LANSING - Michigan's construction industry claimed the lives of 23 workers in 2000.

That number of workers killed on the job represents a significant drop from 1999, when 31 were killed; and 1998, when 29 lost their lives.

Michigan construction deaths have been a see-saw affair over the last 15 years, with seemingly little rhyme or reason as to why fatal incidents are low one year and higher the next. But this time, there may be something more to the decline.

Mike McReynolds, an emergency medical technician and nurse at the University of Michigan Medical Center, studied cause and effect of construction fatalities in Michigan from 1991-98. While stressing that more research is needed, he came to the conclusion that for an employer, "the lack of an accident prevention plan or having a poor accident prevention plan does have consequences."

The consequences were laid out in an abstract prepared last October for the National Occupational Research Injury Symposium, called An Eight-Year Review Of Construction Fatalities Without Accident Prevention Programs. McReynolds concluded, "construction sites without accident prevention programs demonstrated high fatality rates."

The law requires all construction employers to have accident prevention programs, but the quality varies widely.

McReynolds, who has studied injury prevention at U-M for a number of years, recommends that the "minimal components" of a good construction injury prevention program include: a responsible qualified person for coordination of all prevention components including education and emergency response, certified instructors in first aid and CPR, instruction of initial treatment for trauma, and the importance of transferring an injured employee to an appropriate hospital.

"The design of such programs," he said, "should include an upper level management commitment, physicians and nurses from trauma centers, and employee representation in the program design. General first aid education must be taught as well as specific injury prevention for the target population. All prevention programs need an increased focus on trauma prevention awareness and initial treatment."

Since Michigan construction worker deaths spiked up to 35 in 1997, MIOSHA has been more active in trying to reduce the fatality rate. MIOSHA's strategies include maintaining "a strong enforcement presence for employers who do not meet their safety and health responsibilities," including targeting inspections, coordinating consultation, education and training, and using arrangements like "settlement agreements" in industries and occupations that pose the greatest risk to workers.

Some in the industry blame higher injury and death rates on state legislators, who have cut MIOSHA funding over the years and made it more difficult to sue employers. Others say MIOSHA has become too friendly with employers, and do not hand down heavy fines when employers break the law.

Last year, we talked about construction fatalities with Suzy Carter, executive director of the Michigan Construction Trades Safety Institute. At the time, she said she expected the construction industry's injury/death rate to decline for purely economic reasons: contractors, trades and owners now realize that good job site safety brings improved productivity, better on-time performance, and lower workers' compensation costs.

McReynolds agreed, but added that the personal economics of workers should be taken into account, too. "We need to remind workers about the social consequences of safety, and look closely at specific on-the-job behaviors to see where we can make improvements. What I mean by 'social consequences' is that if a worker gets injured or dies on the job, he'll be the subject of conversation for a week, and that'll be it. Then he'll be more or less forgotten. But his family won't forget him. And who's going to pay the bills?"