and a severity
of 36.8 days per worker. In the tube mills the corresponding figures
are: Frequency, 661.3; severity, 23 days.
The rates for skilled workers at the furnaces and on the finishing
floor are strikingly low and explain the low severity rates of the
mills as a whole.
MISCELLANEOUS LIGHT BOLLING MILLS.

The rolling mills included under this heading comprise a group of
mills engaged in light rolling and for the most part hand operated.
The following table gives their accident rates by years from 1910 to
1914. Bar mills are included in the yearly grouping and are also
shown separately for the period as a whole.
T a b l e 9 0 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN

M I S C E L L A N E O U S R O L L I N G M IL L S O V E R A S E R IE S
OF YEAR S.

Accident freaueney rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

m o ..............................................
1911..............................................
1912..............................................
1913..............................................
1914..............................................
Total...............................
Bar mills, 1910 to 1914..




14,434
21,231
22,909
23,382
22,873

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

Death.

336.8
159.6
203.4
216.0
154.8

341,2
164.0
307.4
220.7
158.7

9,4
6.8
6 .7
9.2
4.7

3 .5
2.3
2.1
2.3
1.8

Total.

1 .0
.8
.7
1.0
.5

3.4
3.6
3.3
3.6
3.3

99,809

.8

3.6

215.4

219.8

7.6

2.4

2.8

12.8

21,555

.6

2.3

255.5

258.4 1

5.4

1.7

3.6

10.7

4 .0
2.1
2.7
2.9
2.2

16. S
11.1
11.5
14.5
8.7

ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----MISCELLANEOUS ROLLING MILLS.

231

These mills, as noted, are very largely of the hand-operated type.
In accordance with usual experience, this hand manipulation tends
toward a high frequency rate in these mills, the rate for the whole
period being 219.8 cases per 1,000 workers. The strictly handoperated bar mills, having 21,555 300-day workers, show a frequency
rate even higher—258.4 cases per 1,000 workers. When severity is
considered, the average rate for the 5 years is seen to be 12.8 days
per worker in all the mills and 10.7 days in the strictly hand-operated
bar mills. This tends to confirm the conclusion suggested above, that
hand operations have as a rule high frequency, while those of a more
mechanical nature may give greater severity. It should not be con­
cluded from this that the introduction of machinery of necessity in­
creases the danger of severe injury. In many cases it greatly reduces
hazards; but it is always possible that it will increase them if proper
precautions are not taken. A totally wrong impression often prevails
with employers on this point. They install a new machine which re­
quires fewer men to attend its operations. At once the number of
accidents decreases. It is very easy from this to jump to the con­
clusion that the machine has improved conditions. When, however,
the accidents are compared with the amount of employment, an in­
creased accident rate may appear in frequency or severity, or in both.
To prevent this, there should be critical attention to the safety of all
machines to be installed and careful study of the results of their
operation.
FABRICATING SHOPS.

The accident rates of the fabricating shops are shown in the fol­
lowing table. The relatively small number of 300-day workers shown
for 1910, in the group 1910 to 1914, was due to the fact that informa­
tion was obtainable for only a limited number of plants for that year;
but it is believed that those included were entirely representative,
and thus that the rates for 1910 may be properly compared with
those for the later years.
T a b l e 9 1 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN F A B R IC A T IN G

SH O PS O V E R A S E R IE S OF Y E A R S .

PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000^00-day workers).
Year.

Number
of 300-day
workers.
Death.

Perma­ T em ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Total.

Death.

Perma­ T em ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

1910......................................
1911..............................................
1912..............................................
1913..............................................
1914..............................................

8,713
19,530
28,988
30,470
20,837

1.3
.4
1.1
1.1
.6

3.8
4.7
4.1
3.4
3 .7

447.7
166.1
237.7
241.8
196.9

452.8
171.2
242.9
246.2
201.1

11.4
3.2
9.6
9.8
5.2

2.4
2.3
2.1
1.9
2.4

5.6
1.8
2.4
2.3
2.0

19.9
7.3
14.1
13.9
9.6

T otal...............................

108,538

.9

3.9

235.0

239.7

7.8

2.2

2.4

12.4




SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

232
table

9 1 . — A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN F A B R I C A T I N G SH O P S O V E R A S E R IE S O F Y E A R S -

Concluded.

P R II.—S E IA G O P O P A T 1907 T 1914.
AT
P C L R U F L N S,
O
Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
iNumuer
jof 300-day
workers.

Year.

Perma­ Tem ­
porary
nent
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Death.

1

Total.

Death.

Perma­ Tem ­
nent
porary
disa­
disa­
bility. bility.

Total.

2,081
1,758
1,770
2,074
2,203
2,074
2,045
1,759

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

2.9
1.1
2.8
2.4
.5
1.4
.5
.6

5.8
4.0
3.4
5.3
2.7
6 .8
2 .9
7.4

274.4
179.2
263.3
276.3
294.1
306.2
286.6
190.4

283.1
184.3
269.5
284.0
297.3
314.4
290.0
198.4

25.9
10.2
25.4
21.7
4.1
13.0
4.4
5.1

6.9
4.8
.8
2.2
2.1
4.5
1.1
2.3

2. 5
1.7
2.3
2.6
2.7
3.3
3.0
2 .2

35.3
16.7
28.5
.26.5
8.9
20.8
8.5
9.6

15, 764

1907..............................................
1908..............................................
1909..............................................
1910..............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913..............................................
1914..............................................
Total

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

1.5

4.8

261.9

268.2 |
1

13.7 |

3.1

2.6

19.4

C har t 30.— A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN F A B R I C A T I N G

SH O P S O V E R A

S E R IE S

OF

YEAR S.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

PART I

YEARS

frequency

ALL

Z.&S

ilS -

ISO

YEARS




SPECIAL

FREQUENCY

1 9 1 6 -1 9 1 4

SEVERITY

rates

»So

PART II

PLANTS

»o

to

GROUP OF PLANTS

to

3o

io

30

RATES

ho

Mo

tro

So

1907 - 1914

SEVERITY

RATES

»0

to

Zo

RATES

*\
o

So

ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE----FABRICATING SHOPS.

233

The frequenc}^ rates of fabricating shops shown in the table—239.7
cases per 1,000 workers in the 1910-1914 group and 268.2 in the 19071914 group— are among the highest of the departments of the iron
and steel industry. In severity of accident, however, these shops
occupy a much lower rank, the severity rates being 12.4 days per
worker for the 1910-1914 group and 19.4 days for the 1907-1914
group.
This relation between frequency and severity of accidents conforms
to what might be expected from observations of conditions in fabri­
cating shops. The operations carried on therein are of a character
to produce a large number of minor injuries and a moderate number
of the more severe. The fabricating shops have often been suspected
of a very high severity rate because their work is associated, in the
minds of many people, with the erection of the structural steel which
is fabricated in these shops. But the erection of structural steel (i. e.,
the building of houses, bridges, etc.) is quite a distinct process, the
accident rates of which are shown in a later section of this chapter.
From the above table it appears that for the major group of fabri­
cating shops, covering the period 1910 to 1914, the lowest accident
rates, both frequency and severity, occurred in the year 1911, which
was, on the whole, a dull year for these shops. The following year,
1912, both frequency and severity rates rose, but during the succeed­
ing two years, 1913 and 1914, the severity rates showed a steady
decrease.
Turning attention to the special group of plants, the highest sever­
ity rate (35.3 days) is found in 1907, after which it declines by irreg­
ular steps to 9.6 days in 1914. The chart illustrating this table
(chart 30) shows very strikingly the failure of frequency rates to
give a true picture of accident hazard. During the eight-year period
frequency rates fluctuated at about the same level, while severity
rates showed a marked, although irregular, tendency to decline.
The reality of such decline is brought out by contrasting the severity
rate of the first four years with that of the last four years of the
period. In the first four years the severity rate was 27.2 days. In
the second four years it was 12.0 days, a reduction of more than
one-half.
FORGE SHOPS.

The rates for forge shops are not presented separately by years, as
the number of 300-day workers is hardly sufficient to make such a
classification of value. The frequency rate of these shops for the
period 1910 to 1914 combined was 177.2 cases per 1,000 300-day
workers; the severity rate,^14.9 days per worker.




234

SA FETY M O V E M E N T IN IRON A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

WIRE DRAWING DEPARTMENT.

The accident rates for the wire drawing departments during the
period 1910 to 1914 are as follows:
T ab le

92.—
ACCIDENT RATES IN WIRE DRAWING OVER A SERIES OF YEARS, 1910-1914.
Accident frequency rates (per Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

1910...............................
1911...............................
1912...............................
1913...............................
1914...............................
Total.....................

Number
of 300-day
workers.

10,370
11,819
13,059
12, 769
11,468
59,481

Death.

Perma­
nent
disa­
bility.

0.5
.3
.3
.5
.2

8.1
6.9
8.0
4.6
4.1

.3

6.3

Tem­
Perma­
porary Total. Death. nent
disa­
disa­
bility.
bility.
224.0
177.1
201.2
199.1
151.9
190.4

232.6
184.3
209.5
204.2
156.1
197.1

4.3
2.8
2.8
4.2
1.6
3.0

5.9
4.7
5.7
2.6
3.1
4.3

Tem­
porary Total.
disa­
bility.
2.1
1.7
2.1
2.1
1.6
1.9

12.3
9.2
10.5
8.9
6.2
9.3

This department presents another case in which frequency rates
are high, ranging from 232.6 in 1910 to 156.1 in 1914, while the severity
rates are comparatively low, ranging from 12.3 days in 1910 to 6.2
days in 1914. The figures given show a very considerable reduction
in both kinds of rates during the period covered.
It is of interest to note that the wire-drawing department is less
affected by industrial fluctuations than are several other depart­
ments. One evidence of this is that the number of 300-day workers
does not vary from year to year so noticeably as in other cases,
such, for example, as in the fabricating shops, which employed
19,530 in 1911, and 30,470 in 1913, an increase of more than 50 per
cent. In wire drawing the lowest year is 1910, with 10,370 workers,
the highest, 1913, with 13,059 workers, a difference of only 26 per
cent. This fact is mentioned for the sake of calling attention, as
it is desirable frequently to do, to the very considerable importance
of a careful study of the relation of industrial fluctuations to accident
occurrence. Earlier in the report (Ch. V II) such facts as have been
accumulated upon this subject were presented. But, until such
material has been accumulated on a much larger scale than has
hitherto been possible and the assembled data are critically studied,
many questions of interest and importance must remain unanswered.




Chart 31.—
ACCIDENT RATES IN WIRE DRAWING OVER A SERIES OF YEARS.
[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000300-day workers; severity rate means number of days lost per 300-day worker.]

T fB T E S

S E V E R I T Y 'R R T E 5

JO

U>

30

H
O

SO
lfc.3

9 .2

Z09

lo.S

& 0H

* .9

(o.fc

[5k

7 I>S
j

DBAWING.

\%*

EXPEEIENCE— W
IEE

io

&o

Ho

s~c
235




Y R E Q U U V C Y

ACCIDENT

YEW S

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN IRON AND STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

236

ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT.

The accident rates of the electrical department of the iron and
steel industry for the years 1910 to 1914 are as follows:
Table

93.—
ACCIDENT RATES IN THE ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT OVER A SERIES OF
YEARS, 1910-1914.
Accident frequency rates (per Accident severity rates (days
1,000 300-day workers).
lost per 300-day worker).
Year.

1910...............................
1911...............................
1912...............................
1 .............................
913
1914...............................
Total.....................

Number
of 300-day
workers.

1.526
2,760
3,796
4,012
2,327
14,421

Death.

Perma­
nent
disa­
bility.

1.3
1.1
1.6
3.5
3.4
2.3

2.0
3.3
4.0
3. 7
2.6
3.3

Tem­
Perma­
porary Total. Death. nent
disa­
disa­
bility.
bility.
184.8
129.0
137.8
123.4
129.4
135.7

188.1
133.4
143.4
130.6
135.4
141.3

11.8
9.8
14.2
31.4
30.9
20.7

2.0
2.0
3.6
2.7
2.2
2.6

Tem­
porary Total.
disa­
bility.
2.0
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.6

15.8
13.4
19.4
35.6
34.7
24.9

This department shows a high fatality rate. In this respect it
stands next to the blast furnaces, although its high years are not
equal to the high years in blast furnaces and are very far below the
experience of special blast furnaces in such years as 1907.
The rather discouraging feature of the showing of the electrical
department is that while there has been a fair reduction in frequency,
there has been a very marked and serious rise in severity during the
last two years of the period. The number of 300-day workers, while
well above the limit set for rate computations, is perhaps too small
to base general conclusions upon. This is suggested by the discrep­
ancy between the first three years and the last two. The blast fur­
nace figures cover 20,000 300-day workers and upward in each year;
the electrical department averages only about 2,800, and this exposure
may not be large enough to give typical rates. The average of the
five-year period with its 14,421 300-day workers must be regarded,
however, as having considerable weight.
It was not possible to subdivide the cases in this department accord­
ing to occupation. But it may be noted that in a special group of
plants for which data are available, electricians, inspectors, linemen,
and repairmen suffered 10 out of 13 fatal injuries. It is very note­
worthy that but one of these 13 fatalities was from electrical current
and this was not among the occupations noted above but was a com­
mon laborer who through ignorance approached some high-tension
wires.
:
It would be unsafe to reason very definitely from this small group
of fatalities, but both the figures and personal study of mill conditions
seem to indicate that the direct electrical hazard is well guarded
against. As has been brought out more at length in the study of
causes, the chief danger of electrical employees seems to arise from




AC CID EN T EX PERIEN C E— ELE CTRICAL D E PA R TM E N T .

237

being caught and crushed by unexpected movements when attempt­
ing to repair or adjust electrical equipment, and from falls from poles
and other elevations. In these latter cases the electric current may
play a concealed part. A shock not sufficient in itself to do damage
might cause a man to lose his hold and fall from a pole. This con­
cealed factor would in this case be similar in hazard to that of gas
about a blast furnace and insecure footing in many locations.
MECHANICAL DEPARTMENT.

The accident rates of the mechanical department are shown in the
following table and chart. The second part of the table, covering the
special group of plants, carries the rates back to 1905:
Chart

32.—
ACCIDENT RATES IN MECHANICAL DEPARTMENTS OVER A SERIES OF
YEARS.

[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]




PR I AL P A T
AT
L
L NS

PR I
AT I

1910-1914

S E IA G O P O P A T
P C L R U P L NS

1907- 1 1
94

238

SA FETY M O V E M E N T IN IEO N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

T a b l e 9 4 . — ACCIDENT

RATES IN MECHANICAL DEPARTMENT OVER
YEARS.

A

SERIES OF

PART I — ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

1910...............................
1911...............................
1912...............................
1913...............................
1914...............................
Total.....................

Number
of 300-day
workers.

Death.

15,927
17,863
21,591
24,009
17,772

1.1
.7
.9
1.5
1.0

97,161 ;
!

1

1.1

Perma­
nent
disa­
bility.
3.5
4.5
4.4
4.3
3.4
4.0

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Tem­
Perma­
porary Total. Death. nent
disa­
disa­
bility.
bility.
164.4
168.8
187.1
207.1
177.2
183.1

169.1
174.0
192.3
212.8
181.5
188.2

10.2
6.6
7.9
13.1
8.6
9.5

2.1
2.6
2.7
2.4
2.4

Tem­
porary Total.
disa­
bility.

2.5

1.6
2.2
2.5
2.8
2.2
2.3

13.9
11.4
13.1
18.3
13.2
14.2

8.3
4.1
1.3
1.5
2.7
.6
.6
1.8
1.2
3.0
2.0

4.1
2.0
3.5
3.2
2.8
2.6
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.7
2.4

70.3
14.0
11.9
26.9
19.2
15.3
11.0
7.3
13.2
4.7
16.5

PART n.— SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1905 TO 1914.

1905...............................
1906...............................
1907...............................
1908...............................
1909...............................
1910...............................
1911...............................
1912...............................
1913...............................
1914..............................
Total.....................

1,088
1,146
2,542
1,619
1,977
2,223
2,144
2,362
2,569
1,662
19,332

6.4
.9
.8
2.5
1.5
1.3
.9
.4
1.2
1.3

7.4
7.0
1.6
4.3
4.6
1.3
1.4
3.0
1.9
5.4
3.3

375.0
156.1
249.7
267.3
224.6
182.2
143.2
119.4
107.0
101.1
182.9

388.8
164.0
252.1
274.1
230.7
184.8
145.5
122.8
110.1
106.5
187.5

57.9
7.9
7.1
22.2
13.7
12.1
8.4
3.8
10.5
12.1

From 1910 to 1914 no steady decline in rates can be traced. On
the other hand, the special group shows definite reduction and indi­
cates possibilities toward which the department may properly work.
Since the department as a whole does not show material decline a
very searching inquiry ought to be made to determine whether there
may not be factors of the situation now being overlooked which,
with proper attention, would bring about further improvement.
Certainly the fatality rates among mechanics are higher than should
be the case. One company is using a graded system in ranking its
foremen, which directs particular attention to the more serious acci­
dents. Expedients of this kind should be given a thorough trial in
the effort to extend the record of reduction.
POWER HOUSES.

It was not practicable to compute accident rates for this depart­
ment by individual years. For the combined 5-year period 1910 to
1914 a total of 8,083 300-day workers showed a frequency rate of
70.6 cases per 1,000 workers and a severity rate of 10.1 days per
worker.
In the study of the machine building industry, recently published
by the bureau, power houses in that industry were credited with a
low frequency rate (103 cases), but with a rather high severity rate
(22.1 days). In the machine building report, the number of 300-day




ACC ID E N T EX PERIEN C E---- P O W E R H O U SE S.

239

workers concerned was only 877 and a caution was given that this
number was too small for the purpose of accurate rate compilation.
The rates for power houses in the steel industry, based as they are
on an experience of 8,083 300-day workers, are probably much more
typical of the real hazards of that department and are in accord with
the known conditions of such employment. As yearly rates can not
be computed it is impossible to determine whether improvement has
taken place, but it is easily possible that this department being rela­
tively free from minor accidents, and having no large proportion of
serious injuries, has not been examined with the care necessary to
produce the best safety results.
YARD DEPARTMENT.

The yard operations of steel plants involve the hazards of trans­
portation— the movement of trains, shifting of cars, loading and
unloading of freight, etc. The following table and chart exhibit the
accident rates of this department by years. For the special group of
plants in the second part of the table data were obtainable as early
as 1905.
T a b le

95.—
ACCIDENT RATES IN YARDS OVER A SERIES OF YEARS.
PART I.— ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.

Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Year.

1910...............................
1911...............................
1912...............................
1913...............................
1914...............................
Total.....................

Number
of 300-day
workers.

15,932
9,085
11,180
11,859
7,876
55,932

Death.

Perma­
nent
disa­
bility.

2.5
1.2
2.1
2.4
1.3
2.0

3.1
4.7
5.7
4.3
4.7
4.4

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Tem­
Perma­
porary Total. Death. nent
disa­
disa­
bility.
bility.
128.9
147.1
173.5
155.9
123.7
145.8

134.5
153.0
181.3
162.6
129.7 i
152.1

22.6
10.9
18.5
21.2
11.4
18.0

Tem­
porary Total.
disa­
bility.

2.3
4.2
3.9
2.3
3.1
3.1

1.6
2.0
2.3
2.1
1.7
1.9

26.5
17.1
24.7
25.6
16.3
23.0

PART IT.—SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, 1905 TO 1914.

1905...............................
1906...............................
1907...............................
1908...............................
1909..............................
1910...............................
1911...............................
1912...............................
1913...............................
1914............ ..................
Total......, .............

1,185
1,136
2,618
1,522
1,891
2,134
1,810
2,078
2,751
1,356
18,481

3.4
2.6
1.9
.7
3.2
1.9
LI
.5
.7
1.5

5.9
5.3
3.8
3.3
3.2
5.2
1.1
5.3
2.5
3.7
3.8

241.4
169.0
194.4
187.9
179.8
138.2
106.6
116.0
69.4
67.8
142.0

250.7
176.9
200.1
191.9
186.2
145.3
108- 8
121.8
71.9
72.2
147.3

30.4
23.8
17.2
5.9
28.6
16.9
9.9
4.3
6.6
13.1

3.9
3.8
5.9
2.9
.8
2.4
.7
4.9
1.6
1.5
2.9

2.8
3.1
3.2
2.9
3.0
1.9
2.1
2.1
.9
1.4
2.3

37.1
30.7
26.3
11.7
32,4
21.2
12.7
11.3
2.5
9.5
18.3

In this department the frequency rates for the total group of
plants, for the years 1910 to 1914, gave little indication of improved
conditions. The highest frequency rate (181.3 cases per 1,000 workers)
is in 1912, from, which there is a decline to 129.7 cases in 1914. In




240

SAFETY M O V E M E N T IN IRON AND STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

severity a rate of 26.5 days per worker in 1910 changes to 16.3 days
in 1914.
The special group of plants from 1905 to 1914 shows a much more
pronounced change: In frequency from 250.7 cases in 1905 to 72.2
C h a rt 33—
ACCIDENT RATES IN YARDS OVER A SERIES OF YEARS.
[Frequency rate means number of accidents per 1,000 300-day workers; severity rate means number of
days lost per 300-day worker.]

PR I AL P A T
AT
L
L NS

PR t
AT S

1910-1914

S E IA G O P O P A T
P C L RU F L NS

1 07- 1 1
9
94

in 1914; and in severity from 37.1 days in 1905 to 9.5 days. In
1913 these plants were fortunate enough to entirely escape fatality
in their yard operations and consequently the severity rate touched
in that year the very low point of 2.5 days.
The contrast between the results secured by the industry as a whole
from 1910 to 1914 and by the special plants from 1905 to 1914 js very
noteworthy. It is related very directly to more definite and vigorous




AC CID EN T EX PERIEN C E---- YARD D EPA R TM E N T .

241

efforts on the part of the managements of the special plants. By
them the yard problem has been more thoroughly studied and the
remedies more carefully applied. The result is that for the five-year
period, 1910 to 1914, the severity rate in the special plants is 11.1
days as against 23 days for all plants.
COKE OVENS.

Until the introduction of the by-product coke oven the coke used
by steel mills was seldom produced at the plants themselves. But the
use of the newer process makes it convenient and economical for the
larger plants to manufacture their own coke, and this department is
steadily becoming a more important element in these plants. The
change is indicated by the fact that by-product coke ovens now
furnish some 20,000,000 tons of coke annually as against 35,000,000
tons produced by the wasteful “ bee hive oven” process.
The coke oven department shows high accident severity rates.
The information available is for 13,282 300-day workers during the
combined 5-year period 1910 to 1914. The frequency rate for this
group was lg9.2 cases per 1,000 workers and the severity rate 23.3
days per worker.
The machinery employed and the conditions existing in this work
would not seem to warrant such a high severity rate. The work is
disagreeable and it may be that the labor employed is of less experi­
ence, and as a result subject to greater inherent hazard, than that
used elsewhere. If so, the great problem of the safety man would be
to make the largest possible effort toward the removal of this ignorance
and inexperience.
It is not practicable to compute the accident rates for coke ovens
by individual years.
MISCELLANEOUS DEPARTMENTS.

The following table shows the accident experience for the combined
period 1910 to 1914 for a few departments which it has not seemed
desirable to treat in greater detail, and which are not included in the
general summary in Table 76:
Table

96.—FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF ACCIDENTS, IN MISCELLANEOUS DEPART­
MENTS, 1910 TO 1914.
Accident frequency rates (per Accident severity rates (days
1,000 300-day workers).
lost per 300-day worker).
Department.

Armor plate...................
Axle works.....................
Car wheels......................
Docks............................
Erecting of structural steel.

Number
of 300-day
workers.

3,000
1,326
2,367
1,293
2,157

Death.

Perma­
nent
disa­
bility.

1.3
1.5
1.3
2.3
12.1

4.0
3.0
6.3
8.5
11.1

12771°— 18— B ull. 234------- 16




Tem­
Perma­
porary Total. Death. nent
disa­
disa­
bility.
bility.
120.7
330.3
257.3
107.5
342.1

126.0
334.8
264.9
118.3
365.3

12.0
13.6
11.4
20.9
108.5

1.1
5.0
2.0
6.6
14.7

Tem­
porary Total.
disa­
bility.
2.0
4.9
4.0
2.5
5.4

15.1
23.5
17.4
30.0
128.6

242

SA FETY M O V E M E N T IN IS O N A N D STEEL IN D U ST R Y .

Discussion of the above data will be limited to some comments
upon the high accident rates in the erection of structural steel.
The material upon which such comments are founded came to hand
incidentally in the course of the study of the iron and steel industry
as a result of the fact that certain of the steel plants were engaged in
structural work. Such work lies somewhat outside the limits of the
steel industry, strictly defined, but it is of such interest and impor­
tance as to warrant the inclusion here of the material referred to.
It points to an industrial region which ought to be more thoroughly
explored.
The accident rates for structural work, as shown in the table, are
based on a group of 2,157 300-day workers. This number, while
well above the limit regarded as proper for the calculation of rates,
is regrettably small, and the resulting rates may not be typical.
On the other hand, the fact that the rates by individual years,
although based on too small an exposure to justify presentation,
are substantially uniform suggests that the rates for the period as
a whole may be taken as fairly typical. So far as known they are
the first rates to be determined for structural steel erection, although
the work has been recognized as highly hazardous.

All of the rates are very high. Death, with a frequency of 12.0
cases per 1,000 workers, is more than twice that of coal mines, with
a frequency rate of 5.83 for the five years 1910 to 1914. Permanent
disabilities, with a frequency of 11.1 in structural work, are nearly
twice as numerous as in wire drawing, with a rate of 6.3, and lead
all the steel departments in this respect. Temporary disabilities,
with 342.1 cases per 1,000 workers, are materially in excess of the
rate of 269.4 for Bessemer steel works.
In severity of injury, structural steel work has an even more
unenviable preeminence. This severity of permanent disability
(14.7 days) is more than 3 times that of wire drawing (4.3 days).
The severity of temporary disability (5.4 days) is above that of
miscellaneous rolling mills, which has the highest rate (3.6 days) of any
of the operative departments. The general 'severity rate (128.6
days) exceeds that so far found for any department except a group
of blast furnaces in a year marked by extraordinary fatality.
These figures certainly demand most serious consideration. The
operations of the companies whose experience is noted are known to
be conducted with as much attention to safety as those of any
engaged in this hazardous business. In fact they probably repre­
sent, on the average, a greater care than prevails in such operations
as a whole. Clearly then the erection of structural steel must be
recognized as one of the most, if not the most, hazardous of industrial
operations.




ACCID E N T E X PERIEN C E— -M ISC E L LA N E O U S D EPA R TM E N T S.

243

With this high intrinsic hazard what can be done in the way of
accident prevention ? It may be said at once that this is a much
more serious and difficult problem than that presented by any other
industrial activity. The work is always done under conditions of
some pressure. Both contractor and owner desire the completion
of the structure at the earliest possible time. All apparatus is
installed for temporary use and can scarcely have the solidity and
security of permanent structures. Safeguards easily applicable when
operations are conducted permanently in a fixed locality are highly
difficult when ready removal must be possible. A construction
organization can not in the nature of the case form itself in relation
to the accident problem as can be done when localized.
With all these difficulties the situation should not be regarded as
hopeless. The same principles apply here as in fixed industry and
when worked out, as they surely will be under the steady pressure of
compensation legislation, a reduction of these high rates may be
anticipated.
It is quite common to attribute these rates to the recklessness of
the workers. This should be done with great caution. Much that
appears reckless is simply the outcome of long experience by which
the man walks the slender beam high in air with perfect assurance
and perfect safety. His training makes him safe under conditions
where the less accustomed would be in peril moment by moment.
Such study as it has been possible to make of fatalities in construc­
tion work indicates that the great majority of them appear to have
some other underlying cause than any chance-taking propensities of
the worker.
SUMMARY TABLES.

For convenient reference the following tables are here introduced.
They bring together the experience of several of the departments
considered in the chapter.
T a b le

97.—
SUMMARY OF ALL PLANTS, BY DEPARTMENTS, 1910 TO 1914.
1910

11
91

1
912

Department.
NUMBER OF 300-DAY WORKERS.

