Report of Safety of Printer Emissions in the Workplace Available

Safe Work Australia Chair Tom Phillips recently announced the release of two significant reports on the risks and health effects of printer particle emissions in the workplace. Could this be the next asbestos-type product?
 
 
The two reports, Nanoparticles from Printer Emissions in Workplace Environments and A Brief Review of the Health Risks Associated with Laser Printer Emissions Measured as Particles are a breakthrough in the nanotechnology field," said Phillips.
 
 
Research for the Nanoparticles from Printer Emissions in Workplace Environments report examined particle emissions from laser printers in office environments. A total of 107 laser printers were examined in offices across Queensland. The majority of the nanoparticle exposure experienced by workers over the course of a working day did not come from printers but from other sources, for example vehicle emissions infiltrating the building.
 
 
The report was commissioned under the Safe Work Australia Nanotechnology Work Health and Safety Program, funded by the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research. The report research was undertaken by Queensland University of Technology and Workplace Health and Safety Queensland.
 
 
To understand the potential health effects of particles measured in this report Safe Work Australia commissioned Toxikos Pty, Ltd. to undertake a review. A Brief Review of the Health Risks Associated with Laser Printer Emissions Measured as Particles examined results and assessed them against national and international air quality guidelines and exposure standards.
 
 
Phillips said the review found that the risk of direct toxicity and health effects from exposure to laser printer particle emissions for most people is negligible but people responsive to unusual or unexpected odors may detect and react to the presence of emissions.
 
 
Workers should still attempt to minimize their exposure to printer particles. The nanoparticles from Printer Emissions in Workplace Environments report provides precautionary advice on how offices can assess and control printer particle emissions in their workplace,” said Phillips.
 
 
The research report, review and more information on the Nanotechnology Work Health and Safety Program is available at www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au
 
 
 
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He is an editor and contributor to Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
 
 
 
 
WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK:  www.WCManual.com
 
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contactInfo@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

New Hip Implants Are Becoming a Product Liability

New hip implants appear to have no advantage over traditional implants, suggests a review of the evidence in a report published the British Medical Journal.  And some evidence shows that new implants may be associated with higher rates of revision surgery.

 
While hip replacement is a successful operation, substantial numbers of patients require revision surgery within 10 years to replace the implant because of infection, dislocation, wear, instability, loosening, or other mechanical failures.
 

Traditional hip implants
with metal on polyethylene or ceramic on polyethylene bearing surfaces are associated with low revision rates. Newer alternatives with metal on metal or ceramic on ceramic bearings are available, but their advantage over traditional implants is still not clear.
 

There have also been severe cases of
accumulation of metal ions in tissues of patients with metal on metal hip implants, leading the BMJ to call for better regulation of medical devices. And in 2009, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initiated a comprehensive review of the evidence for approved hip implants.
 

Working with the FDA
, a team of researchers led by Professor Art Sedrakyan set out to compare the safety and effectiveness of hip implants with different bearing surfaces.
 

They analyzed the results
of 18 studies involving 3,139 patients and over 830,000 operations in annual reports of registries.
 
 
They found that functional outcomes (ability to carry out usual daily activities) and general quality of life scores were no different between patients with the new metal on metal or ceramic on ceramic hip implants compared with traditional hip implants.
 
 
While one study reported fewer dislocations associated with metal on metal implants, in the three largest national registries there was evidence of higher rates of implant revision associated with metal on metal implants compared with traditional metal on polyethylene implants.
 
 
One trial reported fewer revisions with ceramic on ceramic compared with metal on polyethylene implants, but data from national registries did not support this finding. 
 
 
The authors conclude: "There is limited evidence regarding comparative effectiveness of various hip implant bearings, and the results do not indicate any advantage for metal on metal or ceramic on ceramic implants compared with traditional bearings." 
 
 
They call for a large randomized trial of bearing surfaces before any claims of benefit are made.

 

Until then, they say "national registries provide important real world data that are critical for the safety and future comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation."

 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
 

Our WORKERS COMP BOOK:  www.WCManual.com
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact

Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Lockout Tagout Violation Results in Crush Death at New York Company

The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited Metalico Rochester Inc. for alleged repeat and serious violations of workplace safety standards following the death of an employee at its 50 Portland Ave. recycling facility in Rochester, N.Y.
 
 
According to an OSHA report, the worker, who operated a large baler, was fatally crushed on June 4 when the machine unexpectedly activated while he was clearing material and he became caught between the baler's pusher block/ram and its return cavity.
 
