The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
77th Congress, 2d Session - House Document No. 879
UNITED STATES DEPARTM ENT OF LABOR
Frances Perkins, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Isador Lubin, Commissioner (on leave)
A. F. Hinrichs, Acting Commissioner
+
Shipyard Injuries and Their
Causes
1941
♦
Prepared by
D ivision o f Industrial Accident Statistics
Max D . Kossoris, C hief
B u lletin 7*1.0. 722
{Reprinted from die M onthly L abor R eview, October 1942, with additional data}
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1943
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, W ashington, D . C.
Price 10 cents
CONTENTS
Page
Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Scope and method of survey_________________________________________
The industry and its hazards_________________________________________
The industry record, 1941--------------------------------------------------------------------The operating departments_________________________________________
Service, maintenance, and miscellaneous departments_________________
Frequency by size of yard______________________________________________
Geographic and operational distribution______________________
D etailed Section
Time of injury:
Monthly record_________________________________________________
Daily record____________________________________________________
Shift-hour of injury occurrence_____________________________________
Injuries and the age of workers---------------------------------------------------------Kinds of injuries sustained:
Part of body affected--------------------------------------------Nature of injury_________________________________,______________
Causes of injury:
Types of accident-------------------------------------------------------------------------Agencies causing accident__________________________________________
Unsafe mechanical or physical condition_____________________________
Unsafe acts of persons_____________________________________
Typical shipyard accidents-------------------------------------------------------------------Description of accidents and suggested methods of prevention_________
Appendix.—Tables----- ---------- -------------— ------------- -------------------------
1
3
4
5
5
7
7
9
9
10
10
12
22
13
14
15
17
17
Letter of Transmittal
U nited States D epartment of L abor,
B ureau of L abor Statistics,
Washington, D. 0., October 20,1942.
The Secretary of L abor:
I have the honor to transmit herewith a report on the occurrence
and causes of industrial injuries to shipyard workers in the United
States during 1941. This report was prepared in the Division of
Industrial Accident Statistics by Frank S. McElroy and George R.
McCormack.
A. F. H inrichs, Acting Commissioner.
Hon. F rances P erkins,
Secretary of Labor.
ii
16
B u lletin 7{o. 722 o f the
U n ited States B ureau o f Labor S tatistics
^Reprinted from the M onthly L abor R eview, October 1942, with additional data]
SHIPYA RD IN JU R IE S AND T H E IR CAUSES, 1941
Summary
DISABLING work injuries cut heavily into essential manpower in
the shipbuilding industry during 1941. A survey of the industrial
injuries which occurred in 93 shipyards revealed that, for every million
man-hours worked, 27 workers were disabled. About 0.6 percent of
these injuries resulted in death or so incapacitated the workers as to
make them unfit for further industrial activity; 4.9 percent left the
injured workers with lesser permanent impairments; and 94.5 percent
resulted in temporary disabilities lasting an average of 17 days each.
While shipbuilding workers are injured more frequently than factory
workers generally, the shipyards have been able to hold their frequency
rates below those in the particular group of industries that have the
most comparable processes.
The most hazardous operations in the industry were those connected
with erection on the ways, in which department the actual assembly
and fitting together of the many parts comprising the hull of a ship
takes place. These operations averaged 40.4 disabling injuries for
every million man-hours worked. Other departments in the group
with relatively high frequency rates almost invariably were closely
related to and subject to many of the hazards of hull construction.
The operating departments having the lowest injury-frequency rates
were nearly all concerned with fitting-out operations.
The electrical departments of the reporting yards did not have a
particularly high injury frequency, but as evidenced by their high ratio
of 1 death in 70 injuries, the probability that an injury would result
fatally was much higher in those units than in any of the other operat
ing department groups.
Generally speaking, it was safer to work in the very large shipyards
than in the smaller plants. When grouped according to size of plant,
the average frequency rates for the reporting yards varied almost
directly from a high of 48.9, for yards of the smallest size, to a low
of 17.4, for yards of the largest size. When considered geographically,
the average frequency rates of yards on the Atlantic Coast, particu
larly in the South Atlantic %rea, were considerably lower than the
average for any other region. The North Atlantic area, however, had
the highest proportion of serious injuries among the various regions.
To supplement the general information supplied to the Bureau for
the year 1941 by the large group of 93 shipyards, a detailed analysis
was made of the individual records of 3,196 injuries, which occurred
during the year in 11 of these yards. The detailed data were analyzed
to determine the time of injury, the age of injured persons, the kinds
of injuries experienced, and the causes of injury.
1
2
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
The detailed analysis indicated that injuries generally occurred less
frequently in the summer months than in the fall, winter, or spring.
Regular day-shift workers experienced a greater volume of injuries
on Mondays than on any other weekday. Second- and third-shift
injuries, however, reached peak volume on Fridays and Wednesdays.
The shift-hour pattern of injury occurrence showed the peak of dayshift injuries to be in the third working hour, with a second and lesser
peak appearing in the eighth hour. Tne evening and night shifts, on
the other hand, had their greatest volume of injuries in the first work*
inghour.
The limited volume of information available regarding the age dis
tribution of shipyard workers gave some support to the common
theory that injuries to older workers tend to be more severe than those
experienced by younger persons. The evidence regarding the fre
quency of accidents by age of worker was inconclusive.
Injuries to the lower extremities were far more common than injuries
to other parts of the body. Head injuries accounted for 21 percent of
the total number of disabling injuries. In spite of the fact that nearly
three-fourths of the head injuries consisted of eye cases, this group
of injuries produced by far the greatest proportion of deaths among
the cases for which such details were known. Finger injuries produced
the greatest proportion of permanent partial disabilities. Abdominal
injuries generally were the most severe kind of temporary injuries.
The most prevalent types of disabling injuries were strains, sprains,
and bruises; cuts and lacerations; fractures; and bums or scalds.
Skull fractures accounted for about 40 percent of the fatalities for
which full details were available, and amputations, mostly of fingers,
accounted for over half of the permanent partial disabilities. Hernia
cases, requiring an average of 51 days for recovery, were the most
severe type of temporary injuries.
Accidents in which workers were struck by falling, flying, or moving
objects produced more injuries than any other type of accident. Fatal
ities, however, resulted most frequently from falls from one level to
another. Permanent partial disabilities resulted most frequently from
accidents in which the worker was caught in, on, or between objects.
The metal parts from which ships are constructed constituted the
leading agency with which injuries were associated, followed by flying
particles, hand tools, and working surfaces. Accidents of the “ struck
by” type accounted for a majority of the injuries connected with each
of these agencies, except working surfaces. Accidents involving
working surfaces, on the other hand, were largely falls or slips.
The serious problem of housekeeping in shipyards is indicated by the
fact that hazardous arrangement or procedure was a factor in over
half of the accidents analyzed. This element of hazard was prominent
in practically every division of the accident type and agency classi
fications.
Among the unsafe acts of persons, which contributed to the occur
rence of injuries, that of taking an unsafe position or posture was most
frequently involved in the accident cases analyzed. This type of un
safe procedure, which includes such specific acts as lifting with bent
back, standing under suspended loads and exposure to falling or
sliding objects, was prominent in all of the operating departments of
the shipyards and was one of the leading causes of nearly all of the
various types of accident.
Better supervision and intensified educational programs to stress
SCOPE AND METHOD OF SURVEY
3
safety fundamentals undoubtedly would do much to reduce the injury
toll in shipbuilding. A great many of the reported injuries resulted
directly from the violation of elementary safety principles, such as
failure to wear goggles in the performance of cmpping, reaming, and
riveting operations; failure to wear hard hats when exposed to falling
objects; failure to warn workers in craneways before moving crane
loads; running in congested areas; and improper use of tools or equip
ment. Nearly all of the reporting yards make some personal safety
equipment available and recommend its use in particular occupations.
Relatively few, however, make its use mandatory. Most of the larger
yards maintain full-time safety departments, but even among these
yards there were few which reported any organized method of instruct
ing the supervisors and rank and file workers in safety fundamentals
beyond a very limited lecture delivered at the time of the worker’s
initial employment.
Scope and Method of Survey
The industry record, 1941.—The general section of this study is
based upon summary reports received by mail from 93 shipyards,
which were in actual operation throughout the major part of the year
1941. In order to secure as high a degree of comparability as possible
in the types of operations ana hazards included in this survey, the
definition of shipbuilding as applied in this study has been somewhat
modified from that regularly applied in the Bureau’s annual surveys
of injuries in all industries. In the regular annual surveys shipbuild
ing is defined1as the construction and repair of vessels of 5 gross tons
or over. In this study, however, only yards which customarily con
struct or repair vessels of 150 feet or more in length have been included.
The coverage of this study, therefore, is more limited than that of the
annual survey, but the data are more uniform and comparable.
None of the United States Navy Yards have been included.
The analysis applied in this section of the study is designed to indi
cate the relative frequency of injuries (a) in the various departmental
divisions of the shipbuilding industry, (b) in shipyards of various sizes,
and (c) in shipyards of various regions of the country.
Detailed section.—The detailed section of the study is based upon
the original injury records of 11 shipyards which made their records
available for analysis and transcription by Bureau agents. The
yards cooperating m this part of the study were widely distributed.
Two were in the North Atlantic area, two m the South Atlantic area,
two in the Gulf area, four in the Pacific area, and one in the Great
Lakes region. Each of these yards was engaged in the construction
of comparatively large steel vessels. One yard was relatively new.
The others had each experienced a tremendous expansion in recent
years, but were all long-established units of the shipbuilding industry.
The combined records of these yards included the details of 3,196
injuries which had occurred during 1941. As far as possible the same
types of detail were taken from the records of each yard. In some
instances, however, the particular details requested were not available.
For this reason the number of cases analyzed in respect to particular
accident factors varies considerably. All parts of the analysis, except
that relating to injuries by age of worker, are based upon data from
at least 9 yards. The analysis of these injuries follows the “American
1 According to the Standard Industrial Classification, prepared by the Division of Statistical Standard
of the U. S. Bureau of the Budget.
4
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
Recommended Practice for Compiling Industrial Accident Causes,”
approved by the American Standards Association, August 1, 1941.
The analysis applied in the detailed section of this study was de
signed to indicate (a) the time of injury occurrence, (b) the relation
ship between injuries and the age of workers, (c) the kind of injuries
that occurred, and (d) how the injuries occurred.
The Industry and Its Hazards
Shipbuilding, as an industry, includes both the construction and
repair of vessels. The yards or establishments comprising the in
dustry range from small plants employing only a few workers to huge
establishments employing more than 10,000 workers apiece. Gener
ally the large yards are highly integrated plants, including within their
organizations many sizable groups of manufacturing processes which
are commonly considered as industries in themselves.
The actual construction of hulls upon the ways parallels the erection
of structural steel for large buildings or bridges, and is subject to all
of the hazards associated with building work, such as falls, or falling
materials, and to all of the dangers associated with welding, riveting,
and the handling of heavy materials. Fitting-out activities, which
are commonly started before the hull leaves the ways and are finished
in the fitting-out basin after launching, closely resemble the finishing
operations involved in building construction, and are subject to
similar hazards.
The fabrication of shapes and subassemblies is largely carried on in
specialized shops within the yards. Employees of these shops, how
ever, are frequently exposed to construction hazards, since much of
their work must be done at the point of installation on or in the vessel.
This is particularly true in fitting-out and repair work. W ithin the
shops, workers are exposed to the variety of hazards associated with
the particular industries which their activities represent. The yard
departments vary considerably both in name and function from plant
to plant, but commonly include units such as a machine shop, a wood
working shop, a fabricating shop, a paint shop, a foundry, a forge
shop, a sheet-metal shop, and a mold loft.
In addition to the hazards normally existing in the industry, many
new dangers to the lives and limbs of shipyard workers have arisen
from the unusual operating conditions now prevalent. The great
expansion of the industry has introduced large numbers of new and
inexperienced workers into the yards. Many of these new employees
had never before worked in any industrial establishment and were
entirely unfamiliar with the hazards of their new occupations. More
over the increasing opportunities for skilled workers throughout
industry generally has resulted in a rising quit rate, thus depriving
the shipyards of many of the experienced workmen upon whose advice
and example much of the safety training for new men must depend.