Fabricating.........
Bessemer............
Open hearths.......
Blast furnaces......
Heavy rolling mills
Tube mills..........
Yards....................




8, 7
13
5,070
9,739
19,389
9,442
9,767
15,932

1 530
9,
5,155
10, 718
21,479
12, 409
13,676
9,085

28,988
6,521
17,355
27,154
16,258
17,080
11,180

30,470
6,885
20,604
31,988
17,569
18,909
11,859

20, 837
4,470
12,877
26>572
11,985
13,909
7,876

244

SA FETY M OVEM EN T IN IRON AND STEEL IN D U STRY.

Table 97.—SUMMARY OF ALL PLANTS, BY DEPARTMENTS, 1910 TO 1914—
Concluded.
1910

1912

1911

1914

1913

Department.
F E U N Y R T S (P R 1,000 300-D Y W R E S).
RQ E C AE E
A OKR
452.8
390.7
319.3
263.3
237.6
167.5
134.5

Fabricating..........................................
Bessemer.............................................
Open hearths........................................
Blastfurnaces.......................................
Heavy rolling mills................................
Tube mills...........................................
Yards..................................................

171.2
246.0
182.1
158.8
136.4
156.0
153. 0

242.9
297.2
241.0
182.3
150.9
130.1
181.3

246.2
242.3
218.3
179.5
112.9
88.5
162.6

201.1
159.7
197.2
152.6
80.4
89.2
129.7

S V R Y R T S (D Y L S P R 300-D Y W RK
E E IT A E A S O T E
A O ER).
19.9
43.0
35.7
38.4
24.4
5.8
26.5

Fabricating..........................................
Bessemer.............................................
Open hearths........................................
Blast furnaces.......................................
Heavy rolling mills................................
Tube mills...........................................
Yards..................................................

7.3
16.8
19.7
26.5
10.7
4.2
17.1

14.1
19.7
30.3
29.5
14.6
9.2
24.7

13.9
28.0
20.8
29.1
10.8
10.0
25.6

9.6
16.0
14.9
20.1
10.4
7.2
16.3

Table 98.—
SUMMARY OF A SPECIAL GROUP OF PLANTS, BY DEPARTMENTS, 1907 TO
1914.
1907

1908

Department.

Open hearths... ..........................
Hpavy rollin'* mills ... __ .........

1909

1910

1
911

1912

1913

1914

N M E O 300-D Y W R E S
U BR F
A OKR.
2,081
2, 987
1.566
4,556
2,007
2,618

1,758
2,120
1,274
3,135
] .451
1,522

1,770
2,872
1,486
4,210
1,813
1,891

2,074
3,138
1,353
4,886
1,792
2,134

2,203
2, 7 5
2
1,380
4,195
1,717
1,810

2,074
3,525
1,749
5,226
2,131
2,078

2,045
3,603
1,658
5,287
2,101
2, 7 1
5

1,759
2,483
1,160
3,504
1,527
1,356

F E U N Y R T S (P R 1,000 300-D Y W R E S).
RQ E C AE E
A OKR
Fabricating...................................
Open hearths.............. ................
Blast furnaces
....... ...... ........
Heavy rolling mills
........................
Tube mills ...................................
Yards...........................................

283.1
313. 4
304.0
195.8
289.0
200.1

184.3
202.9
222.1
171.0
217.1
191.9

269.5
230.8
207.9
185.1
254.4
186.2

284.0
191.2
187.0
141.2
228.3
145.3

237. 3
152.3
126.8
139.2
225.4
108.8

314.4
156.7
124.6
133.2
168.4
121.8

290.0
151.3
91.0
99.3
78.6
71.9

198. 4
115.2
75.0
57.1
45.2
72.2

S V R Y R T S (D Y L S P R 300-D Y W R E ).
E E IT A E A S O T E
A OKR
Fabricating..................................
Open hearths................................
Blast furnaces................................
Heavy rolling mills........................
Tube mills ..................................
Yards...........................................

35.3
52.8
64.1
19.4
10.6
26.3

16.7
7.5
35.2
10.3
4.5
11.7

32.6
14.6
58.7
18.4
12.6
32.4

26.5
14.1
27.4
15.5
9.8
21.2

8.9
9.9
23.2
14.4
3.9
12.7

20.8
12.6
7.9
5.6
11.8
11.3

8.5
29.8
20.0
7.5
10.7
2.5

9.6
11.6
19.6
5.4
3.0
9.5

THE PERIOD 1910 TO 1914 AS A STANDARD OF COMPARISON.

The period 1910 to 1914 has a number of features which commend
it as a suitable standard for measuring future progress from year to
year. By 1910 the movement for safety had gained some headway.
During the period it was vigorously promoted and spread rapidly.




PERIOD 1910 TO 1914 AS A STANDARD.

245

It represents therefore a period which had neither the very serious
conditions of earlier years such as 1907, nor had it as yet reached
the hoped-for goal. It includes enough of good and. bad to offer an
average standard. It includes also years of high, medium, and low
industrial activity, 1910, 1911, and 1912 being only moderately acti ve
business years, 1913 being highly active, and 1914 being a year of
rather low activity. This admixture of varying degrees of activ­
ity also tends to fit the period for service as a point of comparison.
Table 99 may therefore be regarded as a ready reference compilation
against which the operator of a specific type of mill may match his
annual rates in frequency and severity with a feeling that the figures
of the table represent a fair average of past experience. A rate above
these averages represents possibly misfortune, possibly disgrace; in
any event, a condition to be escaped from with all expedition. A
rate below them represents a degree of success proportionate to the
amount by which it is below and should furnish added incentive to
further effort.
T a b le

99.—SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT RATES IN ALL DEPARTMENTS, FOR THE PERIOD
1910 TO 1
914.1
Accident frequency rates (per
1,000 300-day workers).
Department.

Number
of 300-day
workers.

124,636
Blast furnaces...............
Steel works:
28,101
Bessemer.................
71,293
Open hearths...........
5,144
Crucible..................
Foundries.....................
95,917
Rolling mills:
Heavy rolling mills...
67,663
Tube mills...............
73,338
Plate mills...............
21, 7 1
1
128,423
Sheet mills..............
Puddle mills............
12,788
Rod mills................
13,244
99,809
M
iscellaneous mills...
Fabricating shops..........
108,538
Forge shoDs..................
6,249
Wire drawing................
59,481
Electrical......................
14,421
Mechanical...................
97,162
Power houses................
8,083
Yards...........................
55,932
Coke ovens...................
13,282
Armor plate..................
3,000
Axle works...................
1,326
Car wheels....................
2,367
Docks..........................
1,293
Erecting structural steel..
2,157
Total................... 2 1,310,911

Death.

2.6
2.0
2.0
.4
.9
1.1
.5
.9
.7
.7
.6
.8
.9
1.3
.3
2.3
1.1
.7
2.0
2.0
1.3
1.5
1.3
2.3
12.1
1.2

Accident severity rates (days
lost per 300-day worker).

Perma­ Tempo­
Perma­ Tempo­
nent rary
nent
rary
disa­ disa­ Total. Death. disa­ disa­ Total.
bility. bility.
bility. bility.
2.9
5.2
4.6
4.1
4.7
3.9
3.4
4.8
2.6
4.5
5.9
3.6
3.9
3.1
6.3
3.3
4.0
2.6
4.4
2.9
4.0
3.0
6.3
8.5
11.1
3.9

181.1
262.1
218.4
99.0
185.2
133.1
117.6
144.1
150.0
131.5
153.4
215.4
235.0
172.8
190.4
135.7
183.1
67.3
145.8
124.3
120.7
330.3
257.3
107.5
342.1

186.7
269.3
224.9
103.5
190.8
138.0
121.5
149.8
153.3
136.7
159.9
219.9
239.7
177.2
197.1
141.3
188.2
70.6
152.1
129.2
126.0
334.8
264.9
118.3
365.3

171.6

176.7

23.4
17.9
17.8
3.5
7.9
9.4
4.5
7.9
6.1
6.3
5.4
7.6
7.8
11.5
3.0
20.7
9.5
6.7
18.0
18.3
12.0
13.6
11.4
20.9
108.5
10.5

2.8
3.1
3.0
2.1
2.6
2.2
1.7
3.0
1.4
2.0
4.1
2.4
2.2
1.4
4.3
2.6
2.5
2.5
3.1
3.3
1.1
5.0
2.0
6.6
14.7
2.5

2.5
3.8
2.9
1.6
2.2
1.9
1.5
2.0
1.7
1.7
2.0
2.8
2.4
2.0
1.9
1.6
2.3
.9
1.9
1.7
2.0
4.9
4.0
2.5
5.4
2.1

28.7
24.8
23.7
7.3
12.7
13.5
7.7
12.9
9.2
10.0
li.5
12.8
12.4
14.9
9.3
24.9
14.2
10.1
23.0
23.3
15.1
23.5
17.4
30.0
128.6
15.1

1For a table Including severity rates computed on the basis of the scale proposed by the International
Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions see Appendix K.
2Including 195,553 300-day workers in unclassified plants.




C H A P T E R X II.

THE METHODS OF THE SAFETY MAN.

. Since the first report of this bureau upon accidents in the iron and
steel industry was issued (in 1913), the safety organization has become
so standardized and so well known that no more is here necessary than
to recapitulate its essential elements. A safety organization to be
complete and effective must include the following features:
(1) Compensation; (2) director of safety; (3) superintendents’
committees; (4) workmen’s committees; (5) medical and surgical
care; (6) provision for the retirement of the old and incapacitated.
Compensation has now become so generally a matter of law that
its steady pressure is a constantly supporting influence of the very
highest importance to the safety man.
The last of the six items listed— provision for the retirement of the
old and incapacitated— has reference to the need of some method
of removing from industry those who because of age or physical
unfitness are particularly subject to accident.
MAINTENANCE OF INTEREST.

The interest of the employer in the problem of safety is assured by
the steady pressure of the compensation system. His tendency to
become absorbed in the productive aspects of the business is offset
by the appearance of compensation charges in his costs. But this
influence is not particularly effective with the working force. It is
not communicated to them and if it were would hardly excite interest.
The safety man must therefore study the methods of the publicity
agent and present the interesting facts of his duty with all the per­
suasive eloquence which he can command. He may be worthy of all
praise in other features of his activities, but if he fails at this point
the failure is apt to be serious.
In the following pages are recorded some of the methods which
have been evolved out of the experience of safety men in the iron
and steel industry.
USE OF RECORDS AND CHARTS.

No safety man can carry on his work very long without feeling the
need of recording the accident facts as they develop and of finding
some way to present them so that they will convincingly carry their
appropriate lesson. This has proved difficult because the essen­
tials of such record keeping and display have not until very recently
been worked out and applied. It is hoped that the studies of rate
computation, the use of graphic methods, and other features of this
report may afford some workable ideas upon this subject.
246




RECORDS AND CHARTS.

247

One method of charting, employed at intervals in this report, has
so favorably impressed the practical safety men with whom it has
been discussed that at their request it is here presented in detail.
The method referred to is that of curve “ smoothing/* which was
used on an extended scale in the study of labor recruiting in Chapter
VII.
In most steel plants the month forms the most convenient period
for accident tabulation and comparison. But, for diagrammatic
purposes, the ihonth is usually too short a period for clear-cut con­
clusions. Accident rates computed on a monthly basis are liable
to such wide fluctuations as a result of temporary and it may be
unimportant influences that the general trend of events may be
entirely obscured. On the other hand, the full year as a basis of
measurement is too long a period for most purposes.
This difficulty may be overcome in very considerable degree by
using overlapping 12-month periods as bases for computing rates.
For example, instead of computing separately the rates for, say,
January, 1915, February, 1915, etc., or for the years 1915, 1916,
etc., the rates may be computed for the overlapping 12-month
periods ending, respectively, with January, 1915, February, 1915,
and so on. The working out of this method can best be explained
by means of charts 34 and 35.
Chart 34 plots the accident frequency rates, by individual months,
for 5 important departments over the period 1908 to 1914, inclusive,
the data being taken from the actual experience of a steel plant.
This form of chart has been much used by safety men, and when
the fluctuations are slight and the basic data are large in amount it
gives a very satisfactory picture of conditions for each month and
permits of ready comparison between months. In the case of the
data here plotted, however, the fluctuations are so considerable as
to make interpretation extremely difficult if not impossible.
Chart 35 presents the same data in the form of rates computed for
the series of 12-month periods ending with each month from De­
cember, 1908, to December, 1914. With the curves thus smoothed
it is possible to follow them readily and thereby to trace the trend of
events over the period covered.
In plotting the above chart (chart 35) it will be noted that the
true accident rates are used, not relative numbers. Two items of
interest are thus brought out: (1) The relation of departments in
accident frequency. Thus at the beginning of the period the accident
rates for the mechanical department were very much higher than
those for the rolling mills, whereas, at the end of the period, this
relation was reversed. (2) A changed condition in any department
is immediately reflected. For example, beginning with the year end­
ing June, 1915, there is a steady rise in the frequency rates of rolling




248
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IKON
AND
STEEL
IN D U ST U T.




CHART34 - A C E T RATES PLOTTED BY MONTHS.
C ID N

KECOKDS
AND
CHAKTS.

249




CHART 35-ACCIDENT R
ATES PLO D B O E LA
TTE
Y V R PPIN 12-M
G
ONTH PER D
IO S.

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

250

mills up to the year ending December, 1915. Such a rise, showing
itself on the safety man’s chart, would call at once for serious atten­
tion.
METHOD OF PREPARING CHARTS.

The following description of the full process of preparing charts of
the above character may appear somewhat complicated. But this
impression is due to the necessary elaboration of the description and
not to the processes involved, which, as a matter of fact, are simple
and require little labor. For purposes of description the data for
the blast furnaces plotted on charts 34 and 35 will be used.
The detailed steps are as follows: First, a form table must be pre­
pared similar to the following:
[Form for preparing data lor charts.]
Exposures, Exposures, Accidents, Accidents,
Man-hours, by months. by months. by years by months. by years
ending—
endingMonth.

1914

1915

A

B

January.. 195,000 123,000
February 207,000 162,000
March__ 204,000 159,000
April..... 198,000
May....... 198.000
June...... 198.000
July....... 201,000
August... 177,000
September 177,000
October.. 177,000
November 135,000
December 159,000
Total.

Rates, by
years
ending—

9
91619141915191619141 15191619141 151916191419151916
9
1916 191419151
C

D E F
1
65 14
6 54
9
68 53
66
66
66
67
5
9
5
9
5
9
4
5
5
3
742

G H
718
703
688

742

I

K L M N O P
5
37 1
3 1
0 2
24 20
1
7
24
1
9
22
22
1
8
1
7
1
0
1
4

Q R

232

S

33
2
304
305

214
210

1
'
254

342

254

This form of table is arranged to carry data for three years. By
additional columns it may be extended to carry data for any greater
number of years desired.
Columns “ A , ” “ B,” and “ C ” are for the entry of man-hours
month by month. Using the formula, Total man-hours -s- 3000 = 300day workers, the figures in column a D ?; are obtained. These repre­
sent the amount of monthly exposure expressed in terms of 300-day
workers. Summing up column “ D ” gives 742 as the number of ex­
posures for the year ending with December, 1914. This item is then
entered in column “ G ” opposite December. In column “ K ” are




RECORDS AND CHARTS.

251

entered the accidents for each month of 1914. The sum of these gives
254, entered in column “ N ” opposite December. Applying now the
formula, Number of accidents —Number of 300-day workers X 1000 =
Accident frequency rate per 1,000 300-day workers, gives (254 -f742 X 1000 = ) 342, which figure is then entered in column “ Q ” oppo­
site December. This rate (342) for the year ending with December,
1914, may now be plotted, giving point 1, in the curve for blast
furnaces, on chart 34 above.
For the determination of later points in the curve the procedure is
quite similar. Take March, 1915, for example. The number of
man-hours is 159,000. This divided by 3,000 gives 53 300-day
workers, entered in column “ E ” as the monthly exposure for March,
1915. For the 12-month period ending with March the total expo­
sure would be this item (53) plus the corresponding items for
the preceding 11 months. This would be 688, as shown in column
“ H.” The number of accidents for the period may be determined
in the same manner, the result being 210. Dividing this number
(210) by the amount of exposure (688) and multiplying by 1,000 gives
(210 ^ 688 X 1000 = ) 305, as the frequency rate per 1,000 300-day
workers for the year ending March, 1915. This when plotted gives
the entry in column 4 (March, 1915) of chart 35 above.1
Whenever the man hours and the number of accidents are obtained
for a new month the table and the chart can be filled for that month.
As has been said, such a chart gives a picture of the changes of the
month so modified that it is not distorted unreasonably by local and
temporary events.
THE CHARTING OF ACCIDENT CAUSES.

In precisely the same way as just described for departmental rates
(as shown in chart 36), the rates for accident causes may be charted.
One modification, however, will be found convenient— namely, the
use of relative numbers instead of the actual accident rates. This
is so, simply because cause rates vary so greatly that satisfactory
plotting is difficult. By the use of relative numbers, however, it is
possible to relate all the curves to the same base and thus to show how
the different causes are varying with relation to each other.
Thus, it will be found convenient to reduce all of the rates to a
basis of 100 for the initial year, and then to compute the later years as
relatives with the first year as the base. As an example, the following
1Formulas for determining exposures and accidents for years ending with given months may be formed
as follows:
For exposures, let E=exposure for year next earlier than desired year, E'= exposure for desired year,
e= exposure for corresponding month of preceding year, e'= exposure for current month. The formula
will read (E—
e)+e'=E'. Applying this to M
arch, 1915, E=703, e==68, e'=53, (703—
68)+53=688.
For accidents, let A= accidents for year next earlier than desired year, A'= accidents for desired year,
a= accidents for corresponding month of preceding year, a'= accidents for current month. The formula
will read (A—
a)+a'=A'. Applying for March, 1915, A=214, a*=24, a'=20; (214—
24)+20=210.




252
SAFETY
MOVEMENT
I
N
IRON
AND
STEEL
IN D U STRY,




CHART 36.-TREND O ACCIDEN RATES IN PRIN
F
T
CIPAL CAUSE SROUPS.

RECORDS AND CHARTS.

253

table shows the actual frequency rates for one cause of accident—
handling tools and objects— and also shows the resulting relatives
when the first year is taken as a base:
ACTUAL AND RELATIVE FREQUENCY RATES FOR HANDLING TOOLS AND OBJECTS.
(YEAR ENDING DEC., 1914=100.)
Frequency rates.

Relatives.

Year ending w
ith.—
1914
Tanim
rv_______ ___
Febmarv______ ___
Marcli.......................
April........................
May.........................
June.........................
July.........................
August.....................
September.................
October.....................
November.................
December..................

77.8

1915
79.1
78.5
80.5
81.3
80.1
79.4
82.7
84.3
87.6
89.8
94.4
97.4

1916

1914-

1915

11
96
125.8
127.0
125.2
124.2
124.9
123.3
10
2 .1
116.8

10
0 .0

101.7
100.9
103.5
104.5
103.0
12
0 .1
106.3
108.4
12
1 .6
115.4
121.3
125.2

97.9
98.8
97.4
96.6
97.2
95.9
93.4
90.9
8 .2
6
82.4

10
1 .8
105.9

These relatives may thereupon be plotted, as is done in chart 36,
for “ handling tools and objects” as well as for three other causes.
In addition, the curves for labor recruiting and employment are
similarly plotted. If this chart were drawn with the rate for each
month plotted separately, it would appear more confused even than
chart 34 above.
Examination of chart 36 will show that at the beginning of the
period all the curves were declining except those for labor recruiting
and handling tools and objects. The decline of employment must
have been due either to men leaving in excess of men hired, or to
shortened hours of labor, or to both these factors. The decline in
all cause groups except one may be explained by lessened industrial
tension and by “ selective discharge.” Of the men leaving a large
proportion would under such circumstance^ be the younger and less
experienced men. The average quality of the force would be im­
proving in the matter of experience. It is probable that the new men
coming in were assigned largely to tasks involving handling of
material, this accounting for the fact that the frequency rates for
that cause did not decline as did the otlw cause groups.
With minor fluctuations the general decline goes on until about
the year ending with July, 1915. Then labor recruiting begins an
upward trend followed shortly by employment. As long as labor
recruiting continues to rise the frequency rates for all the cause groups
go up, with the exception of the rate for falls of worker.
Since hot substances and cranes and hoists are the groups known
to have high severity, such increased frequency rates for these causes
as appear on the chart from the year ending with June, 1915, and the
year ending with August, 1915, would excite serious attention. An




2 :5 4

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

exception to the general rule appears in the case of falls of worker.
This is very interesting in view of the fact that throughout the period
an active campaign was in progress to improve the condition of the
plant from the standpoint of cleanliness, condition of stairways ajid
ladders, and other items likely to influence the occurrence of falls.
This reinforces the point made earlier (Chapter VII) that in many
cases the natural influence of increased labor recruiting may be
entirely overcome by special effort.
By using colors a larger number of departments and causes can be
introduced on the charts and so a very complete picture of conditions
and their fluctuation can be constantly maintained for reference and
study. The cause chart is particularly effective in determining
whether a particular effort is bearing fruit. It is believed that
safety men will find the labor of producing charts by this method
fully repaid by the clearer and more reliable knowledge which they
will obtain of the facts and the underlying influences at work.
AWARDS AND BONUS PLANS.

The pressure of compensation costs and the presentation of facts
by means of records and charts as just described will usually keep
superintendents alive to the importance of accident-prevention effort.
But these will not suffice for the maintenance of an effective interest
among the working force.
There is, accordingly, resort to various plans, among which awards
and bonus payments play a prominent part. A simple award widely
and effectively used has been the safety button. The receipt of such
a distinction may be conditioned upon a certain amount of service
on a safety committee or upon proof by examination of familiarity
with safety rules. Experience shows, however, that the more vig­
orously such a campaign is pushed the more quickly does it lose its
novelty and with it some* of its effectiveness. Need arises very soon
for some more permanent method of appeal. The interval of use­
fulness of minor awards may be considerably prolonged by ingenuity
in varying the award or the method of deciding how it shall be given.
Finally, however, it in a measure loses its significance. Rather
instinctively the safety man will turn to something in the nature of
a bonus. This is more likely to be true if he is a practical mill man.
The bonus is perfectly familiar to him as a means of stimulating
production, and he naturally looks in that direction when he needs a
continuous motive to keep his safety work going among the men.
It should be pointed out that many of the very best and most
effective safety men have regarded the bonus with disfavor. They
hold that the humane motive should be sufficient and that an appeal
on the ground of economic advantage lowers the standards which
should exist. On the other hand, those who favor such methods




AWARDS AND BONUS PLANS.

255

argue that the appeal on humane grounds is left untouched, while an
element is added likely to keep the matter freshly in the minds of
foremen just as compensation cost does with the employer.
No attempt is here made to justify either view. The fact is simply
recorded that in the search for some means of exercising a continuous
pressure for the maintenance of interest among the foremen an
increasing number of safety men are experimenting with some form
of bonus.
As observed ins practice the commonest form oi such a scheme
seems to be one directed to the foremen, though some cases were
found of plans similar to that described in the machine-building
report1 in which one or two days’ extra pay is given to the entire
force of a successful department.
In installing a bonus plan a study is made of the records of previous
years and rates are prepared for each department of the organization.
These may be simple frequency rates or a plan of classification may
be used which will give greater weight to the more severe accidents.
Such rates are in principle like the severity rates of this report.
After the determination of basing rates some amount will be deter­
mined upon per man under the supervision of a foreman, such, for
example, as $2. Thus a foreman having 100 men under his super­
vision would receive $200 if he had no accidents during a year.
Suppose that a foreman is in a department whose basing rate is 80
and he comes through the year with a rate of 60. This is 25 per cent
of a possible reduction of his basing rate to zero. He would receive
50 cents per man under his supervision. If there were an average of
60 men his bonus would be $30.
No attempt can safely be made to introduce the question of respon­
sibility. To do so leads to endless difference of opinion tending to
obscure the real issue. Each accident is charged up to the foreman
under whom the man works.
Monthly the records are cast up. The safety office transmits to
the accounting department a record of all accidents and of the fore­
men to whose accounts they are chargeable. A regular blank form is
usually provided on which is entered the complete accident record
and the standing of each foreman both for the month and cumulative
to date. These reports are distributed to various interested parties,
such as the general superintendent, each departmental superintend­
ent, and the safety office. Each foreman has his own record for the
month and for the year to date.
It is to be noted that it is the year’s record which counts. Each
month the foremen have a reminder of their duty and opportunity
in the matter.




i Bulletin of Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 216.

256

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

It is probably too soon to reach any conclusion regarding the
effectiveness of this method. This much is certain, for the swarm of
minor injuries for whose reduction personal care is the only remedy
the bonus plan seems to have had a very marked success. This is
in considerable degree due to the care which it induces the foremen
to take in breaking in new men and instructing them both in the
dangers of the work and in safe methods.
•
BULLETIN BOARDS AND DISPLAYS.

As a means of direct appeal something which can. be seen has great
force. Quite early in the movement a great many companies used
with good effect illuminated bulletins at the entrances to their plants.
The extension of this system to bulletins in all parts of the works,
supplied with fresh material from time to time, has been a very
potent influence. An important modification has been the use of a
projection lantern. Its use is sometimes confined to strictly safety
matter, but very commonly other material of interest is interspersed
which serves to emphasize the pictures related to safety when they
are displayed.
COOPERATION WITH COMMUNITY AGENCIES.

Among such agencies which different safety men have used effec­
tively are the school, the community associations, visiting nurses’
organizations, and the church.
The importance of such forms of activity for the long future of the
safety movement can not be overestimated. Their immediate re­
sults may not be measurable by any assembly of rates but they serve
to establish that foundation of appreciation and intelligence which is
essential if sound progress is to continue.
COOPERATION OF ENGINEERS.

Elsewhere it has been pointed out that industrial death must be
eliminated, if at all, by thorough engineering revision. Naturally
from the nature of the development of the safety movement many
safety men are not engineers. They can not look upon their problems
with the thoroughgoing understanding of the trained engineer. This
should be a warning. Unless safety men bring to their aid every
resource of engineering method to a much larger degree than they
have already done the end of their progress is in sight. With gen­
erous and unstinted use of engineering skill, industrial death may be
reduced to a degree not yet even faintly appreciated. Without
such emphasis upon, and extension of engineering effort there is
little hope of getting much beyond the sorry makeshift of compen­
sating for the worker’s death.




APPENDIX A.—SAFETY CODE FOR HOISTING CHAINS.1
{Bulletin of National Safety Council.)
The following recommendations are made for operations requiring the use of chains
as hoisting accessories:
1. Material.
Decide upon the material desired for manufacturing the chain. Low carbon open
hearth steel and wrought iron are both used by reliable manufacturers. Some en­
gineers favor the use of the best quality of iron, such as Norway or Swedish, claiming
it will lend itself to a better weld, has a greater ductility, which allows it to yield under
an overload rather than snap, and is less liable to injury than steel if worked at im­
proper temperatures. A suitable quality of iron should be tough and produce a silky,
fibrous fracture; it should be uniform throughout, free from laminations caused by
layers of slag between the fibers, and be free from an excess of phosphorous and sul­
phur, which would cause cold and red shortness.
2. Specifications.
Prepare a rigid set of specifications to govern the purchase of all chains, and insist
that the purchasing department buy on quality and reputation of manufacturer,
rather than price. The following points should be covered by a good set of specifica­
tions :
(a) Material.—Insist on material passing physical tests in accordance with the
standards adopted by the American Society for Testing Materials.
(b) Workmanship.—Links should have a smooth, workmanlike finish, and be free
from cracks and scars of such a nature as to cause a material reduction in the net crosssectional area. Li&ks should be formed by the three-heat process; that is, first heat,
bending the stock bar to U shape; second heat, scarfing the ends; and third
heat, driving home the weld. Insist on hand-made links with long lap welds, so
finished as not to cause a bulging or any material increase of the section at the weld.
Machine-made or so-called coil-wound links are not acceptable, because such severe
initial internal stresses are set up in the stock bar, due to being bent around so short
a radius while cold. Such links also have the additional disadvantage of a short-lap
weld. Variation in the diameter of the stock bar used in the link at any section
should be limited to one-twentieth of an inch. The stock bars should be as nearly
circular in section as possible, because any irregularities will cause an unevenness of
bearing between the finished links. The method of closing a weld with a “ foot dolly ”
is not objectionable, provided the chainmaker is careful not to hammer the link after
it has lowered in temperature, as such a procedure will undoubtedly harm the weld.
In an attempt to make a weld have a good shape; chainmakers often make the serious
mistake of hammering the weld until it is cold. Such a process tends to harden the
metal and reduces its ductility. Great care should also be taken by the chainmaker
to see that the scarfs are free from grit and dirt before bonding them.
(c) Proportions of links.—The major and minor axes of a link should be as small
as possible, as it not only gLves a greater flexibility to the chain, but also keeps the
1By Earl B. M
organ, Safety Engineer, Norton Co., Worcester, M
ass.
12771°— 18— Bull. 234------ 17




257

258

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

bending stresses in the link down to a minimum.
,
recommended:
Diameter of section.
| inch.
A inch.
§ inch.
A inch.
| inch.
J inch.
1 inch.
1J inches.

