Preiser W., Smith K.H. Universal Design Handbook
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
23.6 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
Ergonomic Needs Assessment Work Practices
10. Are you free of excessive fatigue and pain at the end of your work shift?
10.1 Do you maintain as neutral a work posture as possible? ___Yes ___No
10.2 Do you avoid repetitive and cumulative stresses? ___Yes ___No
10.3 Do you take care of your health? ___Yes ___No
FIGURE 23.3 Illustration from the Workplace Ergonomics Reference Guide.
Long description: This line drawing shows a man seated in an ergonomic chair, facing a computer monitor, telephone,
lamp, and document stand on a table. His hands are positioned on a keyboard mounted on a slide-out tray, which also
holds a computer mouse. Beneath the table is the computer CPU. Over this drawing have been added dimensions of
proper desk height (25 to 34 in.) and depth (19 in. minimum), as well as proper angles for elbow, back, and knees (all at
least 90°), and angle of vision to the monitor (35 percent).
OFFICE AND WORKPLACE DESIGN 23.7
10. Are you free of excessive fatigue and pain at the end of your work shift?
10.1 To maintain as neutral a posture as possible...
10.2 To minimize repetitive and cumulative stresses...
10.3 To maintain your health...
Readjust your chair to suit your individual tasks and to give muscle groups a break
Avoid prolonged use of a “notebook” computer; minimize “recreational” computer use
Have regular general medical and eye examinations as recommended by a physician
Get adequate rest, regular exercise and maintain a healthy diet
Sit in a comfortable upright position with feet flat on the floor, thighs fully supported by the chair
seat, with no pressure on back of knee area
Adjust the chair armrests so that your upper arms are parallel with your upper body, your lower
arms are level, your shoulders neither slumped nor hunched, and your elbows are close to your
sides
Adjust the chair backrest so that the lumbar support contacts with hollow of your back, and you can
lean forward or backward with moderate resistance
Check the knee clearance: If too low, raise the work surface or remove center drawer; if too high,
modify work the surface supports or raise your chair and add a footrest equal to the additional
height; remove any obstructions to free movement of your legs
Check the work surface height: Your hands should rest on the keyboard or work surface with your
forearms on armrests and your wrists in a neutral (relaxed, not bent) posture
Locate the monitor directly behind the keyboard and mouse, with the top of the monitor at your eye
level about arm’s length away; to adjust the angle, place a small mirror on the center of the screen
and tilt the monitor until you can see your eyes
Position your work, equipment and materials directly in front of you; locate the keyboard and mouse
close together on same surface, which should not move when the keyboard is used; use a light
touch on keyboard
Alternate tasks throughout the work shift (example: stop using keyboard, lean back and proofread
your work, retrieve work from printer, messages from fax machine, etc.)
Wherever possible distribute or alternate tasks between right and left hands; alternate between use
of keyboard and mouse (use keystroke equivalents to mouse)
Take regular breaks for simple, brief exercises (examples; shoulder shrugs, neck rolls, ankle
rotations, leg extensions, overhead stretches, hand shakes, finger spreads)
Every 20 minutes, refocus your eyes from the computer screen to an outside window or other
object at least 25 feet away
FIGURE 23.3 (Continued)
23.8 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
This guide includes a simple checklist about common workplace features and provides ergonomic
guidance based on a broad compilation of ergonomic resources addressing the following:
1. Workplace accessibility
• Accessible routes of travel
• Accessible doorways and door hardware
• Changes in level
• Flooring
• Navigation
• Emergency evacuation
2. Visual and auditory information
• Positioning and lighting
• Typeface selection
• Ambient noise and auditory signals
• Sound attenuation
3. Lighting
• Illumination without glare
• Materials and positioning to reduce glare
• Orientation to natural and artificial light
• Personal measures for reducing eye fatigue
4. Storage
• Easy access at the workstation
• Appropriate containers
• Identification of materials
• Safe handling and transport
5. Seating
• Adequate support and stability
• Adjustability features
• How to adjust seat, back, and arm support
6. Work space layout
• Adequate space
• Work surface materials and adjustments
• Air quality
7. Computer displays
• Monitor placement
• Minimizing glare
• Locating source documents
8. Computer inputs
• Keyboard and mouse positioning
• Hand and wrist support
• Software options
9. Telephones and other office equipment
• Electrical supply
• Equipment controls
•
Telephone location
• Telephone peripheral options
10. Work practices
• Maintaining a neutral posture
• Minimizing repetitive and cumulative stresses
• Maintaining general health and productivity
Significantly, CAP’s Workplace Ergonomics Reference Guide offers not only suggestions the
employer can apply to improve workplace ergonomics, but also guidance for workers to minimize
their risk of workplace-related injury by adopting healthy work habits.