Highly indicative of the serious problem created by this situation was
the comment of one safety engineer, who remarked, “ The greatest
hazard in this industry is the lack of trained supervisors.” The
growing necessity for rapid production also introduced an increased
tempo of activity, crowded working conditions, and overtime work,
all of which are commonly associated with increased possibilities for
injury.
In comparison with other manufacturing industries, shipbuilding
THE INDUSTRY RECORD, 1941
5
has generally had a somewhat higher injury-frequency rate than the
average for all manufacturing industries. It has, however, consistently
held its frequency rate at a lower level than that of building construc
tion, and below those in the forging, foundry, and fabricated structuralsteel industries. Most of the large yards maintain safety departments,
and these departments must be given much credit for their success in
holding the average rate for the industry below that of the other
major industries having comparable activities. In 1941, however,
the average injury-frequency rate for all shipyards which reported to
the Bureau for both 1940 and 1941 advanced 20 percent over that of
the previous year.2*
,
The Industry Record 1941 9
On the average, there were about 27 disabling injuries for every
million employee-hours worked during 1941 in the 93 shipyards in
cluded in this study. These injuries resulted in death or permanent
total disability for 1 out of every 2,900 workers in the reporting plants;
in permanent partial disability for 1 out of every 375; and in temporary
disability, involving an average of 17 days lost time, for 1 out of every
19. Considering only the actual time lost by injured persons who
were eventually able to return to work, the lost time in these plants
averaged 1,051 man-days for every 1,000 workers. When the standard
economic time charges for deaths and permanent impairments are
included, the total economic cost of injuries in these plants rises to a
total of 5,787 man-days for every 1,000 workers.
THE OPERATING DEPARTMENTS
Injury frequency.—The mechanical and construction departments,
comprising the operating divisions of the industry, included 79 percent
of the total labor force in the reporting yards and accounted for 85
percent of all injuries. As a group, these departments averaged 29.3
disabling injuries for each million man-hours worked.
Nearly a fourth of all the workers in the reporting shipyards were
regularly employed in the industry’s most hazardous department,
erection upon the ways. It is interesting to note, however, that the
frequency rate for this department, 40.4, was slightly lower than the
national average frequency rate for building construction (41.8) 4,
and considerably lower than the average rate for the more analogous
heavy-engineering construction industry (68.0).
Excepting only “erection upon the ways,” the departmental organi
zation of tne reporting yards varied widely. Of the other types of
departmental units, only the welding departments accounted for as
much as 10 percent of the total employment. The blacksmith or
forge shops were generally small, but they produced the second highest
average frequency rate (36.5). Also m the high-frequency group
were the boiler shops (33.7), the fabricating shops (33.7), the car
penter shops (32.8), and the welding departments (32.5). It was
impossible to distribute the injuries charged to these departments
according to the place at which the accident occurred. Since each of
these departments is closely connected with erecting operations and
much of their work must be done upon the vessels, however^ it is
reasonable to assume that the high injury rates in these divisions
* See report Industrial Injuries in the United States During 1941, based upon the Bureau’s annual survey,
covering industrial injuries in all industries (Monthly Labor Review, September 1942, p. 501).
* Based upon summary reports from 93 shipyards. See appendix, table 1.
4See Monthly Labor Review, September 1942.
6
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
reflect not only shop hazards as such, but also considerable exposure to
the greater general hazards prevailing upon the wavs.
In the small number of yards which reported the operation of
foundrv departments, there was an average of 29.6 disabling injuries
per million employee-hours of foundry work. This rate was much
lower than the national average of 47.0 * for commercial foundries.
The machine shops, most common of all the departmental uoits,
had an average frequency rate of 21.2. Although all of the work of
machine installation is done outside the shop, the workers in that
department held their frequency rate to 20.9. Paint-shop employees,
who also must work upon the hull, had a frequency rate of 20.8.
The operating departments in the lowest frequency-rate group were
nearly all concerned with fitting-out operations. The pipe and sheetmetal shops had average rates of 17.2. The copper wops and the
joiner shops had 15.7 and 15.5 injuries per million hours worked, re
spectively, while the electrical shops averaged 14.7, and the pattern
shops averaged 10.3.. The lowest average frequency rate among the
operating departments was that of the mold lofts, 4.7.
Resultant disabilities.—Although the electrical departments, as
a group, had a relatively low injury-frequency rate (14.7); as com
pared with the other operating divisions, the chance of an injury re
sulting fatally in these departments was nearly double that of any
of the other departmental groups. One in everv 70 disabling injuries
experienced by the electrical workers resulted, in death, compared
with a record of about 1 in 125 for the carpenter shops, the machine
shops, and the paint shops. Fatalities averaged about 1 in 167
disabling injuries in erection on the ways, but totaled less than 1 in
200 in the other departmental units.
Permanent partial injuries were relatively most frequent in the
sheet-metal shops. More than 1 in every 10 of the disabling injuries
reported in these departments produced some form of permanent im
pairment. The joiner shops, with an average of 1 permanent partial
impairment in every 11 disabling injuries, and the carpenter shops,
with an average of 1 in 12, however, had only slightly better records.
Cases involving the loss of one or more fingers were most frequent
among the permanent partial disabilities charged to each of the oper
ating departments. The more serious permanent disabilities involving
the mss of a hand, arm, foot, or leg, occurred in the ratio of 1 in every
3 cases of permanent partial disability in the pipe and joiner shops;
1 m every 4 m the machine shops and machine-installation depart
ments; and 1 in every 5 in the fabricating, erection on the ways, and
sheet-metal departments. Serious eye cases, involving the loss of
sight in one eye, avenged 1 in every 9 permanent partial disability
cases in the sheet-metal shops, 1 in 12 in erection on the ways, and 1
in 16 in the machine shops. Surprisingly, the only cases involving
permanent impairment of hearing were reported as occurring to em
ployees of the welding department, which reported no permanent eye
cases.
Temporary injuries generally were more severe in the woodworking
shops than in any of the other departmental units. On the average,
34 man-days were lost for each temporary disability in the carpenter
shops, and 25 man-days for each temporary injury in the related
activities of the joiner shops. Temporary disabilities in the welding
<See Monthly Labor Review, September 1942.
FREQUENCY BY SIZE OF YARD
7
departments, on the other hand, resulted in an average time loss of
only 12 man-days.
SERVICE, MAINTENANCE, AND MISCELLANEOUS DEPARTMENTS
Frequency.—The service and maintenance departments, as a group,
accounted for 14 percent of the total employment in the reporting
yards, but were charged with only 7 percent of all the disabling in
juries. The comparatively low average frequency rate of 12.6 for the
group, however, reflected more the relative infrequency of injuries in
the clerical, administrative, and drafting departments than it did a true
picture of safety conditions in all departments of the group. Among
general laborers the frequency rate (31.0) was above the average for
the operating departments, and the rates for the maintenance (23.8),
plant protection (22.9), transportation (24.2), and yards (26.1) de
partments were only sightly below the average in the operating de
partments. Administration and drafting are commonly considered
to be activities subject to the same hazards as clerical work. In
shipbuilding, however, the frequent necessity for employees in adminis
trative and drafting jobs to visit the points of operations brings them
into contact with many of the outside hazards. As a result, the
frequency rate for administrative workers (3.8) was double that of the
clerical group (1.9); and the average rate for drafting departments
(2.3) was over 20 percent higher.
Activities, reported as miscellaneous and unclassifiable, many of
which probably would form part of the operating group, included 7
percent of the total employment and 8 percent of ml injuries, resulting
in an average frequency rate of 29.8.
Resultant disabilities.—The possibility of an injury resulting in a
serious disability was considerably higher in some of the service and
miscellaneous departments than in any of the divisions of the operating
group. Fatalities occurred in the high ratios of 1 in every 49 disabling
injuries in the yards departments, 1 in 63 in the general labor depart
ments, and 1 in 72 in the maintenance departments.
Permanent partial disabilities similarly resulted from a high pro
portion of the injuries experienced in these departments, reaching the
very high ratio of 1 in every 8 in the yards departments, and were
only slightly lower in the maintenance departments. Temporary
injuries likewise tended to be rather severe in some of these depart
ments. Employees of the administrative and toolroom departments,
who were temporarily disabled, lost an average of 25 days each, while
those of the general labor departments lost an average of 23 days each.
Frequency by Size of Yard5
In shipbuilding, as in many other industries, the large establishments
generally are safest. The average frequency rates for the 93 ship
yards included in this study, when grouped according to size, varied
from a high rate of 48.9 for yards having fewer than 250 employees
to a low average of 17.4 for the largest yards with 10,000 or more
employees. In sharp contrast to the averages, however, 10 of the
34 yards in the smallest size group, and 1 in the 500-1,000-employee
group, operated throughout the year without a single disabling injury.
The more intensive specialization of work that is possible in the
larger yards may help to account for their better safety record. The
1 See appendix, table 2.
491691— 43---- 2
8
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
individual worker has a better chance to become familiar with the
hazards involved in his job when the range of his duties is limited.
Another factor that accounts for the superior safety record of the
larger shipyards is the greater attention devoted to safety in these
yards. In fact, the effect of organized safety activity within the
various plants is nowhere more apparent than in this comparison of
accident frequency by size of shipyard. Few of the small yards main
tain safety departments or fully equipped first-aid stations. As a'
result, the safety programs of these plants are limited at best to parttime activities on the part of supervisors who may have had no specific
safety training. Similarly, the immediate availability of skilled first
aid or medical attention, which prevents many minor injuries from
becoming lost-time cases, lends considerable advantage to the larger
plants in a frequency-rate comparison.
Typical of the most effective safety and medical programs are the
following brief outlines of the organizations within two of the largest
yards.
Yard A: Yard has a safety department consisting of 4 full-time en
gineers. All new employees are given a safety lecture before going to
work. Safety is stressed in all training courses. All injuries are in
vestigated and analyzed statistically. Safety goggles are supplied
and required to be worn for all welding, grinding, chipping, and drill
ing operations. A small hospital and 2 first-aid clinics, staffed by 5
doctors and 16 nurses, are maintained within the plant. The fre
quency rate for this yard was 11.1.
Yard B: A full-time safety engineering department is maintained.
AU new employees are given a safety lecture. Safety representatives
are appointed among the workers in each department. Weekly plant
and departmental safety meetings attended by worker delegates are
held. Every lost-time accident is investigated and analyzed statis
tically. Employees who normally wear glasses are required to have
safety lenses. Safety goggles or glasses are required in all eye-hazard
operations. Safety shoes are required in the steel mill and recom
mended elsewhere. Three first-aid stations, staffed by a doctor, 3
first-aid men, and 4 nurses, are maintained in the yard. Serious cases
are treated in a yard hospital, staffed with 8 doctors and a number of
nurses. The 1941 frequency rate for this yard was 20.4.4
Geographic and Operational Distribution 6
On the avenge, disabling injuries occurred most frequently in the
yards exclusively engaged m new construction, and least frequently
in those engaged only in repair work. The latter group, however, was
composed mainly of relatively small establishments, which were not
equipped to undertake major hull repairs, and were, therefore, not
subject to the comparatively great hazards connected with work upon
the ways.
As a group, the 11 reporting yards located in the Gulf area had a
much higher average frequency of injuries (50.1) than those of the other
regions. The 20 yards reporting operations on the Pacific coast
averaged 36 disabling injuries per million hours worked, while 13 yards
in the Great Lakes area averaged 35.8. The Great Lakes yards, how
ever, were generally much smaller establishments than those of the
salt-water regions. The North Atlantic group, which included a
* See appendix, table 3.
TIME OF INJURY
9
considerable number of tbe very large yards, and which accounted for
57 percent of the total man-hours reported in the study, had an aver
age frequency rate of 22.6. As a group the 10 yards reporting from
the South Atlantic area had an average frequency rate (15.7) lower
than the average for any other region. Then individual rates, how
ever, ranged from 0 to a very high rate of 83.1.
The North Atlantic area, with an average of over 8 cases of death
and permanent disability among every 100 disabling injuries, had the
highest proportion of senous injuries among the various regions.
The Great Lakes area, however, with 1 death in every 90 disabling
injuries had the highest fatality record.
Time of Injury
MONTHLY RECORD 7
The year 1941 was one of continuous expansion in the 9 shipyards
which furnished detailed monthly information. The number oi em
ployees and the monthly total of employee-hours worked in these
yards more than doubled in the period from January to December.