The following dimensions are

Inside minor axis.
A inch.
f inch.
J inch.
| inch.
1 inch.
1J inches.
If inches.
If inches.

Inside major axis.
14 inches.
1J inches.
I f inches.
I f inches.
2 inches.
2J- inches.
2f inches.
3| inches.

(d)
Proof test.—The most important function in testing a chain is the defection of
defective welds and deformed links. This necessitates a careful examination after
the application of a load in tension equal to the safe working load. It is also recom­
mended that one short sample of at least three links be tested to destruction, and
during the application of this loading the point at which the sides of the links begin
to collapse should be carefully noted, as this is really the critical strength of the
chain. (Analagous to elastic limit of a test bar.)
3. Safe L oads.
Prepare a table of safe loads, based upon the maximum permissible stress of the
material that is used in the manufacture of the link. The following formula is rec­
ommended as amply safe, and, although it gives loads that are much smaller than those
recommended by well-known manufacturers, the users of such loads can feel reason­
ably assured that the material has not been stressed beyond the elastic limit:
FORM ULA. 1

P = 0 .4 fd2 x f x d2
Where P = th e safe load, and
f=the permissible fiber stress of the material in the link, and
d=th e diameter of the stock used in the links.
Generally the strength of a chain link is calculated from the direct internal stresses
produced in the cross section of the link by the loading and neglecting the bending
stresses which are undoubtedly present. The formula cited above takes into consid­
eration the stresses produced by the bending movement, which accounts for the lower
value of the safe loads.
Insisting on proper loading of chains is a most important precaution, as overloading
will cause fatigue or so-called crystallization by reducing the ductility or hardening
the material, and annealing after such a state is reached does not restore the ductility
completely, although it does remedy the condition.
Annealing chains once before they go into service is good practice as any internal
stresses that may have been set up during the manufacture of the chain are thereby
relieved. This annealing should be carefully done by the closed process. Open
annealing gives the oxygen of the air a chance to act and will cause scaling. Do not
attempt to anneal without an accurate pyrometer, and treat at least 30 minutes (to get
complete saturation) to not less than 1,700° F. The best success can be obtained by
using a gas or oil furnace.
i. Marking and R ecords.
Mark each chain by stamping some identifying letter or number on the connecting
ring. This mark should refer to a card record containing the following information:
1 Tliis formula developed by experimental station, University of Illinois.




APPENDIX A.---- SAFETY CODE FOB HOISTING CHAINS.

259

(1) Description of the material used in manufacture; (2) dimensions of the chain;
(3) class of work for which it is used; (4) proof test; (5) safe working load; (6) date
issued for service; (7) date of repair and nature and extent of same.
5. I n s p e c t io n D u r i n g S e r v i c e

and

A ft e r R e p a ir s .

Inspection should be made at least once a week, and oftener if the chain is in con­
stant use, by a competent and experienced man to detect any appreciable reduction
of section in the links due to wear or abrasion, any deformation of the links due to
overloading, and visible flaws in the welds. Chains which have been overloaded to
such a point as to cause fatigue can be detected by a characteristic ring, which is
yielded when struck a sharp blow with a hammer. Further proof of such condition
can be obtained by placing the link edgewise on an anvil and striking it several
sharp blows with a sledge. If it is fatigued it will fracture sharply with a decided
crystalline appearance. In case a chain is found to contain a link of such a nature
the safe thing to do is to discard the entire chain for all overhead lifting purposes
where life is in danger.
6. R i n g s .

Be sure the connecting ring is designed to resist the same safe load as the chain.
The following formula is recommended:
P = 0 .6 17 fd3

D
Where P =the
f= the
d=the
D =the

safe load,
fiber stress of the material used,
diameter of the stock in the ring, and
main diameter of the ring.
7. H

ooks.

Be sure the hook is properly designed by a competent engineer. The common
practice in designing hooks seems to neglect the fact that it is a matter of strength in
a curved beam rather than a straight beam, and therefore gives a load far too large
for safety.
This subject is too complicated to go into detail, but any further information that
is desired will be gladly furnished by the council upon request.
Most important of all—do not overload the chain, and in case it has been overloaded
do not resort to annealing as a remedy, for annealing positively will not restore the
original physical qualities of the material used in the chain. If chains, hooks, or
rings have been overloaded, scrap them.

APPENDIX B.—ACCIDENT CAUSES, BY DEPARTMENTS.
In Chapter II there is presented an analysis and discussion of accident causes in
the various departments of the industry. The following tables offer some supple­
mentary information of considerable interest. They are presented here because of
the fact that the system of cause classification available is somewhat different from
that followed in the text presentation.
Table 100, consolidating a three-year experience, presents the contrast between the
rates for the different causes which prevail under the various conditions incident to
the manufacture of different products. For example, “ cranes” had a frequency
rate of 8.3 cases per 1,000 300-day workers in companies manufacturing miscella­
neous steel products, while for the companies manufacturing fabricated products
the rate was 25.0. The second and third columns of Table 100 show that mills
largely modern and thoroughly organized for safety have a measurable advantage
over mills of older type and organized more recently.




260

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Table 101 presents the same material as the preceding table for each of the three
years. A very constant downward trend is observable. All rates showing an increase
over the rates of the previous year are printed in italics. Frequency rates for the
entire group of plants ran as follows in the three years: 1913, 174.5 cases per 1,000 300day workers; 1914, 124.7 cases; 1915, 124.3 cases. The severity rates for the same
period (which can not be shown in the detailed table because known only for the
totals) are: 1913, 15.45 days lost per 300-day worker; 1914, 11.44 days; 1915, 11.10
days.
Table 102 presents the experience of a large plant for two years after safety organiza­
tion was effected. Four of six departments show marked decline in the frequency
rate for the period. The italic type indicates the cases where the rate increased.
In addition, by comparing the total column of Table 102 with the total column of
Table 100 emphasis is again laid on the progressive possibilities of accident prevention.
Table 100 shows a total frequency rate of 143.7. This is the experience of a very large
group of plants which have been for varying lengths of time engaged upon the safety
problem, all of them organized some years prior to the company represented by Table
102, for which the total frequency rate is 311.9. When the subtotals for the main
cause groups are examined it will be found that almost without exception Table 102
shows the higher rates, such, for example, as falling objects with a rate of 58.9 cases
as against a rate of 29.4 cases for Table 100.
100.—
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY WORKERS) IN PLANTS
PRODUCING SPECIFIED PRODUCTS, BY CAUSES, FOR THE PERIOD 1913 TO 1915.

T ab le

Miscellaneous steel
products.
Cause.

Gas (asphyxiating)...............
Hot substances:
Electricity.......................
Hot metal......................
Hot water, etc................
Total..........................
Flying objects:
From tools, not striking eye
From other sources, not
striking eye.................
Striking eye...................
Total..........................
Cranes:
Overhead.......................
Locomotive....................
Other hoisting apparatus..
Total..........................
Falling material:
Dropped in handling.......
Other............................
Total...................................




Company Company Manufac­ Manufac­
ture of ture of
B
A
wire.
(safety (safety tubes.
work
work
begun
begun
more
early). recently).
1.3

1.2

.4
4.4

9.5
2.3
13.0

13.1
4.0
19.0

1.1

.6
2.8
8.1

6.9

8.2
7.2
.7
.4

Total.

0.1

2.0

Fabri­ Manufac­
ture of
cated
sheets.

products.

1.0

5.8

.6
6.0

5.1
11.7

1.2

4.4
.7
6.3

0.3
4.1

6.2
1 .6
0

1
.1
8.2

3.2
12.9

2.1
2.7
3.4

1
.2
1.5

.3

.5

1.9
4.4
6.7

5.4
16.0
23.5

1.1

2.0
6.6

2.1
.7
1
.1

.6

22.4
.4

2.2

5.7
7.1
5.1

‘ .i

9.1
6.9
.7
.7

5.2
20.7

1.2

39.5
3.9
3.4

1 .2
1

19.1

1 .0
2

21.9

.8

i Less than 0.005.

2.8

44.1
5.9
50.0

2 .1
2
1.7
23.8

26.7
2.7

APPENDIX B.---- ACCIDENT CAUSES, BY DEPARTMENTS.

261

T a b le 1 0 0 .— ACCIDENT

FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY WORKERS) IN PLANTS
PRODUCING SPECIFIED PRODUCTS, BY CAUSES, FOR THE PERIOD 1913 TO 1915Concluded.
Miscellaneous steel
products.
Cause.

Falls:
From ladders...................
From scaffolds..................
Into openings...................
Due to insecure footing......
Total............................
Heat, cramps, and exhaustion..
Handling tools and objects:
Caught between...............
Operating trucks..............
Hand tools......................
Slivers and edges..............
Lifting............................
Total...........................
Machinery:
Caught by.......................
Breakage.........................
Moving material in...........
Total...........................
Power vehicles:
Collisions.........................
Coupling.........................
Falls from car, etc............
Working in or about.........
Other.............................
Total...........................
Unclassified..........................
Grand total...................
Number of 300-day workers.......
Total accidents.......................




Company Company Manufac­ Manufac­ Fabri­ Manufac­
B
ture of ture of
ture of
cated
A
wire. products. sheets.
(safety (safety tubes.
work
work
begun
begun
more
early). recently).
0.6
.7
.5
6.0

0.7
.9
.9
13.2

7.8

15.7
2.9

Total.

0.3
.2
.3
12.7
13.5

0.6
.7
.5
10.5
12.3

.8

0.8
1.7
.2
18.4
21.1
.7

5.7

2.1

7.0
8.9
40.9

3.0
2.0
3.4
2.1
2.0
12.5

7.1
9.1
7.0
22.5
13.4
59.1

27.5
4.6
22.6
6.7
5.4
66.8

4.7
6.8
11.1
21.4
5.4
49.4

8.7
4.5
9.0
10.7
7.3
40.2

4.2
.3
2.9
7.4

2.5
.2
1.7
4.4

11.5
.7
6.1
18.3

11.6
.3
.7
12.6

6.4
.3
1.0

6.1
.4
2.8
9.3

.5
1.6
1.4
2.0
6.3
11.8
13.1
8.9 ;
97.4
178.7
66,078 128,294
22, 081
6 ,m

.1
.5
.4
.1
.8
1.9

1.0
7.0
1.4
5.3
2.6
3.0
19.3
I
i
3.5
.2
1.5 ,
5.2
C)
1

1.0
.4
.3
1.3
3.0

10.9
3.1
11.0

0.4
.2
.2
3.4
4.2
.4

0.7
.6
.3
10.5
12.1

5.2

54.1
54,154
2,928

*Less than 0.005.

.2
.5
.7
.3

.1
.5 1
.4 !
.5 {
1.5

2.1

3 .0 ;

3.8

20.9 ,
11.9
158.4 , 221.6
77,296
24,296
12,244 5,333

7.7
C)
1

.2
.2
.2
1.5
2.1
20.9
146.2
52,875
7,655

.2
.9
.7
.8

2.9
5.5

13.8
143.7
387.265
55,655

262

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
T able

1 01— ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1000 300-DAY WORKERS) IN
Miscellaneous steel products.

Cause.

Company A (safety
work begun early).

Gas (asphyxiating)............

1915

0.7

0.9

0.5

1.7

1.2

0.9

0.2

0.1

1.6
12.1
2.9
16.6

1.6
9.6
2.1
13.3

.6
6.0
1.8
8.4

2.5
16.6
4.7
23.7

1.8
8.8
3.2
13.8

12.8
8.8

1.5

.1
2.9

18.1

.8
6.7
1.0
8.5

.1
.9
7.3
8.3

.3
.9
6.2
7.4

.2

.7

1.4

6.9
8.5

3.1
10.6
14.4

.7
3.8
9.6
14.1 |

.6
2.7
6.6
9.9

.1
.5
4.8
5.4

.8

1.8
2.7

.1
.5
.8
1.4

6.9
.4
.3
7.6

4.6
.8
.3
5.7

8.6
2.0
1.4
12.0

7.9
.7
.8
9.4

10.1

.7
.7
11.5

5.1
.6
.4
6.1

2.7
.1
.5
3.3

2.3
.6
.2
3.1

19.9
.5
20.4

15.1
.9
16.0

47.8
6.2
54.0

|
37.1
30.3
2.7 j 2.2
33.0 j 89.3

15.7
1.3
17.0

8.4
.5
8.9

7.8
.4
8.2

.7
.9
.5
7.8
9.9
1.5

.2
.8
.3
5.7
7.0

.5
.6
.7
11.5
13.3
2.2

.5
.2
.3
3.8
4.8
1 .5

.3
.2
.2
8.9
4.3
1.4

.2
•
4
.1
*.3
3.0
.2

5.9
1.1
5.5
1.6
2.6
16.7

10.8
3.2
11.1
6.4

1.9
1.1
1.4
1.1
2.1
7.6

1.9
.9
1.7
.8
.7
6.0

2.9
.1
1.1
4.1

2.1
.2
1.4

Total.......................
Cranes:
9.3
Overhead....................
Locomotive.................
.8
.5
Other hoisting apparatus
10.6
Total.......................
Falling material:
25.2
Dropped in handling—
Other.........................
1.8
27.0
Total.......................
Falls:
.8
From ladders..............
From scaffolds.............
.4
Into openings..............
.6
Due to insecure footing..
5.2
7.0
Total.......................
1.4
Heat cramps and exhaustion
Handling tools and objects:
Caught between...........
9.8
Operating trucks..........
1.6
Hand tools..................
6.5
3.9
Slivers and edges.........
Lifting.......................
4.0
Total....................... l.._ 25.8
r- . .
'
Machinery:
4.3
Caught by..................
Breakage.................... i
-3
Moving material in....... 1 2.2
6.8
Total.......................
Power vehicles:
Collisions....................
Coupling.....................
1.4
Falls from cars, etc.......
.5
Working in or about__
.5
Other.........................
2.3
4.7
Total.......................
Unclassified......................
14.2
Grand total.............. 123.1




Manufacture of tubes.

1914

1
913

Hot substances:
Electricity..................
Hot metal...................
Hot water, etc.............
Total.......................
Flying objects:
From tools, not striking
eye............ .............
From other sources, not
striking eye..............
Striking eye.................

Company B (sa fe ty
work begun more re­
cently).

.1

.5
.2
.1
s.i
4.0
5.0
90.8

1913

.8

1914

1915

1913

1914

1.2

4.2
.1

1915
0.1

.2

2.6
.9
3.7

1.1
1.4
14.7
18.0
3.5

.9
.6
13.1
15.5
2.8

4.2
1.8
3.7
1.6
2.2
13.0

12.1
3.7
11.6
8.0
9.1
44.5

9.9
2.2
9.8
6.2
8.2
36.3

40.8

4.6
3.4
6.0
3.9
3.4
21.3

2.7
.3
1.1
4.1

5.2
.3
3.2
8.7

4.1
.2
2.4
6.7

3.1
.8
3.0
6.4

3.7
.3
2.7
6.7

1.5
.3
.7
2.4

8.7

.8
.7
*.1
1.0
2.6
4.3
70.2

.7
2.2
2.0
2.1
8.1
15.1
17.2
212.8

.4
1.2
1.5
2.1
5.8
11.0
12.8
156.6

.3
.6
1.8
4.6
8.6
11.5
162.0

.1
.4
.3
.1
1.1
2.0
9.1
81.6

.3
.2
.4
1.1
2.9
38.2

.1
.1
.1
.1
.7
1.1
1.7
32.3

9.8

1.8

.

APPENDIX B.— ACCIDENT CAUSES, BY DEPARTMENTS.

263

PLANTS PRODUCING SPECIFIED PRODUCTS, BY CAUSES AND YEARS, 1913 TO 1915.
j
Manufacture of wire.

1914

1915

1913

C
O
©

.
1
913

♦Fabricated products.

0.1

0.2

.9
5.5
4.7
11.1

.2
4.6
6.3

1.6
5.8
.9
8.3

1915

1914

11.1

1913

Total.

1915

1913

0.1

.6
7.9
4.2
12.7

1914

Manufacture of sheets.

1914

1915

0.8
1.1
2.5
.4
4.0

1.0
4.3
.7
6.0

0.5

0.4

0.3
4.4
5.2
9.9

0.4
4.7
8.8
13.9

0.2
2.7
4.5
7.4

1.4
10.7
4.0
16.1

1.1
6.4
3.2
10.7

.7
6.7
3.6
11.0

.4

.4
1.7
5.2
7.3

j
1.6
5.1
7.3

.1
1.9
3.6
5.6

.4
2.0
4-3
6.7

2.5
9.9
23.3
35.7

2.3
3.6
11.2
17.1

1.3
1.2
11.0
13.5

• !
4
2.4
8.8
11.6

.2
.6
4.7
5.5

.2
.3
3.2
3.7

.6
2.4
8.8
11.8

1.8
5.3
7.5

2.5
.4
1.1
- 4.0

2.1
.6
.7
3.4

1.6
1.0
.6

31.3
.6
4.1

15.5
.3
1.3

7.1
.3

4.2

3.9
.1

36.0

17.1

7.4

4.2

4.0

8.4
1.0
1.1
10.5

5.8
.4
.6
6.8

6.0
.6
.4

3.2

17.2
.3
.3
17.8

17.8
S. 2
21.0

59.8
7.0
66.8

33.8
5.3
39.1

33.2
5.1
38.3

31.9
1.2
33.1

19.1
2.3
21.4

14.6
1.6
16.2

33.7
3.7
37.4

21.7
2.0

22.7
2.1

23.7

24.8

.6

22.4
16.6
3.5 | 1.5
25.9 ! 18.1

15.6
17.3
.3

.5
.4
.3
16.0
17.2
8.2

.3
.2
.3
13.6
14.4
6.7

.8
.2 !
-7
.3 :
.7
8.6 | 11.3
9.1
13.5
2.3
2.7

.6
.7
.4
11.0
12.7
2.3

.3
.5
.4
9.2
10.4
1.2

24.2
2.7
17.5
5.5
4.8
54.7

22.5
3.0
12.1
3.2
4.2
45.0

2.5
11.1
14.4
16.4
5.5
49.9

6.4
3.9
10.2
26.1
6.4
53.0

5.6
4.8
8.5
29.5
4.4
45.8

10.2
5.8
11.1
11.3
7.7
46.1

7.8
3.1
7.9
10.1
6.7
35.6

7.7
4.1
7.7
10.6
7.4
37.5

9.4

10.6
.1

8.0
.5
2.6

10.6

11.1

4.1
.2
.1
4.4

7.5
.4
3.6
11.5

5.5
.3
2.3
8.1

2.4

9.4

7.3
.5
.1
7.6

.1
.1
.5
1.2
4.3
1.9
18.1 | 9.3
300.9 174.2

.7
1.2
.3
2.7
4.9
8.0
162.0

.1
.4
.3
.1
1.0
1.9
30.6
184.9

.1

.3
1.2
1.0
.9
3.8
7.2
16.9
174.5

.2
.5
.6
.9
2.4
4.6
12.2
124.7

-9

.4
.6
.8
10.8
12.1
.5

1.3
1.1
.5
19.9
22.8
1.0

.5
1.5
.1
19.0
21.1
.5

8.5
11.0
7.5
26.1
13.5
66.6

5.6
6.9
6.4
18.6
11.4
48.9

7.0
9.1
6.9
22.6
14.9
60.4

33.5
7.1
33.9
10.1
6.6
91.2

14.8
.7
7.6

9.4
.7
5.6

23.1

15.7

10.1
.6
5.2
15.9

14.0
.7
1.9
16.6

.7
•
4
.4
1.9

.4
.7
.7
.1
2.4

i.o !
.6
.6 ;
.5
.4 j
-1
10.4 1 10.2
| 11.4
12.4
1.1 i

.1
.1
.2
.7
.5
.3
.4
.7
1.6
.9
3.6
1.9
20.7 | 20.1
177. V 136.3

S. 4
21.1
165.6




1

7.0

.4
1.3

.1
.3
.7
1.3
2.4
15.7
140.8"

.3
.1
2.3
2.8
15.8
111.8

5.0
.3

7.7
.1
.8
.5
.7
2.6
4.7
12.8
124.3

264

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

102.—
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES (PER 1,000 300-DAY WORKERS) IN A LARGE
STEEL PLANT, BY CAUSES, AND BY DEPARTMENTS. FOR A 2-YEAR PERIOD AFTER
INTRODUCING SAFETY ORGANIZATION.

T ab le

Cause.

Blast
furnaces.

Rolling
mills.

M
echanical de­
part­
ments.

Wire
mills.

Fabri­
cated
prod­
ucts.

Yards.

Total
(1914
and
1915).

914 1915 1
914 1915 1914 1
1
914 1915 1914 1915 1914 1915 1
915
1.3
Hot substances:
2.7 1.5
Electricity.........................
Hot metal......................... 70.1 44.4
Hot water, etc.................... 12.1 7.7
Total............................. 84.9 53.6

:

0.7 0.6
8
21.9 22.1 *2 .’ i 'ii'i
2.0 2.9 6.5 4.0
24.6 25.6 34.6 16.1

Flying objects:
From tools, not striking eye.. 4.0 1.5 .3
From other sources, not
striking eye.................... 2.7 4.6 1.3
Striking eye...................... 8.1 18.8 4.6
Total............................. 14.8 19.9 6.3
Cranes:
Overhead..........................

5.4

Other hoisting apparatus —

2.7

” 1.5

.3
2.6
5.5
8.4

1 .0 16.1
1

0.1
i.........
4.5 1.5 3.3 2.2
1.1
1.8
20.1 20.2 10.7 18.9
5.6 20.8
7.6 5 0
1.5 * 8
.‘i
4.4
32.3) 26.7 14.0 17.6 8.1 7.7 26.9

3.7J 1.5 .8 .7 3.5
1.4
6.5 4.0 11.6 7.4 10.7 2.2 3.5 5.6 5.6
19.4 9.4 13.0] 6.5 13.2 5.9 10.4 4.4 8.3
|
25.9 13.4 28.3 15.4 24.8 8.8 17.4 10.0 15.4
4.3
2.2 1.3
6.5 1.3

8.5 5 0 22.3 10.3 2.3
1.4
1.2
3.7
1.5
13.6 5.0 22.3 11.7 3.5

4.4

1
Total............................. .8,1 1.5 1 .0 16.1
4.4
Falling m
aterial:
Dropped in handling.......... 59.3 38.3 47.8 76.2 43.2 22.8 38.0 21.1 53.6 54.2 33.4 54.4
Other............................... 28.3 24.5 4.3 7.9 2.2 1.3 33.7 14.2 7.4 2.9 1.2 8.8
Total............................. 87.6 62.8 52.1 84.1 45.4 24.1 71.7 35.3 61.0 57.1 34.6 57.7
Falls:
From ladder...................... 4.0 1.5
1.2 4.3
11.0 3.9 .8 .7
From scaffold.................... 4.0 1.5
.7 1.2
.6
11.9 6.8
Into openings unguarded....
1.7 .3 ‘ ’ ’.* .7 1.2 "i.*i
8
Due to insecure footing....... 24.3 23.0 21.2 26.6 34.6 16.1 31.7 21.6 22.3 18.3 23.0 26.7
Total............................. 32.3 26.0 21.2 28.4 38.9 16.1 56.4 32.6 23.9 20.5 25.4 27.8
Heat, cramps, and exhaustion... 2.7 3.1 1.3
3.7 1.2
......
Handling tools and objects:
Caught between................. 22.9 15.3 31.5 42.6 28.1 25.5 38.0 21.1 47.0 43.2 24.2 38.9
Operating trucks.. ..........
7.7 12.9 9.9 43.2 18.8 7.6 7.1 11.6 9.5 2.3 2.2
Hand tools........................ 25.6 18.4 15.9 28.9 13.0 14-8 32.0 27.3 29.7 4 1.0 18.4 10.0
Slivers and edges............... 6.7 6.1 13.6 21.0 105.8 72.5 19.3 13.9 10.7 12.5 8.1 7.8
Lifting............................. 8.1 16.8 13.9 16.4 36.7 25.5 16.4 28.1 15.7 19.0 16.1 21.1
Total............................. 63.3 64.8 88.0 114.0 226.8157.1113.3 92.5 114.7 125.8 69.1 80.0
Machinery:
Caught by......................... 6.7 3.1 6.6 5.5 38.9 20.1 9.3 8 .0 21.5 5.1 1.2 ......
Breakage..........................
1.2
2.3 8.2
1.4 .6 .8
Moving material in............. 1.3
16.3 13.7 75.6 '25*5 3.4 2.7 11.6 “ 2 9
."
Total............................. 8.0 3.1 25.2 22.4 114.5 45.6 14.2 11.3 33.8 9.5 2.4
Power vehicles:
2.3 2.2
Collisions..........................
.8
.7 12 8 7.8
1
Coupling...........................
3 1 2.3
6
.3 .3
Falls from cars, etc............. 6.7 1.5 1.3 1.7 2.2 ...... 1 1.2 *2.5 1.5 6.9 12.2
.1
Working in or about...........
.3
.8 ..... 2.3
Other............................... 18.9 10.7 7.0 6 6.5 1.3 6.2 *5.3 3.3
2
.1
25.3 "1 .”2
Total............................. 25.6 15.3 10.6 9.3 8.7 1.3 7.9 6.8 7.4 2 | 50.7 34.4
.9
Unclassified............................ 13.5 18.7 1 .6 20.7 34.6 20.2167.7 48.3 22.3 18.3 5.8 22.2
2
|
Grand total..................... 342. 3 263.4 252.9 829.8 535.6295.3 409. 7275.2324.3 272. 5216.6 243.8
Number of SOO-day workers.............
Total accidents.. '...............................




74®
254

668\8,018']8,4M
m l 762\l,127

468
248

745 3,580 3,8721,212 1,865
2\
220^444 9 8 ^ 393 372

868
188

9.3
.3
.9
10.5
45.9
13.0
58.9
3.2
3.6
.5
24.5
31.8
1.3
33.4
9.6
24.6
18.9
18.0
104.5
8.5
1.4
9.4
19.3
.4
1.6
2.3
.2
7,1
11.7
31.5
311.9

900 20,285
219 6,327

APPENDIX C.---- ACCIDENT CAUSES IN BLAST FURNACES.

265

APPENDIX C.—ACCIDENT CAUSES IN BLAST FURNACES.
T a b le

103.—DETAILS OF ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES IN BLAST FURNACES, FOR
CERTAIN CAUSES SHOWN IN TABLE 33.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).
Cause.
1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 Total.

Cranes and hoists:
Skip hoist........................
Other..............................
Falling objects:
Ore and coke from stock__
Ore and coke from skip......
Other sources...................
Falls of worker:
Into pockets and bins........
Fromtransfer and larrycars.
Other falls.......................
Number of 800-day workers.......