 
The inspection by OSHA's Buffalo Area Office found that the company had not developed and used procedures to lock out the baler's power source and also did not provide workers with the required training on those procedures. OSHA's hazardous energy control standard requires that machines be shut down and their power sources locked or tagged out to prevent them from activating while workers are cleaning or performing maintenance on them. (WCxKit)
 
 
OSHA had cited Metalico Rochester Inc. in March 2010 for similar hazards at a Pittsburgh, Pa., location. The recurrence of those conditions in this case resulted in citations for two repeat violations. A repeat violation exists when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years. Additionally, one serious violation was cited for not providing safe access to the baler. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.
 
 
"One means by which employers can prevent new and recurring hazards is for them to work proactively and cooperatively with their employees to develop, implement and effectively maintain an illness and injury prevention program," said Robert Kulick, OSHA's regional director in New York. [WCx]
 
 
Detailed information on controlling hazardous energy, including an interactive E Tool, is available for workers and employers online at: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/controlhazardousenergy/index.html.
 
 
Proposed penalties total $73,300. Metalico Rochester Inc. has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply with OSHA's Buffalo area director or contest the findings to the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
 
Product liability issues: In cases such as this involving lack of machine guarding and lack of warnings and/or training, adjusters must look carefully for potential to bring in additional parties to cover the loss costs such as machinery manufacturer's with potential responsibility for designing unsafe or defective equipment. If a safer design is available for a machine or it's guarding system, the manufacturer has the responsibility to do so; they must  "design out" the defects not just issue a warning about the defect. Simply slapping a warning on a product with inherent defects will not save the responsible party from being held responsible.
 


Author Robert Elliott
, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He is an editor and contributor to Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

 


WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT MANUAL:  www.WCManual.com

VIEW SAMPLES PAGES

MODIFIED DUTY CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/transitional-duty-cost-calculator.php

 

Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.

 

©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Carmel Candy Machine Snags Clothing and Pulls Woman In

We're writing about yet another unguarded machine accident… there are  too many of these around the world. Manufacturers of machinery and employers need to pay close attention to making sure all machines were guarded, employees/supervisors are trained and there were warnings for those few times the guards had to be removed.

Here are the facts we know about this accident.

British chocolate chain Thorntons has been fined after a worker broke her finger while operating a wrapping machine.

According to a report from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), Ellen Yardley, 37, from Derbyshire was working at the company’s Somercotes plant on a foil wrapping machine, where chocolates were wrapped in foil and dispensed down a chute into a tray.   

 

During a short break in production, while the machine was still running, Ms Yardley attempted to clean the inside of the output chute which had become covered in caramel. However, the cloth she was using became tangled in rotating parts which gripped the chocolates and her right hand was dragged into the machine. (WCxKit)

Yardley’s middle finger was fractured and cut, and she was off work for 10 weeks following the incident.An investigation by HSE found the machine had guarding installed but it was inadequate.  

 

A subsequent audit of other machines in the factory found safety improvements were necessary to a range of machines, including preventing access to dangerous parts or repairs to existing safeguards.

 

Thorntons PLC, of Thornton Park, Somercotes, Derbyshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and Regulation 3(1) (a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.(WCxKit)

Southern Derbyshire Magistrates’ Court fined the company $30,000 (20,000 GBP) and ordered it to pay full costs of $12,000 (7,680 GBP).



Author Robert Elliott
, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He is an editor and contributor to Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
 
NEW 2012 WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK:  www.WCManual.com
 
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

British Plastics Company Fined after Technician Crushed on the Job

An experienced technician at a plastic products factory in Cornwall, Great Britain was killed after he was crushed between the plates on a machine used to make plastic lids.
 
 
According to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), Shaun O' Dwyer, 54, originally from North Yorkshire, but living in Redruth died in the incident on May 30, 2008 at Curver UK Ltd's factory on Cardew Industrial Estate.
 
 
HSE prosecuted Curver UK Ltd., (formerly Contico Europe Ltd.) for failing to provide adequate safety measures.
 
 
Truro Crown Court heard that in preparing the machinery O'Dwyer needed to access the plastic moldings machine's plates. This was normally done via a guard which, when opened, prevented the machine from operating. However in this case one of the conveyors on the machine had been removed and O'Dwyer was able to access the machine through an unguarded gap. Whilst he was inside the machine the press started to operate and the plates closed crushing him at a pressure of over 1,000 tons.
 
 
HSE Inspector Trevor Hay noted, "This tragic incident could have been avoided if the company had observed standard industry guidance from the British Plastics Federation and the British Standards Institution. Users of such machinery should ensure effective safeguards are in place to avoid further deaths or injuries to their workers."(WCxKit)
 
 
Curver UK Ltd of York Gate, London, pleaded guilty to committing a breach of Regulation 11 (1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations under Section 33(1) (c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £160,000 ($245,000) and ordered to pay £32,000 ($49,000) costs.
 
 
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. He is an editor and contributor to Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
 
 
 
NEW 2012 WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK:  www.WCManual.com
 
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Study Addresses Dangers of Proximity to Battery Manufacturing Units

A recent report looks at the dangers faced by both children living in close proximity to battery manufacturing units on the developing world and workers who work in such facilities.
 