Reflecting much credit on the safety organizations of these particular
yards, the volume of injuries in these plants did not increase at a
much higher rate than did employment, as might well have been ex
pected, but rather expanded at practically an equal rate. The monthly
frequency rates for these yards, therefore, showed a surprisingly narrow
variation. It is highly significant, however, that the frequency rates
generally were lower m the period from May through August, when
weather conditions were best for outdoor work, than they were in the
winter, spring, and fall months. Similarly-, the proportion of injuries
resulting in death and permanent impairments reached its lowest
point in the same period of good weather.
DAILY RECORD 8
The distribution of 2,429 injuries, which occurred in 11 shipyards,
indicates that cumulative work fatigue, of the type which builds up
day by day and is not completely overcome in the normal rest periods
between workdays, was not an important contributing factor in ship
yard accidents during 1941, despite the increased speed of operations
and longer hours which characterized the industry during that year.
The volume of injuries on the regular day shift was much greater
on Mondays than on any other day of the week, lending some support
to the occasionally expressed theory that recreational pursuits on a
day off are frequently more fatiguing than the day-to-day routine of
heavy work to which workers have accommodated themselves. It
is possible too, that even one day of dissociation with the hazards of
daily work may be sufficient slightly to lessen the skill with which
those hazards are avoided. The relative volume of injuries to firstshift workers declined successively on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and
Thursdays. Fridays showed a slight increase, hardly great enough
to be significant. Saturdays showed a sharp decline, mainly as a
result of the fact that Saturday was not a full workday for all em
ployees.
The second, or evening shift, did not have a Monday peak of injuries.
Tuesday injuries on this shift were more numerous than those occur7 See appendix, table 4.
• See appendix, table 5.
10
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1041
ring on Mondays, Wednesdays, or Thursdays, but were less numerous
than the Friday cases. Full employment upon the second and third
shifts was not common during 1941 in the shipyards surveyed, and
the total number of injury cases reported for these shifts was relatively
small. The distributions for the evening and (particularly) for the
night shifts, therefore, should be evaluated as being based upon rather
small samples.
SHUT-HOUR OP INJURY OCCURRENCE *
The time-of-occurrence pattern, revealed by the distribution of
2,262 injuries reported in 11 yards, shows a striking similarity
between the second and third shifts and a striking dissimilarity
between these shifts and the regular day shift. On the day shift,
injuries were most frequent during the third working hour; were least
frequent in the fifth and sixth hours; and rose practically to third-hour
volume again in the eighth hour.
The evening and night shifts, on the other hand, had their greatest
volume of injuries in the first hour. The number occurring in the
second and third hours declined somewhat, but remained relatively
high. In the fourth hour the volume dropped decidedly, probably
reflecting the reduction in activity during lunch periods. In each of
the following three hours the number of cases remained relatively
constant, but at a level below that of the second and third hows. In
the eighth hour of both of the late shifts the number of injuries again
fell to approximately the lunch-hour level. The high concentration
of injuries in the first three hours of these shifts appears to indicate
that many of the late-shift workers are not fully rested and properly
alert to the hazards of the plants when they report for work. In
considerable measure this condition may be due either to the difficul
ties of securing the full benefits of sleep during daylight hours, or to
the fact that workers on these shifts must secure their recreation and
attend to their personal affairs before going to work, rather than after
work as is customary for day workers.
Injuries and die Age of Workers
A general distribution by age was available for only one of the
shipyards visited. No general comparison to indicate whether ornot
age is an important factor in injury frequency could therefore be
made. It was possible, however, to distribute 3,102 injuries, occur
ring in 11 yards, on the basis of the age of the injured persons and to
indicate the types of resulting disability.*10
Although these data neither support nor weaken earlier findings,11
which indicated that older workers are less likely to experience
injuries than are younger workers, they do lend support to the previous
conclusion that injuries to older persons are likely to be more serious
than those experienced by younger persons.
The average time required for recovery from temporary disabilities
increased directly with the age of the injured persons, particularly
in the age groups above 30, and most pronounced in the age groups
above 40. Specifically, the average recovery period for those of less
than 30 years of age was about 15 days; for those of 30 to 40 years of
• See appendix, table 6.
10See appendix, table 7.
11 See Relation of Age to Industrial Injuries, in Monthly Labor Review# October 1940 issue (p. 789), or
Bureau of Labor Statistics pamphlet Serial No. R. 1191.
KINDS OP INJURIES SUSTAINED
11
age it was 17 days; and for those of 40 and over it was 19 days or
longer. It is also pertinent in this connection that, among the
injuries studied, there was an abrupt rise in the proportion of cases
resulting in death and permanent disability as the age of the injured
persons went above 35.
For one very large yard it was possible to obtain a distribution of
employees according to age, as of January 15, 1942.12 Although the
indications obtained from an age distribution for only one yard are
insufficient as a basis for any general conclusions, it seems apparent
that age was not a great factor in the general accident picture of this
yard; disabling injuries occurred with practically the same frequency
m all age groups. Occupational differences, particularly those result
ing from the tendency to place older persons in positions requiring
least activity, however, could not be taken into account in this
comparison.
Kinds of Injuries Sustained
PART OF BODY AFFECTED 13
Injuries to the lower extremities^—toes, feet, and legs—accounting
for 37 percent of the injuries for which details were available, were far
more common than injuries to other parts of the body. Head injuries,
of which nearly three-fourths were eye cases, accounted for 22 percent
of the total number of disabling injuries; injuries to arms, hands, and
fingers accounted for 20 percent; and injuries to the trunk accounted
for 17 percent.
Leg, foot, and toe injuries were consistently prominent throughout
the various operating departments. Eye injuries occurred with some
frequency in nearly all of the operating departments, but reached out
standing proportions in the welding and erection on the ways divisions.
In these two operating imits, eye cases comprised 19 and 22 percent,
respectively, of all disabling injuries. Head injuries, other than those
affecting the eyes, were also relatively frequent in the welding depart
ments, where they totaled about 10 percent of all disabling injuries,
and in the paint shops, where they amounted to 15 percent. Injuries
to the chest, back, or abdomen Occurred in nearly all of the operating
departments, but were of high relative importance only in the paint
shops and pipe shops.
As the number of disabling injuries available for analysis in the
service and maintenance departments was comparatively small, the
proportionate distribution for these departments cannot be consideredvery stable. It is of interest, however, to note that for these depart
ments as a group 25 percent of all disabling injuries were foot cases,
20 percent were leg cases, 14 percent were finger cases, and over 12
percent were back cases.
Head injuries, other than eye cases, produced by far the greatest
proportion of deaths (7 in 200)? but resulted in relatively few perma
nent partial disabilities. In direct contrast, over 27 percent of the
disabling finger injuries resulted in permanent partial impairment.
The most serious temporary disabilities were those resulting from
abdominal injuries. On the average, these cases each required 34 days
for recovery. Temporary leg ana arm disabilities also had compara
tively long average recovery periods (22 and 21 days, respectively)
12 See appendix, table 8.
12 See appendix, tables 9 and 10.
12
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
reflecting largely the extended recuperative periods required in major
fracture cases. Temporary eye disabilities, on the average, required
less time for recovery than did temporary injuries to any other part
of the body.
NATURE OF INJURY 14
Of the 3,175 disabling injuries classified by nature of injury, 96
percent fell into 4 general classifications. In the operating depart
ments as a group, 36 percent of all disabling injuries were strains,
sprains, or bruises; 36 percent were cuts or lacerations; 15 percent
were fractures; and 8 percent were bums or scalds. Relatively similar
proportions prevailed in most of the major departmental divisions.
The welding departments, however, had a much higher than average
proportion of bums, and a lower than average proportion of fractures,
while in the carpenter shops and machine shops the reverse situation
prevailed. Cuts and lacerations constituted distinctly more than
average proportion of disabling injuries in the blacksmith shops, the
boiler shops, and the machine installation departments. Amputations
were relatively most important in the fabricating shops, joiner shops,
and sheet-metal shops.
The nature-of-injury pattern in the service and miscellaneous depart
ments was generally comparable with that of the operating
departments. Notable, however, was the fact that 45 percent of the
disabling injuries charged to the transportation departments consisted
of fractures.
Resultant disabilities.—Six of the 15 fatalities included among the
3,183 disabling injuries, for which both the nature of injury ana the
extent of disability were known, were the result of fractures of the
skull. Amputations accounted for over half of all the permanent
partial disabilities. About 4 percent of the fracture cases and slightly
less than 2 percent of the cuts and lacerations also resulted in per
manent partial disability.
Hernia cases generally required much more time for recovery than
any other type of temporary injury (51 days on the average). Frac
tures, with an average of 37 days lost per case, constituted the second
most serious type of temporary injury. The majority of the temporary
injuries, including bums ana scalds, cuts and lacerations, strains,
sprains, and bruises, and cases of occupational disease, however, all
had an average recovery period of about 13 days.
Nature of injury and part of body affected.—Nearly three-fourths of
all the eye injuries were cuts or lacerations, which might well have
been prevented through the use of safety goggles. Nearly all of the
remaining fourth were bums, largely inflicted by radiations from weld
ing apparatus. Of the head injuries, other than to eyes, about half
were cuts and lacerations, a fourth were bruises, and about 14 percent
were skull fractures.
Injuries to the lower extremities were largely of three general types—
cuts and lacerations; strains, sprains, and bruises; and fractures.
Strains, sprains, and bruises predominated among the leg and foot
injuries, accounting for about half of the cases affecting each. Cuts
and lacerations represented a considerably greater proportion of the
leg injuries (39 percent) than they did of the foot cases (24 percent).
On the other hand, fractures occurred with greater relative frequency
(18 percent) among the foot injuries than among the leg injuries (10
** See appendix, tables 11,12, and 13.
CAUSES OP INJURY
13
percent). In direct contrast to the relatively low proportions of
fractures among the leg and foot cases, two-thirds of the toe injuries
involved fractures. _Most other toe injuries were cuts and lacerations
(18 percent) or strains, sprains, or bruises (15 percent).
Finger injuries were laigely (46 percent) cuts and lacerations, but
included a high proportion of amputations (18 percent) and fractures
(23 percent). Cuts and lacerations similarly predominated among
injuries to the hands (44 percent), although fractures (16 percent)
and sprains and bruises (29 percent) together accounted for a larger
proportion. More than 1 in every 5 arm injuries (22 percent) were
fractures; 32 percent were cuts and lacerations; and 35 percent were
strains, sprains, or bruises.
Injuries to the trunk were largely strains, sprains, or bruises.
Of all the chest injuries, however, 22 percent involved fractured bones;
and more than a fourth of the abdominal injuries were hernia cases.
Infection following an injury was relatively uncommon except
among the cases of cuts or lacerations to the extremities. _ Its high
incidence among injuries of this type, however, is very indicative of
the tendency to ignore what appear to be minor cuts and scratches.
As a group, the cases of cuts and lacerations which developed infec
tion produced an average time loss of 13 days each, compared with an
average of 12 days each for those without infection. This difference
in average time lost is highly emphasized when it is recognized that
prompt and efficient first aid probably would have prevented the infec
tions, and thereby would have kept many of these injuries from be
coming lost-time cases.
Causes of Injury
TYPES OP ACCIDENT w
About 46 percent of the 3,139 disabling injuries for which details
were available resulted from the injured persons’ being struck by
falling, flying, or moving objects. In each of the operating depart
ments, except the mold lofts, accidents of this type occurred more
frequently than any other disability-producing type of accident.
Slips on level surfaces and overexertion, accounting for 16 percent of
the injuries, constituted the second most prominent accident type,
and similarly occurred in substantial numbers in practically every
department.
Falls from one level to another, accounting for 11 percent of all
injuries, and falls on the same level, accounting for 5 percent of the
injuries, were relatively common in all of the departments which
normally participate in work on the ways or in the vessels, but were
particularly prominent in the electrical shops, paint shops, and
machine-installation departments.
Contact with extreme temperatures (which produced about 4 per
cent of the injuries) occurred most frequently, as might be expected,
in the foundry and welding departments. Accidents of the “caught
in, on, or between” type, accounting for about 3 percent of the injuries,
were most prevalent in the blacksmith shops, fabricating shojps,
joiner shops, machine shops, and sheet-metal snops. The inhalation
of noxious fumes or gases in improperly ventilated work spaces, such
as inside tanks or hold compartments, and the absorption of harmful
radiations, particularly from welding apparatus, accounted for
11 See appendix, tables 14 and 15.
14
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
another 3 percent of the injuries. These types of accidents occurred
most frequently to workers in the welding and erection on the ways
departments.