1.3
0.7
0.8
0.7
6.2 15.1 8.3 9.4 14.8 5.2 6.5 4.6 6.0 2.6
7.9
.7 2.3 1.2
18.7 7.9 2.6 2.4 1.3 2.2
.9 , 3.5
.1
.8
.9
96.8 55.5 53.0 38.5 35.0 40.7 15.9 17.7 17.5 7.8
35.6
13
.7
2.1
.8 2.0
1.7
1.1
.9
•7 .7 1.1
*8
1.0
.4
19.8 23.0 21.1 25.1 12.1 22! i 9.4 14.8 7.8 11.2
16.2
961 1,262 jj1,566 1,274 1,486 1,S53 1,880 1,749 1,658 1,160 18,849

APPENDIX D,—ACCIDENT CAUSES IN OPEN HEARTHS.
T a b le

104.—
DETAILS OF ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES IN OPEN HEARTHS, FOR
CERTAIN CAUSES SHOWN IN TABLE 36.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).
Cause.
1907

Working machines:
1.7
Charging machines.......
Objects flying from ma­
.3
chines.......................
2.7
Unclassified .1.............
Cranes and hoists:
3.3
Hot T IP l...................
T t.a
5.7
Scrap..........................
29.1
Unclassified.................
Handling tools and objects:
2.0
Objects flying from tools.
43.2
Unclassified.................
Power vehicles:
.3
Ladle cars....................
2.3
Ingot cars....................
Scrap cars....................
Other cars.................... 14.1
t,
Number of 300 day workers... S 987




1908

1909

1910

2.4
0,9
.5
.5
.9
24.1
.9

2 .6
2
.5
.5

6.6
2,120

1.9

.7

1.3
1.3
2.9
18.2

1.0
.3
20
.2
35.5
.3
.7
9.1
2,872

1911

2.2

32.8

1.0

.4

7.3
2,188

0.6

1913

0.8

6.6
2,725

1914

.3

0.8

1.3

.1
.8

.4

.6

.8
1 .1
1

25.2
/
.3
.3
11.9
8,525

23.3

21.3
.4

1
.1

.1
2.0

13.3

Total.

.4

.9
.7
18.3
.7
23.9

.6

1912

13.6
8,608

12.5

1.2

2,488

.9
1.4
18.0

.6

28.7

.2

.4
.6
9.3
28,468

266

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.
A P P E N D I X E .— A C C I D E N T C A U S E S I N R O L L I N G M I L L S .

T ab le

105.—
DETAILS OF ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES IN ROLLING MILLS, FOE
SPECIFIED CAUSES, SHOWN IN TABLES 40, 41, 43, AND 44.
HEAVY ROLLING MILLS.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000300-day workers).
Cause.
1908

1907
Working machines:
Charging cranes and pushers..
Roll tables..........................
Rolls..................................
Transfer tables.....................
Hot beds.............................
Shears................................
Straighteners.......................
Objects flying from machines .
Other machines...................
Hot substances:
M in rolls.......................
etal
Scale..................................
Other.................................
Number of800-day workers.

0.2
.2
2.0
.2
.9
1.3
.9
2.9

8.1
1.5
13.6
4,556

2.9

.6
.6
.3
1.6
3.8
2.2
1.0
1.6
9.3

3,185

1909

0.2
1.7

.5
.7
1.7
3.3
5.2

1910
0.4
.4

1.0
.2
.2
.8

1.4
5.5

1
911

1912

3.1

2.5

.7
.7
1.7
5.2
.5

.4
.4
3.8

” .*i’

1
.1
1 .1
0

1.5
7.2

0.2

.2
2
.1
.4
1.0
1 .1 11.5
2
8.6
4 1 I 4 8 4,196
,2 0 ,8 6

1913

0.2
2.3

.2
.9
5.2

0.3
.9
2.3
.3
.3
.3
.9

2.0
.6
1.4
5.4
8,504

TUBE MILLS.
Working machines:
Charging cranes and pushers......
Rolls.......................................
Shears....................................
Straighteners...........................
Threaders................................
Objects flying from machines —
Other machines.......................
Number of800-day workers...............

8.5
4.5

5.5

5.0
18.9
2,007

9.0
9.6
19.3
1,459

1 .0
2

2.8

1.7

2.2
1
.1
1
.1
1 .6
1

7.2
18.8
1,818

1
.1
1
.1
.6
.6

4.5
5.0
19.0
1,792

3.5
2.9

1.9
.5

1.0

0.7

1,717

1.4
7.0
8.9
2,131

.5
5.7
3.3
2,101

1.3
.7
1,527

3.5

0.5
.5
3.5

0.7

3.5

2.2

.6
.6
4.1
1 .1
1
1 .8
2

PLATE MILLS.
Working machines:
Charging cranes........................
Roll tables .............................
Rolls.......................................
Transfer tables ........................
Hot beds.................................
Shears....................................
Straighteners
..................
Objects flying from machines__
Other machines.......................
Hot substances:
Scale.......................................
Other....................................
Number of800-day workers...............

1
.0
1
.0
1
.0
.5
1
.0

2
.1
2
.6

5.2

3.4

2
.6

4.3

8.4
.5
20.4
1,915

6.8
1.7
15.3
1,178

0.6
1.2

.5
4.8

5.5

3.7

3.1
2.4
3.1
17.1

1
.6
1.6

4.9

.6

1.8
1
.2
1 .8
2

4.5
.5
1.5
1.5
.5
16.1

14.4

1,645

1,992

2,018

0.8

7.8
5.8
1.2
3.7

0.3
8.2
5.1
4.1

0.4
11.5
4.1

3.8
3.8
5.5
26.2

0.4
5.3
2.7
1
.1
3.4
.4
3.8
2.7
11.4

2.9
9.5
21.4

1
.6

2.7
4.8

1
.1

17.8
37.9

29.4

2,866

2,687

2,488

2,926

2,691

1,684

16.0
1,872

3.6
3.6

2.0
2.0

.7
.7
1.5
5.8
1,879

SHEET MILLS.
Working machines:
Doublers.................................
Rolls.......................................
Shears....................................
Objects flying from machines__
Other machines........................
Hot substances:
Sheets being handled................
Falls on hot sheets....................
Other.....................................
Handling tools and objects:
O >ing packs,_______ _____
ppT
Other.....................................
Number of 800-day workers...............




0.5
1.4
5.4
.9
5.0
.5
11.3

1 .0
0
1 .2
2

27.1
2,211

0.5
3.1
5.6
2.6
4.1
.5
5.6
5.1
14.4
23.6
1,951

2.5
7.2
1.3

.8

.8

1
.1
2.6
1.9

8.2

13.6
2
.1
.5

2
.1

.5
4.2
.5
17.8
1,906

2
.1

APPENDIX P .— WORKING M ACHINES A CAUSE OS' ACCIDENTS. 2 6 7

APPENDIX F.—WORKING MACHINES AS A CAUSE OF ACCI­
DENTS IN MECHANICAL AND FABRICATING DEPARTMENTS.
The following table presents the frequency of accidents in mechanical departments
and fabricating shops, caused by the various working machines. It was not practi­
cable to compute severity rates, which would have been of even greater interest and
value.
T a b le 1 0 6 . — ACCIDENT

FREQUENCY RATES FROM WORKING MACHINES IN MECHANI­
CAL AND FABRICATING DEPARTMENTS, 1907 TO 1914, BY YEARS.

M C A IC L D P R M N S.
EHN A EA T E T
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).
1907
Bending rolls.....................
0.4
Boring mills......................
Drills................................
3.9
Lathes..............................
2.0
M
illers..............................
Planers.............................
1
.2
Presses and punches...........
Reamers...........................
.4
Riveters............................
1
.2
Shapers......................... ..
.4
Grinding wheels....... ,.....'1.
1
.2
Objects flying frommachines. 18.9
Other working machines.
13.8
Number of300-day workers__ 2,5^2

1908

1909

1910

1
911

1912
0.4

1.9

2.0

5.8

1.9
1.9

1
.0
.5

1.3
.4

14.7
16.2
1 1,979

.9
.9
8
.1
10.3
2,223

1
.2
.6
.6

22.9
9.3
1,619

4.0
.5

1
.0
.5
2.0

1
.8

2.3
3.3
1.4

.4

1
913
0.4

2.1

1 .6
2
7.0

.4
3.0

1.2

.8
3.7

1914

1
.2

i.7
8.9
6.4
2,862

.4
2.3
4.3
2,569

0.6
.6
1.8

4.8
5.4
1,662

Total.

0.1
.1
2
.1
1.8
.1
1
.1
.6
.2

.7
.3
1.5
11.3
9.1
17,098

F B IC TIN D P R M N S.
AR A G EAT ET
Bending rolls.....................
Boring mills......................
1
.0
Drills...............................
1.9
1
.1
Lathes..............................
.6
Planers.............................
i.o
Presses and punches...........
1.4
1.7
Reamers...........................
6.2 1 2.8
I
Riveters...........................
5.8
2.3
Shears..............................
' 1.7
Blotters.............................
1
.0 1
.1
Grinding wheels.................
1
.0
Objects flying frommachines. 12.5
io.2
Other working machines.....
1 .6 7.4
0
Number of SO -dayworkers__ 2,081 | 1,758
O

1
.1
1
.1
1
.1
6.2

1
.0
1
.0
2.4
1
.0

7.3
2.3

3.9
7.2
4.8
1.4

i.i
16.9
7.9
1,770

19.3
6.3

2.8

1

2,074

0.5
0.5
1
.0
.9
.5
1.4
1.4
1.4
4.1
7.2
6.8 6.8
2.7
3.4
1.4
3.6
1.4
1.9
27.7
37.6
9.1
1 .6
1
2,203 | 2,074
............

.2
...

0.5
.5
1
.0
.5
3.9
8.3
3.9

2.0

0.6
.6
2.3
.6
1
.1

3.4
3.4

1
.1
1
.1

.5
i.i
36.7
18.8
5.9
2.8
2,045 i 1,914
!

0.5
.3

1
.1
1
.1
.6
4.0
6.2
3.4
1
.8

.3
.9
22.9
7.8
15,674

The rates of the above table must not be mistaken for the rates for the operators of
such machines. ' It was not possible satisfactorily to isolate the occupations. As was
pointed out in the text, working machines, while not contributing largely to the
general severity rates for the department as a whole, probably show a high rate for
those who operate them.
Comparing the two sections of the table it will be observed that mechanical depart­
ments have distinctly higher frequency rates upon the characteristic machine shop
equipment such as boring mills, drills, lathes, and planers. Fabricating shops are
higher wheft presses, punches, reamers, and riveters are considered. This may repre­
sent greater m e in the respective departments and does not certainly indicate relative
hazard of these machines. Determination of relative hazard would require occupa­
tional rates.
One further point deserves comment. Objects flying from machines have declining
frequency rates in the mechanical department but show no such tendency in the fabri­
cating shops. This is undoubtedly due to greater effort and success in the mechanical
departments in introducing the use of protective goggles.




268

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

APPENDIX G.—POWER VEHICLES AS A CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS
IN YARDS.
T ab le 1 0 7 .— ACCIDENT

FREQUENCY RATES FROM POWER VEHICLES IN YARDS, 1907
TO 1914, BY YEARS.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000300>day workers).

clause.
1907
Falls from moving cars or engines__
Run over by moving cars or engines..
Struck by moving cars or engines—
Unsignaled movement....................
Operation of engine........................
Getting on or off............................
Operation of switches.....................
Caught in frogs or switches..............
Locomotive cranes moving..............
Coupling and uncoupling................
Derailments..................................
Other...........................................
Total...................................
Number of 300-day workers...............

1.5
3.4
5.0
1.9
1.9
3.8
3.1

.8

14.9
.4
4.6
41.3
2,618

1908

0.6
1.3

1.3

2.0
1.3

3.9
1.3
4.1
15,8
1,522

1909

1
.1
2.6

3.3

4.7
.5
4.2
.9
2.3
4.7
4.2
.5

3.2
.5
.5
1
.6
.5

1912

1
911

1910

9.8
6.9
1
.6
.5
4.8
4.7
37.0
23.3
1,891 2,134

.6

1.7
1.7
1.7

.6
8.8
1
.1

4.3

1.9
.5
.5
2.9
1.4
3.4
3.4
.5
7.7
1.4

1 .1
0

23.8 j 33.7
1,810 2,078

1
913

11
94

0.7
.7
1.5

1
.1

3.6
.7
6.5
.4
4.8

0.7
.7
1.5
.7
1.5
2.2
3.7
9.6
.7

2 .0
0

.8
2 .1
2

2,751

1,356

APPENDIX H.—NATURE OF INJURY, BY DEPARTMENTS.
T a b le

108.—
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES, BY NATURE OF INJURY AND BY DE­
PARTMENTS.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).

Nature of injury.

Asphyxia...............
Bruises, cuts, andlacerations—
Of abdomen.......
Of arm or arms...
Of trunk............
Of foot or toes__
Ofhand or fingers.
Ofhead or neck...
Of leg or legs......
Unclassified.......
Total..............
Burns—
By electricity....
By gas...............
By hot metal.. . .
By hot water and
steam.............
Unclassified.......
Total..............
Crushing injuries—
Of abdomen.......
Of arm or arms
Of chest.............
Of foot or toes__
Of hand or fingers.
Of head.............
Of leg or legs......
Unclassified.......
Total..............




e­
Blast Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube Heavy Plate Sheet Fab­ M
rolling
fur­
ricat­ chan­ Yards.
naces. hearths. mer. dries. mills. mills. mills. mills. ing. ical.
4.8

0.3

0.7

.5
4.3
7.0
23.3
24.8
16.0
10.1
3.0
89.0

.7
.4
4.4
4.7
5.1
8.5
24.1 44.1
40.1 49.5
16.7 14.9
9.3 12.1
3.9
1.9
104.4 136.2

.7
3.4
18.4
4.4
17.7
44.6

.8 ! .1
4.0
.4
21.1 34.7
2.1
1.9
10.1 13.2
38.1 50.3

.4
1.0
12.4
.2
3.7
17.7

.2
(i)
.3
1.5
3.8
.1
.5
p)
6.5

.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.9
.7
4 6 ! 3.0
.
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.2
6.5 j 4.3

.1
.2
1.0
2.4
.2
.3
.6
4.8

.1
1.9
3.8
.1
.5
.5
7.1

0.2

0.8

0.3

.9
.6
9.2
3.2
4.7
4.4
24.3 43.5
34.6 53.9
9.9 16.9
12.4 22.2
2.0
2.3
91.6 153.4

0.2
0.6
.5
10.9
7.6
4.5
1.1
5.1
7.9
21.5 40.9 25.8
30.3 75.1 50.1
3.8 19.3 14.9
9.7 19.9
7.6
.4
.3
5.4
78.1 168.9 116.7

0.2
0.5
0.8
2.3
5.0
2.8
2.9
21.9 20.9
37.2 51.3
9.3 10.9
8.5
9.1
1.8
2.4
85.0 102.9
1.3
.9
10.8
1.2
1.0
15.3

1 Less than 0.05.

1.2
.4
1.3
.2
.9
4.0

1.4
.2
1.0
2.7
4.3
9.8

.6
3.4
5.9
26.3
34.1
12.6
12.1
2.4
97.3
.
.1
.2
1.4
1.7
3.1
6.4

.1
.1 i .6 ! .1
.1
.2 ! .1
.1
.1
.1
.6
.6
• ; 5.1
7 ! 1.3
3.4
4.0
3.6
.1
.1
.1
.1
.3
.2
.5
.4
.1
.8
0)
4.3
5. 9 ; 7.2 , 5. 8

.2
.4
1.6
.1
.1
2.3

.1
.1
.1
.9
2.9
.l
.3
.2
4.5

1.3
.7
2.1
1.0
4.2
9.4

2.2
1.5
7.7
.6
2.6
14.6

.3
1.2
4.8
.3
1.5
8.1

APPENDIX H .---- NATURE OF IN JU R Y , BY DEPARTMENTS.
T a b le 1 0 8 .— ACCIDENT

269

FREQUENCY RATES, BY NATURE OF INJURY AND BY DE­
PARTMENTS—
Concluded.
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).

Nature of injury.

Blast Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube Heavy Plate Sheet Fab­ M
e­
fur­
rolling
ricat­ chan­ Yards.
naces. hearths. mer. dries. mills. mills. reins. mills. ing. ical.

Dislocations and
sprains—
Of ankle............ 4.0
Of back............. 2.7
.4
Of foot or toes__
.6
Ofhand or fingers. .4
Of knee.............
.9
Of shoulder........
Of wrist............ 1
.8
Unclassified.......
.1
Total.............. 1 .1
11
.
Electric shock_
Eye injuries............. 16.5
Fractures—
Of arm.............. 1
.1
0f both arms.
_
.2
Of collar bone_
Of face..............
.2
Of foot or toes__ 1.9
Of hand or fingers. 3.3
Of leg................ 1 5
.
.1
Of both leps.......
0 ' pelvis............ .1
1
Of ribs..............
.6
Of skull............. 1
.2
Unclassified.......
.2
Total.............. 1 .2
0
Heat exhaustion....... .1
Infections................ 8
.0
Unclassuied............. 1 !
.6

3.5
3.8
.3

.6

.3
.7
.4

1
.2
.2
1 .0
1
1 .6
2
i. 1
.3
.3
3.4
4,2
1.9
.1

.1
.9
.5

.1
1 .8
2
1
.5

5.3
9.1
4

1.5
1.7

.8
.4
1.0
1
.2
2.0
1.0

.1
.3
1
.0
.1

21.3
27.5

6.2

1.3
.1
.3
.3
3.5
2.6
1.9

.1
.1

1.4
1.4
.4

.7
.7

32.5

.1

3.6
3.3
.5
.3
1
.1
.7
.5
2.7
.7
13.6

4.0

2.6
.1
.6
.4
.8
.4
1
.1

.4
10.5

6
.6

5.3
........
.5
.9
.5
2.5

1
.0

17.8

.1
1
2 .1 1 .6 1?.0
2

.1
.3
2.3
3.5

.3

.6

.7

.1
.1
1.8
2.1

.1

.2
.2

.7

.1
.5
.1

2.0
.2

.5

.4
3.7
3.8

2.0
.1
.5
.6
.1

5.4
4.7
1.3
.1

.6
.1
.1

4.1

.8
.1
.1
.1
.6
.2

.5
.3
6.7
3.4

3.2

2.6
Q
L3

1
.1
1.0
.6
2.0
.5

1 .6
2
38.8

.2 .8
.2 .2
.1
.6
2 1 .8
.1 2
1 14.4
.8
1
.2 3.7
.1
.3
1
.6
.2
.9
.1
6.0 35.2
1
.6 .6
.6
.8

3.9
3.7
.7
.6
.4

1.0
.8

2.9
.3
14.2
27.9

9.1
.2
2.3

.1
1 .1
0

.6

.6

.3
;4
2.7
3.3

.4
.3
3.3
3.1
1
.1
.1

.5

.4
.5

1.0
.1

.8
2

5.7 11.7 13.3
9.8
.4
1
.G
.3
.1
5.2 >
15.0
3.5
4.4
4.7
1
.8 .8 2.5
.9
1 i .7 1.5 1.4
.1
-8
192.7 265.7 m 3 181.8 144.1 226.3 j 112.4 268. 2 187. 5
13.5
.1
7.1

5.1
3.1
,4
.4
.5
.9
.5
1.7
.4
12.9

.1

.1
1 .1
0
.2
3.7
1.9

Grand total,.. 190.5
147.3
Number oj 300-day
workers................. 19,425 £6,011 7,829 18,710 16,443 87,464 14,346 19,498 15,764 19,882 18,481




270

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

APPENDIX I.— RESULT OF INJURY, BY DEPARTMENTS.
T a b le

109.—
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY RATES, BY RESULTS OF INJURY AND BY DE­
PARTMENTS, ALL PLANTS, 1910 TO 1914.
[For number of accidents on which these rates are based see Appendix K.]
Accident frequency rates (per 1,000 300-day workers).

Result of injury.

e­
Blast Open Besse­ Foun­ Tube Heavy Plate Sheet M
fur­
rolling
chani­ Fabri­ Yards.
naces. hearths. mer. dries. mills. mills. mills. mills. cal. cating.
1.98

Total, feet and
toes.............
Leg...................
Both legs...........
Thumb..............
1joint thumb.....
1joint finger or
fingers............
1 finger............
st
2 finger............
d
3d finger............
4th finger...........
Hand................
Both hn.ruf|s............

1.99

08
.8

0.50

1.05

.17
.06
.14

Death..................... 2.60
Permanent disability:
Loss of—
Great toe........... .06
2
1joint greattoe... .0
Other toe or toes.. .07
1j oint other toe
or toes............ .05
Foot................. .06
1
Both feet........... .0

.14

.18
.06
.16
.07
.13

.1
2

.14

.07
.05

.16
.0
1
.19

.03

.16

.18
.05

.27

.62

.69

.0
1
.20

.07

.1
1
.25
.0
1

,14
.14

.27

.74

.52

.1
1

.18
.18

1
1

.03
.06
.57
.26
.15
.08
.15

.2
1
1.29
.56
.24
.14
.15

.10

.14
.32

11
.2
.60
.1
1
.18
.2
1

.10

Total hands and
2.87 2.77
fingers.......... 1.40
Arm.................. .07
.07
Both arms .......
Eye.................. .36
.20 .75
Both eyes.......... .06
Other................ .64
.51
.96
Total permanent
disability....... 2.92
4.60 5.16
Temporary disability:
Terminating in—
1 week............ 89.85 108.51 116.83
st
2 week............. 38.00 48.35 60.75
d
3d week............. 18.52
21.87 29.28
4th week............ 9.48
13.47 18.64
5th week............ 6.61
7.52 10.50
13.88 21.84
6th-13th week__ 11.71
14th week and
later............... 3.05
2.90 3.20
1.83
Unknown......... 3.92
1.06
Total............. 181.14 218.35 262.13
Grand total..... 186.66 224.93 269.28
l

.60
.05
.08
.35
1.31
.41

.1
0

.12

0 8 0.6
.8
8
.09
.05
.32

1.04

0.87

20
.0

.06
.03
.08
.03
.04

.03
.08
.15

.08
.07
.06
.05
.06

.2
1

.24

.40
.06

.04

.26
.94
.34

.15
1.05
.74
.18

.03

.04
.07

.09
.09
1.47
.64
.32
.28
.23
.14

.09
.18

3.26
.09
.27
.51

1.99
.05

.12
.68

2.47
.04
.25
.38

3.38

3.86

.08
.06

.1
0

.04
.05

.1
1

.2
0

.32

.61

.06
.17

.30

.2
0

.09
.27

1.08
.57
.14
.23
.30
.06

.45
.18
.16
.23

.0
2

.16

.03
.48
.83

2.75
.03
.02
.43
.26

2.26
.05
.25
.89

4.84

2.64

4.03

3.88

4.36

108.92 59.21 65.93 70.60
33.12 27.19 26.38 31.46
15.79 12.78 13.42 15.80
7.99 6.45 7.77 9.12
5.19 3.89 5.38 5.11
6.55 9.58 9.25
8.92
2.69 1.34 2.45 2.34
.41
2.60
.18 2.17
185.22 117.58 133.09 144.12
190.80 121.46 138.00 149.84

82.07
36.31
12.54
6. 71
3.75
6.08
1.85
.57
149.97

.1
1
.16
.20

.22
.14
.12

26
.6

2.25
.04

.04

.04
.45
.90
4.70

.1
2

11
.0
.26
.14
.09

.1
0
.1
1
.0
1

.12

.17
.98
.42
.19
.14

.1
1

.09

20
.2

95.60
41.38
17.03
9.38
5.63
10.90
2.41
.80
183.03
153.29 188.22

.8
6

137.85 75.29
48.82 31.57
19.16 13.78
10.15
7.29
7.03
5.29
10.34
9.82
1.47
1.93
.15
.79
234.99 145.77
239.73 152.13

N u m b e r o f 300-day
i
workers ......................... 124,686^ 71,293 28,101 95,917 73,338 67,663 21,711 128,423 97,162 108,538 65,932




APPENDIX J . ---- DATA FOR CHART 11.

271

APPENDIX J.—DATA UPON WHICH CHARTS 11, 12, AND 13
(RELATION OF EMPLOYMENT AND OUTPUT TO ACCIDENT
OCCURRENCE) ARE BASED.
T a b le

110.—DATA UPON WHICH CHART 11 IS BASED.*
PART I.— NUMBER OF 300-DAY WORKERS.

Month.

1908

January................................
February..............................
March..................................
April .. .
...............
Mav
.
...............
June........
...............
July
.
...............
August ..
.....................
September. .
..................
October...
.....................
November
..................
December .........................
Total
...............

451
390
424
377
360
361
367
336
358
373
380
398
4,575

1909
391
447
470
474
495
534
541
549
553
573
605
583
6,215

1910
672
6
95
674
704
705
684
634
592
603
543
607
529
7,642

11
91
370
445
467
466
4
75
458
510
513
480
502
545
543
5,774

1 12
9
482
558
595
597
622
650
647
633
649
646
642
675
7,396

191
3

1914

678
6
85
665
671
685
690
690
68
6
612
569
539
410
7,562

428
469
502
453
429
416
436
418
398
304
238
250
4,741

8
8

37
35
38
41
26
33
41
44

PART H.— NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS.

January................................
February..............................
March..................................
April....................................
May.....................................
June.....................................
July.....................................
August.................................
September.............................
October................................
November.............................
December.............................
Total...........................

53
73
69
65
44
47
52
55
65
53
54
55
685

81
96
11
2
97
116
92
1
24

128
11
7
1
25
89
79
83
73
63
59
41
41

32
32
42
28
44
56
90
67
53
6
6
62

1,084

12
,0 0

640

65
72
70
62

8
8

12
2

6
8

84
91
17
1
1
26
118
19
0
89
81
85
55
79
1,134

32
45
32

2
2
1
2
8
1
2

86
6

349

325
649
635
1,150
988
667
664
549
454
426
471
490
7,468

5
71
369
439
728
659
439
418
2
73
172
1
34
5
5
2
3
4,280

1
9
1
9
28
1
0
9
24
40
9
5
3
4
9
19
7

10
0

54
114
84
76
71
90

12
1
6
8

PART m .— NUMBER OF NEW MEN EMPLOYED.

Jan.1...................................
Feb. 2..................................
M 3..................................
ar.
Apr. 4..................................
May 5...................................
June 6..................................
July 7...................................
Aug. 8..................................
Sept. 9..................................
Oct. 10.................................
Nov. 11.................................
Dec. 12__________________
Total........

318
1
97
61
25
63
39
53
30
94
93
134
17
4
1,254

17
9
278
268
327
409
643
648
1,008
712
563
794
457
6,304

560
332
793
638
461
324
190
233
1
73
154
13
3
35
4,026

2
0

29
65
6
6
71
1
53
597
365
17
0
242
344
16
9
2,255

i
!
i
i
!
i Data relative to tonnage were furnished as confidential and so are not included in this table.




SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

272

Table 111.—DATA UPON WHICH CHART 12 IS BASED.i
PART I.— NUMBER OF 300-DAY WORKERS.

1908

Month.

10
2
22
0

January...
February..
March......
April.......
May........
June....—
July........
August___
September.
October__
November.,
December..

248
280
254
463
471
537
520
381
385

Total

4,221

1909
418
365
428
462
473
525
534
51
4
516
473
5,527

1910

1911

430
455
4
91
476
496
468
440
476
4
51
467
437
374

419
445
478
463
483
455
428
468
440
453
426

5,461

5,321

1912

1913

416
440
480
480
496
460
474
510
488
538
515
468
5,765

545
494
512
523
558
508
507
517
527
540
452
415

83
123
97
7
1
69
58
55
79
70
99
92
63
959

78
55
51
28
2
0
40
25
33
30
23
24
473

446
440
519
490
352
360
403
345
309
296
2
31
234
4,425

PART n.—NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS.

January................................
February..............................
March..................................
April....................................
May.....................................
June.....................................
July.....................................
August.................................
September............................
October................................
November.............................
December.............................
Total...........................

45
48
65
83
63
117
128
155

11
2
10
0

105
116
1,146

138
75
11
0
83
127
12
2
1
49
1
76
160
164
1
39
154

137
139
1
31
11
5
1
17
1
09
107
89
92
119
99
75

85
74
99
83
13
0
1
26
99
12
1
9
1

1,588

1,365

10
,1 1

11
0
6
1
67

6
6

27
2
1
35

2
0

14
1
9
17
1
0
14
5

6
1
0

198

PART HI.— NUMBER OF NEW MEN EMPLOYED.

