Tim Turney at Casella explains why HAVS legislation differs between the US and UK.
The governing health and safety bodies from both the UK and the USA advise best practice when it comes to preventing Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS), but the UK’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) leads the way in legislative and enforcement actions. In the decade before 2020, HAVS cases in the UK were in linear decline before increasing again in 2021. Due to a lack of specific legislation on HAVS in the US, the condition is widely under reported, with most sources quoting a 1983 study by NIOSH.
What is it?
HAVS is a medical condition caused by the prolonged use of hand-held machinery or powered tools. When a person uses such tools for extended periods, transmitted vibration can affect the blood vessels, nerves, muscles, and joints in the hand, wrist, and arm, leading to a range of symptoms. These symptoms typically include:
- Tingling or numbness: Often felt in the fingers, hands, or arms.
- Loss of sensation or dexterity: Difficulty feeling or manipulating objects with precision.
- Pain or discomfort: Typically in the fingers, hands, wrists, or arms.
- Reduced grip strength: Difficulty holding onto objects firmly.
- White finger (Raynaud’s phenomenon): The fingers may become white, numb, and painful in response to cold or stress due to restricted blood flow.
The severity of HAVS symptoms can vary depending on factors such as the duration and intensity of exposure to vibration, individual susceptibility, and the specific characteristics of the vibrating tools being used. In severe cases, HAVS can significantly impact an individual’s ability to work and perform daily activities. In 2022, the Industrial Industries Disablement Benefit (IIDB) recorded 300 cases in the UK. As the US does not have a rigorous reporting structure or agency collecting the data, the scale of the issue in the States is unknown.
Preventing HAVS involves implementing measures to reduce exposure to hand-arm vibration, such as using tools with lower vibration levels, taking regular breaks, maintaining equipment in good condition, and providing training to workers on safe tool use. Additionally, early detection through health surveillance programs can help identify and address symptoms before they worsen.
Legislation
In the UK, HAVS is regulated through specific legislation under the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005, which sets strict limits on vibration exposure. The regulations also enforce regular health surveillance on employees likely to be exposed to vibration at or above the action exposure level, and mandates comprehensive risk assessments to mitigate this risk. Employers are required to act if exposure exceeds certain thresholds, with clear guidance on minimising risks through engineering controls, tool maintenance, and worker training.
The HSE will inspect workplaces to prevent damage to employees’ health where employers fail to keep levels under prescribed limits. This proactive and prescriptive approach often begins with Improvement Notices which, if not acted upon, will result in further punitive action such as fines and imprisonment for those responsible.
In contrast, the US does not have specific legislation dedicated to HAVS. Instead, HAVS-related risks are addressed indirectly through broader regulations such as OSHA’s General Duty Clause and standards governing hand and power tools. These regulations focus on general workplace safety, but do not include specific limits for vibration exposure or mandatory health surveillance for workers using vibrating tools.
OSHA’s approach is reactive and relies heavily on employer discretion for risk management. This less stringent regulation is characteristic of the broader regulatory landscape in the US, which tends to prioritise reducing immediate physical hazards over long-term occupational health risks. Particularly those that develop slowly over time, such as HAVS.
Additionally, OSHA’s emphasis on ergonomics and vibration is typically folded into a wider conversation about workplace safety, rather than being treated as a stand-alone issue. The onus for implementing corrective action on workplace safety falls to local authorities that have specific regulations.
Why?
The difference in regulation is due to policy differences in how the two countries enforce workplace health. The UK regulates occupational health issues, prioritising prevention and worker welfare, driven by a central state model where government agencies like the HSE actively intervene to protect workers. The UK’s more comprehensive regulatory framework for HAVS reflects this, ensuring that both employers and workers are aware of the risks and required actions to prevent them.
The US places greater emphasis on employer autonomy and reactive enforcement, with OSHA intervening primarily when a hazard is identified or when complaints are raised. The lack of specific HAVS regulation suggests that in the US, workplace risks like HAVS are not controlled with the same urgency as in the UK, where regulatory bodies directly address these occupational health issues. This may be due in part to a stronger tradition of litigation in the US, where workers are more likely to seek compensation through legal channels rather than relying on regulatory enforcement.
It is important for employers in the US to assess and control the risks associated with vibration exposure, provide training and information to employees, and implement ergonomic practices to minimise the risk of HAVS. Compliance with OSHA standards is crucial to maintaining a safe and healthy workplace.
Whilst the HSE’s enforcement of HAVS legislation in the UK may be more comprehensive and proactive than OSHA’s less prescriptive approach, the increase in cases past 2020 means that there is still work to be done in both countries. Employers should actively implement engineering controls and conduct regular health surveillance to mitigate the risk of financial penalties and, more importantly, to protect workers from the irreversible symptoms of HAVS.
Approaches to managing the risks associated Musculoskeletal disorders
In this episode of the Safety & Health Podcast, we hear from Matt Birtles, Principal Ergonomics Consultant at HSE’s Science and Research Centre, about the different approaches to managing the risks associated with Musculoskeletal disorders.
Matt, an ergonomics and human factors expert, shares his thoughts on why MSDs are important, the various prevalent rates across the UK, what you can do within your own organisation and the Risk Management process surrounding MSD’s.