In the service and maintenance departments as a group, accidents
of the “struck by” type were the most productive source of disabilities.
A v ery high proportion of the injuries experienced by employees of the
administrative and yards departments, however, resulted from falls,
slips, and overexertion. Reflecting the necessity of handling heavy
material and of working on and around closely and irregularly piled
material in the stock yards and on the ways, cases of slips ana over
exertion similarly were frequent in the general labor departments.
Fatalities occurred with much greater frequency in the case of falls
from one level to another than in accidents of any other type. Perma
nent partial disabilities, a very large proportion of which were cases
of lost fingers, occurred in the exceptionally high ratio of 1 in every 5
disabling injuries resulting from accidents of the “caught in, on, or
between” type, and with relatively high frequency in accidents of the
“struck by” and “striking against” types. Similarly, accidents in
which workers were caught in,.on, or between objects produced the
most severe temporary disabilities, although those resulting from falls
from one level to another were also generally quite severe.
AGENCIES CAUSING ACCIDENT 16
M etal stock, including such items as the plates, rods, angles, and
shapes from which ships are constructed, constituted the agency most
closely involved in 27 percent of the injuries for which information as
to agency of causation was available. More than half of the accidents
in this group were of the “struck by” type. Also prominent among
the metal-stock accidents were slips and overexertion and accidents
of the “striking against” type.
Flying particles, mainly metal particles dislodged in welding, chip
ping, drilling, or riveting operations and grit blown through the out
door working area of the yards by the winds prevailing in coastal
regions, were the second most prominent injury agency, being in
volved in 10 percent of all the injury cases. In most cases these were
eye injuries, which the use of goggles might have prevented. The
resulting disabilities, however, were generally of a temporary nature,
and, on the average, involved relatively short recovery periods.
Hand tools and working surfaces similarly were the agencies in
volved in relatively large proportions of the cases analyzed (8 percent
each). The hand-tool accidents were largely of the “struck by” type.
A large proportion of the accidents involving working surfaces on the
other hand were falls or slips, particularly the staging accidents, which
were largely falls from one level to another.
Among those accidents in which ship hulls under construction figured
as the agency, accidents of the “striking against” type were most
frequent, although falls, slips, and overexertion, and “struck by”
accidents were each responsible for a considerable number of injuries.
Ladder accidents were mainly falls, slips, or occurrences of the “strik
ing against” type. Of the accidents in which lumber was classed as
the agency, more than half were of the “struck by” type, 23 percent
were the result of slips and overexertion, and 13 percent were of the
“striking against” type.
16 See appendix, tables 16 and 17,
CAUSES OF INJURY
15
Injuries in which cranes were involved produced the largest propor
tion of deaths related to any of the outstanding individual agencies.
Generally these were accidents in which the injured parson was struck
by the materials being lifted or moved by the cranes. The mechanical
agencies, i. e., machinery, engines and pumps, hoisting apparatus, and
conveyors, generally were prolific producers of permanent partial
disabilities. The most severe temporary injuries, involving an aver
age recovery period of 30 days, were those resulting from crane acci
dents. Those temporary injuries for which the agency was charac
terized as “radiations from welding apparatus” (i. e., cases of welders’
flash) were on the average the least serious disabling injuries ascribed
to any of the various agencies.
UNSAFE MECHANICAL OR PHYSICAL CONDITION 17
Serious problems in housekeeping are ever present in the ship
building industry. In work upon the ways much of the relatively
limited space around and inside the vessel is necessarily occupied by
staging. Similarly the necessity of keeping hatchways, and often
portions of the deck itself, open for the delivery of material and equip
ment to the inride of the ship, limits the amount of space available for
work or placement of materials. The air lines and cables connecting
with every riveting hammer and every piece of welding apparatus
extend in every direction over and through the hull. As a consequence
the walkways and working spaces in, on, and about the hull are gen
erally restricted and cluttered with material and equipment despite
the best of housekeeping efforts.
Under normal conditions the yard areas present fewer physical
than the ways. The expanded activity of the yards in 1941,
Eroblems
owever, necessitated vast increases in the stocks of material for which
yard space had to be found, and required corresponding expansion in
the activities and personnel of the vard shops and departments. In
most instances this expansion in yard activities had to be accomplished
without an increase in yard space. The resulting crowding of material
and workers created many new housekeeping problems in the yard
areas, and intensified the injury hazards attributable to poor house
keeping.
The importance of the housekeeping problem in relation to the
prevention of injuries is strikingly indicated by the fact that of the
2,075 injury cases for which details indicating the unsafe mechanical
or physical condition were available, over half were related to hazard
ous arrangement or procedure, meaning in most cases, “poor house-'
keeping.” Typical of the injury-producing accidents included in this
category were those resulting from tripping over obstructions in
walkways and work spaces, and striking against or being struck by
materials projecting or falling into walkways and work spaces.
A substantial proportion of the accidents classified as “falls to
different levels” were also related directly to these housekeeping
shortcomings.
Defective agencies, including such items as damaged or worn tools,
improperly erected staging, and deteriorated cables and slings, were
responsible for 13 percent of all the injuries. Such unsafe conditions
figured as a cause factor in more than a fifth of the accidents claggad
as falls and in somewhat lower, but still important proportions of the
» See appendix, tables 18,1#, and 20.
491691—43----- 3
16
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
“striking against,” “struck by,” and slips or overexertion types of
accidents.
Improperly guarded agencies, such as open gears on machinery,
staging without rails or toeboards, and unmarked deck openings, pro
duced another 12 percent of the injuries. These improper or non
existing agency guards were also responsible for a considerable propor
tion of the accidents of the “caught in, on, or between” type, particu
larly those involving machinery as the agency, and a high proportion
of those classed as “falls to a different level.”
UNSAFE ACTS OF PERSONS 18
Analysis of the unsafe personal actions winch contributed to the
occurrence of 2,337 disabling injuries in 11 shipyards revealed that
the act of taking an unsafe position or posture was a factor in just
about half of all the cases. Included in this general category are the
specific acts of lifting with bent back or while in an awkward position,
standing under suspended loads, exposure to falling or sliding objects,
standing or passing too close to openings, riding in an unsafe position,
entering unsafe enclosures,, end approaching too close to hazardous
activities of others. The accidents resulting from these; unsafe acts
accounted for three-fourths of the fatalities resulting from the injuries
Analyzed, and produced about one-third of the permanent, partial
disabilities.
Over 80 percent of the accidents designated as “falls on the same
surface,” and 65 percent of those resulting from falls to different levels,
were directly associated with the act of taking an unsafe position or
posture. Similar unsafe actions were involved in 62 percent of toe
accidents classed as slips and overexertion and in about half of those
in which the worker struck against or was caught in, on. Or between
objects. Far from being toe peculiar failing of employees in,particular
departments or occupations, these personal faults figured largely in
the accidents charged to all of toe shipyard departments. The obvious
implication, therefore, is that a generalized educational program to
can the attention of all employees to toe hazards connected with these
unsafe acts might go far in toe reduction of shipyard injuries.
Failure to use safe attire contributed directly to the occurrence of
about 9 percent of all the injuries. Such negligence included failure
to wear goggles in the performance of chipping, reaming, and riveting
operations; failure to use hard hats when working in positions of
exposure to flying or falling objects; failure to wear safety shoes or
gloves when regularly assigned to the work of handling heavy, rough,
hot, and awkward material; and the wearing of loose clothing around
moving machinery. Accidents resulting from these unsafe acts were
particularly prominent in work on the ways, in the blacksmith shops,
in the fabricating shops, .in toe machine shops, and in the welding
departments. Among the various accident types, failure to use safe
attire was most important as a contributing factor in the types des
ignated as inhalation, absorption, or ingestion, striking against, struck
by, or contact with extreme temperatures.
Similarly, using unsafe equipment, using hands instead of equip
ment, or using equipment unsafely were factors in the occurrence of
about 20 percent of all the injuries analyzed. These unsafe practices,
arising largely from a lack of proper care or safety knowledge, were
18 See appendix, tables 21,22, 23, and 24.
TYPICAL SHIPYARD ACCIDENTS
17
relatively common in all shipyard departments and produced a sub
stantial number of the injuries changed to each of the general accident
types. More than half of the injuries related to the use of hand tools,
and an important proportion of those in which the agencies involved
were given as machinery, working surfaces, ladders, lumber, or metal
stock, resulted either from using unsafe equipment or of using equip
ment unsafely.
Oilier types of unsafe acts, such as operating without authority,
failure to secure or warn, operating or working at unsafe speed, and
making safety devices inoperative, were not uncommon, but as a
group accounted for only about 3 percent of the injuries analyzed.
“Operating without authority” generally applied to the use of ma
chines O r mechanical equipment by persons other than the regular
operators. “Failure to secure or warn,” which resulted in a consider
able volume of the “struck by” accidents, frequently involved such
practices as the improper adjustment of slings, failure to block vehicles
parked on', inclines, failure to warn workers in the vicinity before lift
ing, lowering, or moving crane loads, and failure properly to post
warnings regarding openings in walkways or work spaces or regarding
hot substances and dangerous electrical contacts.
Operating or working at unsafe speed, including such specifically
unsafe acts as running along congested walkways or upon scaffold
platforms, resulted in a considerable volume of falls. The dangerous
practice of making safety devices inoperative was most commonly
connected with accidents involving machines, while unsafe loading or
placing figured as a contributing cause in a substantial proportion of
the injury cases involving lumber or metal stock.
Typical Shipyard Accidents
It is apparent from the foregoing analysis that many shipyard in
juries result from the interrelation of several cause factors. Generally
speaking, the elimination of any one of these interrelated factors will
avoid the occurrence of an injury, which should be the preventionist’s
first duty. The achievement of immediate and effective resiilts, there
fore, depends to a considerable extent upon the preventionist first
learning what factors are involved, mid secondly, recognizing which
of these factors can be most readily eliminated. To illustrate that the
remedies in large measure are of common-sense nontechnical character,
brief descriptions of a number of shipyard accidents were secured and
typical examples of these were given individual consideration. The
descriptions of these accidents, accompanied by suggestions as to the
preventative measures, which might have avoided the occurrence of
injury, are given below.
DESCRIPTION OF ACCIDENTS AND SUGGESTED METHODS OF PREVENTION 14
1. An employee running across the gantry track stumbled and fell. His arm
went into a trolley box and contacted a 440-volt line.—Electrocution.
(a) The trolley box should have been enclosed or suitably guarded.
(b) Employees should be continually warned against unnecessary running.
2. After removing chains from a hoisting block on gantry crane, employee
stood under block. The lim it switch on the crane failed, causing cable to tear,
loose from block, which fell on employee.—Fatal.
>•In the analysis of these accidents, selected as typical of those reported, the authors had the assistance
of H. O. DesJardins, associate safety engineer, Division of 8hore Establishments, XT. S . Navy Depart
ment. The analysis was made from cards to which the descriptions of accidents had been transcribed s
as not to reveal the identity of reporting establishments.
18
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
(a) Employees should never he permitted to remain under crane when the block
is raised either with or without a toad.
(b) The crane operator should not have hoisted the block to the lim it switch.
(c) It should be standard practice to test lim it switches twice daily—at the
beginning of the shift and at midday.
3. Operator, unable to see employee, swung crane. Employee was caught be
tween counterweight and brake staff.—Fatal.
(a) Crane operators should not move crane until signal is given by crane fol
lower, who should see that everyone is dear.
(b) A n audible warning signal should be sounded before crane moves.
(c) A painted sign (tDanger—Keep O ff9 should be placed by the brake staff
and the supervisors should see that its warning is obeyed.
4. Employee was using a stationary grinder with the guard raised. The guard
fell, forcing his fingers against the emery wheel.—One finger amputated.
(a) A fixed type of guard would have prevented this accident.
5. Employee was making a time study as to the performance of a Morton
Draw Shaper. Instead of going up steps at front of the machine and walking
around on the platform to read the dials, he walked to the rear of the machine
on the ground level, placing himself between the end of the ram and the plat
form. On the return stroke the ram crushed him against the platform.—fatal.