January___
February—
March.......
April........
May..........
June.........
July..........
August......
September..
October_
_
November..
December..
Total.

18
3
1
3
52
227
75
115
74
10
0
75
743

168
32
67
6
8
332
426
520
570
320
388
246
176
3,313

199
308
614
586
203
98
299
126
354
301
59

2
2

3,169

59
109
175
329
281
135
113
188
254
281
44
1
4
1,982

330
687
481
618
391
406
529
667
519
4
41
387
340
5,796

390
70
334
168
338
176
464
1
2
534
526 ..........i9
177
1
8
104
114
6
1

8
1
0

3,060

i Data relative to tonnage were furnished as confidential and so are not included in this table.




463

A PP E N D IX J. ---- DATA FOR C H ART 13.
T a b le

273

112.—
DATA UPON WHICH CHART 1 IS BASED.
3
PART I — NUMBER OF 300-DAY WORKERS.

1912

Quarter.
First...................................................
Second
................................................
Third..................................................
Fourth................................................
Total..........................................

1913

2,304
2,295
2,361
2,370
9,330

1 14
9

2,431
2,441
2,480
2,344

1,720
1,C
98
1,897
1,798

9,696

7,113

11
95

1 16
9

1,904
2,019
2,067
2,123
8,113

2,575
2,639
2,757
2,789
10,760

189
303
409
399

496
573
826
521

1,269
2,029
2,293
1,977

1,973
2,468
2,828
2,362

64
621
1,117
982

1,377
2,175
2,449
1,840

PART I I — NUMBER OF DISABLING ACCIDENTS.

362
First...................................................
443
Second................................................
407
Third..................................................
362
Fourth................................................

430
426
405
288

242
2
61
21
5

11
2

PART III— NUMBER OF NONDISABLING ACCIDENTS.

First...................................................
Second................................................
Third..................................................
Fourth................................................

879
937
1,139
1,025

957
1,282
1,399
1,667

879
1,082
1,079
696

PART IV.—NUMBER OF NEW MEN EMPLOYED.

First...................................................
Second......................... -.....................
Third............................. ....................
Fourth................................................
12771°— 18— B u n . 234-------18




630
508
967
365

274

APPENDIX K.—RESULT OF INJURY, BY DEPARTMENTS AND YEARS.
T a b le

113.—SUMMARY OF CASES OF ACCIDENT IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY FOR THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD 1910 TO 1914, BY DE­
PARTMENTS.

Un­
classi­
Total, Blast Besse­ Open- Cru­
Heavy
Wire Elec­ M Power
e­
Coke
cible
all
PlnteSPud- Bod Sheet
fied Fabri'
fur­ m hearth m Foun­ roll- m ! die mills. mills. Tube roll­ cation. Forges. draw­ trical. chani­ houses. Yards. ovens.
er
depart­ naces. steel. steel. elt» dries. in?
ills. m
mills.
cal.
ills.
ing.
m
ills.
ing
ments.1
ing.
mills.

2

12
7
24
4
19
2
3
106

1
0
1
5
7

4
8
4

1
6
1
8
1
8

3

1
4

3

415
1,910
230
13
7
13
9

1
1

1
3
5
1
3
5

1
3
28
12
3
1
7

Total............
Temporary disability:
Terminating in—
First week.................
Second week.... ..
Third week.....
Fourth week.............
Fifth week.................




2

10
0
1
6
6

1

14
0
1
9

1
0

1
9
1
3

6

1

1
0
1
2
7

1

1
4
2
2

8
4

7
1

1
9

9

8

8
7

3
7

84

9
4

8

2
0

3
3

2
3

1
2
2
0
1
1

3
7
4

1
1

3
3

1
3
15

1
4
4

1
4
16

1
7

1
2

6
8

4
4
6
7

3
3
2

4
1
8
5
3

35
1
64
1
8

34
46
2
9
4 13
1
4
1
6
1 13
0
9
1
7
2 9

40
19
7
1
5
25
3
3
7

3

18
108
1
4
5
1
0
3

1
6
2
1
2

2
2
1
2

5
4
2
15
6

1
1
1
5
1
9
4

5
1
8

11
2
1
2
8
3
5

1

6
5
3

2
1

1
4

2
,

4
3

1
7

844

9
45
7
80

27

37

5

8
6

2
6

2
6
1
1

5,080

3
64

145

328

2
1

41
5

21
6

15
0

3
49
7

1
0

118,215
49,521
21,854
11,883
7,282

4

5

11,198 3,283 7,736
4,737 1.707 3,447
2,308
8 1,559
23
1,182
524 96
1
84
2
295
53
6

3

8
a

1
2

6
6

1
1
1
3
1
4

2
1

1
2
1
0
1

1
2
6

4

7

6
1

2
1

2

3

1
6

36

4
7

2

7
4

1

7
30

3
9

9

5

2
1

5
0

4
3

28

4

57

7
8

339

248

363

41
2

1
9

2 2 1,447 4,461 1,533 882
3 0
1 4 3,177 1,785 6 3 347
0
8
6 1,515
0
4
9 8 3 3 145
0
3 76 56 17 7
4 6
2
9
9
2 4 8 . 3 4 11 65
6 9
6
1

1
6

2

9 7 10,540 4,343 9,698 14,962
8
4 4,664 1,994 5,415 5,299
68
2 1 1,611 937 2,531 2,080
3
,1 2
12 862 473 1,375 1 0
1
7
6 4
92 285 815
73
6

3

15
3

2
1
2

12
0
1
1
6
6

2
3

6
1
2
2

12
1

2
7

1

1
1

3
3

5
1
8

1
7

3

2
0
7
3
1
0

9

1

1

3

3

4
7

1
4

4
4

27
136
1
8
1
4
1
1
9

1
23

4
4
5

8
1

376

48

392

460 6,424 1,129 9,289
310 2,551 388 4,021
1 4 1 2 1 1 1,655
4
,0 0 6
63
494
82 9 1
1
2
8
256
5 547
0

9
3

2

1
1
2
1

9
1
3

1

5
0

1
0

244

39

282 4,211
18 1 76
0
6
7
6 ’ 71
3
25
48
0
296
1
7

91
2
295
10
4
7
2

6
6

IN D U STRY.

11
4

STEEL

5
6

AND

3
24

IRON

1,524

I
N

Death...........................
Perm
anent disability:
Loss of—
G toe...................
reat
Other toes.................
Foot.........................
Both feet...................
Leg..........................
Both legs...................
Thumb.........
First finger. . .
Second finger.............
Third finger...............
Fourth finger..............
Hand........................
Both hands................
Arm.........................
Both arms.................
Eye..........................
Both eyes..................
Other.............

MOVEMENT

Result of injury.

SAFETY

Department.
!

Sixth to thirteenth week
Fourteenth week and
later.......................
Unknown..................

64 90
1
9
12,671 1,459
2,717
9
0 27
0
380
2,162
30 1 1
3
488
226,305 22,576 7,366 15,567
6
232,909 23,264 7 , 5 7 16,036

1
8
80
64 20 96 11 7 1 4 1,318 1,123
8 1
16
6 5
2 27 237 98 209 160
2
1
2
0 73 13 139 16
17
4
9 45
9,005 3.129 1 6 1 2,032 19,260 8,62322,500 25,505
, 8
5 118,301 9,337 3 2 3 2 7 7 2,118 19,686 8,90821,947 26,020
3
4
', 5
3
9

856

1 258
2
1 249
5817,766
0

Total.....................
Grand total.............
Number of 300-day workers.. 1,310,911 124,636 28,101 71, 293j 0,144 95,917 67,663 21,711 12,,788 13,244 12$ 423 73,338 98,809 108,538




1 Includes some departments not shown in detail.

40

8

2
7

44
9
5
3
3
5

1 4 1,059
1
4
2 23
6
8
7 7

3
5

8
6

54
9
18
0
4
4

12
1
3
1
1
4

1 ;,723 2,038 18,288
1,327 1,95717,794
1,
1

5 4 8,153 1,651
4
5 1 8,509 1,717
7

6,,249 59,,481 14,4*1 97,162

8,083 55,932 13,282

1,,080
1,,107

276
T ab le

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

114—SUMMARY OF CASES OF ACCIDENT IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUS­
TRY DURING THE YEARS 1910 TO 1914.
Year.
xiosLui 01 injury.
1910

Death.....................................
Permanent disability:
Loss of—
Greattoe........................................
Other toes. ..... ..... -,....... ..........
Foot..............................................
Both feet........................................
Leg................................................
Thumb...........................................
First finger.....................................
Second finger...................................
Third finger....................................
Fourth finger...................................
Hand.............................................
Both hands.....................................
Arm...............................................
Both arms.......................................
Eye...............................................
Both eyes.......................................
Other.............................................
Total...........................................
Temporary disability:
Terminating in—
First week......................................
Second week...................................
Third week.....................................
Fourth week...................................
Fifth week......................................
Sixth to thirteenth week...................
Fourteenth week and later................
Unknown.......................................
Total...........................................
Grand total..................................
Number of 300-day workers.......................

1911

1912

1913

1
914

327

204

348

426

219

26

3
6
5
7
42
1
25
9
7
789
67
56
57
1
6

45
79
25

28
39
26

90
2
109
848

37
48
1
6
1
7
78
364
38
27
28
24
1
9
90
2
152
931

Ul
1
228
1,241

10
,2 0

16
6
860

23,234*
10,079
4,139
2,203
1,482
2,458
266
247
44,108
45,283
202,157

18,213
7,618
3,292
1,698
10
,1 0
1,984
486
285
34,676
35,811
231,544

29,101
11,524
5,158
2,760
1,687
3,011
77
3
597
54,575
56,164
300,992

28,593
11,869
5,592
3,175
1,793
3,040
7
82
712
55,556
57,182
319,919

19,074
8,431
3,673
2,047
12
,2 0
2,178
446
321
37,390
38,469
256,299

2
1
2
0
1
35
1

59
386
34
15
2
1
16

1
2

2
2

1
7

10
1

432
58
44
54
27
1
6

10
0
4
1
89

1
1
2
1

7
1
303
33
3
1
33
1
7
7
3

8
8
1

APPENDIX L.— A COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES
ACCORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE
AND THE SCALE PROPOSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSO­
CIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS BOARDS AND COM­
MISSIONS.
One of the most interesting results of the meeting of August, 1917, of the Inter­
national Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions at Boston was
the association’s acceptance of a report of its committee on statistics, recommending
the adoption by the several State commissions of a system of accident severity rating.
Inasmuch as the Bureau of Labor Statistics had earlier worked out and applied the
somewhat similar scheme of severity rating used in this report and in Bulletin 216, i
a comparison of the two systems is of interest.2
Both systems are based on the same fundamental idea—that, because accidents
differ so greatly in the seriousness of the resulting injuries, the mere frequency of
accidents does not offer a true measure of accident hazard; and that such a measure
1Accidents and accident prevention in machine building. Bulletin 216, U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* The report of the committee on statistics of the I. A. I. A. B. C. was published in the Octobor, 1917,
number of the Monthly Review, pp. 123 to 143.




APPENDIX L.---- COMPAEISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES. 2 7 7

can be obtained only by comparing accidents on the basis of their severity. Also,
both systems adopt the same scheme for the measurement of severity, namely, the
time loss resulting from the injury. In the case of temporary disability, this time
loss is accurately measured by the number of days during which the worker is inca­
pacitated for labor. In the case of death and permanent disabilities, it is necessary
to use a more or less arbitrary scale.
It is in the fixing of this scale that the two systems differ. The bureau’s scale
values death as equivalent to the loss of 9,000 workdays, on the basis that the average
age of men killed by accident is about 30 years, and their expectancy of active labor,
at that time, about 30 years (300 workdays per yearX 30 years expectancy=9,000
workdays). Permanent total disability was given a rating of 10,500 days, on the
ground that total invalidism is economically more severe than death, inasmuch as it
not only deprives the victim of all his productive power, but makes him, to some
extent, a burden on the time of others. In valuing permanent partial disability, the
bureau’s scale took the loss of the arm as the most severe of such disabilities, and rated
this injury at 2,808 days (or 31 per cent of death). In so doing it was recognized that
existing industrial and educational conditions probably make the loss of an arm to
most workers a more serious injury, from the standpoint of earning capacity, than is
represented by a 31 per cent of death rating. But, on the other hand, it appears
probable that better methods of functional rehabilitation and education in the future
will tend greatly to diminish the economic importance of almost all partial disabilities.
The proposed association scale rates death much lower, and permanent disabilities
much higher than does the bureau’s scale. Death, by the association’s scale, is rated
at 6,000 days (i. e., 20 years), total permanent disability being classed the same as
death, and the arm is assigned a value of 4,500 days,- or 75 per cent of death. The
time losses assigned the lesser partial disabilities are correspondingly higher than
those for similar disabilities in the bureau’s scale.
*
The two scales, in detail, are as follows:
SCALES OF TIME LOSSES FOR W EIGH TING INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS SO AS TO SHOW
SEVERITY OF ACCIDENTS.

Scale used by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in Bulletin 216 and 23}.
Result of injury.
Death......................................................................................................
Permanent total disability.........................................................................
Loss of members:
Arm..................................................................................................
Le?...................................................................................................
Hand................................................................................................
Foot..................................................................................................
Eye...................................................................................................
Thumb..............................................................................................
First finger.........................................................................................
Second finger......................................................................................
Third finger.................................. .....................................................
Fourth finger......................................................................................
Great toe............................................................................................




Per cent of Time losses
death loss. in days.

10
0 .0

117.0
31.0
29.0
24.0
2 .0
1
13.0
6.0
5.0
3.0
2.5
1.5
3.8

9,000
10,500
2,808
2,592
2,UQ
1,845
1,152
540
414
270
225
135
342

278

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Scale proposed by the committee on statistics of the J. A. I. A. B . C.
Degree of
disability
in per
cent of Days lost.
permanent
total
disability.

Result of injury.

Death......................................................................................................
10
0
60
,0 0
Permanent total disability.........................................................................
10
0
60
,0 0
Arm above elbow, dismemberment.............................................................
75
-4,500
60
Arm at or below elbow, dismemberment......................................................
3.000
Hand, dismemberments............................................................................
50
3.000
Thumb, any permanent disability of...........................................................
600
1
0
5
Any one finger, any permanent disability of........................................ .........
300
Two fingers, any permanent disability or......................................................
750
1|
2
tThree fingers, any permanent disability of....................................................
2
0
10
,2 0
Four fingers, any permanent disability of..................................................... 1,800 30
2
0
Thumb and one finger, any permanent disability of.......................................
10
,2 0
25
Thumb and two fingers, any permanent disability of.....................................
1,500
Thumb and three fingers, any permanent disability of...................................
33£
20
,0 0
40
Thumb and four fingers, any permanent disability of.....................................
2.400
keg&bove knee, dismemberment.................................................................
75
4,500
50
3,000
Leg at or below knee, dismemberment.........................................................
40
2.400
Foot, dismemberment...............................................................................
5
Great toe, or any two or more toes, any permanent disabiiitv of......................
300
0
One toe, other than great toe, anv permanent disability of..I..........................
One eye, loss «f sight............... .................................................................
30
1,800
10
0
Both eyes, loss of sight................................................ t ............................
60
,0 0
1
0
600
One ear, loss of hearing...............................................................................
50
Both ears, loss of hearing............................................................................
3,000
The following table shows the results obtained by applying the two scales to the
Bame groups of accidents.
*
115.—
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES IN THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY FOR
THE FIVE-YEAR VERIOD, 1910 TO 1914, AND FOR MACHINE BUILDING IN 1912.

T a b le

Accident severity rates (days lost per 300-day worker).
Department.

I. A. I. A. B. C. scale.
Number Bureau of Labor Statistics scale.
of
300-day
Perma­ Tempo­
Perma­ Tempo­
workers.
nent rary
nent rary
Death. disa­ disa­ Total. Death. disa­ disa­ Total.
bility. bility.
bility. bility.

Steel industry:
Blast furnaces............ 124,636
Steel works—
Bessemer............. 28,101
Open hearth........
71,293
5,144
Crucible..............
Foundries..............
95,917
Rolling mills—
67,663
Heavy...............
21,711
Plate..................
12, 788
Puddle...............
Rod.................... 13,244
Sheet.................. 128,423
73,338
Tube..................
Miscellaneous....... 08,809
Fabricating shops...... 108,538
6,249
Forge shops...............
59,481
Wire drawing............
14,421
Electrical..................
Mechanical................ 97,162
8,083
Power houses............
Yards....................... 55,932
Coke ovens.............. : 13,282
Armor plate..............
3,000
Axle works...............
1,326
Car wheels................
2,367
Docks.......................
1,293
Erecting...................
2,157
Total1................... 1,310,911
M
achine building............ 115,703

23.4
17.9
17.9
3.5
7.9
9.4
7.9
6.3
5.4
6
.1
4.5
7.6
7.8
11.5
3.0
20.7
9.5
6.7
18.0
18.3
1 .0
2
13.6
11.4
20.9
108.5
10.5
2.9

2.8
3.1
3.0

2
.1
2.6
2.2
3.0
2
.0

4.1
1.4
1.7
2.4
2.2
1.4
4.3
2.6
2.5
2.5
3.1
3.3
1
.1
5.0

2.0
6
.6

14.7
2.5

1
.6

2.5
3.8
2.9

1
.6
2.2
1.9

2.0
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.5

2.8
2.4
2.0
1.9
1
.6

2.3
.9
1.9
1.7
2.0
4.9
4.0
2.5
5.4

2
.1
1
.1

28.7
24.8
23.7
7.2
12.7
13.5
12.9
1 .0
0
11.5
9.2
7.7
1 .8
2
12.4
14.9
9.3
24.9
14.2
1 .1
0
23.0
23.3
15.1
23.5
17.4
30.0
128.6
15.1
5.6

15.6
11.9
11.9
2.3
5.3
6.3
5.3
4.2
3.6
4.1
3.0
5.1
5.2
7.7
2.0
13.8
6.3
4.5

1 .0
2
1 .2
2
8.0

9.1
7.6
13.9
85.7
7.0
1.9

3.3
4.0
4.7
3.4
3.4

2.8
4.1
2.8

5.1
1.9
2
.1
3.3
2.8
1.9
5.6
3.6
3.2
2.5
4.1
4.4
1
.8
7.6
2.2
9.3
16.5
3. 2

2
.1

1 This total includes the “ unclassified” departments, not shown above.




2.5
3.8
2.9

1.6
2.2

21.4
19.3
19.5
7.7
10.9

1.9

1 .0
1

2.0
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.5

2.8
2.4
2.0
1.9
1
.6

2.3
.9
1.9
1.7
2.0
4.9
4.0
2.5
5.4

2
.1
1
.1

11.4
8.7
10.7
7.7

6
.6
1 .2
1
10.4
1 .6
1

9.5
19.0

1 .8
1

7.9
18.0
18.3

1 .8
1
2 .6
1

13.8
25.7
107.6
12.3
5.1

APPENDIX L.---- COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES. 2 7 9

Examination of the table shows that the severity rates obtained under the asso­
ciation’s scale are, for the most part, considerably lower than those derived by the
bureau’s scale. Thus, the severity rate for the steel industry as a whole is decreased
from 15.1 days to 12.3 days lost per worker and for machine building from 5.6 days
to 5.1 days. In one instance, however, the reverse is true. Thus, in crucible melting
the bureau’s scale gives a severity rate of 7.2 days while the association’s scale gives
7.3 days.
A most interesting point to be noted is that while the use of the different scales alters
the rates, there is no important change in the relations between the rates for the several
departments and industries. This emphasizes the fact that the precise scale used is
not of primary importance. Severity rates, as absolute amounts, are not significant.
Their importance lies in the fact that they offer the most satisfactory^measure of acci­
dent hazards as between different industrial groups. As long as the scale used is
reasonably accurate it will fulfill its function.
116.—ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PROPOSED.BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS.

T ab le

Iron and steel industry.

(See also Table 2.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

International Association
scale.

Num­
ber of
Per­
Per­
300-day
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
work­
nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
ers. Death. dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
1907............................................
1910............................................
1911............................................
1912............................................
1913............................................
1914............................................
1915............................................
1916............................................
1917............................................

27,632
•79,486
80,029
93,666
91,107
77,474
79,065
108,994
86,847

Blast furnaces.
1907............................................
1910............................................
1911............................................
1912............................................
1913............................................
1914.............................................
1915............................................
1916............................................
1917............................................

1

961
3,891
3,921
5,034
5,641
4,797
4,835
6,694
5,194

Steel works.
1907............................................ 1,176
1910............................................ 4,246
1911............................................ 4,293
1912............................................ 5,546
1913............................................ 5,207
1914............................................ 3,073
1915.......
......................... 4,713
1916............................................ 6,556
1917........................................... 6,347




19.9

1 .0
1
7.8
8.2
10.3
6.9
6.4
6.3
7.0

4.0
3.9
3.8
3.4
2.9
2.5
2.6
3.1

2.0

3.2 27.1
17.1
13.5
13.8
1.9 15.1
1.5 10.9
1.3 10.3
1.3 10.7

2.2
1.9
2.2

1 1 .2
.2 0

6.8

13.3
7.3
5.2
5.4
6.8
4.6
4.2
4.2
4.6

4.7
4.6
4.3
3.8
3.2
3.2
3.8
2.5

34.1
17.0
10.7
17.9
16.0
13.8
14.9

6.6
6.2

3.2
2.2
*1.9
2.2
1.9
1.5
1.3
1.3

23.3
14.2
11.7
11.9
1 5
2.
9.3
8.7
8.3
8.3

9.1
3.1

5.5
2.8
2.3

4.8
4.9
3.2
5.6
2.5

2.3
1.7
1.3
1.5

48.7
22.9
19.6
26.9
23.1
20.4
19.4
15.2
24.3

20.4 11.5
25.4 8.9
9.8 5.5
13.0 5.9
9.2 4. 4
13.7 4.0
7.6 5.5
9.2 6.5
9.4 2.6

5.5
3.2
2.3
3.1
3.1

1.2

(See also Table S . )
51.7
25.4
16.1
26.8
24.0
2 .6
0
22.3

1 .1
2

31.4

6.9
2.3
8
.0
6.4
5.1
3.8
2.7
4.9
1.9

5.5 64.1
30.5
26.4
36.0
2.3 31.4
1.7 26.1
1.3 26.3
1.5 18.5
1 34.4
.1

2.8
2.3
2.8

8
.1

20.7

2.8
1
.1

(See also Table 4.)
30.6 13.7
38.2 6.5
14.7 4.4
19.5 4.7
13.8 3.7
20.5 3.3
11.5 4.6
13.7 6.3
14.2 1.9

5.5
3.2
2.3
3.1
3.1

49.8
47.9
21.4
27.3
2 .6
0
25.9
17.7

2
.1
1
.6
1 2 .8
.8 1
1.4 17.5

2
.1
1
.6
1.8
1.4

37.4
37.5
17.6
2 .0
2
16.7
19.8
14.7
17.5
13.4

280

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T a b l e 1 1 6 .— ACCIDENT

SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY 'WORKER) A C CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.
Sheet mills.

(See also Table 5.)
Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

International Association
scale.

Num­
ber of
Per­
Per­
300-day
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
work­
ers. Death. nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
1907.............................................
1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................
1915.............................................
1916............................................
1917............................................

21
,2 1

15,485
14,461
19,129
15,780
12,963
16,266
21,640
23,916

Tube mills.
1907............................................ 2,007
1910............................................. 6,038
1911............................................. 7,678
1912............................................ 8,694
1913............................................ 9,619
1914........................................... 6,459
1915............................................. 7,109
1916............................................. 11,355
1917............................................. 11,657

8
.1

13.4
3.1
5.2

8
.0

1.4
3.9
4.2
3.4

5,615
8,205
10.448
10,673
5,992
9.111
13,027
11,505

Wire drawing.
1910............................................
1911............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914............................................
1915............................................
1916............................................
1917............................................

8,374
8,186
8,278
7,604
6,306
7,859
9,552
9,528

Fabrication.
1907.
1910.
1911.
1912.
1913.
1914.
1915.
1916.
1917.




2,081
3,935
4,007
5,023
5,313
3,811
2,994
4,465
5,020

1
.8

.7
1.5

.6
1
.0
1
.0

1.2
1.7
1.8
2.3
2.0

13.1
16.8
7.4
9.3
10.7
1.7 4.6
1.5 6.0
1 6.8
.6
1.5 5.9

5.3
8.9

2
.1

3.5
5.3
.9

2.6
2.8

2.3

5.2
2.3
2.9
2.5

1.7

1
.2
1
.8
2.3
2.0

11.7
12.9

.9
1.5
1.4

1.7
1.5
1
.6
1.5

8.3
8.3
4.8
5.0
5.9
5.2

1.9
.4
3.1

4.6
1.7
1.5

2.3
1.7
1.7
1
.0
1.5

1
.8
1
.2
.9
.6
.8
.5

9.5
3.1
5.4
8.0
7.2
6.3
4.0
2.9

5.9
5.8
4.2
3.5
4.0
4.2
4.8

3.2
2.2
2.5
2.1
1.3
.8
1.4
.9

21.9
16.8
11.3
1 .2
1
9.3
1 .2
2
8.5
7.5

7.9
7.4
4.7
4.8
7.3
8
.8
3.7

2.2
2.0

1
.0
2.2

6.8

(See also Table 6.)
4.5
1.5

1
.2
6.2

5.6
5.6
2.5

1.5
.3
2.7
1.9

2
.0
1.5
1.5

1
.6 .8
6 1
.2 .1

Unclassified rolling mills.
1910.............................................
1911.............................................
1912.............................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................
1915.............................................
1916.............................................
1917.............................................

3.8
1.7
2.5

19.2
13.2
6.9
8.4
6.0
10.9
3.5
7.0

1 .6
0

3.0

1
.8
1 8.8
.2
.9 8.0
.6 4.6
.8 3.2

4.1
3.7
3.7
1.7
1
.1
4.1

4.6
1.7
1.5

.5

3.5
5.4
9.9

7.8

1
.0
.8

2.1

6
.1

(See also Table 7.)
4.9
4.5
3.4
2.8
3.2
3.5
3.8

2.6

3.2
2.2
2.5
2.1
1.3
.8
1.4
.9

27.3
19.9
1 .8
2
13.3
10.5
15.2
8.7
10.5

1 .8
2
8.8
4.6
5.6
4.0
7.2
2.3
4.6

2.2

(See also Table 8.)
4.3

5.9

2.2 5.9
2.2 6.6

4.7
1.4
1
.1
3.8
.9

3.6
4.3
6.0
7.4
2.9

2.2 12.4
2.0 1 .1
0
2.3 1 .1
1
0
2.3 1 .6
1.8 7.5

2.3 9.4
1.9 13.1
1.6 5.4

2.9
1.5
1.4
3.2

1
.0
.8
2.5
.6

8.0

2.3
2.3
1
.8
2.3
1.9

1
.6

(See also Table 9.)
25.9 6.9
9.2 1.7
2 3.5
.2
9.0 3.2
8.5 5.6
7.1 1.9
9.0 1.9
14.1 1.7
7.2 3.8

2.5 35.3
12.7
7.7
14.8
2.3 16.4
1.5 10.5
2 13.0
.1
2 18.4
.6

1
.8
2.0
2.6

1 1 .6
.6 2

17.1
6.0
1.5
6.0
5.9
4.7
6.0
9.4
4.8

8
.8

2.3
4.6
4.4
6.9

2.8
2.8
2
.2
3.5

2.5

28.4

2.3
1.5

14.8
9.0
10.9
14.2
9.9

1 1 .1
.8 0
2.0 8
.1
2 13.0
.6

2
.1
2
.6
1
.6

APPENDIX L.— COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES, 2 8 1
T a b le 1 1 6 .— ACCIDENT

SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.
Mechanical departments.

(See also Table 10.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.
Num­
ber of
300-day
work­
ers. Death.

2,542
7,871
6,712
7,122
7,474
5,125
5,693
9,185
8,892
Yards.

