References
- http://www.bls.gov/opub/tedl2008/dec/wkl!art02.htm
- 노동부, 산업재해 현황분석, 2008
- 한국산업안전보건공단, 근골격계부담작업 유해요인조사시행 지침 및 작성 방법, 2004
- 한국산업안전보건공단, 근골격계부담작엽 유해요인조사 지침 (KOSHA CODE H-30-2003), 2003
- 기도형 등,근골격계부담작업 유해요인조사이행실태에 관한 연구, 한국산엽안전공단, 2007
Journal of the Korean Society of Safety (한국안전학회지)
- Volume 24 Issue 4
- /
- Pages.90-95
- /
- 2009
- /
- 1738-3803(pISSN)
- /
- 2383-9953(eISSN)
Survey on Experts' Opinion for the Legal Examination of WMSDs Risk Factors
근골격계부담작업 유해요인조사 제도에 대한 전문가 의견 조사
-
Lee, In-Seok
(Department of Safety Engineering, Hankyong National University)
;
-
Park, Jae-Hee
(Department of Safety Engineering, Hankyong National University)
;
- Jung, Hwa-Shik (Department of Occupational Therapy, Dongshin University) ;
- Kee, Do-Hyung (Department of Industrial and Management Engineering, Keimyung University) ;
- Kim, Hyun-Joo (Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, College of Medicine, Dankook University) ;
-
Roh, Sang-Chul
(Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, College of Medicine, Dankook University)
-
이인석
(한경대학교 안전공학과)
;
-
박재희
(한경대학교 안전공학과)
;
- 정화식 (동신대학교 작업치료학과) ;
- 기도형 (계명대학교 경영공학과) ;
- 김현주 (단국대학교 산업의학과) ;
-
노상철
(단국대학교 산업의학과)
- Published : 2009.08.30
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate industrial safety and health experts' opinions on the examination system of WMSDs(work related musculoskeletal disorders) risk factors. For doing this, a questionnaire study and two FGIs(focused group interview) were conducted. A questionnaire with open questions about the examination system was developed, and sent to 42 experts consented bye-mail. Of the experts, 24 experts responded, whose data were used in the analysis. The FGIs were performed for the persons in charge of industrial safety and health in industries and ergonomists. The questionnaire study revealed that most experts(91.3%) agreed with legalization of employers' duty for preventing WMSDs, necessity of the 11 tasks designated by Ministry of Labor, the examination system and ergonomics program, and pertinency for the examination system classification of periodic and occasional one. However, more than half experts disagreed with timeliness and appropriateness of the legal system. This was validated by the low approval rates for appropriateness of the 11 tasks, methods of the examination, charge person in the examination and ergonomics program. FGIs showed that it was desirable for the examination system to be legalized, and that the system was generally properly performed. It was suggested that the system be partially revised with reflecting problems disclosed during its enforcement rather than whole revision. It is expected that when revising relevant legal system, the results of this study would be used as valuable data.