By Jaquelyn Burton (Coeval, Inc.) A person who has been awake for 17 hours faces the same risk of a crash as a person who has a BAC reading of 0.05 g/100ml and those who are awake for 24 hours will have a driving performance similar to a person who has a BAC of 0.1 g/100ml. – Adelaide Centre for Sleep Research
If being tired is equivalent to being drunk – why does shipping culture equate working hard with not resting?
With all of the studies that have been done on fatigue in the past 80 years, it would make sense to have a consensus about how much rest is necessary to avoid it being a contributory factor in accidents. The only result that is seen time and time again is that fatigue can be catastrophic.
“More recent research has revealed sleep loss-induced neurobehavioral effects, which often go unrecognized by the affected individuals. The neurobehavioral impact extends from simple measures of cognition (i.e., attention and reaction time) to far more complex errors in judgment and decision making, such as medical errors,” – Harvey R Colten and Bruce M Altevogt. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Sleep Medicine and Research.
“The prevailing view until the 1990s was that people adapted to chronic sleep loss without adverse cognitive effects (Dinges et al., 2005)”
Because of the perception that people could adapt to chronic sleep loss it was standard practice in the maritime world to work on schedules that were and in some cases still are sleep depriving. During the period that this view was dominant was also the same time that the minimum manning requirements were put into place under the assumption that those minimum levels of crew members would be able to operate the vessel safely. What wasn’t accounted for was the fact that fatigue would be so critical to the safety of the vessel.
The errors in judgment and decision making have been sighted as a contributing and a primary factor in many maritime incidents and accidents. More problematic than fatigue itself is the culture that Mariners have built around fatigue being a badge of courage.
It has become so apparent a part of the maritime culture that a conference report in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health said: “Most commonly, seafarers are willing to work while highly fatigued because it is seen as “professional” to do so. The widely held belief that fatigue “comes with the job”, whilst not particular to the maritime industry is certainly pervasive within it, making it difficult for seafarers to recognize fatigue as a problem and to take appropriate action. This “forces” crew into the poor compliance trap as they feel responsible to manage their own shipboard fatigue, making current fatigue management approaches ineffective. ” – Fatigue Risk Management: A Maritime Framework, Michelle Rita Grech
Many mariners were expecting and in some cases still are expecting to be paid 4 or 5 hours of overtime each day, resulting in them working 12 or 13 hours in a 24 hour period. They want to maximize their income when they can. Due to the Work-rest hour restrictions they can not work beyond 72 hours in any seven day period. This culture of more work is “professional” is a direct result of pay being based on overtime and not included in a lump sum monthly rate.
There has been an effort made by the ILO and the IMO to combat these practices in the name of maritime safety that has resulted from the most recent sleep research.
Unfortunately, because of the maritime traditional watch systems and crewing practices that resulted from the previous operating schedules sleep deprivation and fatigue are still problematic, even with the STCW and MLC 2006 Regulations on work rest that are now in force.
There are vessels that face detention and fines due to MLC violations, and many other ships calming exceptions. Some ships still work on a six hours on, six hours off watch rotation. A schedule that is still allowed in the STCW and MLC rules!
“Performance deficits in individuals who slept 6 hours or less per night were similar to those observed in individuals after two nights of total sleep deprivation. Most striking was that study subjects remained largely unaware of their performance deficits, as measured by subjective sleepiness ratings.” – Harvey R Colten and Bruce M Altevogt. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Sleep Medicine and Research.
The problem with the MLC rules, beyond that they can be complex to calculate and schedule by hand, is that they restrict hours in any 24 hour period and allow no more than two rest periods in any 24 hour period. Resulting in a violation of the rules to break a six on, six off watch without adding an additional watch stander to the watch schedule. Even the traditional watch schedule of 4 hours on 8 hours off has been shown to diminish performance over time. Eight hours off of watch does not equate to eight hours of sleep – the mariner still has to shower, eat, and wake up again in that 8 hour period, in one study showed the average amount of sleep for the watch standers to be 6.6 hours.
“ …highly fatigued workers were 70 percent more likely to be involved in accidents than were workers reporting low fatigue levels…” – Harvey R Colten and Bruce M Altevogt. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Sleep Medicine and Research.
As automation is increasing, many operators are reducing their manning levels to their minimums to cut down operating costs. This is only exasperating the levels of fatigue onboard their vessels. Some ships are now being detained at port-state controls for having falsified their work-rest logs.