Access to dangerous areas should be adequately guarded.
This employee apparently was unfamiliar with the hazards and should have
been given more training and closer supervision.
6. A worker was tripped when he stepped on or near a welding line just as the
welder pulled his line. He lost 72 days from the resulting knee injury.
(a) Welders9 lines should be cradled overhead to prevent tripping hazards.
(b) Welders should face their lines and watch carefully when puffing.
7. Employee working inside hull was struck by a 30-pound piece of pipe, which
fell through a deck opening. The pipe had an offset flange on one end making
it impossible for it to roll. The pipe, however, had been placed over a welder's
line. Probably someone pulled the welder's line, which caught in the flange and
dragged the pipe to the opening.—Lost two fingers.
(a) M aterial should never be placed upon welders9 lines.
(b) Whoever pulled the line should nave looked before he puffed , and should
have stopped when he felt the resistance of the pipe.
8. Men were placing cork insulation and were using a cork cement with which
they were unfamiliar. The cement apparently contained carbon tetrachloride
although the label simply stated “will throw off toxic fumes which are not
poisonous, but will displace oxygen and cause nauseating effects to workmen."
A number of the workers became sick and three died.
(a) The fact that the cement contained carbon tetrachloride should have been
printed upon the label or stenciled upon the container , with a warning to use only
in well-ventilated spaces.
(b) However, the warning quoted should have impressed the workmen’s super
visors sufficiently (1) to impel them to inquire what toxic substance was in the
cement; (2) to warn the workmen that it was toxic; and (3) to see that the proper
ventilation and respiratory protection was provided when the cement was used in
confined spaces. In this instance the warning that the fumes would displace
oxygen should have indicated that only respirators connected with an outside air
supply would be safe.
9. Employee borrowed an Ingersoll-Rand high-speed vane pneumatic grinder
from another worker intending to continue and deepen the grooves in a one-half
inch twist drill which had been broken off. He removed the small four-inch
wheel and replaced it with a six-inch saucer wheel. When power was applied
the wheel shattered and some of the flying parts struck the employee's head.—
Fatal.
This was a case of using equipment unsaf ely , probably due to lack <„
on the part of the workman. A portable grinder should not have been used,
revolutions were in excess of the permissible speed for the six-inch saucer wheel
and centrifugal force caused it to explode. Better training and close supervision
over the use of equipment probably would prevent this type of accident.
TYPICAL SHIPYARD ACCIDENTS
19
10. After lunch, man sat on locomotive crane bed behind cab in violation of
yard safety rule. Engineer turned cab parallel with track without signaling,
crushing man between cab and coupling.
(a) Engineer should not operate without signaling. He should he sure that the
space around the crane is dear before moving.
(b) M en should not he permitted to violate safety rules. Discipline and general
safety education might prevent many such accidents.
11. A carpenter, who was assigned to remove the bracing supporting some
heavy material in a freight car, started to repair a discarded stepladder for use
in entering the car. To secure a firm work surface, he placed the ladder upon
the crane-rail ties and then stood inside the rail to nail bracing strips on the
ladder. The electric crane moved along the track and struck him in the back.—
Fatal.
(a) The crane should have had an audible , automatic warning signal and the
crane cab should have been so arranged that the operator could have an unob
structed view of the track when moving the crane.
(b) The carpenter should have been trained not to expose himself to danger
unnecessarily.
(c) The defective ladder should have been removed from the work place when it
was first found to be defective.
12. A hooker-on was holding one end of a crane load of channels attempting to
guide the load into place. For some reason the load jerked. The sling chain
nearest the hooker-on slipped, tilting the load, which pinned the hooker-on to
the ground. Inspection revealed no defects in the crane mechanism or brake.—
Fatal.
(a) Crane loads should be guided with a rope, or with a long pole, not by hand.
(b) There should have been a spreader between the two sling chains, which would
have prevented the chain from slipping regardless of how the load may have been
jerked or swung.
13. A crane operator was found dead in the cab of his crane after the lunch
period. He was sitting in a chair, which was tilted backwards, with his head
against an open switch.
Electric switches should be covered so that it is impossible to touch the contacts.
14. Operator of swing-saw was holding material with his hand in line with the
drive belt and pulley. As he pulled the saw forward his hand became wedged
between the stock and the revolving belt and pulley.—Severe friction burns on
left hand.
The belt and pulley should have been completely enclosed.
15. Employee was chipping a steel plate with a hammer and cold chisel. A
small piece of stefel struck his eye.—Lost sight of eye.
Employees should be required to wear goggles on all chipping operations .
16. W elders clothes caught fire, burning his arms and face. Injured was
lying on his side working with hands raised above his body welding rivet holes
in inner-bottom shell plates. Inner bottoms were about 3' x 3' x 3'. Apparently,
he had been using an oxygen hose, left by a heater, for cooling and ventilating
purposes, which accounted for the rapid spread of the fire.—Lost 185 days.
This employee had not been given proper training regarding the hazards of using
oxygen as a cooling agent. Both supervisors and workmen should be repeatedly
warned that the introduction of oxygen will spread fire , and if mixed with acetylene
may be explosive. The use of burners9 equipment by unauthorized persons for any
purpose should be prohibited and the prohibition enforced.
17. Shipfitter leaderman was trying to pull plates together at stem of ship.
Contrary to yard rules he built himself a scaffold without a hand rail. His
pulling device parted, throwing him from the scaffold.—Fatal.
Bad supervision. A ll scaffolds should be built by designated crews of trained
scaffold builders and inspected by the supervisor before being put into service.
18. While walking through unlighted space on ship, employee stepped into open
trunk and fell 27 feet. Fractured skull —Fatal.
The open trunk should have been guarded by a barricade with red warning lights.
20
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
19. Electrician was workingon wiring between decks on ship. He stepped into
hold and fell about 20 feet. Died 12 days later.
Supervisory failure to provide necessary barricade over hold. A ll openings should
be guarded.
20. Men were taking plates off bottom of vessel in drydock. Plate stuck—
men were told to stay clear as leader was going inside to knock it loose. Man
disobeyed instructions and went under plate. When it came off, it hit him,
fracturing lumbar vertebra.
(a) Failure on the part of the employee to carry out instructions of supervisor.
(b) The leader, knowing of the possibility of danger, should have remained on the
outside while one of the workers went inside to knock out the plate.
21. A desk was being lowered to the bottom of vessel, through cargo hatch.
Desk slipped from sling, and fell striking partition in vessel, which caused desk
to bounce in under cargo deck where it struck workman. Man died with frac
tured skull. This man owned a safety hat, but was not wearing it.
Improperly adjusted sling. Suspended loads should not be swung over heads of
workmen. A warning signal should have cleared the employee from the danger
zone. The fa d that the employee was not wearing his safety hat was of secondary
importance in this case. It should, however, be mandatory that safety equipment
be worn if it is issued.
22. Employee was working on the top of an 18-foot trestle repairing a light
on the steam crane boom. A plank, which was nailed on top of the trestle, pulled
out, causing him to fall to the pier.—Fatal.
Failure to provide substantial working platform. Workplaces should be checked
by the supervisor before work is started.
23. The riggers were told to remove the launching timbers from underneath
new steel hull. They were to run a line from the timbers through snatch blocks
to the crane. Instead of using timber tongs to make a proper fastening of the
line to the timbers, this man merely drove a steel dog into the timbers and attached
the line to the dog with a bowline. When the strain on the line was taken up by
the crane, the dog pulled out of the timbers, hooked him behind the left knee,
knocked him down on his back, and dragged him several feet.—Fatal.
Inadequate supervision. The faster ings should have been checked and ordered
corrected. The workman apparently had not received proper training.
24. Men were moving section of keel with improper gear. As crane lifted keel,
clamps let go turning keel section over on employee's foot. Seven fractures result
ing in partial stiffening of foot and ankle.
Supervisory failure to provide proper lifting gear.
25. Man was operating square shears (power). Tips of second and ring fingers,
left, passed dog and underneath blade when lever was tripped.—Ends of fingers
amputated.
A ll square shears should be provided with a guard located at front of blade.
26. Man was working out-feed end of Oliver ripsaw from which splitter had
been removed. The stock kicked back pulling left hand into back of saw.—
Severed tendon, little finger stiff.
A proper self-adjusting guard and splitter would have prevented the employee
from coming into contact with the saw.
27. Sheet-metal worker, working on hull, returned to shop to have work
punched. It was necessary for operator to change the punch on machine which
made it necessary to remove guard and guide, rower belt is thrown off pulley
by lever which extends toward operator and point of operation of machine.
Employee became interested in procedure and leaned on stock bench with face
about 1 foot from machine. For some reason the belt engaged the pulley, caus
ing press to operate. The new punch assembly had not been locked in and plunger
hit the semicircular female ring, causing it to fly out and strike worker in eye.—
Loss of eye.
A locking device should have been provided to prevent belt shifter from moving
over driving pulley.
TYPICAL SHIPYARD ACCIDENTS
21
28. Employee was placing weight box on assembly platform, using a hook
from bridge crane on fixed sling on box, with another sling hanging loose from
hook. When he released hook from box and signaled craneman to hoist away,
the clamp on unused sling caught on under side of weight box, causing it to turn
over against his leg.—Fractures and stiffening of joints.
Employee should have gathered all sling hooks together prior to giving the uhoist
away” signal to crane operator.
29. Employee was on staging at side of ship and had removed goggles to clean
them. A riveting gang 25 feet away was chipping off a burr from a rivet. A
part of the burr flew and struck employee in eye and perforated eyeball, making
it necessary to remove eye.
Failure on the part of the riveting gang to provide a barricade to retain flying
chips .
30. Workman was setting in heads of spikes. A piece flew from head of set
hammer and struck the workman's eye.—Loss of sight in one eye.
Failure to wear eye protection —goggles. Hammer head may have been slightly
hard or chipped . It is advisable to check brittleness of hammers before they are
pul into service.
31. A handyman shipfitter was engaged in the erection of a bulkhead. The
center line girder, measuring 8'x 8' and weighing 2,368 pounds, had been pre
viously placed in position and tack-welded to the bulkhead. Injured was work
ing in a kneeling position at the comer formed by the junction of the girder with
the bulkhead. His helper, working on the other side of the girder, suddenly
sensed that the girder was moving. He shouted to injured who, in attempting
to move backward out of the way, fell over some tool boxes lying behind him.
As he fell the girder toppled over, crushing him beneath it.—Fatal.
Failure on the part of welders to properly tack-weld girder to the bulkhead. A
lack of proper supervision and training is indicated .
32. Man was working between two weight boxes, welding stiffeners on section
of bulkhead. Had been away from his work and, upon returning, evidently
lowered himself to a sitting position by holding on top of weight box, pulling the
box over on him, fracturing skull.—Fatal.
Failure on the part of employee to properly secure weight boxes.
33. Man working in copper shop melting rosin from air chamber was burned
when the pressure built up in the chamber by misdirected heat caused remaining
rosin to blow out. Concussion tore the clothing from man, splattering him from
head to thighs with the hot rosin.—Lost 43 days.
A pressure-reducing valve in the air line would have prevented pressure from
being built up in the chamber. The workman should have been warned of the
hazard and should have been more closely supervised .