 
A new study reported in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene claims children living close to battery manufacturing units in the developing world were 13 times more apt to have lead traces in their blood than their U.S. counterparts.(WCxKit)
 
 
Health officials point out that lead poisoning damages the central nervous system, the kidneys, and the cardiovascular reproductive systems, along with leading to low hemoglobin percentages. In children, it can retard learning, make them hyperactive and even lead to violent behavior.
 
 
The researchers, using data from studies published between 1993 and 2010, also discovered that battery industry workers in the developing world had three times higher blood lead levels than their U.S. counterparts.
 
 
Children and workers in developing countries face significant risks of lead poisoning, which can cause lifelong health problems,” commented Perry Gottesfeld, executive director of Occupational Knowledge International (OK International) and study author. “Without major improvements, we expect that lead poisoning cases will continue to increase as the industry grows.”
 
 
The battery industry uses approximately 80 percent of the global lead output. The demand is being led by huge demand for batteries in vehicles, solar power systems, cellular phones and for back-up to power supply.(WCxKit)
 
 
According to The World Health Organization (WHO), 120 million people are over-exposed to lead – approximately three times the number infected by HIV/AIDS – and 99 percent of the most severely affected live in the developing world.
 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Learn the ABCs of WORKERS COMP:  www.WCManual.com
 
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php

 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact  Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

UK Baker Fined After Teen Employee Has Fingers Crushed

A baker from Hampshire, Great Britain has been fined after a teenage worker had his fingers crushed in a machine at a bakery near Ringwood.

 
 
According to a report from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the agency prosecuted Peter Ellis, 58, of Belinda’s Bakery over the incident, which happened in 2010. (WCxKit)
 
 
Southampton Magistrates’ Court heard that a male worker, who does not want to be named, was operating a dough molder at a Belinda’s Bakery in the village of Poulner, Hampshire. The machine has two powered running rollers which drive dough through the machine, to be molded to the correct shape and size.
 
 
While operating the machine, the worker put his right hand in between the rollers. He suffered crush and skin injuries to his fingers and sustained cuts and bruising to the middle and index fingers. The HSE investigation found there was no guarding in place to prevent access to the powered rollers on the machine. The court was told that immediately following the incident, Ellis reinstalled guarding on the dough molder, which had been removed some two years earlier. (WCxKit). Note: in a claim like this, the manufacturer should be put on notice of a potential "failure to guard" claim because the machine should have had "fail safe" guarding.
 
 
Ellis of Picket Hill, Ringwood, Hampshire pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) (a) of Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. He was fined $800 and ordered to pay costs of $500.

 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.


WORKERS COMP MANAGEMENT:  www.WCManual.com

 
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact

Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

OSHA Issues Revised Hazard Alert for Hair Salon Workers

The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently issued a revised hazard alert to hair salon owners and workers about potential formaldehyde exposure from working with certain hair smoothing and straightening products.
 
 
The revised alert was prompted by the results of agency investigations, a warning letter issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and factually incorrect information recently sent to salons by a company that manufactures hair products. OSHA's updated alert can be viewed at: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/formaldehyde/hazard_alert.html.
 
 
According to a report from the Department of Labor, during recent investigations, OSHA's air tests showed formaldehyde at hazardous levels in salons using Brazilian Blowout Acai Professional Smoothing Solution and Brasil Cacau Cadiveu, resulting in citations for multiple violations. OSHA found that workers were exposed to formaldehyde in these salons at levels higher than the agency's protective limits. OSHA also cited two manufacturers and two distributors of hair smoothing products for violations that included failing to list formaldehyde on product labels as well as on accompanying hazard warning sheets, known as material safety data sheets, that are provided to the products' users.
 
 
The FDA issued a warning letter to the importer and distributor of Brazilian Blowout Acai Professional Smoothing Solution stating that the product is adulterated and misbranded. Although the solution contains methylene glycol, which can release formaldehyde during the normal conditions of use, the product is labeled "formaldehyde free" or "no formaldehyde" and does not list formaldehyde on the material safety data sheet.
 
 
Following an Aug. 24 letter sent by Brazilian Blowout to salon owners claiming that all OSHA air tests performed on the company's Brazilian Blowout Professional Acai Smoothing Solution yielded results below OSHA's standard for exposure, the agency sent a letter today to the company refuting that assertion.
 
 
"Misleading or inadequate information on hazardous product labels is unacceptable," said OSHA Assistant Secretary Dr. David Michaels. "Salon owners and workers have the right to know the risks associated with the chemicals with which they work and how to protect themselves."
 