The solution is to raise manning – as the airlines had to. Minimum manning should be calculated to ensure that the vessels can operate entering ports, sailing and completing cargo operations without having any crew members – including the captain going into work-rest hour violation. The airlines do this by having two pilots and are safer for it. The only way to avoid fatigue is to spread the workload. How much longer will we continue to let fatigue be a factor, risking the safety of crews, vessels and cargo? The watches need to be stood, alarms must be answered, judgment calls must be made. Fatigue can be a matter of life or death – don’t let it be yours.
Top 10 Shift Work Myths
Myth #1 – Overtime within your workforce is evenly distributed
Best practices suggest that when overtime is equally distributed across a workforce, up to approximately 12% overtime is an acceptable rate. However, overtime rates vary across industries, companies and employees.
Research indicates that in many industries, 20% of employees work 60% or more of the overtime (Figure 4).1
Figure 4. Actual distribution of overtime at an extended hours facility.1
Since accidents and safety problems can be caused by one fatigued employee, the risk of an accident occurring can rise as the distribution of overtime becomes increasingly skewed.
The imbalance exposes the pool of high overtime employees to extra health risks, and exposes the company to increased absenteeism costs, health care costs, safety issues, and legal liability.
Myth #2 – Employee productivity increases linearly
Studies and reports suggest that productivity can suffer with increased overtime hours.
Data from 18 manufacturing industries in the U.S. shows that for most of these industries, productivity (measured as output per hour) declines when overtime is used.2
On average, a 10% increase in overtime results in a 2.4% decrease in productivity (more output is achieved, but the number of hours worked increases as well—not as much output per hour is realized).
This performance decline is confirmed by the work of J. Nevison of Oak Associates. In his white paper, Nevison brings together scientific, business, and government data to demonstrate that little productive work takes place over and above 50 hours per week (Figure 2)3. Two other studies, also examined in the white paper, show that productive hours drop by an additional 10 hours when the number of consecutive long workweeks increases from four to 12, highlighting the cumulative effects that overtime can have on productivity.
Figure 2. Productive vs. actual work hours, from a collection of four studies4
Myth #3 – Adequate staffing means having enough employees to cover permanent positions
Often overlooked are the real drivers of overtime in 24/7 operations. In any given week, employees may not be available to fill their scheduled shifts because of multiple reasons including:
- Vacation days
- Floating holidays
- Sickness related absenteeism
- Non-sickness related absenteeism/personal days
- Injury-related absenteeism
- Training
- Special work assignments (committees, team building, projects, etc.)
- Jury duty, bereavement, FMLA, etc.
- Turnover/delays in filling position with adequately trained employees
Many 24/7 operations do not realistically estimate or measure the full impact of these factors and hence run their shifts with fewer staff than needed, effectively increasing the relief coverage requirement (i.e. overtime) and impacting the time on duty and off duty of their personnel.
Furthermore, many companies do not monitor and analyze their historical payroll and human resources data so that they are unable to make even simple forecasts about scheduled and unscheduled absenteeism. Without this data, they are unable to accurately define seasonal, weekly and daily fluctuations in coverage demand.
Based on CIRCADIAN's 2014 Shiftwork Practices data, we found that the "leaner" operations (i.e. reduced staffing levels) reported higher absenteeism rates (Figure 1).
Interestingly, over 50% of all unscheduled absences are due to either: personal needs, stress, or an entitlement mentality (i.e. “I’ve earned it”).5
Figure 1. Staffing Levels & Absenteeism Rate 5
Myth #4 – Operational decisions on shift scheduling are best if mandated by management.
Management-mandated work schedules often prevent an operation from reaching its full potential in terms of operational costs, productivity, efficiency, and safety.
Employee participation is just as important in the process of designing and implementing the new work schedule as the characteristics of the new work schedule itself.6-9
Surveys suggest that management-mandated work schedules can lead to:10
- Increased absenteeism
- Excessive overtime costs
- Increased health problems and fatigue
- Decreased morale
- Increased turnover costs
- Recruitment problems
Studies comparing methods of shift schedule selection have found that employee involvement in schedule redesign increases the benefits of schedule redesign considerably, as compared to management-mandated schedule changes. These benefits include:11-18
- Increased worker satisfaction with schedule design
- Decreased unscheduled absences from illness
- Improved physical and psychological vigor
- Decreased turnover and number of vacant positions
- Increased organizational commitment
- Improved employee and management relations
Myth #5 – If a shift schedule works well at our other plant, it will work for us here.