Appendixi
b)
4
1
(0
<*) 1
1
8
! Severity
100
85
1
2
5
(*)
3
35
8
1
<0
2
7
(*) 2
<0
4
2
13
7
(*)
Injury
rates *
Frequency
departments...................... 1,082 100 100
crating departments.......... 705 79 79
Blacksmith shop.............. 55
1
1
1
1
Boiler shop....................... 31
4
Carpenter shop................ 54
4
1
Copper shop..................... 15
1
4
5
Electrical shop................. 54
Erection on the ways....... 64 23 23
6
Fabricating...................... 42
7
Foundry........................... 12
1
1
1
Joiner shop....................... 20
1
Machine installation....... 27
4
3
8
8
Machine shop................... 68
1
1
Mold loft.......................... 36
3
3
Paint shop........................ 53
Pattern shop.................... 28 <*) <*)
6
6
Pipe shop.......................... 52
Sheet-metal shop.............. 40
4
4
Welding............................ 54 10 11
vices and maintenance___ 256 14 14
2
Administration................ 42
2
6
6
Clerical............................. 48
Drafting............................ 34
1
1
2
2
General labor................... 25
1
Maintenance.................... 28
1
Plant protection............... 12 0) (*)
Toolroom.......................... 15 <*)
<’)
1
1
Transportation................. 30
1
1
Yards................................ 22
scellaneous......................... 121
7
7
Temporary to
tal disability
Department
Numberporting
of units re
Percentage of total
number of employ
ees
Percentage of total
number of employeehours worked
Percentage of total
number of disabling
injuries
Death and per
manent total
[ disability
Permanent par
tial disability
Percentage of injuries
resulting in—
0.6 4.9 94.5 26.9
.5 5.0 94.5 29.3
5.4 94.6 36.5
0
.5 2.1 97.4 33.7
.8 8.1 91.1 32.8
7.9 92.1 15.7
0
1.4 4.9 93.7 14.7
.6 4.3 95.1 40.4
.1 6.8 93.1 33.7
0 100.0 29.6
0
8.9 91.1 15.5
0
.4 5.9 93.7 20.9
.8 6.4 92.8 21.2
6.3 93.7 4.7
0
.8 7.7 91.5 20.8
0 100.0 10.3
0
6.1 93.9 17.2
0
.4 10.1 89.5 17.2
.4 2.3 97.3 32.5
1.5 6.5 92.0 12.6
5.1 94.9 3.8
0
0 100.0 1.9
0
0 100.0 2.3
0
1.6 1.6 96.8 31.0
1.4 11.9 86.7 23.8
3.0 3.0 94.0 22.9
0 100.0 7.1
0
1.1 6.7 92.2 24.4
2.0 12.8 85.2 26.1
1.1 2.6 96.3 29.8
2.9
3.0
1.6
2.0
5.5
.7
1.9
4.0
3.0
.7
2.3
2.1
3.0
.2
3.5
.2
2.0
2.7
1.8
2.1
.4
(3)
C4.2O
6.0
4.8
.2
4.5
5.1
3.3
Average days lost per I
i temporary total dis- JJ
T able 1 .— Injury rates and extent of disability , classified by department, for 98
shipyards , 1941
17
17
19
19
34
16
17
16
14
24
25
14
21
23
21
21
20
14
12
19
25
16
16
23
12
21
25
16
16
IT
i The frequency rate Is the average number of disabling injuries for each million employee-hours worked*
The severity rate is the average number of days lost for each thousand employee-hours worked. Thestandard time-loss ratings for fatalities and permanent disabilities are given in Method of Compiling Industrial
Injury Rates, approved by the American Standards Association, 1937.
*Less than 0.5.
* Less than 0.05*
22
23
APPENDIX
T able 2 .— Distribution of injury-frequency rates for 93 shipyards , by size of
establishment, 1941
Item
Total number of establishments ____ ___
Number of establishments having frequency
rates
of1—
o________________________________
1-10 ____ ___ ________
11-20_____________________________
21-30_____________________________
31-40_____________________________
41—30
51-60_____________________________
01-70___________________________
71-80_____________________________
81-00 __
____________________________
r „ „. .
101 over, ,
Total number of employees—percentage___
Total employee-hours worked--percentage__
Total number of disabling injuries—percent-_
. __
0 1 -1 0 0
and
AgA
A v f ir a g A f r a q iiA n r y r a tft 1
A v e r a g A S A V A r it y r a t A 1
1 See footnote 1, table 1.
-r
______
-
Total
1 to 249 em
ployees
Size of establishments.
23
34
1,
it
*
ii ti
M
1
7
11
ie*sP
*t
§1
li
It |8 it 11
l |
H
tl
7
4
11 10
1
0
0
0
0
1
6
2
0
0
2
0
1
2
2
0
3
3
13
1
1
1
2
8
3
16
1
2
3
0
4
3
14
1
1
1
3
0
0
0
1
1
1
6
3
0
01
1
0
1
8
5
0
1
1
4
91
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
01
0
4
3
0
0
0
0
4 16 21 23
1
1
100
4 15 21 22
1
1
100
3
5 18 25 24
2
100
26.9 48.9 38.4 37.4 32.3 33.3 28.7
2.9 2.9 2.4 3.6 2.0 2.1 2.1
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
36
23
17.4
4.2
17
13
24
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
T a bl e 3 .— Injury rates and extent of disability, classified by geographic location and
Severity
Qi
Frequency
Percentage of injuries Injury rates1
resulting in—
Percentage of total
number of emifioyees
Percentage of
number of em
hours worked
total
Percentage of cabling
number of dis
injuries
Death and per
manent total
disability
Permanent par
tial disability
Temporary to
tal disability
11
Number of est
ments
Area and operation
1
Total.................................................... 93 100 100 100 0.6 4.9 94.5 26.9
2.9
New construction......................... 35 51 46 52 .6 6.9 92.5 30.7
3.9
Repair........................................... 26
5
6
5.9
1.0
5
93.1
22.4
3.6
Both repair and new construetion............................................. 32 44 48 43 .6 2.4 97.0 24.0
1.9
North Atlantic area............................ 35 54 57 48 .8 7.6 91.6 22.6
3.9
New construction......................... 11 29 30 26 .7 12.0 87.3 22.9
4.5
Repair........................................... 11
2
3
3 1.0 10.9 88.1 17.9
4.3
Both repair and new construc
tion............................................. 13 23 24 19 .9 1.9 97.2 22.7
2.1
South Atlantic area............................ 10 11 12
.9
6.0
7
93.1
15.7
1.9
New construction.........................
4
2
.4 1.2 98.4 66.4
1
2
2.5
Repair...........................................
4
4.3
0
95.7
27.9
9.1
<*)
<*)
Both repair and new construc
% 11
tion.............................................
2
5 1.0 8.7 90.3 11.2
1.7
Great Lakes area................................. 13
3
4
3
2.9
1.1
96.0
35.8
4.5
New construction.........................
4
2
2.4
41.3
6.8
Repair...........................................
6 <*) <*)2 (*)3 02.0 9.1 95.6
90.9 58.0 10.5
Both repair and new construc
tion.............................................
3
1
1.4 98.6 26.2
1
1 0
.9
Gulf area.............................................. 11
8
14
.4
8
1.9
50.1
97.7
2.3
New construction.........................
5
5
4
9 .3 2.1 97.6 61.0
2.1
Repair...........................................
2
1
1
1 .8 1.7 97.5 31.0
3.4
Both
repair
and
new
construc
tion.............................................
4
2
3
4
.5 L2 98.3 39.1
2.2
Inland area *........................................
4
1
0
1
1
.9
99.1
25.2
.3
New construction.........................
3
1
1
1 0
.9 99.1 27.6
.3
Pacific area.......................................... 20 23 19 26 .4 1.7 97.9 36.0
1.9
New construction.........................
8 12
8 11 .6 1.9 97.5 38.3
2.6
Repair....................... ...................
3
2
2
1
.7
2.2
97.1
19.1
1.2
Both
repair and new construc
tion........................................
9
9
9 14 .2 1.5 98.3 37.2
1.5
1 Seefootnote 1, table 1.
* Less than 0.5.
1 Includes data for shipyards not shown separately because of insufficient coverage.
T a bl e 4*— Disabling injuries, classified by month of injury and extent of disability,
for 9 shipyards , 1941_________________________ __
Month
Percent
age of
average
number
of em
ployees
Total____________
January__________
February.,................
March.......................
April------------------May-------------------June..........................
July-..........................
August......................
September................
October.....................
November________
December.................
1 See footnote 1, table 1.
100
71
73
77
81
87
86
99
106
111
125
134
150
Percent
age of
total em
ployeehours
worked
Percent
age of
total
number
of dis
abling
injuries
100
5
6
7
7
7
7
9
9
9
11
11
12
100
6
6
7
7
6
7
8
8
10
11
11
13
Percentage of injuries
resulting in—
Injury rates*
Death Perma Tempo
and per nent
rary
Fre Severity
manent partial total quency
total dis disa
disa
ability bility bility
0.4
0
0
.9
0
0
0
.8
0
.6
.6
1.7
0
4.7
8.7
7.9
2.7
11.2
5.5
2.8
2.3
1.6
3.7
6.2
2.2
4.6
94.9
91.3
92.1
96.4
88.8
94.5
97.2
96.9
98.4
95.7
93.2
96.1
95.4
19.9
21.5
19.4
21.2
21.1
16.4
18.5
18.5
17.8
21.6
20.1
20.1
20.8
1.6
2.8
2.2
1.9
1.8
2.4
.5
1.3
.4
1.4
1.9
2.6
1.6
25
APPENDIX
T able 5*— Distribution of disabling injuries in 11 shipyards, by shift and by day of
week on which injury occurred, 1941
Total
Percentage of disabling injuries occurring on—
number
of dis
abling
Wednes Thurs Friday Saturday
injuries Sunday Monday Tuesday day
day
8hift
Total____________
D ay..-----------------Evening__________
Night____________
2,429
1,759
497
173
18.1
19.4
14.9
14.5
2.3
2.2
2.2
3.5
18.1
18.4
17.5
16.8
16.6
16.3
16.7
20.2
15.1
15.1
15.7
13.3
16.4
15.6
18.9
16.2
13.4
13.0
14.1
15.5
T able 6*— Distribution of disabling injuries in 11 shipyards , by shift and by hour of
shift in which injury occurred, 1941
Shift
Total
Percentage of disabling injuries occurring in—
number
of dis
abling First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth
injuries hour hour hour hour hour hour hour hour Other
Total__________ 2,262
Day___________ 1,588
Evening_______ 495
Night_________
179
13.2
11.0
17.2
22.3
11.6
10.7
13.7
14.0
15.5
15.4
16.4
14.5
11.1
12.0
9.5
7.8
8.5
7.5
10.9
10.6
9.0
8.1
11.1
1L2
12.1
12.8
10.5
10.6
12.9
14.5
8.9
9.0
6.1
8.0
1.8
0
T able 7*— Disabling injuries, classified by age of injured and extent of disability,
for 11 shipyards, 1941
Number of disabling injuries
Resulting in—
[Age group
Average
days lost
per tem
Death
partial Temporary total porary
nent and
totalperma
dis Permanent
disability
total
dis
disability
ability
ability
Percent
Percent
Percent
Number Percent
age Number age Number age Number age
Total
Total___________ 3,102
20 years and under.
342
21 to 25 years------673
26 to 30 years------583
31 to 35 years------412
351
36
years_____
41 to
to 40
45 years
274
46 to 50 years
211
51 to 55 years------137
56
to
60
years.
70
61 to 65 years _
35
12
66 to 70 years
71 years and over..
2
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
15
0
3
5
1
4
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0.5
.4
.9
.2
1.1
L5
96
9
20
14
11
11
11
10
7
0
3
0
0
3.1
2.6
3.0
2.4
2.7
3.1
4.0
4.7
5.1
8.6
2,991
333
650
564
400
336
263
201
128
70
32
12
2
96.4
97.4
96.6
96.7
97.1
95.8
96.0
95.3
93.4
100.0
91.4
100.0
100.0
17
15
14
15
17
17
23
19
24
27
37
22
32
26
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
T a bl e 8 .— Employment and disabling injuries, classified by age of employees, for
1 large shipyard, 1941
20 years and under.
21 to 25 years.........
26 to 30 years.........
31 to 35 years.........
36 to 40 years.........
41 to 45 years.........
of
Number of Number
employees disabling
injuries
Percent
15
28
19
13
9
6
Percent
11
29
22
12
12
6
of
Number of Number
employees disabling
injuries
Age group
46 to 50 years.....................
51 to 55 years.....................
56 to 60 years.....................
61 to 65 years.....................
66 to 70 years.....................
Percent
0)
4
3
2
1
Percent
0)
(0
tO Cn
Age group
i Less than 0.5.
T able 9«— Disabling injuries, classified by department and by part of body injured,
for 11 shipyards, 1941
; Hand(s)
| Finger(s)
! Leg(s)
Foot or feet
Toe(s)
All departments............... 3,179 468 96 113 157 263 118 161
Operating departments... 2,867 459 86 108 141 224 112 143
Blacksmith shop.......
62 46 04 21 22 8 2 2
Boiler shop.................
68 4 7 7 12 125 3 5
Carpenter shop_____ 167
8 9
Copper shop..............