OFFICE AND WORKPLACE DESIGN 23.9
23.5 ENABLING UNIVERSAL DESIGN
The Enabler system was developed in the 1970s (Steinfeld et al., 1979) to aid designers of products
and environments in integrating the needs of elderly people and people with disabilities with the
rest of the population. This approach points out a number of human functional characteristics that
are important to consider in design for human use. The Enabler, as seen in Fig. 23.4, offers a way
of dealing with the functional effects of disabilities without getting tangled in medical jargon or
compromising confidential medical information.
It is important to keep in mind that the impact of each of these functional characteristics is deter-
mined as much by the demands of the environment as by the level of functional ability. For example,
limitation of balance is far more significant for a high-rise building construction worker than for a
data entry operator, even though their levels of limitation may be very similar.
Since its development in the 1970s, the Enabler system has been widely adapted, including its
use in The Workplace Workbook 2.0 (Mueller, 1992), an illustrated guide to reasonable accommoda-
tion and assistive technology for employers. As seen in Fig. 23.5, the explanatory text clarifies each
functional limitation.
This approach has also been used by office furniture system manufacturer Herman Miller, Inc., in
helping its customers comply with the ADA and gain control of disability management. Herman Miller,
Inc., based in Zeeland, Michigan, and second in size only to Steelcase among office furniture manufac-
turers, had a strong reputation among its customers and wanted to maintain it (Mueller, 1997).
A
B1
B2
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
Difficulty interpreting information
Severe loss of sight
Complete loss of sight
Severe loss of hearing
Prevalence of poor balance
Incoordination
Limitations of stamina
Difficulty moving head
Difficulty reaching with arms
Difficulty in handling and fingering
Loss of upper extremity skills
Difficulty bending, kneeling, etc.
Reliance on walking aids
Inability to use lower extremities
Extremes of size and weight
FIGURE 23.4 The Enabler.
Long description: This line drawing shows the outline of a human figure standing on a
scale. Along the body are dots connected by lines to corresponding functional limitations
listed to the left of the figure.
FIGURE 23.5 Definitions of functional characteristics of disabilities from The Workplace Workbook 2.0.
Long description: Definitions of each of the 17 functional characteristics of disabilities used in The Workplace Workbook 2.0 are presented, along
with selected data from the 1990 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).* These data relate to the 16,904,000 Americans ages 18 to 69 who
report a “work limitation” due to a chronic condition covered by the NHIS, such as “deformity/impairment of lower extremities.” For example,
1990 NHIS data indicate that more than 23 million Americans of all ages, both working and nonworking, report having some hearing impair-
ment, while 398,000 report a work limitation due to a hearing impairment. Many people with disabilities do not report a work limitation, because
they do not require accommodation, do not wish to self-identify, or are not in the workforce. Some disabilities result in more than one functional
characteristic, so they are listed more than once. It should be kept in mind that individuals having temporary or minor conditions such as flu or a
broken leg, as well as those who live long enough to experience the natural effects of aging, will also experience some of these characteristics.
OFFICE AND WORKPLACE DESIGN 23.11
In response to their customers’ concerns, Herman Miller, Inc. produced a videotape and an
illustrated guide to office planning and design entitled Designing for Accessibility (Herman
Miller, Inc., 1995). These materials include recommendations for creating a workplace that was
as usable for workers with disabilities as for those without disabilities. This workplace also
includes flexibility for making specific accommodations for employees who need reasonable
accommodation.
In the early 1990s, Herman Miller’s customers felt the impact of the ADA in several ways.
Public businesses and state and local government facilities were required to ensure that their
facilities were accessible to people with disabilities. This meant that interiors, office systems, and
furniture designed and supplied by Herman Miller to these customers had to comply with the acces-
sibility guidelines of the new law. Furthermore, the ADA required that employers make “reasonable
accommodation” for employees with disabilities. This meant that a Herman Miller workstation
might have to accommodate an employee who could be blind, deaf, a wheelchair user, or limited
in a variety of other ways.