1907............................................
1910............................................
1911............................................
1912............................................
1913............................................
1914............................................
1915. •
...........................................
1916............................................
1917............................................

Per­
Per­
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
nent porary Total. Death. nent poral'y TotaL
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.

7.1
8.0
6.7
6.3
8.4
5.3

1.3
2.9
3.3
4.0
3.5

2.6
1 2.8
.6
8.8 4.2
1.0 2.3

11.9
12.3
11.5
1 .0
2
13.6
9.1
5.5
14.0
4.1

4.8
5.3
4.5
4.2
5.6
3.5
1
.1
5.9
.7

1.7
3.7
4.2
5.0
4.7
2.9
3.1
5.2

3.5
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.7

1 .0
0
10.4
1 .2
0
10.9
1 .0
2

3.2 26.3
1.2 21.3
2.0 9.0
2.3 23.0
1.9 27.0
1 12.7
.8
1.3 5.4
1.5 18.3
1.0 20.4

11.4
11.7

7.8
3.0

3.2

1.0

22.4
15.9
9.2
19.3
19.8
11.9
6
.0
15.7
16.7

1 .1 2.8
1
.1
1.9 2

2
.1
1
.1

16.0
5.1

1 .2
0

2.2
2.4
2.8

15.5
14.5
13.8
16.6

4.4
2.3
1.2
1.5

7.7
3.5
2.9

18.4
9.8
8
.2
7.4

1.8

3.1

po

1907............................................
1910............................................
1911............................................
1912............................................
1913............................................
1914............................................
1915............................................
1916............................................
1917............................................

3.1
2.4
1.9

7.1
4.8
9.1
6.7

3.5
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.7

1
.2
1
.1
1
.0
.8

2,618
17.2
17.6
5,111
3,726
2.4
4,102
15.4
4,275
23.2
6.2
2,900
3,689
6,302 ’ “ ii.T
15.2
4,738

7,562
115,703

5.9
2.5
4.6
5.3
1.9
4.7
4.1
5.4
4.2

7,642
5,774
7,396
7,562

2.2
1
.6

16.6
2.9

A large steel plant.
1910
1 11
9
1
912
1 13
9

2.8

1
.2 7.6
1
.1 5.3
1 1 .1
.0 2
.8 4.3

(See also Table 11.)

Steel manufacture and machine building.
Iron and steel (1913).....
Machine building <1912).

International Association
scale.

1 5.6
.6
1 .2 6.8
0
15.4 2.4
4.1 6.0
4.7
7.6 6.6
1 .0 5.7
0

1
.2
2.0

2.3
1.9
1.8
1.3
1.5

(See also Table 19.)
2.4

1
.1

2 .2
1
5.6

(See also Table 20.)

15.3
14.1
6.0
16.7

2.4
2
.1
5.5

2
.2

2.2
2.4
2.8

19.9
18.6
14.3
2.4 21.3

9.4
4.0

3.1
2.7
7.0

.8
1 .1 2
1

2.4

949
Under 20 years.............................
20 to 29 years................................ 16,443
30 to 39 years................................ 14,417
40 years and over.......................... 11,124
Total.................................. 42,933

9.5

3.4

5.9

1.4

.8
6.0 1
6.2 .9
.2
4.9 1

Age groups in a tube m ill, 1907 to 1914.
20 to 29 years................................ 6,351
30 to 39 vears................................ 4,977
40 years and over.......................... 2,965
Total.................................. 14,293




2.8 1.7
1.8 1
.0

9.1
3.8

.9
1.3

0
7.7 2 .6
3.5 11.3
0
2.9 1 .0
2.6 8.7
3.1 10.4

6.3
4.0
4.1
3.3
3.9

2.6

b
o

Age groups in a large steel plant, 1907 to 1914• (See also Table 51.)

(See also Table 52.)
3.1 8.2
2.4 5.2
1.9 11.9
2.6 7.7

.1
1.9 2
1 1
.2 .2
6 1
.1 .1
2.5 1.6

2.6

282

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

116.—ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.

T a b le

Inability to speak English in a large steel plant.

(See also Table 53.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.
Num­
ber of
300-day
work­
ers. Death.

1906.
American born.............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born..

Total...................................
1907.
American born. „........................... 1,719
English-speaking foreign born......... 2-267
Non-English-speaking foreign born.. 3,599
Total................................... 7,585
1908.
American born..............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born..
Total...................................
1909.
American born..............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born...
. Total............... ...................
1910.
American born..............................'
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born...
Total...................................
1911.
American born..............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born...
Total...................................
1912.
American born..............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreing born...
Total...................................
1913.
American born..............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born...
Total...................................
Total 8 years.
American born..............................
English-speaking foreign born.........
Non-English-speaking foreign born...
Total..................................




Per­
Per­
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
!

j
1,370
1,806
4,218
7,494

1,188
1,689
1,698
4,575

52.6
61.4
38.4
46.8

5.0
2.3
3.2
4.3

2
.1

59.7
1.9 65.6
3.5 45.1
2.9 54.0

35.1
40.9
24.6
31.2

6.4
2.9
4.1
5.5

1.9
3.5
2.9

2
.1

43.6
45.7
32.2
39.6

31.4
27.8
30.0
28.6

2.5
7.0
5.5

2.1
2.8

20.9
18.5

2 .0
0

3.2
9.0
7.0

2
.1
2.8

6.2

36.6
37.6
4.3 39.8
3.2 32.6

19.1

7.9

4.3
3.2

26.2
30.3
31.3
30.2

7.6
26.6
31.8
23.6

2.3
2.6
6.4
3.9

1.4 1 .8
1
1.7 30.9
3.7 41.9
2.4 29.9

5.1
17.7

2.9
3.3

15.7

5.0

1.4
1.7
3.7
2.4

9.4
22.7
33.1
23.1

!
|
14.0 i 8.3
20.7
36.0
19.6
8.8
12.5
23.6

1.3
2.4
4.1
2.7

1.5
3.0
3.2
2.7

26.1
16.1
17.9

.1

1,453
2,027
2,735
6,215

12.4
31.1
13.2
18.8

1.9
3.2

1,843
3,283
2,516
7,642

9.8
5.5
28.6
14.1

1.5
4.2
3.2

1,369
2,446
1,959
5,774

26.3 1
.2
14.7 3.5
4 B 4.2
.1
14.0 2.5 |

1,863
2,653
2,877
7,396

3.4
12.5

1,782
2,472
2,877
7,582
12,587
18,746
22,910
54,243

International Association
scale.

6
.1
15.2
18.2
12.5
16.7
18.6
2 .1
1
23.2
21.4

2
.1
.6

1.5
3.0
3.2
2.7

2 .2 8.2
1

.8

1
.0

1 11.4
.0
.7 7.7
4.1 36.9
1.9 19.2

6.5
3.7
19.1
9.4

1.9
5.4
4.1

.7
41
.*
1.9

1 28.7
.2
2.4 2 .6
0
3.2 1 .0
2
2.0 18.5 j

17.5
9.8
3.1
9.3

1.5
4.5
5.4
3.2

2.4
3.2

1.7.
5.9
7.1
5.3

1.5 3.2
1 1 .1
.8 1
4.4 24.0
2.7 14.1 !

2.3
8.3
4.1

1.7
7.1

1 17.0
.1
1.4 21.3
4.4 24.0
1
2.3 2 .2

2.2
1.7
3.3
3.5
3.2

2.3
7.6
9.1

6.8

1 .1 .9
0
1 .1 2.2
2
8.3

9.1

1 .1 2.8
1

i
1.5 |21.8
2.0 26.4
2.8 29.5

12.4
14.1
15.4

2.6 |27.2

14.3

2.2
4.2
4.5
4.1

1 .1
1

8.3
6.3
28.6
15.4

1 2 .2
.2 0

2.0

16.7
11.5
14.5

1.5
1
.8
4.4
2.7

3.8
11.7
21.9
13.6

1 1 .1
.1 2

1.4 | 15.7
4.4 2 .8
1
2 | 16.2
.3
i
|
1.5

16.1

2.0 20.3
2.8 22.7
1
2.6 2 .0

APPENDIX L.---- COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES. 2 8 3

Table 116.—
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) ACCORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.
Night and day rates in a large steel plant.

{See also Table 54.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

International Association
scale.

Num­
ber of
Per­
Per­
300-day
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
work­
ers. Death. nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
1907:
Night.....................................
Day.......................................
1908:
Night..................................
Day......................................
1909:
Night.....................................
Day.......................................
1910:
Night.....................................
Day.......................................
1911:
Night.....................................
Day.......................................
1912:
Night.....................................
Day......................................
1913:
Night.....................................
Day.......................................
1914:
Night................. : .................
Day.......................................
1907 to 1914:
Night.....................................
Day.......................................

2,079
4,036
1,435
2,786
1,883
3,644
1,857
3,604
1,703
3,618
1,902
3,863

21
,0 2

4,086
1,416
3,009
14,287
28,646 ]

13.0

1.4

6.5
14.3
12.3
4.8

1.5
2.5
1.7

.0
2.2 1
1
.1

1.6
1 .0 2.0
0

4.5

.3

6.6 1
.1
1
.6
2.2
6.3 1.2
6.9

Iron and steel industry.
All plants:
1910..................................... 202,157
1911.................................... 231,544
1912..................................... 300.919
319.919
1913 ... .
1914... .
.................
256,299
Total................................ 1.310.911
Special plants:
1907..................................... 27,632
190 8
19,481
1 9
90
24,543
1910...............................
27,144
1911....................................
24,519
1912....................................
28,922
1913. .
29,766
1914....................................
20,241
Total................................ 202,248

.4

1
.2
1
.1
.0
1 .6 1
1
5.0
9.5

14.6
7.9
10.4
1 .0
2
7.7
10.5
19.9
8.3
15.8
13.9
8.8
5.9
1 .1
1
5.8
11.4

1.5

5.4 19.8
4.7 7.9
3.3 4.4
3.8 1 .8
1
4.0 2 .8
0
4.0 18.0
3.8 1 .2
0
3.8 15.8
2.4 2
.8

2.6 8.8
2.5 13.1
1.9 14.5

1 6.0
.2
1 8.8
.1
1 2.7
.1
1 3.2
.0
3.0 10.5
2.9 11.3

8.7
1.5

1.8

4.3
9.5

1.3
1
.4
1.9
3.2

3.3
6.3
7.7
3.0
4.4

.5
1.5
1.4
1.3
.4
1.4

8.2 2.2
3.2 2.0
6.7 2.6

5.4
4.7
3.3
3.8
4.0
4.0
3.8
3.8
2.4

2.6
2.5
1.9

15.9
7.5
4.7

1 .0
0
16.7
14.4
9.0
13.1
2.9
7.4

1 .2
0

10.9
4.6
6.9
3.1
3.8
8.7
9.4

2.0
2.8

1
.2
1
.1
1
.1
1
.0

4.2
4.6

1.5
1.9

3.0
2.9

9.7
5.3
6.9
8.0
5.1
7.0

3.7
3.2
3.3

2.5
1.9
2.3

15.9
10.4
12.5
13.0
9.7
12.3

3.2
2
.6
2.7
2
.6
2.4
2.4
2.0
1.7
2.5

2 .6
1

(See also Table 71.)
2.9
2.5

2.6
2.2
2.2
2.5
4.0

2.2
1.4
2
..1
1
.6
2.5
1.4

2.1
2.2

2.5 19.9
1.9 12.3
2.3 15.3
2.2 16.4

1 1 .8
.8 1
2.1 15.1 j
3.2
2.6
2.7
2
.6
2.4
2.4
2.0
1.7
2.5

27.1
13.1
19.9
18.6

1 .8
2
1 .8
0

14.5
9.6
16.1

13.3
5.5
10.5
9.3
5.9
3.9
7.4
3.9
7.6

2.8
2.8
3.2
5.1

2
.8
1.8
2.7
2
.0
3.2
1.8
2.7

2.8

2.2
1
.8
2
.1

10.9
15.0
14.6
10.3
9.5
1 .2
1
8.3
12.9

Departments of special iron and steel plants, 1907 to 1914• (See also Table 76.)
Bessemer ................................... 5,920
Fabrication.................................. 15,764
Open hearths..................
. .. . 23,453
Foundries.................................... 7,338
17,098
Mechanical....
Blast furnaces...
11,626
Sheet mills................................... 19,119
Yards.......................................... 16,160
Plate mills...................
.......... 13,625
Heavy rolling mills........................ 34,999
Tube mills___________________ 14,539
Total_________________ 179,642




16.7
13.7
14.6
7.4
9.5
25.5

8.0
1 .1
1
7.9
8.2

4.3
10.9

1.9
3.1
2.6
1.5
1.5
3.2
2.2
2.7
2.6
1.5
1.5

2.1

4.0 I 22.6
2.6 19.4
2.7 19.9
2.9 1 .8
1
2.4 13.4
2.9 31.6
1.4 1 .6
1
2.2 16.0
2.8 13.3
2.3 1 .0
2
2.9 8.7
2.5 15.5

11.3
9.1
9.7
4.9
6.3
17.0
5.3
7.4
5.3
5.5
2.9
7.3

2.0

3.9
4.2
2
.0
1.9
3.8
3.0
3.6
3.6
1.9
1.9
2.7

4.0
2.7
2.9
2.4
2.9
1.4

2.6

2.2
2.8

2.3
2.9
2.5

17.3
15.6
16.6
9.8
1 .6
0
23.7
9.7
13.2
1 .8
1
9.7
7.7
12.5

284

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

116.—
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.

T a b le

B last furnaces.

(See also Table 77.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

International Association
scale.
Num­
ber of
Per­
Per­
300-day
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
work­
ers. Death. nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa-“
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
All plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................
Special plants:
1905.......................................
1906.......................................
1907........................................
1908.......................................
1909.......................................
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total...................................

19,389
21,479
27,154
31,988
26,572
124,636

31.1
2 .8
1
24.5
23.9
15.6
23.4

961
1,262
1,566
1,274
1,486
1,353
1,380
1,749
1,658
1,160
13,849

46.8
135.5
51.7
2 .2
1
54.5
2 .0
0
19.6
5.1
16.3
15.5
37.0

4.4
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.5

2.9 38.4
2.3 26.5
2.5 29.5
2 29.1
.6

2
.8
4.8

5.2
5.0
5.5
4.8
3.3
3.2
2.2
1.7
1.5

2.8

6.9
6.5
.9
4.2
1.4

1
.1
2.2

2.5
3.2

5.2
2.8
2.9
3.1
2.9

2.9
2.3
2.5

28.8
19.6
21.7

2.5 28.7

20.7
14.5
16.3
15.9
10.4
15.6

3.3

2.5

21.4

56.8
143.3
64.1
32.5
58.7
27.4
23.2
7.9
2 .0
0
1 19.6
.6
3.3 43.5

31.2
90.3
34.5
14.1
36.3
13.3
13.1
3.4
10.9
10.3
24.7

5.7
5.2
3.3
5.0
8
.1 5.5
7.7
4.8
1
.1 3.3
5.0
3.2
1.7
2.2
1.3
1.7
2
.6
1.5
2.9
1
.6
3.8 | 3.3

42.1
98.6
48.1
26.6
40.7
21.5
17.0
6.4
15.0
14.8
31.8

2.0 2 .1
0

Occupational groups in blast furnaces, 1905 to 1914.
Cast-house men............................. 1.357
Common labor.............................. 4,930
Mechanics................................... 3,670
86
8
Stockers......................................
Unclassified.................................. 3,006
Total.................................. 13,849 |

59.7
31.0
2 .1
2
30.5
56.9
37.0

Bessemer departments.
AD plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.....................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................
Special plants:
1907.......................................
1908.......................................
1909.......................................
1910.......................................
1 ]J
9
......................
1912
..............................
1913. ......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................




5,070
5,155
6,521
6,885
4,470
28,101

35.5
10.5
12.4
20.9

967
5
11
750
784
669
788
875
576
5,920

9.3
52.8
24.0
34.4

1 .1
0
17.9

10.3
15.6
16.7

6.5
1
.8
2.4
3.5
5.0
3.2

6.3
4.0
1
.8
2. 7
2.4
3.3

2.6 2 .6
1
2.0 15.3

(See also Table 78.)
72.5
36. 6
26.3
36. 7
64.9
43.5

39.8
20. 7
1.7
4
20.3
37.9
24.7 1

2
.1
28
.

4.1
5.9
3.8

6.3
4.0
1.8
2.7
2.4
3.3

53.8
26.8
19l3
27.1
46.2
31.8

23.7
7.0
8.3
13.9
6.7
11.9

2.7
3.2
3.1
3.5
3.5
3.3

4.9
3.3
4.4
3.7

31.3
13.5
15.8

3.8

19.0

6
.2

2.7
.3
.4
5.5
2.8
.4
4.5

7.3
4.8
4.0
4.6
2.5
2.7
2.4

2.0

4.0

16.2
40.3
2 .0
0
27.9
8.0
5.5
15.2
17.5
16.9

7.7

(See also Table 79.)

2.6
3.0
2.9
3.3
3.3
3.1

2
.6
.3
.4
5.2
2.4
.4
4.3
1.9

43.0
16.8
19.7
28.0
2 15.9
.6
3.8 24.8

4.9
3.3
4.4
3.7

7.3
4.8
4.0
4.6
2.5
2.7
2.4

2.6

19.2
57.9
28.0
39.4
7.7
5.1
13.1
22.5

4.0

2 .6
2

35.2
16.0
22.9

6.9
10.4
10.9

2 .1
1
2.6 1 .8
2

2.6

APPENDIX L.---- COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES. 2 8 5
TABLE 1 1 6 . — ACCIDENT

SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.
Open hearths.

(See also Table 80.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

International Association
scale.

Num­
ber of
Per­
Per­
300-day
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
work­
ers. Death. nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
All plants:
191 0
191 1
191 2
191 3
191 4

9,739
10,718
17,355
20,604
12,877
71,293

Total...
Special plants
190 7
190 8
190 9
191 0
191 1
191 2
191 3
191 4

2,987
22
,1 0
2,872
3,138
2,725
3,525
3,603
2,483
23,453

Total...

27.1
15.1
23.9
15.3
9.8 .
17.8 ;

4.4
2
.1
3.6
2.5
2.7
3.0

42.2
4.2
9.4

7.4

7.7
25.0
7.2

2.7
1.7

1
.1
2.0
8 2.6
.6
6
.6 .6

14.6

2.6
2.6

4.1
2
.6
2.9
2.9
2.3

35.7
19.7
30.3
2 .8
0
14.9

2.9 23.7
3.2
3.2
2.9
2.7
2.2
3.1

2.2

52.8
7.5
14.6
14.1
9.9
1 .6
2
29.8

1 1 .6
.8 1

2.7 19.9 |

18.1

1 .1
0
15.9
1 .2
0
6.5
11.9

7.1
3.4
5.8
4.1
4.4
4.9

1 .0
2
2.8 1
.8

28.1

6.3
5.7
4.4
5.1
16.7
4.8

9.7

3.2
4.2
1
.04.4
2.8
4.2
4.2

4.1

2.6

2.9
2.9
2.3
2.9

29.3
16.1
24.6
17.2
13.2
19.7

3.2
2.2
3.2
2.9
2.7
2.2
3.1

43.3
6.8
12.7

2.7

16.6

1 .8
2
8
.1
11.7
2 .6
2
1 1 .8
.8 0

Occupational groups in open hearths, 1905 to 1914• (See also Table 81.)
Common labor.............................. 4,851
Pitmen........................................ 5,492
954
Pouring plarform men...................
Stocking floor men........................ 7,761
Unclassified................................. 5,395
Total.................................. 24,453
Foundries.
All plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................
Special plants:
1907.......................................
1908
.................................
1
909 ..................................
1910......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................




16,885
13,499
23,294
24,605
17,634
95,917

29.7
13.2
9.4
3.5

2 .0
0

5.4
.6
.5
1
.1
5.7

5.7
1.9
2.8
1.7
2.5

14.7

2.8

2.8

40.8
15.7
12.7
6.3
28.3
20.3

19.8
8
.8
6.3
2.3
13.3
9.8

8.8
1
.0
.8
1
.8

9.2
4.5

5.7
1.9
2.8
1.7
2.5

2.8

34.3
11.7
9.9
5.8
25.0
17.1

(See also Table 82.)
3.7 2.2
1 .0 2.2
2
9.3
7.7
7.1
7.9

3.4
2.7
2.3

2.6

939
719
985
1 189
875
1,056
990
585

9.6

.8

2 .6
0
17.0
9.1

1.7
1.4
1.7

2.8
1.3
2
.0

7,338

7.4

1.5

1.7 7.6
1.9 16.0
2.5 15.1
2.4 1 .8
2
2.1 11.5
2.2 12.7
3.1 13.5
2.5 2.5
3.8 5.5
3.0 4. 4
2 24.9
.6
3.3 23.1
2.4 1 .8
2
1 7 3. 7
.
2.9 1 .8
1

2.5

8
.0
6.2
5.1
4.7
5.3

6.4
13.7
11.3

6
.1
4.9

2.9
2.9
4.4
3.5
3.0
3.4

1.7
7.1
1.9 1 .8
2
2.5 13.1
2.4 1 .0
1
.
2 1 9.8
2.2 10.9

1
.0
2.2
18
.
2
.2

3.1
2.5
3. 8
3.0

3.7
1.7

2
.6
2.0

2.6
3.3
2.4
1.7
2.9

10.5
2.5

6.0

4.8
18.5
18.3
1 .2
0
4.3
9.8

286

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

T a b l e 1 1 6 . — ACCIDENT

SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.
Occupational groups in foundries, 1910 to 1914.

(See also Table 83.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.
Num­
ber of
300-day
work­
ers. Death.

Cleaners....................................... 4,196
Core makers................................. 1,273
M
elters and helpers....................... 1,261
Molders and helpers....................... 5,266
Totaf.................................. 11,996

9.3
9.3
7.2

Heavy rolling mills.
All plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................
Special plants:
1907.......................................
1908.......................................
1909.......................................
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................

9.0
.1
4.2

6.8
6.6

2.1
2
.1

6
.8

1.4
2.4

9.4

2.2

4,556
3,135
4,210
4,886
4,195
5, 226
5,287
3,504
34,999

15.8
5.7
15.0

.7
2.3

1

4.7 23.0
1.5 1
.6
1 6.0
.8
3.3 19.4
3.4 17.2

5.7
5.7
4.5

1 .8
1
1.3
5.4
8.9

8.6

4.7
1.5
1
.8
3.3
3.4

2 .2
2
2.8

2.8
2.0
2.0

19.4
9.0
11.7
8
.6
8.9

7.2
17.9
16.5

(See also Table 84.)

18.1
6.5
10.5
7.7

All plants:
1910........................ ..............- 3,287
1911........................ .............. 4,390
1912........................ .............. 5,128
1913........................ .............. 5,430
1914........................ .............. 3,476
Total................... .............. 21,711
Special plants:
1907........................ .............. 1,915
1908........................ .............. i 1,173
1909........................ ..............i 1,634
1910........................ ..............i 1,872
1911........................ .............. 1 1,645
1912........................ ..............! 1,992
1913........................ .............. , 2,015
1914........................ .............. | 1,379
Total................... ..............|13,625




Per­
Per­
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.

9,442
12,409
16,258
17,569
11,985
67,663

Plate mills.

International Association
scale.

3.5

.6
.1
1 .1 2
1
8.6 3.2
1.7 1
.6
5.1
.6
2 1.4
.6
8 1.5
.2

2.8
2.0
2.0

24.4
10.7
14.6
0
1.7 1 .8
1.3 10.4
1.9 13.5

2.9
2.3
2
.8
2.3
2
.6
2.3
1
.8
1.4
2.3

19.4
10.3
18.4
15.5
14.4
5.6
7.5
5.4

1 .0
2

1 .1
2
4.3
7.0
5.1
4.5
6.3

10.5
3.8
7.4
5.7
1
.1
3.4
1.7
5.5

1 .0
0

4.5
2.7
2.7
1
.8
3.1

2.8
.9
2.9
.8
2.7
4.1

1.7
1.3
1.9

2.9
2.3

2.0
.8

2.8
2.3
2.6
2.3
1
.8

1 .8 | 4.9
2

2
.0

1.9
1.9

1.4
2.3

1 .0
1
14.3
9.0
13.6
12.4
12.4
5.4
6.0
5.0
9.7

(See also Table 85.)
19.2
10.3
3.5
5.0
5.2
7.9
18.8
7.7
5. 5
14.4
4.5
8.9
7.9

3.6
2
.1
4.3
2.7

2
.1

3.0

8.2
.8

.4
3.7
1
.6
3.0
.9

.6
2.6

2.0 24.8
1.9 14.2
2.3 1 .2
0
1.8 9.5
1.4 8.7
2.0 12.9
3.7 30.7
2 1 .1
.6 1
3.1 9.0
0
2.7 2 .8
2 4.4
.8
3.0 10.5
2 12.4
.6
.1
1.5 2
2.8 13.3

6.9
2.3
3.3
3.4
5.3

! 2.9
| 5.9
! 3.7
j 2.9
j 4.1

i
12.5 1 .2
1
5.1 | 1
.1
3.7 ! .5
9.6 j 5.1
2.2
3.0 ! 4.1
5.9 ; 1
.2
..........i .8
5.3 3.6

1.9
2.3
1
.8
1.4

2
.0
3.7

2.6

3.1
2.7
28
.
3.0
2.6
.5
1

2.8

19.7
11.7
10.5
8
.8
7.7
11.4
27.4
8
.8
7.3
17.4
5.0
1 .'0
0
9.7
2.3
11.7

APPENDIX L.---- COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES. 2 8 7
T a b l e 1 1 6 . — ACCIDENT

SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.
Sheet mills.

(See also Table 86.)
Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

Num­
ber of
300-day
work­
ers. Death.

/
All plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................
Special plants:
1907.......................................
1908....................
....
1909.......................................
1910.................... ..................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................

18,501
29,710
32,087
25,938
22,187
128,423

21
,2 1

1,951
2,366
2,637
2,433
2,925
2,691
1,905
19,119

Per­
ma­
nent
dis­
abil­
ity.

13.1
3.0
5.3
7.3
4.1

1.7
1.5

6
.1

1.4

1
.6
1
.2
1
.2

8
.1
15.2
1 7
3.
14.8
3.1
3.3
4.7

3.8
15
.
2.0
2.4
.8
2.4
2.5
.3

.8.0

2.2

International Association
scale.

Per­
Tem­
ma­ Tem­
porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
disa­
bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.

.

1.7 16.5
1.3 5.9
9.0
2.7 1 .1
0
1.7 6.9
1.7 9.2 !

2
.1

8.7
2.0
3.5
4.9
2.7

2
.1
2
.2
1
.6
1
.6

4.1

1.9

1 13.1 1 5.4
.2

1 2.7
.2
1.3 18.5
1 17.5
.1
1.5 17.1
2.0 7.5
1.7 8
.6
1.4 6.4
1.4 1 .6
1

1 .1
0
9.1
9.9

2
.1
2.2
3.1
5.3

2.3

1.7
1.3
1.7
1.7
1.7

2
.1

12.7
5.4
7.8

8.2
6.0
77
.

5.6
2.7
3.3
1
.1
3.3
4.7
.4

1 1 .2
.2 2
1
.2 3.2
1.3 14.1
1 13.5
.1
1.5 12.5
2
.0 7.4
1.7
8
.6
1.4

4.9

3.0

1.4

9.7

1
.0

1.7
1.5
1.5

5.0
14.0
9.3

2.0

Occupational groups in sheet m ills, 1910 to 1914• (See also Table 87.)
Hot-mill crews.............................. 5,200
Other occupations......................... 7,391
Total................................... 12,591
Tube mills.
All plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total...................................
Special plants:
1907.......................................
1908.......................................
1909.......................................
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total..................................