7 0 1 0 0 0 2 0
Electrical shop........... 120 17 6 5 6 9 6 6
264 26 41 58 105 33 61
Erection on the ways. 1,182
Fabricating................ 220 15 5 4 7 7 7 5
Foundry.....................
9 0 0 22 04 40 0 2
Joiner shop.................
1 1
37 3 0
Machine installation..
64 277 4 83 4 6 2 3
5
13 16 12 13
Machine shop............ 235
Mold loft....................
9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Paint shop.................
60 5 3 06 6 4 8 0
Pattern shop..............
0 0 0 0
1 0 1
Pipe shop................... 142 18 4 7 9 15 11 9
Sheet metal shop.......
81 10 1 1 6 6 4 4
Toolroom...................
2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
Welding..................... 401 79 19 19 11 26 12 23
Service and maintenance. 167 5 3 2 8 21 3 7
Administration..........
24 0 1 0 2 3 0 2
Clerical.......................
7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
Drafting.....................
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
General labor.............
32 1 1 1 0 6 1 1
Maintenance..............
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Plant protection........
3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Transportation..........
31 0 0 0 1 3 1 1
Yards.........................
69 0 1 1 5 8 1 2
Miscellaneous.................. 145 4 7 3 8 18 3 11
205
191
5
8
11
0
11
63
18
1
2
6
23
2
5
0
5
6
0
25
4
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
10
294
259
7
7
10
2
7
93
37
0
5
5
34
0
3
0
14
11
0
24
23
1
0
0
8
0
1
6
7
12
495
439
13
14
32
1
20
162
36
1
6
9
37
5
9
0
19
8
0
67
34
10
1
0
1
0
0
3
19
22
468
400
13
7
25
0
21
152
45
3
2
8
28
1
5
0
19
11
0
60
42
4
1
0
7
0
1
10
19
26
203
178
4
4
19
1
0
75
26
0
4
3
14
0
2
0
6
7
0
13
10
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
4
15
uomopqy i
Arm(s)
Department
Total number of d
bling injuries
i ___ ______
Eye(s)
Brain or skull
Head—not else
where classified
Chest (lungs)
Back
Number of disabling injuries affecting—
iili
r
138
127
1
1
11
0
6
49
8
0
3
4
5
0
4
0
6
6
0
23
5
1
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
6
27
APPENDIX
10.— Disabling injuries, classified by part of body injured and extent of disa ___________
bility, for 11 shipyards , 1941
___________
T able
Number of disabling injuries
Average
days lost
per ternporary
Death and Permanent Temporary total dis
permanent
partial total dis ability
Number Percentage total dis disability
ability
ability
Resulting in—
Total
Part of body injured
100
15~
3
4
5
8
4
5
6
9
16
15
6
4
3,187
468~
97
113
157
263
119
162
205
295
496
470
203
139
Total....................................—
Eye(s)___________________
Brain or skull...........................
Head, not elsewhere classi
fied .......................................
Chest (lungs) . . -Back __ Abdomen_____
Arm (s) . . . . . ___
Hand (s)
_ _
Finger(s)________________
Leg(s)......................................
Foot or feet ., - __
Not^elsewbere classified___
14
102
—
0
3
1
0
0
1
3
80
4
0
4
0
—
5
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
17
7
17
16
16
17
34
21
15
16
22
18
16
23
3,071
462~
92
108
156
263
117
161
202
215
492
470
199
134
T able 11.— Disabling injuries, classified by department and by nature of injuryf
___________________________ for 11 shipyards, 1941
All departments.
Operating departments__
Blacksmith shop.......
Boiler shop.................
Carpenter shop..........
Copper shop..............
Electrical shop...........
Erection on the ways.
Fabricating................
Foundry....................
Joiner shop.................
Machine installation.
Machine shop............
Mold loft..............
Faint shop.................
. Batternshop..............
Pipe shop...................
Sheet-metal shop.......
Toolroom...................
Welding.....................
Service and maintenance.
Administration..........
Clerical.......................
Drafting.....................
General labor.............
Maintenance..............
Plant protection........
Transportation..........
Yards.........................
Miscellaneous.
3,175
2,862
62
68
167
7
118
1,181
221
9
37
63
234
9
60
1
142
81
2
400
167
24
7
0
31
1
4
31
69
146
57
49
1
2
1
1
3
8
10
0
5
0
8
0
1
0
2
6
0
1
5
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
1
3
251 1,007
237 918
1 21
6 30
3 46
1
0
5 35
86 398
11 83
4
2
1 12
1 24
8 76
1
0
12
2
0
0
15 42
3 27
0
0
91 108
3 50
5
0
4
1
0
0
1 12
0
0
0
0
8
0
1 21
11 39
Strains, sprains,
and bruises
With in
fection
Cuts, lacera
tions
Without
infection
Bums and scalds |
Nature of injury
Amputations
Department
; Total number of
abling injuries
J
134 1,170
126 1,040
6 23
19
0
8 68
3
0
6 51
44 435
6 71
2
1
1 13
5 23
17 75
6
2
4 28
0
0
0 61
3 27
1
0
23 134
5 69
15
0
2
0
0
0
9
1
0
1
2
0
9
0
3 32
3 61
i i
490
427
8
11
36
2
17
178
38
0
5
10
47
0
11
1
19
12
0
32
35
3
0
0
6
0
1
14
11
28
31
30
1
0
4
0
1
10
2
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
3
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
14
14
00
00
0
11
00
0
000
00
0
0
o3
0
000
0
00
00
0
21
21
011
0
0
11
0
00
00
0
00
0
a2e
0
000
0
000
a
0
28
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
T a b l e 12 .— Disabling injuries , classified by nature of injury and extent of disability,
for 11 shipyards, 1941
Number of disabling injuries
Nature of injury
Death
and per
manent
Number Percents
age total
dis
ability
Total______________________________
Amputations _
___
Bums and scalds..........................................
Outs, lacerations—without infection-------Cuts, lacerations—with infection________
Strains, sprains, and bruises.......................
Fractures_________ :________________
Hernia.________ ___________________
Industrial diseas..........................................
Not elsewhere classified_______________
3,183
57
251
1,008
134
MW
403
31
14
21
Average
days lost
per tem
porary
Perma Tempo total dis
nent par rary ability
tial dis- total dis
ability ability
Resulting in—
Total
102
56
1
18
1
6
20
0
0
0
15
1
1
2
0
2
8
0
0
1
100
2
8
32
4
37
15
1
0) 1
3,066
0
249
088
133
1,166
465
31
14
20
17
13
12
13
14
37
51
13
6
1 Less than 0.5.
T a bl e 13 *— Disabling injuries, classified by nature of injury and by part of body
injured, for 11 shipyards, 1941
Total----------------------------- 3,178
Eye(s)---------------------------Brain or skull......................... 467
Head—not elsewhere classi 07
fied....................................... 113
Chest (lungs)_____________ 157
Bade.___________________ 262
Abdomen________________ 119
Arm(s)__________________ 161
Hand(s)_________________ 203
Finger(s)________________ 295
Leg(s)...................................... 406
Foot or feet........... .................. 468
Toe(s)...................................... 203
Not elsewhere classified......... 137
56
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
53
2
0
1
0
251 1,008
113 331
1 43
18 61
0
17
2
10
2
6
17 36
21 68
13 89
24 160
27 08
0 34
13 46
133 1,172
8
8
31
0
2 23
0 102
0 237
0 76
15 57
22 59
46 26
25 227
12 248
3 31
0 47
402
0
22
8
34
13
5
36
32
68
48
83
134
0
31
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
u«
.Cl—
Not elsew l
classified
1
Hernia
Fractures
1
W ith in
fection
|
1
Nature of injury
Cuts, lacera I tions
Ji
f!
at
W ith ou t
j infection
Amputations
Part of body injured
Total number of
abling injuries
$
14 . 21
0
7
0
0
1
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
18
3
29
APPENDIX
T a bl e
1 4 .—
Disabling injuries , classified by accident type and extent of disability,
for 11 shipyards, 1941
Number of disabling injuries
Average
days lost
per tem
porary
Death
Tempo total
and per Perma
dis
rary
nent
manent partial total ability
Number Percenttotal
age
dis
dis
dis
ability ability ability
Resulting in—
Total
Accident type
Total______________________________
Striking against
__ _____
Struck b y __ r
Ganght in, on, or between... _____
Fall on same level__
_______
Fall to different level
Slip (not fall) or overexert!on
Contact witn extreme temperature __ _
Inhalation, absorption, ingestion r ___
Contact with electric current . .
Not elsewhere classified .. . .
AH departments-----------Operating departments....
Blacksmith shop____
Boiler shop------------Carpenter shop_____
Copper shop-----------Electrical shop............
Erection on the ways..
Fabricating_________
Foundry___________
Joiner shop_________
Machine installation..
Machine shop............ .
Mold loft__________
Paint shop_________
Pattern shop...............
Pipe shop....................
Sheet-metal shop____
Toolroom__________
Welding----------------Service and maintenance..
Administration______
Clerical—....................
Drafting.......................
General labor----------Maintenance----------Plant protection_____
Transportation...........
Yards...........................
Miscellaneous................... .
Q)
\l)
15
0
6
1
0
6
0
1
1
0
0
102
13
65
17
1
2
2
2
0
0
0
3,022
367
1,341
69
152
347
506
138
95
3
4
17
14
16
31
17
26
18
18
6
11
26
injuries , classified by accident type and by department, for 11
shipyards , 1941
O gj
Number of disabling injuries caused by—
if
i i g If
ij SI *
ej >
1| OuQ§ O1Q oId h9© <g fti i
M
fl
3,131 380 1,407
2,822 337 1,270
62 6 39
68 4 39
166 27 67
4
7 0
118 14 40
1,157 110 567
220 37 119
4
9
1
36 7
15
63 9 25
235 32 103
1
9
5
59 11 16
1 0
1
142 18 58
80 15 32
1 0
1
389 41 139
165 20 76
24 1
6
4
6 2
0
0 0
32 3 16
1
1 0
4
1
1
31 3 21
67 10 27
144 23 61
p i ||| f§
JJ © l i
M
~ll
g o 8 !si •gii?
5* o
fc
3
87 152 353 508 141
77 133 322 450 132
4 0
1 10 1
1 8 8 4
3
4 6 26 32 2
0 0 *1 2 0
4 10 26 20 3
15 62 143 175 28
12 3 7 30 7
0 0 0 0 4
3 4 3 4 0
2 3 13 10 1
18 14 17 43 7
0 0 0 2 0
2 6 13 10 1
0 0
0 0 0
2 11 9 30 11
5 2 7 15 1
0 0 0 0 0
3 11 48 59 62
6 12 21 27 2
0 3 7 7 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1
1 2 2 6
0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0
2 0 2 3 0
3 6 9 11 1
4 7 10 31 7
onta
elect
rent
Department
100
12
46
3
5
11
16
4
3
Lot fall)
overtion
Less than 0.5.
T a b l e 1 5 * — Disabling
3,139
380
1,412
87
153
355
508
141
96
3
4
96
94
1
1
2
0
0
55
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
25
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
3
T
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
T a bl e 16 .— Disabling injuries and resulting disability, classified by agency, for
11 shipyards, 1941
Number of disabling injuries
Agency
Total.....................................
Boilers and pressure vessels.,
Chemicals.............................
Conveyors.............................
Electrical apparatus.............
Elevators..............................
En
Fly _
Hand tools..
_____
Hatchways, ropes, and cables..
Hoisting apparatus.
Cranes...............
Other.................
Hot substances........
Ladders...................
Lumber..............................................
Machinery..........................................
Metal stock........................................
Radiations from welding apparatus.
Ship hulls...........................................
Vehicles................
Working
surfaces.
Staging...........
Other..............
Other....................