At the same time, a recession was causing American businesses to postpone investments in new
facilities and equipment. Seeking to make the most of their investments, Herman Miller’s customers
began to preface their contacts with sales representatives with the question “How do your products
comply with the ADA?” Since the ADA does not include standards for products such as office fur-
niture, Herman Miller products by themselves could not comply with this law. Instead, the law was
written for compliance by organizations. Herman Miller set out to address its customers’ question
by developing a program to communicate its philosophy of complying with the ADA through work-
place design that eliminates barriers that all workers face.
For example, a worker using a wheelchair might have difficulty retrieving a thick file folder from the
top drawer of a four-drawer file cabinet. But a coworker with short stature might have similar difficulties,
as would a worker with wrist fatigue after long hours of keyboard work. The philosophy also included the
capability to make “reasonable accommodation” for disabled employees without undue effort or expense.
The company also developed an Applications Guide to help customers understand the require-
ments of the ADA, the incentives for returning employees with disabilities to the job, and the features
of office furniture products that made reasonable accommodation possible (Herman Miller Inc., 1995).
The drawing shown in Fig. 23.6 is keyed to a list of features. Both the video and the Applications
Guide were made available on request through Herman Miller’s sales network.
23.6 EFFECTIVE JOB ACCOMMODATION
Through Herman Miller’s efforts, customers learned the best approach to effective job accommoda-
tion. When approaches such as that suggested by Herman Miller are applied to the overall design of
workplaces, most job accommodations are very simple and involve minimal cost. But this doesn’t
mean that inexpensive accommodations are reasonable and expensive accommodations are not. The
most successful accommodations are those that are
1. Effective. The solution enables the individual with the disability to do her or his job productively
and safely. An effective accommodation does not substitute for the individual but enables the
individual to use his or her own abilities.
2. Transparent. The solution either has no effect on coworkers, customers, and other aspects of the
business or has a positive effect in improving productivity and/or safety.
3. Timely. The solution can be implemented within a reasonable time frame.
4. Durable. The solution is useful and flexible enough to remain effective throughout the employee’s
service. Maintenance, as well as modifications necessary due to business or technology changes,
can be readily accomplished.
Reasonable workplace accommodations are likely to be a compromise among these criteria. For
example, it may be less expensive for a business to relocate an employee who uses a wheelchair to
23.12 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
a ground-floor office than to invest in an elevator to the usual workplace. Similarly, it may be less
disruptive for coworkers to invest in a document scanner than to restructure jobs, so that a coworker
can read documents to a blind employee. Each employer must select, from a number of alternatives,
the solution that best suits the needs of the individual and the business.
23.7 GOOD DESIGN IS JUST GOOD BUSINESS SENSE
Thorough analysis of Herman Miller products and their usefulness to workers with disabilities was
needed for production of the Applications Guide. This effort revealed that Herman Miller’s tradi-
tional strong attention to established ergonomic principles was a good beginning. The flexibility of
its products in meeting a variety of needs also helped customers to meet unique ergonomic needs of
workers with disabilities.
Significantly, Herman Miller’s competitors also realized the importance of providing guidance
to their customers regarding workers with disabilities. Haworth, Inc. developed an ADA Handbook
(referenced in Mueller, 2002), which described the requirements of the law and, like Herman Miller,
illustrated ways in which Haworth products could be used effectively to comply with these require-
ments. The Knoll Group produced a guidebook entitled Workplace Issues: Universal Design and the
ADA (also referenced in Mueller, 2002). Steelcase, in its award-winning design for a self-contained
workspace called “Personal Harbor,” incorporated accessibility guidelines into the parameters of the
project (Mueller, 2002).
FIGURE 23.6 Illustration from Designing for Accessibility.
Long description: Black-and-white architectural line drawing showing overhead view of an office workplace divided
into eight individual workstations, including hallways, signage, partitions, doors, shelves, desks, cabinets, and tables.
OFFICE AND WORKPLACE DESIGN 23.13
23.8 LESSONS LEARNED FOR UNIVERSAL DESIGN
Given the ever-increasing rate of technological advances, it seems that just about anything that can
be imagined may very well be technologically possible. Among these advances, broadband and wire-
less technologies greatly enhance opportunities for employers to accommodate flexible work styles,
schedules, and workplaces for workers with and without disabilities. The Rehabilitation Engineering
Research Center for Wireless Technologies (Wireless RERC) in Atlanta, Georgia, focuses on ensur-
ing that people with and without disabilities have equitable access and use of wireless products and
services. Through its Survey of User Needs (SUN) and Consumer Advisory Network (CAN), RERC
conducts user research and shares its findings to increase awareness among consumers and the wire-
less industry. As technology evolves, this awareness must be constantly reinforced and expanded to
other fields of workplace access and technology, including landscape and building architects, facility
managers, interior designers, product designers, and graphic designers.