0.8

3.5
13.4
7.9

2.9

2.0

1.7 6.0
1.5 17.8
1.5 11.4

3.6
2.5

1.9
.5
3.9
4.7
3.0
3.0

2.3
2.3
2
.1
1.7

1
.2

2
.1
1
.6
1.5
1
.2
1
.2

5.2
4.4
7.7
8.8
5.9

2
.1

1.5

6.6

1.9
1
.0
4.9
1.4
1
.0
1.4
1
.1
2.3
1.9

4.6
3.7
3.6
3.7
3.1
2.3

1 .8
1

(See also Table 88.)
\
1

9, 7
67
13,676
17,080
18,909
13,906
73,338
2,007
1,451
1,813
1,792
1,717
2,131
20
,1 1
1,527
14,539

2.8 1
.0

.7
5.8
7.1
4.5
4.5

1.9
1.9
1.7
1.4
1.7

4.5
5.0
5.0
8.4

1.5
.8
4.0

8
.6

.9
1.9

4.6

1.5

1
.1
.8
1
.1

2 5.8
.1
1 4.2
.6
1.5 9.2
1 1 .0
.2 0
1 7.2
.2
1.5

7.7

I
i
4.6 ! 10.6

3.7
3.6
3.7
3.1
2.3

1 4.5

, 12.6
! 9.8
, 3.9
! 11.8
1 |10.7
.2
1 3.0
.1
2.9 8.7

Occupational groups in tube m ills, 1907 to 1914.
Common labor.............................. 2,123
Furnace crews.............................. 3,066
Finishing; crews............................ 4,110
Unclassified................................. 5,210
Total................................... 14,539




2.3
8.9
5.3

8.5

2.2
6.9
4.3

3. 8
.2
.4

3.0
3.3
3.3
5.6
5.7
2.9

1
.2
1
.1

2.9

9.5
4. 7
8.4
4.1
9.3
8
.0
3.4
7.7

(See also Table 89.)

10. 7 23.0
.9 1 ! .
.1
1.0 3.6 !
2.2 j 2.4 11.5 j
1.5
2.9 8
.7

5.7
1.5
4.6
2.9

4.7
.2
.5
2.7
1.9

1. 7
0
.9
1.0 i

21.1
1.1
3.0
2.4 ; 9.7
2.9
7.7

288

SAFETY MOVEMENT IN IKON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

116.—
ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO' POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Continued.

T a b le

Unclassified rolling mills.

(See also Table 90.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.

International Association
scale.

Num­
ber of
Per­
Per­
300-day
ma­ Tem­
ma­ Tem­
work­
ers. Death. nent porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
dis­ disa­
dis­ disa­
abil­ bility.
abil­ bility.
ity.
ity.
14,434
21,231
22,909
23,382
22,873
Total................................... 99,809
Bar mills, 1910 to 1014.................... 21,555
191 0
191 1
191 2
191 3
191 4

9.4
6.8
6.7
9.2
4.7
7.6
5.4

Fabricating shops.
All plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total...................................
Special plants:
1907.......................................
1908.......................................
1909.......................................
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912....................;.................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total...................................

8,713
19,530
28,988
30,470
20,837
108,538
2,081
1,758
1,770
2,074
2,203
2,074
2,045
1,759
15,764

Wire draiving.
1910
..
.
...........
1911.............................................
1912 ...........................................
1913.............................................
1914.............................................
Total...................................

10,370
11,819
13,059
12,769
11,468
59,481




2.4
1.7

2.8 1 .8
2

6.3
4.5
4.5
6.1
3.1
5.1

3.6 10.7

3.6

4.8
3.4
2.9
3.4
2.5
3.3
2.3

4.0
2
.1
2.7
2.9

1 .0
0
1 .1
0

15.1

3.6

9.5

12.4

2.2 7.8
2.8 1 .2
1

(See also Table 91.)

11.4 2.4
3.2 2.3
9.6 2
.1
9.8 •1.9
5.2 2.4
7.8 2.2

5.6 19.9
1 7.3
.8
2.4 14.1
2.3 13.9
2.0 9.6
2.4 12.4

25.9
1 .2
0
25.4
21.7
4.1
13.0
4.4
5.1
13.7

2.5
1.7
2.3
2.6
2.7
3.3
3.0

6.9
4.8

.8
2.2
2
.1
4.5
1
.1
2.3
3.1

2.2
2
.6

35.3
16.7
28.5
26.5
8.9
2 .8
0
8.5
9.6
19.4

7.6
6.4
6.5
3.5
5.2

3.1
2.9
2.7
2.4
3.1

5.6
1.8
2.4
2.3

11.5

2.8

2.4

10.4

17.3
6.8
16.9
14.5
2.7
8.7
2.9
3.4
9.1

8.8
6.1
1.0
2.8

2.5
1.7
2.3
2.6
2.7
3.3
3.0

28.6
14.6
2 .2
0
19.9
8
.1
17.7
7.3
8.5
15.6

2.9
1.9
1.9

7.7
6
.1
7.4
3.4
4.0
5.6

2
.1
1.7
2.1
2
.1
1
.6
1.9

12.7
9.7
11.4
8.3
6.7
9.5

2.8
2.8

2.0
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.6

12.7
10.9
16.0
26.1
25.2
19.0

2.1

2.7
5.7
1.4
2.9
3.9

16.3

6.8
1 .2
1
2.0 8.6

2
.2
2.6

(See also Table 92.)

2.8 4.7
2.8 5.7
4.2 2.6
1 3.1
.6

2.1 12.3
1.7 9.2
2 10.5
.1
2 8.9
.1
1 6
.6 .2

3.0

1.9

4.3

Electrical departments.
1910............................................. 1,526
2,760
1911........................................ .
1912............................................ 3,796
1913............................................ 4,012
1914............................................ 2,327
Total................................... 14,421

1.8

4.0 16.8
2 1 .1
.1 1
2.7 11.5
2.9 14.5
2.2 8.7

3.5
2.3
2
.1
2.3

5.9

4.3

{See also Table 93.)

1 .8 2.0
1
9.8 2.0

14.2
31.4
30.9
20.7

9.3

2.8
1
.1
2.0

3.6
2.7

2.2
2.6

2.0
1.6
1
.6
1.5
1
.6
1
.6

15.8
13.4
19.4
35.6
34.7
24.9

7.9
6.5
9.4
20.9

2 .6
0

5.0
3.7
3.0

13.8

3.6

APPENDIX L.---- COMPARISON OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY RATES. 2 8 9
T a b le 1 1 6 .— ACCIDENT

SEVERITY RATES (DAYS LOST PER 300-DAY WORKER) AC­
CORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS SCALE AND THE SCALE PRO­
POSED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS—
Concluded.
Mechanical departments.

(See also Table 94.)

Bureau of Labor Statistics
scale.
Num­
ber of
Per­
300-day
ma­
work­
Death. nent
ers.
dis­
abil­
ity.
All plants:
191 0
191 1
191 2
191 3
191 4
Total...
Special plants
190 5
190 6
190 7
190 8
190 9
191 0
191 1
191 2
191 3
191 4
Total...

15,927
17,863
21,591
24,009
17,772
97,161
1,088
1,146
2,542
1,619
1,977
2,223
2,144
2,362
2,569
1,662
19,332
Yards.

ill plants:
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914.......................................
Total...................................
Special plants:
1905.......................................
1906........... ...........................
1907.......................................
1908.......................................
1909.......................................
1910.......................................
1911.......................................
1912.......................................
1913.......................................
1914......................................
Total..................................

15,932
9,085
11,180
11,859
7,876
55,932

.1
1 .2 2
0
6.6 2.6

7.9
13.1

8
.6

2.7
2.4
2.4

9.5

2.5

57.9
7.9
7.1
2 .2
2
13.7
1 .1
2
8.4
3.8
10.5

8.3
4.1
1.3
1.5
2.7

.6
.6
1
.8
1
.2

3.0

1 .1 2.0
2

International Association
scale.

Per­
Tem­
ma­ Tem­
porary Total. Death. nent porary Total.
disa­
dis­ disa­
bility;
abil­ bility.
ity.
13.9
6.8
11.4
4.4
13.1
5.3
18.3
8.7.
13.2
5.7
2.3 14.2 | 6.3

2.7
3.3
3.5
3.1
3.1
3.2

4.1 70.3
38.6
2.0 14.0
5.3
4.7
3.5 11.9
3.2 26.9
14.8
9.1
2.8 19.2
2.6 15.3
8
.1
2.0 1 .0 5.6
1
1.7 7.3
2.5
7.0
1.5 13.2
1.7 4.7
2.4 16.5 j 8.1

1 .6
0

1.6
2.2
2.5
2.8
2.2

5.2
1.7
1.9
3.5

.8
.8

2.3
1.5
3.8

1.6 1 .1
1
2.2 9.9
2.5 11.3
2.8 14.6
2.2 1 .0
1
2.3 1 .8
1
4.1

2.0

3.5
3.2

2.8
2.6
2.0

2.6

1.7
1.5
1.7
2.4

3.0
5.6
5.2
3.0
4.1
4.1

2.3
2
.1
1.7
1.9 s

53.3
12.5
9.9
19.9
15.4
11.5
8.4
6.5
1 .0
0
5.5
13.1

(See also Table 95.)

2 .6
2

10.9
18.5
2 .2
1
11.4
18.0

2.3
4.2
3.9
2.3
3.1
3.1

1,185
30.4
1,136
23.8
2,618
17.2
1,522
5.9
1,891
28.6
2,134
16.9
1,810
9.9
2,078
4.3
2,571 . . . . . .
1,356
6.6
18,481 1 13.1

3.9
3.8
5.9
2.9
.8
2.4
.7
4.9
1
.6
1.5
2.9

1
.6
2.0

26.5
17.1
24.7
25.6
16.3
23.0

15.1
7.3
12.3
14.1
7.6

37.1
30.7
26.3
11.7
32.4
2 .2
1
2 12.7
.1
2 11.3
.1
.9 2.5
1.4 9.5
2.3 18.3

20.3
15.9
11.5
3.9
19.1
11.3
6.6
2.9
4.4
8.7

2.3
2
.1
1.7
1.9

2.8
3.1
3.2
2.9
3.0
1.9

1 .0
2

5.2
5.0
7.8
3.8
1
.1
3.2
.9
6.5

2
.1
2.0
3.8

1
.6
2.0

19.7
14.9
18.8
19.2
13.4
18.0

2.8

28.3
24,0
22.5
1 .6
0
23.2
16.4
2
.1 9.6
2 11.5
.1
.9
3.0
1.4
7.8
2.3 | 14.8

3.1
3.2
2.9
3.0
1.9

Miscellaneous departments, 1910 to 1914• (See also Table 96.)
Ai mor plate.................................
Axle works..................................
Car wheels..................................
Docks.........................................
Erecting structural steel................

3,000
1,326
2,367
1,293
2,157

1 .0 1
2
.1
13.6 5.0
11.4 2.0
20.9 6.6

108.5 14.7

See p. 81.
12771°— 18— Bull. 234------ 19




2.0
4.9
4.0
2.5
5.4

15.1
23.5
17.4
30.0
128.6

8 1.4
.0
9.1 6.4
7.6 2.6
13.9 8.4
72.3 16.5

2.0

4.9
4.0
2.5
5.4

11.4
20.4
14.2
24.8
94.2




IN D E X .

A.
Page.
Accident, definition of......................................................................................................... 52,53
Accident experience, by departments and occupations.................................................. 46-50,205-245
All plants, summary of................................................................................................ 243-245
Bessemer department........................................................................... ................. 47,212-214
Blast furnaces.................................................................................................... 46,47,206-211
Cokeovens.................................................................................................................. 241
Crucible melting department........................................................................................ 218.219
Electrical department.............................................................................................. 49,236,237
Fabricating shops............................................................................................... 48,49,231-233
Forge shops.................................................................................................................. 233
Foundries.............................................................................................................. 47,219-220
Mechanical department........................................................................................... 49,237-238
Miscellaneous departments........................................................................................... 241-243
Open hearth departments........................................................................................ 47,214-218
Period 1910 to 1914 as a standard of comparison........................................................... 50,244,245
Plate mills......................................................................................................... 47,48,2?^ °24
Powerhouses.............................................................................................................2 3
9
Puddle mills.............................................................................................................. 22 * 2
*1 25
Rod mills..................................................................................................................... 225
Rolling mills,heavy................................................................................................ 47,220-222
Rolling mills,light, miscellaneous............................................................................. 48,230,231
Sheet mills............................................................................................................. 48,225-227
Structural steel, erection of................................................................................... 49,50,242,243
Tube mills............................................................................................................. 48,228-230
Wire-drawing department....................................................................................... 49,234,235
Yards.................................................................................................................... 49,239-241
Accident prevention. (See Causes and prevention of accidents.)
Accidents, special study of, during war period......................................................................... 23-32
Accidents. (See also Causes and prevention of accidents; Rates, industrial accident; Charts.)
Age,influence of, upon accidents.................................................................................... 40,141-144
Alcohol, use of, passible influence of, on accidents............................................................. 41,153,154
Asphyxiating gas, cause of accidents, blast furnaces...............................................................102,103
Awards and bonus plans of the safety man............................. ..................................... 50,51,254-256
B.
Bessemer steel works:
Accident experience in............................................................................................ 47,212-214
Causes of accidents in.................................................................................................. 114-116
Control of accidents in, summary......................................................................................
38
Open hearth and, safety movement in, results of................................................................ 17,18
Blastfurnaces:
Accident experience in........................................................................................ 46,47,206-211
Accident reduction in.............................. : ..................................................................166,167
Asphyxiating gas........................................................................................................102,103
Breakouts.....................................................................................................................
9
2
Causes of accidents in.............................................................................................. 89-105,265
Control of accidents in, summary of..................................................................................37,38
Cranes and hoists, cause of accidents.................................................................................
9
1
Falling objects.............................................................................................................. 100
Falls of worker, cause of accidents.................................................................................... 1 1
0
Furnace, the modern,description of..................................................................................
9
4
Furnaceslips.................................................................................................................93-98
Gas flames...................................................................................................................98-100
Handling tools and obj ects, cause of accidents.................................................................... 1 1
0
Hot substances, cause of accidents...................................................................................91-100
Occupational accident rates.......................................................................................... 208,211
Occupations and causes, freguency rates by.................................................................... 104,105
Power vehicles, cause of accidents................................................................................. 101,102
Safety movement in, results of.........................................................................................16,17
Sparks and splashes...................................................................................................... 92,93
93
Spills and explosions.....................................................................................................
Working machines, cause of accidents...............................................................................
90
7
2
Boilers and steam pipes, engines and motors, and power transmission, causes of accidents..............
Bonus and awards, plans ofthe safety man.................................................................. 50,51,254-256
Breakouts, cause of accidents, blast furnaces...........................................................................
92
Breakouts,cause of accidents, open hearths............................................................................. 108
Bulletinboards and displays, of the safety man...................................................................... 256
Bureau of Labor Statistics (United States) and International Association of Accident Boards and
Commissions, comparison of severity rates according to scales of........................................... 276-289




291

292

INDEX.

C.
Page.
Care, medical and surgical, of the injury.............................................................................. 192,193
Carelessness of worker, so-called, illustrations of.................................................................... 376,177
Carelessness of worker, undue emphasis...............................................................................
165
Causes and prevention of accidents:
Accident experience, by departments and occupations............................................. 46-50,205-245
Accident reduction methods among mechanics and fabricators.......................................... 126,127
Accident reduction, extent of.......................................................................................... 177
Accident severity rates........................................................................................... 35,36,55,56
Age, influence of, upon accidents...............................................................................40,141-144
Alcohol, use of, possible influence of, upon accidents..................................... .............. 41,153,154
Bessemer steel works, accident experience in.............................................................. 47,212-214
Bessemer steel works, control of accidents in, summary of...................................................
38
Blast furnaces, accident experience in..................... T
............................................. 46,47,206-211
Blast furnacas, accident reduction in.............................................................................. 166,167
Blast furnaces, causes of accidents in......................................................................... 89-105,265
Blast furnaces, control of accidents in, summary of.............................................................37,38
Boilers and steam pipes, engines and motors, and power transmission...................................
72
Breakouts in blast furnaces and open hearths................................................................... 92,108
Carelessness of worker, and accident prevention................................................................. 165
Carelessness of worker, illustrations of so-called................................................................ 176,177
Causas, principal physical, importance of, in different departments......................................72-86
Causes, principal physical, in iron and steel industries........................................................ 67-71
Causes, summary of, by departments....................................................................... 36,37,86,87
Causes, use of ratas in study of.........................................................................................64,65
Conjugal condition, as influencing accidents..................................................................... 41,152
Control of accident causes in the departments, summary of..................................................37-39
Cost, prohibitive, objection of, in accident prevention...................................................... 171,172
Cranes and hoists, physical cause of accidents.................................................................... 74-76
Crucible melting department, accident experience in........................................................218,21r
Day and night turns, relative hazards of.................................................................... 41,146-1"
Dusseldorf district, Germany, day and night turn experience in........................................ 151, V
Electrical department, accident experience in, summary of..................................................
Elimination of serious industrial accidents, possibility of.............................................. 42,164-1.
Engineering and structural defects................................................................................ 165,1
(>
English, inability to speak, as relates to accidents................................................... 40,11,1 4 1 <
4~4
Experience, by departments and occupations, summary of..................................................46-5(
Fabricating shops, accident experience in............................................................... 48,49,231-231
Falling objects, physical cause of accidents........................................................................78-8(
Falls of worker, physical cause of accidents................................................................... 37,80-81
Fatal injuries, causes of, analysis of............................................................................... 119-174
Fatalities, nature of injury in, analysis of........................................................................ 174^
17('
Forge shops, accident experience in.................................................................................. 2
3r
Foundries, accident experience in............................................................................. 47,219,22
Foundries and steel works, causes of accidents in.............................................................106-11
Geographic location of steel plants, a possible factor in accident occurrence..................... 40,140,14
Handling tools and objects, physical cause of accidents................................................... 37,82-8
Hospital records, use of, in study of nature of injury.....................................................44,191,19*.
Hot substances, physical cause of accidents................................................................... 37,76-7.
Human factor in accident occurrence..................................................................... 39-42,131-16*’
Inexperience, extreme, ellect on accident rates................................................................ 161-163
Inexperience, influence of, upon accidents....................................................................... 131,141
Infection, declining rate of....................................................................................... 43,183,184
Iron and steel industry, fatal injuries in, causes of, in 372 eases, 1910 to 1914......................... 170,171
Machine building and iron and steel industry, comparison of accident causes in......................87,88
Machine building and iron and steel industry, nature of injury m....................................... 43,179
Mechanical department, acci dent experience in........................................................... 49,237,238
Mechanical, fabricating, and yard departments, causes of accidents in................................. 124-130
39
Mechanical, fabricating, and yard departments, control of accidents in, summary of..............
Miscellaneous departments, accident prevention in............................................. .............. 169
Miscellaneous physical causes...................................................................................... 37,85,86
Nature of injury as related to accident prevention................................................... 42-45,178-193
Occupations and causes—
Blast furnaces......................................................................... 104,105
Occupations and nature of injury.......................................................................... 43,44,184-191
Open hearths, accident causes in............................................................................. 106-114,265
Open hearths, accident experiencein......................................................................... 47,214-218
Open hearths, accident prevention in............................................................................ 167,168
Open hearths, control of accidents in, summary of..............................................................
38
Organization, importance of, in accident preventi on........................................................... 169
Physical causes of accidents.................................................................................... 36,37,67-88
Plate mills, accident experience in........................................................................ 47,48,223,224
Power vehicles, physical cause of accidents........................................................................84,85
Progress in prevention of accidents, illustrations of.................................................. 45,46,199,200
Prevention of accidents, limits of.............................................................................. 42,164-177
Prohibitive cost, objection of,in accident prevention........................................ ...............171,172
Puddle mills, accident experience in.............................................................................. 224,225
Rod mills, accident experiencein..................................................................................... 225
Rolling mills, accident prevention in............................................................................. 168,169
Rolling mills, causes of accidents in......................................................................... 117-124,266
Rolling mills, control of accidents in. summary of.............................................................. 38,39
Rolling mills, heavy, accident experience in............................................................... 47,220-222
Rolling mills, light, miscellaneous, accident experience in............................................. 48,230,231
Safety man, methods of the................................................................................. 50,51,246-256
Safety movement, progress of............................................................................... 45,46,1 4 0
9 r-2 4
Selective discharge, influence of, upon accidents................................................................. 140
Sheet mills, accident experiencein............................................................................ 48,225-227
Standard of comparison, period of 1910 to 1 as a, in accident experience...................... 50,244,245
914
Steel works and foundries, causes of accidents in............................................................. 106-116




INDEX.

293

Causes and prevention of accidents—
Concluded.
Page.
Structural steel, erection of, accident experience in, summary of...........................................49,50
Time cost, average, not a measure of progress in accident prevention.................................... 192
Tube mills, accident experience in............................................................................ 48, 228-230
Wire-drawing, accident experience in, summary of.............................................................
49
Working hours, distribution through, of accidents and production.............................41,42,154-163
Working machines, physical cause of accidents.................................................................. 72-74
Yards, accident experience in................................................................................... 49,239-241
Yards, accident prevention in........... ................................................................................ 169
Charts:
Charting of accident causes............................................................... :.......................... 251-254
Basic data for charts on relation of employment and output to accident occurrence.............. 271-273
List of, in present report................................................................................................ 6,7
Safety man’s form and methods of preparing.................................................................. 250, 2 1
5
Safety man’s use of records and................................................................................ 50,246-250
Coal mines, metal mines, and iron and steel industries, fatality rates in....................................... 203
Coke, limestone, and ore, rational treatment of, in blast-furnace practice..................................... 96-98
Coke ovens, accident experience in........................................................................................ 241
Community agencies, safety man’s cooperation with...............................................................51,256
Conjugal conditions, as influencing accidents.........................................................................41,152
Control of accident causes in the departments, summary of.......................................................37-39
Corrosive substances. (See Hot substances.)
Cost, prohibitive, objection of,in accident prevention............................................................ 171,172
Cranes and hoists:
As physical cause of accidents................................................ ..................................... 36,74-76
Bessemer department.................................................................................................... 115
Blast furnaces...............................................................................................................
91
Open hearths............................................................................................................ 107,108
Crucible melting department, accident experience in............................................................. 218,219

D
.
Day and night accident rates.......................................... .............................................. 41,146-152
Day and night accident rates, comparison of, in large steel plant, 1905 to 1907 and 1908 to 1910....... 157
Pay and night accident rates, Dusseldorf district, Germany................................................... 151,152
Day-turn production, per cent of, of total production in nine mills of a steel dlalit, 1912 to 1913...... 159
59
Death and permament disabilities, time losses fixed for............................ “ .............................
Death, injuries causing:
Accident rates of................................................................................................ ..........
56
A.natom location, and nature of, 956 cases in iron and steel industry, 1905 to 1914............... 1 4
ical
7
Causes of, analysis of................................................................................................... 169-174
Causes of 372 cases of fatal injury, list of, in iron and steel industry, 1910 to 1914................... 170,171
Nature of, analysis of........1 .................................................................................... 1 1 6
7#—7
Department, accident causes by.................................................................................80,87,259-264
Departments. (See also Bessemer steel works; Blast furnaces; Fabricating shops; Foundries;
Mechanical, fabricating, and yard departments; Open hearths; Plate mills; Rolling mills; Sheet
mills: Tube mills; Yards.)
Disabilities, short-term, rapid decline of, in iron and steel industry......................................... 191,192
Disabilities, time allowances for specified, under laws of various States.......................................
58
Disabilities. (See also Permanent partial disabilities; Permanent total disabilities.)
Discharge, selective, a factor in accident occurrence................................................................. 110
Displays and bulletin boards, of the safety man...................................................................... 256
Dusseldorf district, Germany, day- and night accident rates in................................................ 151,152
E.
Electrical department, accident experience in.................................................................. 49,236,237
Employment and output, relation of, to accidont occurrence, basic data for charts 11,12, and 13.. 271-273
Engineering and structural defects in relation to accident occurrence....................................... 165,166
Engineers, safety man’s cooperation with............................................................................... 256
Engines and motors, boilers and steam pipes, and power transmission, causes of accidents............
72
English, inability to speak, relation of, to accidents...................................................... 40,41,144-146
F.xperience, accident. (See Accident experience.)
Explosions and spills, cause of accidents, blast furnaces...........................................................
93
Explosions, cause of .accidents, open hearths........................................................................ 110, 1 1
1
F.
Fabricating shops, accident experience in.................................................................... 48,49,231-233
Fabricating shops, causes of accidents in................................................................................ 126
Fabricating shops, safety movement in, results of........................................................ 20,21,231-233
Fabricating, mechanical, and yard departments. (See Mechanical, fabricating, and yard depart­
ments.)
Falling objects as physical cause of accidents...................................................................... 37,78-80
00
Falling objects, cause of accidents, blast furnaces.................................................................... 1
Falls of worker as physical cause of accidents..................................................................... 37,80-82
Falls of worker, car.se of accidents, blast furnaces.................................................................... 1
01
Fatalities. (See Death, injuries causing; also Pates, industrial accident.)
Forge shops, accident experience in....................................................................................... 233
Foundries, accident experience in.................................................................................. 47,219,220
Foundries, causes of accidents in........................................................................................... 1
16
Foundries, occupational accident rates in............................................................................... 220
Foundries and steel works. (See Steel works and foundries.)
Frequency rates................................................................................................................. 53-55
Frequency rates. (See also Rates, industrial accident.)
Furnace slips. (See Slips, furnace.)
Furnace, the modern, description of......................................................................................
9
4




294

INDEX.

G.
Page.
Gas nam cause of accidents, blast furnaces......................................................................... 08-100
es,
Gas flames, cause of accidents, open hearths............................................................................ Ill
Geographic location of steel plants, a possible factor in accident occurrence........................... 40,140,141
Germany, Dusseldorf district, day and night accident rates....................................................151,152

H
.
Handling tools and objects:
Actual and relative accident frequency rates...................................................................... 253
As physical cause of accidents...................................................................................... 37,82-84
Blast furnaces............................................................................................................... 1 1
0
Open hearths............................................................................................................. 111,112
Hang and scatfold, furnace men’s terms, meaning of.................................................................
95
Hospital records, use of, in study of nature of injury......................................................... 44,191,192
Hoisting chains, safety code for.......................................................................................... 257-259
Hot substances:
As physical cause of accidents..................................................................................... 37,76-78
Bessemer department..................................................................................................... 115
Blast furnaces.............................................................................................................. 91-100
Open hearths........................................................................................ .................... 108-111
Hot water and steam, cause of accidents, open hearths............................................................. Ill
Hour of day, distribution of accidents and production by....................................................... 154-163
Human factor, the, in accident occurrence ....................................... ........................... 39-42,131-163
Age, influence of, on accident rate^............................................................................ 40,141-144
Age groups, accident frequency and severity, according to................................................ 143s1
44
Alcohol, use of, discipline experience of a large steel plant....................................... ............ 1
53
Alcohol, use of, influence of, on accidents................................................................... 41,153,154
Conjugal conditioning! uence of, on accidents................................................ ................. 41,152
Day and night accident rates............................................................................... . 41,146-152
Day and night accident rates, comparison of, large steel plant, 1905 to 1607 and 1908 to 1910..... 157
Day and nieht accident rates in a large steel plant, by years, 1907 to 1914............................... 150
English, inability to speak, relation of, to accidents................................................. 40,41,144-146
Experience of worker, accident frequency rates according to................................................ 13
1
Geographic location! of steel plants and immigrant labor............................................... 40,140,141
Germany, Dusseldorf district, day and night accident rates in, specified industry groups......... 1 1
5
Labor recruiting, effect of, on accident rates..................................................................... 40,133
Press hands and employees in other occupations, number injured per day, after beginning work
162
on machine.................................................... ..........................................................
Press hands, inexperienced, and experienced metal workers, accidents to, by hour of day....... 162
Production and accidents, relation of, among press hands.......................................... *
...... 157,158
Production and accidents, relation of, provisional explanation of........................................ 159-161
Production and accidents, relation of, to extreme inexperience of worker............................ 161-163
Production, total, per cent of, in day turns, in nine mills of a large steel plant 1912and 1913....... 159
Selective discharge......................................................................................................... 140
Speeding up, effect of, on accident rates............................................................................ 132
Summary..................................................................................................................... 39-42
W
orkirtg hours, distribution through, of accidents m machine building andiron and steel Indus! ry 1 6
5
Working hours, distribution through, of production and accidents............................. 41,42,154-163
Hydraulic hoist, Bessemer department, cause of accidents in..................................................... 115

I.
Industrial accident rates. (See Rates, industrial accident.)
Industrial railways, accidents in connection with.....................................................................
27
Industrial railways, and plants producing specified products, trend of accident rates....................
26
Infection, declining rate of............................................................................................. 43.183,184
Injuries causing death, nature and anatomical location of, 956 cases in iron and steel industry, 1905
to 1914..........................................................................................................................
1
74
Injury, nature of...................................................................................................... 42-45,178-193
Blastfurnaces............................................................................................................ 184-187
Care of the injured, first-aid appliances, etc............................................................ 44,45,192-193
Departments, in the................................................................................................ 43,179-184
Disabilities, short-term, rapid decline of......................................................................... 191,192
Distribution of accident cases during first week.................................................................. 192
Hospital records, use of............................................................................................44,191,192
Tnfected and other cases of injury, by departments, 1905 to 1914........................................... 1 3
8
Infection............................................................................................................... 43,183,184
Labor recruiting and, and other factors, use of rates in study o f.............................. ............65,66
M
achine building and iron and steel industry...................................................................43,179
Occupation and.................................................................................................. 43,44,184-191
Open hearths............................................................................................................. 187-189
Summary of................................................................................................................. 42-45
Safety man’s pfogress, average time lost not a measure of.................................................... 1
92
Tube mills................................................................................................................. 189-191
Injury, results of, accident rates according to........................................................................ 197-199
Injury, results of, summary of accidents by......................................................................... 274-276
Inspection, safety load, etc., of hoistinef chains, safety code for................................................ 257-259
Interest in safety problem, maintenance of, by safety man........................................................ 246
International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions, and Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics, severity rates and scales of, compared..................................................................... 276-289
Iron and steel industry:
Accident causes, principal............................................................................................... 67-71
M
achine building and, comparison of causes in.................................................................. 87,88
Other industries and, comparison of accident hazards in............................................... 46,200-203
Safety movement in, progress of........................................................................... 45,46,194-204
(See also M
achine building and iron and steel industry.)