1 Less than 0.5.
Death
and per
Number Percent
manent
age total dis
ability
3,066
8
28
4
17
3
1ft
31ft
234
98
122
101
21
116
77
182
199
808
70
92
48
26ft
6ft
190
375
Average
days lost
per tem
porary
Perma Tempo total
dis
nent par rary ability
tial dis total dis
ability ability
Resulting in-
Total
100
0) 1
0) 1
0)
0) 10
8
3
4
3
1
4
3
6
6
27
2
3
2
8
2
6
12
15
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
3
3
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
102
0
0
1
1
0
2
2
12
3
11
8
3
2
1
3
26
23
0
3
3
3
1
2
6
2,949
8
27
3
16
3
13
313
221
92
108
90
18
113
76
179
172
783
70
89
44
251
63
188
368
IT
21
1$
2ft
10
ft
14
19
30
2ft
18
2ft
18
18
18
ft
16
31
APPENDIX
T able 17*— Disabling injuries, classified by accident type and by agency, for 11
shipyards, 1941
Total..........................................
Boilers and pressure vessels.__
•Chemicals..................................
Conveyors.................................
Electrical apparatus.................
Elevators...................................
Engines atuI primps
‘P lying p a rti efea
Hand tools...............................
Hatchways, ropes, and cables..
Hoisting apparatus...................
Cranes.................................
Other..................................
Hot substances.........................
Ladders.....................................
Lumber.....................................
Machinery................................
Metal stock...............................
Radiations from welding ap
paratus...................................
Ship hulls..................................
Vehicles.....................................
Working surfaces......................
Staging................................
Other..................................
Other....................................:..
0Q
ii
-sS o
hi
O
Fall on same
level
Fall to differ
ent level
1 Slip (not fall)
or over| exertion
Contact with
extrem e
temperature
Inhalation,
absorption,
| ingestion
Contact with
electric cur
rent
N ot else
where clas
sified
11
Number of disabling injuries caused byStruck by
Agency
b*S
f f t*
h 3 .|
87 145 345 485 139
1 0 0 4
0
0 0 0 11 2
2 0
0
0
2 3 2 3 2
2 0 0
1 0
1 1 1 2 1
0 0 0 0 11
3 11 3 28 10
3 12 41 23 0
9 1 4 5 0
8 1 4 2 0
1 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 103
0 0 48 17 0
3 10 9 41 0
37 7 2 33 5
16 36 16 173 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 3 20 10 1
4 1 11 5 0
1 39 102 68 0
0 3 50 6 0
1 36 52 62 0
6 18 84 75 0
3,059 374 1,385
2
8 1
6
28 0
1
4 0
2
17 2
0
3 0
7
15 2
307 0 295
232 13 161
7
98 12
122 2 101
101 1 85
21 1 16
116 1 12
3
77 9
182 23 96
198 37 77
808 116 451
72 0
0
92 42 15
48 3 24
255 29 15
65 3
3
190 26 12
377 82 110
93
0
19
0
0
0
0
1
0*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
72
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
T able 18.— Disabling injuries, classified by unsafe mechanical condition and extent
of disability, for 11 shipyards, 1941
.. .at
Number of disabling injuries
Unsafe mechanical condition
Total. __ ______________________
Improperly guarded Agencies .
Defective Ageney ___
Hazardous arrangement or procedure........
Improper illnm ination_____
Improper ventilation. ...............................
Not elsewhere classified 1 _____
Death
per
Per and
Number centage
manent
total
disability
%075
249
275
1,162
15
11
363
100
12
13
561
1
17
1Includes cases involving no unsafe mechanical^condition.
Average
days lost
per tern-
Resulting in—
Total
12
3
4
4
0
1
0
Perma
nent
partial
disability
67
23
13
270
40
Tempo toST
rary disability
total
disability
1,996
223
258
1,131
15
10
359
18
27
19
18
21
9
10
32
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
T a bl e 19*— Disabling injuries , classified by agency and by unsafe mechanical
condition , for 11 shipyards, 1941
Number of disabling injuries caused by—
Total
number
HazardNot
of dis Im
ous' Im
Im
else
abling properly Defec
proper proper where
arrange
tive
injuries guarded agency ment illumi ventila classi
agencies
or pro nation tion fied»
cedure
Agency
T otal.....................—------Boilers and pressure vessels.
Chemicals............................
Conveyors...........................
Electrical
apparatus...........
Elevators.............................
Engines and pumps...............
Flying particles......................
Hand tools...*.........................
Hatchways, ropes, and cables.
Hoisting apparatus.
Cranes.............
Other...............
Hot substances___
Ladders..................
Lumber..................................................
Machinery.............................................
Metal stock................-..........................
Radiations from welding apparatus. _.
Ship hulls...............................................
Vehicles...............
Working surfaces.
Staging.........
Other............
Other...................
2,053
4
24
2
12
2
7
99
84
15
108
150
544
29
30
171
48
123
246
245
1
12r
0
1
0
8
40
8
6
2
3
4
9
56
24
5
6
269
0
021
0
2
25
2
47
38
9
0
9
11
17
41
0
10
1*153
4
3
15
4
100
34
42
38
4
43
19
82
69
435
4
33
26
65
7
58
153
0
0
1
3
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
41
1
08
000
01
10
0
10
0
0
0
361
0
9
a0
0
0
0
0
204
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
31
6
5
7
43
20
0
2
1
6
0
6
14
i Includes cases involving no unsafe mechanical condition.
T a bl e 20.— Disabling injuries, classified by accident type and by unsafe mechanical
condition, for 11 shipyards, 1941
Accident type
Total..................................
Striking against.................
Struck by...........................
Caught in, on, or between.
Fall on same level..............
Fall to different level____
Slip (not fall) or overexertion...............
Contact with extreme temperature___
Inhalation, absorption, ingestion.........
Contact with electric current...............
Number of disabling injuries caused by—
Total
number
HazardImIm Not else
of Improp
ous
disabling erly Defec
arrange >rop< proper where
tive ment
or
injuries guarded agency
ventila classi-'
agencies
proce nation tion fled*
dure
2,075
249
930
64
114
276
310
93
51
3
63
30
4
112
10
3
5
0
i Includes cases involving no unsafe mechanical condition.
275
27
119
1
25
56
40
061
1,162
167*
487
32
79
96
250
42
7
2
15
1
3
0
2
6
3
00
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
01
9
0
364
17
258
1
4
6
7
41
39
0
33
APPENDIX
T able 21.— Disabling injuries, classified by unsafe act and extent of disability,
_____________________________ for 11 shipyards, 1941_____________________________
Number of disabling injuries
Average
days lost
per temTem porary
Death Per
total
per manent porary dis
Num Per and
manent
partial
total
ability
ber centage total dis dis
dis
ability ability ability
Total
Unsafe act
Resulting in—
12
86 2,239
Total_________________________________ 2,337 100
Operating without authority, failure to secure
1
22
or warn
_ _______________
8
0
30
1
1
25
26
0
Operating or worlrfng at unsafe speed _
1
5
15
Making safety devices inoperative . r
0
20
Using iunsafe equipment or equipment un
436
35
472
21
1
safely___ __________________________ _
1
1
145
6
Unsafe loading, placing, etc_______________ 147
27
9
1,109
1,145
49
Taking unsafe position or p«stnre r
3
5
0
8
Working on moving or dangerous equipment..
0
1
3
4
Distracting, teasing, fighting, etc rT- ___
3
0
198
201 8 9
Failure to use safe attire „
12
3
281
0
284
Not elsewhere classified * .
>Less than 0.5.
* Includes cases involving no unsafe act.
T a ble 22*—Disabling injuries, classified by department and by unsafe act, for
18
14
28
26
17
19
21
19
7
7
12
11
______________________________ shipyards , 1941______________________________
1
All departments------------------ 2,331 30
2,102 28
Operating departments Blacksmith shop.. »
38 1
46 1
Boiler shnp
137 1
Carpenter shop.„.r
7 1
Copper shop . . . r ___
Electrical shot) _ _______ 89 2
Erection
on the______
ways____ 851 35
Fabricating
157 1
Foundry ______
7
26 1
Jofner shop llirr
Machine I n s t a l l a t i o n . 32 1
Machine shop.
189 0
Mnjdfnft
.
6 0
PaintShop. ___
2
Pattern shnp
_ . __ 491 0
111 3
Pipe shop .
72 1
Sheet-metal shop..
1 0
Toolroom.
Welding __
283 5
Service and maintenance------- 119 2
Administration_________
20 0
Clerical
_r . .
2 0
D ra ftin g
. . . __
0 0
General labor _ __ 31 2
1 0
Maintenance
1 0
Plant
protection ..
Transportation .
_ _ 21
0
Vards ___ ______
43 0
110 0
Not elsewhere classified „
i Includes cases involving no unsafe act.
teas:, etc.
Failure to m
attire
Working on
ing or dan
equipment
l
Making safety de
vices inoperative
ii
i
I
I
d
iif
p
jl
ll
Jjjj
jf
if
ii
•3
laIs ill ,
ot
I
^548
Department
Number of disabling injuries caused by—
to *© 3<p
1
co-5§
© - 0 ft
£U
|1
*45
CO 0
0
P
P
tl
25 20 470 147 1,144 8 4 201
22 18 424 127 1,018 8 4 191
0 0 7 1 16 0 0 0
0 0 14 2 21 1 0 0
1 1 33 15 70 0 0 0
2 0 0 0
0 1 1 2
1 2 16 4 51 1 0 0
11 2 162 52 417 01 1 99
3 0 40 13 56 0 00 30
6
0 0 0 0
0 2 5 2 15 0 0 0
0 0 5 1 19 20 0 183
0
1 1 41 11 94
2 0 0 0
0 1 2 1
1 2 11 1 25 0 2 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 1 24 9 56 0 0 2
2 1 14 6 36 1 1 00
0 0 0
0 0 0
1
2 4 49 6 131 2 0 66
1 1 24 11 64 0 0 6
0 0 3 0 16 0 00 00
0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 110 00 00 01
0 1 9 4
0 0 0 00
0 0 1 0
1 0 0
0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0
0 0 2 3 22
0 0 5
1 0 8 4
0 0 4
62
22
9
2 1
282
262
13
7
16
0
12
101
39
0
1
3
21
0
5
0
16
10
0
18
10
1
1
0
3
0
0
2
3
10
34
SHIPYARD INJURIES AND THEIR CAUSES, 1941
T a bl e 131.— Disabling injuries, classified by agency and by unsafe act, for 11
______________________________ shipyards, 1941_____________________________
o
Total
______ 2,316 30
4 0
Boilers and pressure vessels__
.__ 254 00
Chemicals . _________ ___
Conveyor#
Electrical apparatus
14 0
1
Elevators...
_-, __ 3
1
8
Engines and pumps.. - __
236 0
Elying pertiftfftS
Hand tools________________ 195 5
Hatchways, ropes, and cables.. 85 1
Hoisting apparatus
109 6
Cranes................................. 91 5
Other_______ j_________ 18 1
Hot substances____________
86 0
Ladders________________ _
54 0
Lumber__________________ 128 1
Machinery______ _________ 156 5
Metal stock............................... 623 3
Radiations from welding ap
paratus_________________ 33 0
Ship hulls____ _____ ____ _
64 1
Vehicles..................................... 39 2
Working surfaces___ _______ 176 2
Staging............................
50 1
Other_________________ 126 1
O ther....................................... 274 2
1Includes cases involving no unsafe act.
o
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
6
0
2
1
9
2
7
4
► /§ 1©8o.
i |
1
fi
l§ 1 P
P
tj
1©
f j
19 471 143 1,137
0 2 0
2
1 2 2 12
1 1
1
0]
3 1
7
1 0
1
0
4
0 3 0
2 5 0 20
0 109 3 58
0 11 6 66
1 19 3 77
01 14 3 68
5 0
9
1 8 2 35
1 23 4 23
0 24 13 73
6 51 4 75
0 110 83 330
0 4 0
2
1 47
3 6
0 3 5 26
2 36 3 116
1 23 0 23
1 13 3 93
1 50 12 162
&
7
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
I t
0
|
ailure to us
attire
ot elsewhere
fled*
l§
§
1
|1
sf
i!
11
sing unsafe
mentorequi]
unsafely
nsafe loading
ing, etc.
Agency
oJj
perating without
authority, failure
to secure or ^vara
1
forking on moving
or d a n g e r o u s
equipment
Number of disabling injuries caused by—
I
JQ
to
4 198
0 0
5
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 134
1 5
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 24
0 0
0 2
0 5
1 4
0 8
0 0
0 0
1
0
0 0
1
0
2 10
Z
282
0
3
0
0
0
0
75
13
1
3
1
2
15
1
15
8
86
19
4
1
7
0
7
31
@FedFRASER