Through participation of citizens with disabilities in research such as that conducted at Wireless
RERC, other groups—including Congress, rehabilitation technologists, major manufacturers of tele-
communications, and computer software and hardware developers—have gotten the message that
people with disabilities are a major portion of the workforce and are likely to remain so. It has become
clear that “disabled” no longer means “unable to work.” This attitude has been rendered obsolete by law
as well as by population demographics and the economic realities of disability in business.
Accommodation of workers with disabilities through job and workplace design is here to stay.
By instilling a universal design approach among those responsible for the development of work
environments and products, the incidence of work disabilities can be reduced. And those accom-
modations that are required for workers with disabilities will be much more likely to be reasonable
accommodations.
23.9 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Beal, R. W., “Survey of Rehabilitation and Return-to-Work Practices among U.S. Disability Carriers,”
GLADNET Collection, 2007; online: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1445&
context=gladnetcollect. Accessed Oct. 7, 2009.
Benitez-Silva, H., M. Buchinsky, and J. Rust, “Induced Entry Effects of a $1 for $2 Offset in SSDI Benefits,”
State University of New York, Stony Brook, 2006; online: http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/~hbenitezsilv/jpam06.pdf.
Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey, U.S. Department of Labor,
2009; online: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsdisability.htm. Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program, The Workplace Ergonomics Reference Guide, U.S. Department
of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, 1998; online: http://www.tricare.mil/cap/Ergo_
Guide/CAP_Ergo_Guide.pdf. Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
Herman Miller, Inc., Designing for Accessibility: Beyond the ADA Applications Guide and Video, Zeeland, Mich.,
1995.
Job Accommodation Network, “Workplace Accommodations: Low Cost, High Impact; Annually Updated
Research Findings Address the Costs and Benefits of Job Accommodations,” Washington: U.S. Department of
Labor, Office of Disability and Employment Policy, 2009.
Lew, H., “Rehabilitation Needs of an Increasing Population of Patients,” Journal of Rehabilitation Research and
Development, 42(4), 2005; online: http://www.rehab.research.va.gov/jour/05/42/4/pdf/lew.pdf. Accessed Nov. 7,
2009.
Louis H., and Associates, The New Competitive Advantage, Washington: National Organization on Disability,
1994.
Mueller, J., The Workplace Workbook 2.0, Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 1992.
———, Case Studies on Universal Design, Raleigh, N.C.: Center for Universal Design, 1997.
———, “Environmental Access in the Workplace,” in Clinician’s Guide to Assistive Technology, D. Olson and
F. DeRuyter (eds.), St. Louis, Mo.: Mosby, Inc., 2002.
23.14 PUBLIC SPACES, PRIVATE SPACES, PRODUCTS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
National Safety Council, “Report on Injuries in America,” 2008; online: http://www.nsc.org/lrs/injuriesinamerica08
.aspx. Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
Social Security Administration (1999). “President Clinton Signs The Ticket To Work And Work Incentives
Improvement Act Of 1999,” Social Security Legislative Bulletin106-15, Dec. 17, 1999. Online: www.ssa
.gov/legislation/legis_bulletin_121799.html. Accessed Apr. 25, 2010.
Steinfeld, E., S. Schroeder, J. Duncan, R. Faste, D. Chollet, M. Bishop, P. Wirth, and P. Cardell, “Access to the
Built Environment: A Review of Literature,” Washington: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
1979.
Taylor, P., R. Kochhar, R. Morin, W. Wang, D. Dockterman, and J. Medina, “America’s Changing Workforce:
Recession Turns a Graying Office Grayer,” Washington: Pew Research Center, 2009; online: http://pewsocialtrends
.org/assets/pdf/americas-changing-workforce.pdf. Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel, “Building on the Ticket: A New Paradigm for Investing
in Economic Self-Sufficiency for People with Significant Disabilities,” 2007; online: http://www.disability
.gov/employment/research_&_statistics. Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
U.S. General Accounting Office, Social Security Disability, Washington, 1995.
U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Disability Insurance: SSA Should Strengthen Its Efforts to Detect
and Prevent Overpayments,” GAO-04-929, Sep. 10, 2004; online: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-929.
Accessed Nov. 7, 2009.
PRIVATE SPACES
SECTION 2