INDEX.

295

LPage.
Labor recruiting, relation of, to accident occurrence.................................................. 40,65,66,133-136
Limestone, coke, and ore, rational treatment of, in blast-furnace practice.................................... 96-98
M.
M
achine building, and iron and steel industry:
Accidents in; distribution of, through hours of day turn and night turn................................ 15
6
Nature of injury in, summary of......................................................................................
43
Physical accident causes in, comparison of........................................................................ 87-88
M
aterial, safe loads, etc., of hoisting chains, safety code for..................................................... 257-259
Mechanical department, accident experience in................................................................ 49,237.238
Mechanical department, safety movement in, results of............................................................ 21,22
Mechanical, fabricating, and yard departments:
Causes of accidents in.................................................................................................. 125-130
Control of accidents in, summary of.................................................................................
39
Fabricating shops.......................................................................................................... 126
Mechanical department.................................................................................................. 125
Mechanics and fabricators, accident reduction methods among.......................................... 126,127
Safety methods in yards.............................................................................................. 129,130
Yard department....................................................................................................... 128,129
Yards, safety methods in............................................................................................. 129,130
Medical and surgical care of the injury................................................................................ 192,193
Metal mines, coal mines, and iron and steel industries, fatality rates in....................................... 203
Methods of the safety man........................................................................................ 50,51,246-256
M
iscellaneous departments, accident experience in............................................................... 241-243
Miscellaneous departments, accident prevention in.................................................................. 169
Monday Effect in Industry, quotation from Prof. A. F. Stanley Kent’s.................................... 1
61
N.
Nature of injury. (See Injury, nature of.)
Night and day accident rates. (See Day and night accident rates.)
O
.
Occupations:
Accident experience by, and by departments......................................................... 46-50,205-245
Accident rates and, in blast furnaces................................................................................ 209
Accident rates and, in foundries...................................................................................... 220
Accident rates and, in open hearths, 1905 to 1914................................................................ 218
Accident rates and, in sheet mills.................................................................................... 227
Accident rates and, in tube mills..................................................................................... 230
Causes and, frequency rates by, blast furnaces................................................................ 104-105
Causes and, frequency rates by, open hearths................................................................. 113,114
Causes and, frequency rates by, sheet mills....................................................................... 1 4
2
Causes and, frequency rates by, tube mills..................................................................... 120,121
Departments and, accident experience by.............................................................. 46-50,205-245
Nature of injury and................................................................................................... 184-191
Nature of injury and, blast furnaces.............................................................................. 184-187
Nature of injury and, open hearths............................................................................... 187-189
Nature of injury and, summary of................................................................................... 42-45
Nature of injury and, tube mills................................................................................... 189-191
Open-hearth furnaces:
Accident experience in............................................................................................ 47,214-218
.......................................................................... 167,168
Accident prevention in.................... v
Bessemer steel works and, results of safety movement in.................................................... 17,18
Causes of accidents in.................................................................................................. 106-114
Causes, unclassified, of accidents in............................................................................... 112,113
Control of accidents in, summary of.................................................................................
38
Occupational accident rates......................................................................................... 217,218
Occupations and causes in, frequency rates by................................................................ 113,114
Ore, coke, and limestone, rational treatment of, in blast-furnace practice.................................... 96-98
Organization, importance of, in accident prevention................................................................
169
Organized safety work, effect of, in reducing accidents........................................................... 203,204
Output and employment, relations of, to accident occurrence, basic data for charts 11, 12, 13....... 271-273
P.
Permanent partial disabilities, rates for..................................................................................57-60
Permanent total disabilities, rates for.....................................................................................56,57
Physical causes of accidents......................................................................................... 36,37,67-88
Physical causes of accidents. (See also Causes and prevention of accidents.)
Plate mills, accident experience in.............................................................................. 47,48,223,224
Plate mills, causes of accidents in....................................................................................... 121,122
Power houses, accident experience in.............................................................................;... 238,239
Power transmission, engines and motors, boilers and steam pipes, causes of accidents...................
72
Power vehicles:
As physical cause of accidents......................................................................................... 84,85
Blastfurnaces............................................................................................................ 101,102
Open hearths............................................................................................................... 112
Press hands and workers in other occupations, average number injured per day.......................... 162
Press hands, inexperienced, and experienced metal workers, accidents to, by hour of day.............. 162
Press hands, relation among, of productions and accidents..................................................... 157,158
Prevention of accidents. (See Causes and prevention of accidents.)
Production and accidents, distribution of, through working hours........................................... 154-163
Production and accidents, relation of, among press hands...................................................... 157,158
Production, total of day turns, per cent of, in specified hour of employment innine mills of asteel plant 159
Prohibitive cost, objection of, in accident prevention................./ .......................................... 171,172
Puddle mills, accident experience in................................................................................... 224,225




296

INDEX.

R.
Rates, industrial accident:
Page.
A ll departments, frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1914..................................................................
245
A ll plants and special groups of plants, b y departments, frequency and severity....................... 243,244
Age groups, severity rates, in large steel plants, b y two different scales.............................................
281
Age groups, severity rates, in tube m ill, b y tw o different scales.........................................................
281
Bureau of Labor Statistics (U nited States) and International Association of Accident Boards
and Commissions, comparison of severity rates according to scales o f ......................................... 276-289’
Bessemer department, frequency and severity, b y causes, 1907 to 1914..............................................
114
Bessemer department, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants.......... .............................
213
Bessemer department, severity rates, b y tw o different scales...............................................................
284
Blast furnaces, comparison of rates in, for years of similar industrial activity, 1906 and 1913____
104
Blast furnaces, frequency rates, b y occupation and causes, 1905 to 1914.............................................
105
Blast furnaces, frequency rates, b y nature of injury and occupation, 1905 to. 1914............................
185
Blast furnaces, frequency rates for certain causes....................................................................................
265
Blast furnaces, frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917......................................................................
17
Blast furnaces, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1905 to 1914..................................................
89
Blast furnaces, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants.....................................................
20&
Blast furnaces, occupational accident rates, 1905 to 1914........................................................................
209
Blast furnaces, occupational groups in, severity rates, b y tw o different scales.................................
284
Blast furnaces, severity rates, b y tw o different scales......................................................................... 279,284
Boilers and steam pipes, engines and m otors, power transmission^ as causes, frequency and
severity rates, 1907 to 1914...........................................................................................................................
72
Cause groups, principal, frequency and severity rates, b y departments, 1905 to 1914......................
87
Coal mines, metal mines, and iron and steel industry, fatality rates...................................................
203Cranes and hoists, frequency and severity rates, b y departments, 1907 to 1914.......... ..................... 74,75
Departments and nature of injury, frequency and severity rates.........................................................
180
Departments of tw o groups of plants, frequency and severity rates i n ................................................
205
Dusseldorf district, Germany, night and day rates, b y industry groups............................................
151
Electrical department, frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1914............................ *..........................
236
Electrical departments, severity rates, b y tw o different scales.............................................................
288
English, inability to speak, severity rates according to, in large steel plant, b y tw o different scales.
282
Fabricating departments, working machines in, frequency rates for 1907 to 1914.............................
267
Fabricating shops, frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917..................................................................
21
Fabricating shops, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914............................................
126
Fabricating shops, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants............................................ 231,232
Fabricating shops, severity rates, b y tw o different scales.................................................................. 280,288
79
Falling objects, frequency and Severity rates, b y departments, 1907 to 1914............................. *____
Falls of worker, frequency and severity rates, b y departments, 1907 to 1914.....................................
81
Fatalities, tim e loss due to, m ethod of estimating, in com putin g rates...............................................
56Foundries, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914.........................................................
116
Foundries, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of p lan ts.............................................................
219
Foundries, occupational accident rates, 1910 to 1914................................................................................
220
Foundries, severity rates, b y tw o different scales....................................................................................
285
Frequency rates................................................................................................................................................ 53-55
Handling tools and objects, actual and relative frequency rates...........................................................
25&
Handling tools and objects, frequency and severity rates 1907 to 1914................................................ 82,83
H ot substances, frequency and severity rates, b y departments, 1907 to 1914.....................................
77
Industrial railways, frequency rates, 1915 to 1917.....................................................................................
26
Infected and other cases of injury, frequency rates, in five departments, 1905 to 1914.....................
183
Injury, nature of, frequency rates b y ....................................................................................................... 268,269
Injury, result of, frequency rates of..............................................................................................................
270International Association of A ccident Boards and Commissions and Bureau of Labor Statistics
(United States), comparison of severity rates according to^cales o f................................................ 276-289
Iron and steel industry, fatalities and total accidents, 1913 to 1917.......................................................
24
Iron and steel industry, frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917......................................................
1&
Iron and steel industry, frequency and severity rates, b y result of in ju ry ..................................... 197-199
Iron and steel industry, frequency and severity rates, 1905 to 1914 com bin ed...................................
68
Iron and steel industry, frequency and severity rates, for subdivisions o f groups of principal causes
69
Iron and steel industry, frequency and severity rates, in tw o groups of p lan ts................................. 195,196
Iron and steel industry, frequency rates, b y causes, 1913 to 1917..........................................................
28
Iron and steel industry, severity rates, b y tw o different scales......................................................... 279,283
Large steel plant, discipline rates, for use o f alcoholic intoxicants.........................................................
155
Large steel plant, frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1913..................................................................
61
Large steel plant, frequency and severity rates, 1905 to 1917..................................................................
15
Large steel plant, frequency and severity rates, according to age groups, 1907 to 1914....................
143
Large steel plant, frequency and severity rates, according to inability to speak English, 1906 to
1913..................................................................................................................................................................
145
Large steel plant, frequency rates, according to age groups, 1906 to 1910................................................
141
Large steel plant, frequency rates, according to period of experience..................................................
131
Large steel plant, frequency rates, b y causes and by departments, after introducing safety organ­
ization.............................................................................................................................................................
264
Large steel plant, frequency rates, b y conjugal condition, 1906 to 1910....................................................
152
Large steel plant, night and day rates, 1907 to 1914.................................................................................
150
Large steel plant, night and day severity rates, b y tw o different scales..............................................
283
Large steel plant, severity rates, according to inability to speak English, b y two different scales. . .
282
Large steel plant, severity rates, b y age groups, under tw o different scales.......................................
281
Large steel plant, severity rates, b y tw o different scales........................................................................
281
Machine building and iron and steel industry, frequency and severity rates, b y nature of injury,
1905 to 1914......................................................................................................................................................
179
Machine building and iron and steel industry, severity rates, b y tw o different scales....................
278
Machine building and steel manufacture, frequency and severity rates..............................................
60
Machine building and steel manufacture, severity rates, b y tw o different scales..............................
281
Meaning of.......................................................................................................................................................... 52,53
Mechanical department, frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917.....................................................
21
Mechanical department, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914................................
125
Mechanical department, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants................................. 237,238
Mechanical department, severity rates, b y tw o different scales....................................................... 281,289
Mechanical department, working machines in, frequency rates for, 1907 to 1914.............................
267
Miscellaneous causes, frequency and severity rates, b y departments, 1907 to 1914............................
8ft




INDEX.

297

Rates, industrial accident—Continued.
Page.
Miscellaneous departments, frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1914...............................................
241
Miscellaneous departments, severity rates, b y tw o different scales......................................................
289
Nature of injury, frequency rates b y ........................................................................................................ 268,269
Nature of injury, labor recruiting, and other factors, use of rates in study o f....................................65,66
Night and day frequency rates, 1905 to 1907 and 1908 to 1910................................................................
157
Night and day severity rates, large steel plant, b y tw o different scales..............................................
283
Occupational groups in blast furnaces, severity rates, b y tw o different scales..................................
284
286
Occupational groups in foundries, severity rates, b y tw o different scales..........................................
Occupational groups in open hearths, severity rates, b y tw o different scales....................................
285
Occupational groups in sheet m ills, severity rates, b y tw o different scales........................................
287
Occupational groups in tube mills, severity rates, b y tw o different scales.........................................
287
Open hearths, occupational accident rates. 1905 to 1914..........................................................................
218
O pen hearths, occupational groups, severity rates, b y tw o different scales.......................................
285
Open hearths, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914....................................................
106
215
Open hearths, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants.......................................................
Open hearths, frequency rates, b y occupations and causes, 1905 to 1914.............................................
113
Open hearths, frequency rates, b y nature of injury and occupation, 1907 to 1914......................... 187,188
Open hearths, frequency rates, for certain causes.....................................................................................
265
Open hearths, severity rates, b y tw o different scales...............................................................................
285
Permanent partial disabilities....................................................................................................................... 57-60
Permanent total disabilities...........................................................................................................................56,57
26
Plants producing specified products and industrial railways, frequency rates, 1913 to 1917...........
Plants producing specified products, fatality rates. 1913 to 1917...........................................................
25
Plants producing specified products, frequency rates, b y causes, 1913 to 1915............................... 260-263
Plate mills, frequency rates, for specified causes.......................................................................................
266
Plate mills, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914.........................................................
121
Plate mills, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of p lan ts........................................................ - .
224
Plate mills; severity rates, b y tw o different rates.....................................................................................
286
Power vehicles, frequency and severity, b y departments, 1907 to 1914................................................ 84,85
Power vehicles in yards, frequency rates for 1907 to 1914........................................................................
268
R olling mills, frequency rates for certain causes.......................................................................................
266
117
R olling mills, heavy, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914.......................................
Rolling mills, heavy,frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants....................................... 221,222
Rolling mills, heavy, frequency rates, for certain causes........................................................................
266
R olling mills, heavy, severity rates, b y tw o different scales..................................................................
286
R olling m ills,light, miscellaneous,frequency and severity rates, 1900 to 1914..................................
230
R olling m ills,unclassified, frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1917................................................
IS
R olling m ills, unclassified, severity rates, b y tw o different scales...................................................... 280,288
Safety systems, degree of developm ent of, frequency rates according t o .............................................
20i
Scales of Bureau of Labor Statistics (U nited States) and International Association of A ccident
Boards and Commissions, comparison of severity rates according t o ............................................. 276-2S.'
Severity rates............................................................................................................... 35,36,55,56,60-64,276-289
Sheet m ills,frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917.............................................................................
IS
Sheet m ills,frequency and severity ra tes,by causes, 1907 to 1914.........................................................
123
Sheet m ills, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants-....................................................... 225,226
Sheet m ills, frequency rates, b y occupations and causes, 1907 to 1914..................................................
124
Sheet mills frequen cy rates, for specified causes.......................................................................................
266
Sheet m ills,occupational accident rates, 1910rto 1914................................................................................
227
Sheet m ills, severity rates, b y tw o different scales. . . , .......................................................................... 280,287
Steel manufacture and machine buildin g, severity rates, b y tw o different scales.............................
281
Steel w orks, frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917............................................................................
17
Steel w orks, severity rates, b y tw o different scales...................................................................................
279
T ube m ill, frequency and severity rates, according to age groups, 1907 to 1914..................................
144
Tube m ills,frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917.............................................................................
19
T ube m ills,frequency and severity rates,by causes, 1907 to 1914..........................................................
119
Tube mills, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants............................................................
228
Tube m ills,frequency rates,by nature ofin ju ry and occupation, 1907 to 1914..................................
190
Tube m ills,frequency ra tes,by occupations and causes, 1907 to 1914..................................................
121
266
Tube m ills, frequency rates for specified causes............................................................................ ............
T ube m ills, occupational accident rates, 1907 to 1914................................................................................
230
Tube mills, severity rates, b y age groups, b y tw o different scales........................................................
281
Tube m ills,severity rates, b y two different scales................................................................................. 280,287
Use o f, in study of accident causes................................................................................................................ 64,65
Use of, in study of nature of injury, labor recruiting, and other factors............................................... 65,66
W ire drawing,frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1914.................................................................... 234,235
W ire drawing, frequency and severity rates, 1910 to 1917........................................................................
20
W ire drawing, severity rates, b y tw o different scales........................................................................... 280,288
W orking m achines,frequency and severity rates, b y departments, 1907 to 1914...............................
73
W orking machines, frequency rates for, 1907 to 1914.................................................................................
267
Y ards, frequency and severity rates, 1907 to 1917......................................................................................
22
Yards, frequency and severity rates, b y causes, 1907 to 1914...................................................................
128
Y ards, frequency and severity rates, tw o groups of plants.....................................................................
239
Yards, power vehicles in, frequency rates for, 1907 to 1914......................................................................
268
Yards, severity rates, b y tw o different scales......................................................................................... 281,289
Kates, use of, in study of accident causes............................................................................................................64,65
Rates, use of, in study o f nature of injury, labor recruiting and other factors.............................................65, 66
Rates. (See also Rates, industrial accident.)
"Records and charts, use of, b y safety m an................................................................................................ 50,246-250
Results of injury. (See Injury, results of.)
Rings and hooks, safety load, etc., of hoisting chains, safety code for........................................................ 257-259
R o d m ills, accident experience in .........................................................................................................................
225
Rolling mills'.
Causes of accidents in ............................................................................................................................ 117-124,266
Contro 1o f accidents in , summary o f .............................................................................................................. 38,39
H ea vy, accident experience in, summary o f...................................................................................... 47,220-222
H eavy, causes of accidents in ...................................................................................................................... 117-llp
H eavy and light, accident experience in .............................................................................. 47,220-222,230,231
Light, miscellaneous, accident experience in............. ...............................................- ...................... 48,230,231




29 8

INDEX.

R olling mills—Concluded.
Page.
Plate m ills, accident experience in ................................................................................................. 47,48,223,224
Plate mills, causes of accidents i n .............................................................................................................. 121,122
Prevention of accidents in ............................................................................................................................ 168,169
Sheet mills, accident experience i n ....................................................................................................... 48,225-227
Sheet m ills, causes of accidents i n ................................................................. : ....... ................................... 123,124
Sheet m ills, safety m ovement in ; results o f .................................................................................................
18
T ube mills, accident experience in ........................................................................................................ 48,228-230
T ube mills, causes of accidents in ...............................................................................................................119-121
Tube mills, safety movem ent in, results o f................................................................................................ 18,19
Unclassified, results of safety m ovem ent in ................................................................................................
19
Running stopper, in Bessemer department, cause of accidents................................................................. 115,116

S.
Safety code for hoisting chains.......................................................................................................................... 257-259
Safety man, methods of th e .................................................................................................................... 50,51,246-256
Awards and bonus plans of.............................................................................................................. 50,51,254^256
Bulletin hoards and displays o f .....................................................................................................................
256
Charting of accident causes.......................................................................................................................... 251-254
Charts, m ethod of preparing....................................................................................................................... 250,251
Community agencies, cooperation w ith..................................................................................................... 51,256
Engineers, skill, cooperation w ith .................................................................................................................
256
Maintenance of interest...................................................................................................................................
246
Records and charts, use of..................................................................................................................... 50,246-250
Safety methods in yards..................................................................................................................................... 129,130
Safety movement:
Accident rates over a series of years, showing progress........................................................................ 195-197
Bessemer and open-hearth steel works, results i n ..................................................................................... 17,18
Blast furnaces, results i n ................................................................................................................................. 16,17
Coal mines, metal mines, and iron and steel industry, fatality rates i n ..............................................
203
Fabricating, shops, results in .......................................................................................................... 20,21,231-233
Illustrations from individual plants..............1............................................................................... 45,46,199,200
Injury, results of, accident rates according to, over a series of years................................................ 197-199
Iron and steel industry, comparison of, with other industries...................................................... 46,200-203
Mechanical departments, results i n .............................................................................................................. 21,22
Organized safety work, effect of, in reducing accidents......... : ............................................................ 203,204
Prevention of accidents, illustrations of progress in ................................................................... 45,46,199,200
Progress o f........................................................................................................................................... 45,46,194-204
Results of , in various departm ents............................................................... ............................................... 16-22
Rolling mills, unclassified, results in ............................................................................................................
19
Safety systems, degree of developm ent of, accident rates classified according t o ..............................
204
Sheet mills, results i n .......................................................................................................................................
18
Tim e lost, average, not a measure of progress............................................................................................
192
Tube mills, results in ........................................................................................................................................ 18,19
War, review of safety m ovem ent with special reference to th e.............................................................. 11-32
Wire-drawing department, results i n ...........................................................................................................
20
22
Yards, results in ................................................................................................................................................
Safety organization, accident rates after introducing, experience of a large steel p lan t..........................
264
Safety system, degree of developm ent of, and accident rates........................................................................
204
Scaffold and hang, furnace m en’s terms, meaning o f .......................................................................................
95
Scales of tim e losses for showing severity of accidents................................................................................. 276-289
Scope and purpose of present report....................................................................................................................
35
Selective discharge, a factor in accident occurrence.........................................................................................
140
Severity rates............................................................................................1................................................... 35,36,55,56
Severity rates, use of, illustrations o f................................................................................................................... 60-63
Severity rates. (See also Rates, industrial accident.)
Severity rating, growing recognition of importance of.....................................................................................
64
Sheet mills:
Accident experience in ........................................................................................................................... 48,225-227
Causes of accident i n ..................................................................................................................................... 123,124
Occupational accident rates in .......................................................................................................................
227
Safety m ovem ent in, results o f......................................................................................................................
18
Slips, furnace, occurrence of, in blast furnaces.................................................................................................. 94-98
Sparks and splashes, cause of accidents, blast furnaces................................................................................... 92,93
Sparks and splashes, cause of accidents, open hearths.....................................................................................
109
Specifications, safe load, etc., of hoisting chains, safety code for............................................................... 257-259
Speeding up, effect of, on accident rates.............................................................................................................
132
Spill?, and explosions, cause of accidents, blast furnaces................................................................................
93
Spills, cause of accidents, open hearths...........................................*.............................................................. 109,110
Steam and hot water. (See H ot water and steam.)
Steel works and foundries, causes of accidents in .......................................................................................... 106-116
Bessemer department................................................................................................................................... 114r-116
Breakouts, open hearths..................................................................................................................................
108
Causes, unclassified, Bessemer departm ent................................................................................................
115
Causes, unclassified, open hearth............................................................................................................... 112,113
Cranes and hoists, Bessemer departm ent....................................................................................................
115
Cranes and hoists, open hearths................................................................................................................. 107,108
Explosions, open hearths............................................................................................................................. 110, 111
Foundry department.......................................................................................................................................
116
Gas flames, open hearths.................................................................................................................................
I ll
Handling tools and objects, open hearths................................................................................................I l l , 112
Hot substances, Bessemer department........................................................................................................
115
Hot substances, open hearths....................................................................................................................108-111
H ot water and steam, open hearths..............................................................................................................
I ll
Hydraulic hoist, Bessemer departm ent.......................................................................................................
115
Occupations and causes, accident frequency b y , open hearths........................................................... 113,114
Open hearths.................................................................................................................................................. 10&-114
Power vehicles, open hearths.........................................................................................................................
112
“ Running s to p p e r/’ Bessemer departm ent.......................................................................................... 115,116




INDEX.

299

Steel works and foundries, causes of accidents in—Concluded.
Page:
Sparks and splashes, open hearths............................................... ................................................................
109
Spills, open hearths...................................................................................................................................... 109,110
W orking machines, Bessemer departm ent.................................................................................................
115
W orking machines, open hearths..................................................................................................................
107
Structural steel, erection of, accident experience in, summary o f .................................................. 49,50,242,243
Surgical and medical care of the in ju ry ........................................................................................................... 192,193
T.
Time allowances, comparative, for specified disabilities, under laws of various States..........................
58
Time losses fixed for death ana permanent disabilities..................................................................................
5J
Tim e losses in one plant, illustrative..................................................................................................................
60
Tim e losses, scales of for weighting industrial accidents............................................................................. 277,278
Tim e cost, average, not a measure of progress in accident prevention........................................................
192
Tube mills:
A ccident experience i n ........................................................................................................................... 48,228-230
Causes of accidents i n .................................................................................................................................. 119-121
Occupational accident rates in .......................................................................................................................
230
Safety movement in, results o f...................................................................................................................... 18,19
W.
W ar, review of safety movement with special reference to th e..................................................................... 11-32
Accident causes, trend of, 1913 to 1917.........................................................................................................
28
Accident rates, b y products, during war period........................................................................................ 25-27
Accidents during the war period, special study of.................................................................................... 23-32
Accidents in connection with industrial railways, during war period.................................................
27
Bessemer and open-hearth steel works, results of safety movement in ................................................ 17,18
Blast furnaces, results of safety movement in ............................................................................................ 16,17
Charts A, B, and C .......................................................................................................................................... 29-32
Departments, summary of experience in .................................................................................................... 22,23
Fabricating shops, results of safety movement i n .................................................................................... 20,21
Mechanical department, results of safety movement in .................................. \ ..................................... 21,22
R olling mills* unclassified, results of safety movement i n ......................................................................
19
Safety experience of a group of plants, 1907 to 1917.................................................................................. 15,16
Safety movement, results of, in various departments..............................................................................16-23
Sheet mills, results of safety movement i n .................................................................................................
18
Tube mills, results of safety movement i n ................................................................................................. 18,19
Wiredrawing, results of safety movement i n .............................................................................................
20
22
Yard department, results of safety movement i n ....................................................................................
W iredrawing, accident experience in .......................................................................................................... 49,234,235
Wiredrawing, safety movement in, results of....................................................................................................
20
W orking hours, distribution through, of production and accidents................................................ 41,42,154-163
W orking machines:
As physical cause of accidents................................................................................................................. 36,72-74
Bessemer department......................................................................................................................................
115
Blast furnaces....................................................................................................................................................
90
Open hearths.....................................................................................................................................................
107
Y.
Yard, fabricating, and mechanical departments. ( See Mechanical, fabricating, and yard departments.)
Yards:
Accident experience i n ___ *................................................................................................................... 49, 239-241
A ccident prevention in ....................................................................................................................................
169
Causes of accidents i n ........................................................... ....................................................................... 128,129
Safety methods in ......................................................................................................................................... 129,130
Safety movement in, results o f......................................................................................................................
22




A D D IT IO N A L COPIE S
OF THIS PUBLICATION M A Y B E PROCURED FROM
TH E SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
GO VERN M EN T PRINTING OFFICE
W A SH IN G TO N , D . C.
AT

25 CEN TS P E R C O P Y

V