This is a common misconception in companies with multiple facility locations. A shift schedule that’s effective and well-liked at one facility can cause disagreements and tension among workers at a seemingly identical facility.
Shift schedules need to be based on the social, operational and physiological needs of the workforce and managers at each specific company site. Some factors to consider include:
- Geographic location
- The lifestyles of workers
- Cultural differences
- Worker demographics
These factors can greatly impact the popularity of different shift schedules among workers. For example, avoiding rush hour traffic is often important to workers in large cities, whereas workers in rural areas might prefer longer spans of days off.
Best shift scheduling practices suggest choosing a schedule with features that support the priorities of workers at each individual facility.
Pleasing everyone may be impossible, but having the majority of workers in favor of a new shift schedule will greatly increase the likelihood of a successful schedule change.
Myth #6 – Given the choice, workers always select the best schedule for them and the worst for the company.
Much conflict between management and shiftworkers is the result of misunderstanding and poor communication.
Management often feels that it is doing its part by “telling,” rather than both telling and listening to the needs of workers. Workers may feel that they’re providing valuable insight, but management only hears the complaints. As a result, management may feel that workers only care about themselves and making money.
While the occasional worker may try to game the system, most workers are truly concerned with the well-being of the company. After all, workers realize that any problem that the company faces will ultimately affect them. In light of this, most workers will choose a schedule that will satisfy the company while still fulfilling their individual needs.
The best way to ensure that workers understand the reasons for making any scheduling changes is by keeping them informed. This can be accomplished through company-wide meetings or events, as well as through regular emails or letters about the general state of the company.
Myth #7 – Falling asleep on the job is a matter of willpower
While curling up with a pillow and blanket at work is clearly deliberate, many fatigued individuals unknowingly experience microsleeps while working. A microsleep is a brief sleep episode that lasts up to 30 seconds, during which a person temporarily loses consciousness and external stimuli aren’t perceived.19
Individuals who experience microsleeps are often unaware that they briefly lost consciousness and will frequently deny that they fell asleep.20 When an individual arouses from a microsleep episode, it may feel like a brief lapse in attention or mind wandering.
Research suggests that even individual neurons can experience microsleeps, which means that your parts of the brain may be “offline” even if you’re seemingly awake.21
Microsleeps are most commonly associated with sleep deprivation and driving; however, microsleeps can also occur in the absence of sleep deprivation when completing monotonous, repetitive tasks.
Myth #8 – Napping during work is a lazy and unacceptable behavior
Before you write off napping as a leisurely activity that should be banned at work, you might want to consider the ways in which napping at your workplace can improve the alertness and productivity of workers.
Ten minute power naps provide immediate benefits upon awakening and boosts in performance that can last up to 4 hours!
Ten minute naps have been shown to: decrease fatigue, increase vigor, improve performance, improve communication, decrease blood pressure, improve reaction time, improve subject well-being, and increase alertness.
Longer naps that last 90 minutes (or longer) still offer many restorative benefits; however, they are not as efficient as power naps. Longer naps allow for memory consolidation and therefore have been shown to improve memory. Extended napping is frequently associated with profound sleep inertia, which can be crippling to productivity. In order to avoid the sleep inertia of long naps, it's advised to sleep a full 90 min sleep cycle in order to wake up at the lightest sleep stage.
Myth # 9 – Hours of service requirements are sufficient for mitigating employee fatigue
Most fatigue regulations start and end with hours of service policies. While this is a good starting place, it fails to address all of the factors that contribute to fatigue. To ensure the alertness of workers, a comprehensive fatigue risk management system (FRMS) needs to be in place.
CIRCADIAN® 5 Defenses FRMS Design
A fatigue risk management system (FRMS) is a data-driven, risk-informed, safety performance-based program that reduces the risk of fatigue-related incidents in 24/7 operations. An FRMS will continually monitor and reduce fatigue risk.
Workforces that have implemented fatigue risk management systems experience fewer problems with absenteeism, turnover and excessive overtime. Employees in these workforces have greater morale, less stress, and are more productive workers.
Myth #10 – There’s very little financial ROI with fatigue risk management
To some, fatigue might seem like a minor concern, yet it costs companies millions of dollars each year in excess costs, accidents and errors.
