*
As many as one in 16 commercial fishermen will die during a prolonged career on the sea, federal work experts figure. Logging came in a close second during the 1990s, followed by piloting commercial aircraft.
Fishing was the United States’ most dangerous profession during much of the 1990s. Estimates of the most fatalities per
100,000 workers from 1992 through 1998:
Occupation Fatality Rate
Fishing: 140.6
Logging: 134.7
Commercial aviation: 96.2
Structural metal working: 68.6
Mining: 55.7
Note: Totals represent only industries that employ at least 50,000 workers.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
(The above is from an LA Times article)
I had assumed that the largest number of fatalities for construction workers would be from vehicle accidents going to and coming from work. I was wrong, except for laborers. The following is from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics web site and is based on 1996 statistics published in a 1998 article:
(Sorry, but I was just too lazy to put this in an HTML table to make all the columns line up… Each line is the occupation, the number of fatalities in that occupation in 1996 for each 100,000 workers in that occupation, the most common cause of fatalities in that occupation, and the percentage of fatalities in that occupation that actually were a result of the most common way to go – i.e. 74% of fishers – fisherpersons? – that perished on the job were a result of drownings.)
Occupation, Fatalities/100,000, Most frequent fatal event(%)
Fishers 178.4 Drowning (74%)
Logging 157.3 Struck by object (76%)
Structural metal workers 85.2 Falls (77%)
Construction Laborers 35.7 Vehicular (29%)
Roofers 31.0 Falls (67%)
Excav/loader operators 28.3 Contact with object (39%)
Firefighters 16.0 Highway (38%)
Police 11.9 Homicide (48%)
Operating Engineers 15.5 Highway (29%)
Electricians 12.8 Electrocutions (50%)
Guards 12.0 Homicide (54%)
Painters 8.9 Falls (56%)
Carpenters 7.1 Falls (57%)
Heat/air cond. mechs 6.9 Electrocutions (29%)
Plumbers 5.8 Falls (19%)
Managers, food & lodging 5.4 Homicide (88%)
Sales, supervisors, proprietors 5.0 Homicide (65%)
Food Service worker 0.9 Homicide (80%)
Teachers, K12 0.5 Aircraft Crashes (29%)
As the above are in fatalities per 100,000 workers, the actual number of fatalities depends upon the number in the occupation. The highest 3 occupations were:
Truckdrivers 785
Farming occupations 569
Construction laborers 291
Some others are:
Electricians 98
Carpenters 87
Fishers 66
Painters 45
Plumbers 32
Roofers 61
Structural metal workers 52
(The actual file giving the 1996 figures is
http://stats.bls.gov/opub/cwc/1998/Spring/art5exc.htm
and click on the “download in PDF format”.)
I don’t know where you contractors fall in all of this (pun only slightly intended) – possibly in the “sales, supervisors, and proprieters” catagory – where maybe your primary risk is getting shot by an irate husband…
Anyway, if you almost fell off of something today and are concerned with your occupational mortality, forget about Columbine and become a K-12 teacher or go down to the local McDonalds and apply for that open food service worker position (just be sure that it is not a supervisor position…)
Replies
*
Hi Casey,
Wondered where you've been. Pondering mortality apparently.
joe d
*Actually, Joe, I have been pondering HTML tables. (After all I'm really immortal, aren't I??? Or have I confused that with immoral again???) I decided that the info I cobbled together really didn't look too good and that I really did need to practice my HTML tables, so I redid it - unfortunately I didn't get it done within the 30 minutes alloted for historical accuracy...Anyway here is the occupation data related to building trades for 1996, with a couple of comparison items, that I gave above but was all smushed together. Occupation Fatalities/100,000 Most frequent fatal event (%) Fishers 178.4 Drowning (74%) Logging 157.3 Struck by object (76%) Structural metal workers 85.2 Falls (77%) Construction Laborers 35.7 Vehicular (29%) Roofers 31.0 Falls (67%) Excav/loader operators 28.3 Contact with object (39%) Firefighters 16.0 Highway (38%) Police 11.9 Homicide (48%) Operating Engineers 15.5 Highway (29%) Electricians 12.8 Electrocutions (50%) Guards 12.0 Homicide (54%) Painters 8.9 Falls (56%) Carpenters 7.1 Falls (57%) Heat/air cond. mechs 6.9 Electrocutions (29%) Plumbers 5.8 Falls (19%) Managers, food & lodging 5.4 Homicide (88%) Sales, supervisors, proprietors 5.0Homicide (65%) Food Service worker 0.9 Homicide (80%) Teachers, K12 0.5 Aircraft Crashes (29%)
*This is why I became an Army helicopter pilot in my first life. The fatality rate was high in spurts, but low on average. And we had great parties.
*So, can we really expect 29% of our K-12 teachers to die in an aviation accident? This is not so preposterous when one learns how to lie with statistics.
*No, Rich. 29% of K-12 teachers who die, die in an aviation accident. For every 200,000 K-12 teachers, only one dies (each year).Rich Beckman
*Beckman, right you are. I was so intent on being the wiseacre that it superseded my reading comprehension. Even still, I am not dissuaded from making the observation that statistics are so often misrepresentive of reality that they are, in a word, unreliable. Yet, they are used to shape policy and regulations. This begats the situation where our policy makers attempt to legislate some all encompassing regulation coupled with incomplete thought to how such rules affect each class. I bristle at such heavy handedness restrictions. (I know I am going way out on a tangent, but oft-repeated stats have a way of becoming "evidence" to support some agenda. Besides, I cannot allow such a light-hearted, FYI post to remain so.)OTOH, I can attest to the veracity, therefore value, of some statistical analysis and how such work can be used to serve a common interest. The key word here is "some". Each of us has to think critically when confronted by statistics. I, for one, see red flags popping up all over the place when I see or hear charts or lists of statistics. To me, the bottom line is that statistics are merely anecdotal and are, at best, of limited use for, say, a special interest. Humans, by their very core nature, will always live outside of the analytical envelope and this should always take precedence over each or any statistical estimate.Having spent exactly one sentence in this missive on what could be construed as a positive statement for statistics (modeling, analysis, etc) you can see where I stand. Now, if you will excuse me, I better end this for according to Fusco, I have used up enough bytes for 4 or five posts.chow
*....how many inch & a half heart attacks you had lately?
*LOL, man those are the worst. It's amazing what all goes thru your mind in an 1 1/2".
*Grab a can of spray paint and join with me to paint over all those don't step on this step labels....I'll hit Walmart and Lowes...you guys get the rest.near the stream falling...always falling...on a big rock through space...ajCaution:Living may or may not end in death...do not live and you may live forever.
*...here's 3 of my favorites,,...tar paper over the chimney hole until the mason gets to the job......whoops......................*and walking backwards counting ceiling joists until you get to the stairwell hole......whoops........*and the plywood over the stair hole to keep the wind from blowing up .........whoops......*