 
Formaldehyde can irritate the eyes and nose; cause allergic reactions of the skin, eyes and lungs; and is a cancer hazard. The revised hazard alert notifies salons that if they use products that contain or release formaldehyde, they must follow the requirements in OSHA's formaldehyde standard at 29 Code of Federal Regulations 1910.1048. OSHA further requires manufacturers, importers and distributors of products that contain formaldehyde as a gas or in solution, or that can release formaldehyde during use, to include information about formaldehyde and its hazards on product labels and in the material safety data sheets. (WCxKit)
 
 
The alert also now includes details about the information that is required to be listed on the labels and the material safety data sheets of products that contain or could release formaldehyde.
 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

ABCs of WORK COMP CONTROL:  www.WCManual.com
 
 

 

WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Australian Company Fined after Worker Crushed in Industrial Blender

A Western Sydney manufacturing company and its director have been fined a total of $127,400 and ordered to pay WorkCover’s legal costs after a high powered industrial blender was turned on with a man inside it.
 
 
According to a report from WorkCover Authority of New South Wales, FIP Brakes International (FIP) produces industrial sized brake pads, as well as other products, for trains and other railway vehicles and employs around 60 people mainly based at its facility in Wetherill Park. Its managing director is Chris Katakouzinos. (WCxKit)
 
 
A machine operator was killed when he was cleaning out an industrial blender at FIP’s premises. The power to the machine had not been isolated and the machine became operational with the worker still inside. He died at the site with extensive crush injuries and lacerations.
 
 
A WorkCover investigation found a significant number of safety failings:
 
1.      The machine should not have been able to operate while its front doors were open.
 
2.      The safety switches were either broken or malfunctioning.
 
3.      The machine’s electrical power supply had not been turned off.
 
4.      The machine operator should not have been working alone.
 
5.      The machine was not properly maintained.
 
6.      The operator was not given proper training.
 
 
FIP and its director were charged with breaches of the  Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000  and both pled guilty.
 
 
In handing down her finding in the Industrial Court, Justice Backman said the incident was foreseeable and that there were serious deficiencies in the company’s systems.
 
 
FIP was fined $117,000 and Katakouzinos $10,400. The court ordered them to pay WorkCover’s legal costs.
 
 
WorkCover NSW’s Acting General Manager of Work Health and Safety Division Peter Dunphy said the risks to the employee’s safety were entirely foreseeable and the incident should never have happened.
 
 
This case is particularly significant given that the company’s insurer had 12 months previously identified major shortcomings in the company’s occupational health and safety systems.
 
 
The WorkCover investigation found that many of the identified problems had not been addressed. (WCxKit)
 

The steps that should have been taken were not only simple, but they were well-known safety practices in the industry.”

 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Our WORKERS COMP BOOK:  www.WCManual.com
 
 

 

WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php
 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.

Sony Recalling TV Due to Fire Hazards

Sony announced it is recalling 1.6 million Bravia televisions worldwide after a series of reports claim the sets were emitting smoke and even melting in some instances. According to Sony, eight of its Bravia range of LCD television sets are subject to the recall. Product liability and product safety are important concepts slightly diverging from workers compensation; however, we thought this might be of interest to some readers as we are talking about several other safety concepts today.

 
 
The problems affect flat-panel Bravia sets which have been sold since 2007. Eleven separate incidents of overheating have been reported in Japan since 2008; however Yuki Shima, a spokesperson for Sony, said that no consumers have suffered injuries. (WCxKit)
 
 
 
Even though no issues or problems have been reported outside of Japan, the majority of the impacted television sets were sold in either Europe or the US. The model numbers are: KDL-40D3400, KDL-40D3500, KDL-40D3550, KDL-40D3660, KDL-40V3000, KDL-40W3000, KDL-40X3000 and KDL-40X3500.
 
 
"If you own one of the products mentioned above and if you notice any abnormality (e.g. unusual noise, unusual smell or smoking), please turn it off immediately, unplug the power cable, stop using the TV, and contact us," according to a Sony statement. "We have confirmed that this symptom does not occur when power is switched off. In the unlikely event that you are affected by the issues above, we sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.”

 

Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
 

Our WORKERS COMP BOOK:  www.WCManual.com
 
WORK COMP CALCULATOR:  www.LowerWC.com/calculator.php

 
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
 
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact

Professional Development Resource

Learn How to Reduce Workers Comp Costs 20% to 50%"Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%"
Lower your workers compensation expense by using the
guidebook from Advisen and the Workers Comp Resource Center.
Perfect for promotional distribution by brokers and agents!
Learn More

Please don't print this Website

Unnecessary printing not only means unnecessary cost of paper and inks, but also avoidable environmental impact on producing and shipping these supplies. Reducing printing can make a small but a significant impact.

Instead use the PDF download option, provided on the page you tried to print.

Powered by "Unprintable Blog" for Wordpress - www.greencp.de