Fatigued workers cost employers $136.4 billion annually in health-related lost productive time (absenteeism and presenteeism), almost 4x more than their non-fatigued counterparts.22
Fatigued workers exhibit up to 4x the worker’s compensation costs as compared to non-fatigued workers (Figure 3).24 A recent meta-analysis of 27 observational studies found that sleep problems increase the risk of workplace injuries by 62 percent.23
Figure 3. Fatigue Levels & Worker’s Compensation24
Addressing and mitigating fatigue within an operation can significantly decrease excess costs related to: absenteeism, turnover, accidents, and healthcare.
ÂÂÂ
Debunk Other Shift Work Myths
Explore the variety of CIRCADIAN white papers that cover an assortment of 24/7 workforce topics including:
- Shift Scheduling
- Staffing Levels
- Fatigue Risk Management Systems
- Shiftwork Lifestyle Training
- And much more!
REFERENCES
- CIRCADIAN databases
- Shepard E, Clifton T. Are Long Hours Reducing Productivity in Manufacturing. International Journal of Manpower 2000; 7.
- Nevison, J. Overtime Hours: The Rule of Fifty
- Permission from Nevison, Oak Associates.
- CIRCADIAN. 2014 Shiftwork Practices.
- Hauburger. Implementation of self-scheduling in the poison center. Vet. Hum. Toxicol. 39(3),175-7. 1997.
- Knauth P.The design of shift systems. Ergonomics 36(1-3),15-28. 1993.
- Knauth P. Changing schedules: shiftwork. Chronobiol. Int. 14(2),159-71. 1997.
- Kogi K, Di Martino VG. Trends in participatory process of changing shiftwork arrangements. Work & Stress 9 (2/3), 298-304. 1995.
- Circadian Technologies, Shiftwork Practices Survey 2002.
- Ala-Mursula et al. Employee control over working times: associations with subjective health and sickness absences. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 56(4),272-8. 2002.
- Beltzhoover M. Self-scheduling: an innovative approach. Nurs. Manage. 25(4),81-2. 1994.
- Bradley, Martin. Continuous personnel scheduling algorithms: a literature review. J. Soc. Health Syst. 2(2),8-23. 1991.
- Holtom et al. The relationship between work status congruence and work-related attitudes and behaviors. J. Appl. Psychol. 87(5),903-15. 2002.
- Moore-Ede M. The Twenty-Four Hour Society: Understanding Human Limits in a World that Never Sleeps. 1994.
- Smith PA et al. Change from slowly rotating 8-hour shifts to rapidly rotating 8-hour and 12-hour shifts using participative shift roster design. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health. 24(S3), 55-61. 1998.
- Teahan. Implementation of a self-scheduling system: a solution to more than just schedules! J. Nurs. Manag. 6(6),361- 81. 998. Erratum in: J. Nurs. Manag. 7(1),65. 1999.
- Sakai K et al. Educational and intervention strategies for improving a shift system: an experience in a disabled persons' facility. Ergonomics 36(1-3),219-25. 1993.
- International Classification of Sleep Disorders Diagnostic and Coding Manual, http://www.esst.org/adds/ICSD.pdf, page 343.
- Higgins, Laura; Fette Bernie (in press). "Drowsy Driving" (PDF). Retrieved 2013-06-12.
- Vyazovskiy, V. V., Olcese, U., Hanlon, E. C., Nir, Y., Cirelli, C., & Tononi, G. (2011). Local sleep in awake rats. Nature, 472(7344), 443-447.
- Ricci, J. A., Chee, E., Lorandeau, A. L., & Berger, J. (2007). Fatigue in the US workforce: prevalence and implications for lost productive work time. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 49(1), 1-10.
- Katrin Uehli, Amar J. Mehta, David Miedinger, Kerstin Hug, Christian Schindler, Edith Holsboer-Trachsler, Jörg D. Leuppi, et al. (2014). Sleep problems and work injuries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Medicine Reviews. doi:10.1016/j.smrv.2013.01.004
- Aguirre, A. Shiftwork Practices Survey, 2005.
Additional Info
- References:
Related Posts
15 SLEEP RESOLUTIONS FOR 2016
FATIGUE RISK MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: ARE THEY NECESSARY?
SHIFTWORK SAFETY CHECKLIST
9 COMMON MYTHS ABOUT 12-HOUR SHIFTS
Crane drivers at Felixstowe are often fatigued because we are forced to perform other tasks in our rest periods.If a pilot of a passenger plane was exceptionally tired it would be wrong to let him/her operate,but it is ok for a crane driver to operate some of the biggest kit in the world.Big accident waiting to happen!
ReplyDelete