Health and Safety Education in Auto Body Collision and Machine Tool Technology Programs in Vocational Colleges: Challenges and Opportunities.

Collision repair, machining, and metal manufacturing are industries with a large percentage of small businesses whose owners face unique challenges implementing health and safety regulatory requirements. Previous research found that 72% of collision repair technicians and 47% of machinists attended some classes or graduated from vocational colleges. Although health and safety is a mandatory part of the curricula for post-secondary vocational education, little is known about what, how, and when health and safety is taught and if teaching is effective. Surveys and discussion groups were used to evaluate health and safety education in two vocational colleges in Minnesota. Six instructors and 76 students in collision repair, and 6 instructors and 130 students in machine tool technology programs participated. Instructors had no formal training in health and safety, few teaching materials, and lacked opportunities to learn about safety in their trade. Teaching was unscripted and heavily influenced by each instructor's™ industry experience, knowledge, perceptions and attitude towards safety, with little or no guidance from school administration, or safety professionals. Student survey results show that graduates have significant gaps in safety and health knowledge. Standardized trade-specific curricula and instructor training are needed to ensure students receive adequate health and safety education.

The Collision Auto Repair Safety Study (CARSS): a health and safety intervention.

BACKGROUND: Collision repair employs approximately 205,500 people in 33,400 shops. Workers are exposed to a diverse array of chemical, physical, and ergonomic hazards. METHODS: CARSS was based on a random and purposeful sample. Baseline and one baseline and one-year evaluations consisted of 92 questions addressing issues, such as Right-to-Know, fire protection, painting-related hazards, ergonomics, electrical safety, and personal protective equipment. Owners received a report and selected at least 30% of items found deficient for remediation. In-person and web-based services were provided. RESULTS: Forty-nine shops were evaluated at baseline and 45 at follow-up. At baseline, 54% of items were present. This improved to 71% at follow-up (P < 0.0001). Respiratory protection improved 37% (P < 0.0001) and Right-to-Know training increased 30% (P < 0.0001). Owners completed 61% of items they selected for remediation. CONCLUSIONS: Small businesses' interventions should address the lack of personnel and administrative infrastructure. Tailored information regarding hazards and easy-to-use training and administrative programs overcome many barriers to improvement.

Two-year follow-up of the Collision Auto Repair Safety Study (CARSS).

This paper presents an evaluation of the sustainability of health and safety improvements in small auto collision shops 1 year after the implementation of a year-long targeted intervention. During the first year (active phase), owners received quarterly phone calls, written reminders, safety newsletters, and access to online services and in-person assistance with creating safety programs and respirator fit testing. During the second year (passive phase), owners received up to three postcard reminders regarding the availability of free health and safety resources. Forty-five shops received an evaluation at baseline and at the end of the first year (Y1). Of these, 33 were evaluated at the end of the second year (Y2), using the same 92-item assessment tool. At Y1, investigators found that between 70 and 81% of the evaluated items were adequate in each business (mean = 73% items, SD = 11%). At Y2, between 63 and 89% of items were deemed adequate (mean = 73% items, SD = 9.5%). Three safety areas demonstrated statistically significant (P < 0.05) changes: compressed gasses (8% improvement), personal protective equipment (7% improvement), and respiratory protection (6% decline). The number of postcard reminders sent to each business did not affect the degree to which shops maintained safety improvements made during the first year of the intervention. However, businesses that received more postcards were more likely to request assistance services than those receiving fewer.

Understanding safety climate in small automobile collision repair shops.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, approximately 236,000 people work in 37,600 auto collision-repair businesses. Workers in the collision-repair industry may be exposed to a wide range of physical and chemical hazards. METHODS: This manuscript examines the relationship of safety climate as reported by collision repair shop workers and owners to: (1) an independent business safety assessment, and (2) employee self-reported work practices. The study was conducted in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. RESULTS: A total of 199 workers from 49 collision shops completed a survey of self-reported work practices and safety climate. Surveys were completed by an owner or manager in all but three shops. In general, self-reported work practices were poor. Workers' scores on safety climate were uniformly lower than those of owners. For workers, there was no correlation between how well the business scored on an independent audit of business safety practices and the safety climate measures they reported. For owners, however, there was a positive correlation between safety climate scores and the business safety assessment. For workers, safety rules and procedures were associated with improved work practices for those engaged in both painting-related and body technician-related activities. CONCLUSIONS: The enforcement of safety rules and procedures emerged as a strong factor positively affecting self-reported work practices. These findings identify a simple, cost effective path to reducing hazards in small workplaces.

A comparison of owner and expert evaluation of health and safety in small collision repair shops: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Workplace evaluation is one of the first steps in reducing the risk of injuries and illnesses, and is part of several programs that promote a participatory approach to occupational health among small business owners. The usefulness of written safety evaluations is contingent upon non-safety professionals obtaining accurate and reliable results. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to better understand auto body shop owners' ability to correctly identify occupational health and safety issues within their businesses. METHODS: In this study, 11 auto body shop owners used a 25-question checklist, developed specifically for this industry, to identify key safety and health problems. Owner results were compared with those of an industrial hygienist (IH) experienced in using the assessment form. RESULTS: The average number of safety problems identified by the IH was twice as large as the number identified by business owners (P = 0.02). The average percentage agreement of answers between owners and the IH was 81% (SD = 21%). Shop owners were more accurate in assessing the presence of written safety programs and records than the presence of unsafe work conditions. Overall, owners' sensitivity (ability to correctly identify a safety-deficient item) was low (0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Collision shop owners had some difficulty correctly identifying many unsafe/non-compliant items or situations in their facility. Naïve users' ability to correctly identify potentially hazardous situations--sensitivity--should be the metric of concern for the validity of safety assessments, and efforts should be directed at bringing this number as close to one as feasible.