Occupational fatalities in Alaska: two decades of progress, 1990-1999 and 2000-2009.

INTRODUCTION: Alaska had the highest work-related fatality rate of any state during 1980-1989. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health established the Alaska Field Station (AFS) to address this problem. METHODS: AFS established surveillance systems to provide scientific assessments of occupational hazards. Interventions were developed in collaboration with partners and evaluated. RESULTS: During 2000-2009, Alaska experienced a 42.5% decline in work-related fatalities over the previous decade of 1990-1999. In 2009, the workplace fatality rate for Alaska was 5.6/100,000 workers. Commercial pilot deaths were reduced by 50% and Bering Sea crab fishing death rates were reduced by 60%. Building on this success, AFS established national programs to improve safety in the commercial fishing and oil and gas extraction industries. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: A focused, epidemiological approach to reducing fatalities in high-risk occupations is effective. Ongoing commitment to this type of approach will assist in continued success in Alaska and elsewhere.

Does the small farm exemption cost lives?

BACKGROUND: Congress has exempted farms with fewer than 11 employees from enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. Three states (California, Oregon, and Washington) do not observe the exemption. METHODS: We compared rates of fatal occupational injury in agriculture, by year, in 1993-2007, in California, Oregon, and Washington (aggregated), and the remaining states (as two aggregated groups): those with, and those without, state-designed occupational safety and health programs. RESULTS: Fatality rates were approximately 1.6 to 3 times as high in both groups of states observing the small farm exemption as in the group of three states not observing it. Comparisons excluding the agriculture industry showed weaker differences. CONCLUSIONS: The three states' opting out of the small farm exemption may have had substantial direct effects. They may also reflect and/or encourage a generally more effective approach to occupational health and safety. Although alternative explanations must be considered, the stakes are high in terms of injury and loss of life; further investigation seems urgently indicated.