My company decided to save some money by reducing our lighting and electricity expenses. To wit: They are reducing the number of bulbs in the overhead lighting system. Some were already reduced a year ago (from 3 to 2 bulbs), and now they are reducing them from 2 to 1 bulb.
A department manager asked me (I’m on the Safety Committee here) whether doing this will increase eye strain or cause any other safety or health related issues.
We already have two departments who have made this lighting change. Looking around there, I said that it’s not dim enough to cause people to not see things that they might trip over or bang in to, nor is it dim enough to make reading words on paper difficult.
He mentioned that it might cause eye strain. I said that eye strain is mostly caused by focusing on something a fixed distance from your face for hours on end without re-focusing on other objects, and that I wasn’t aware of eye strain being caused by low light. But, I said I’d look in to it.
I looked online for some info. Canadian OHS has this site:
It mentions, “Keep in mind that recommended level of light in offices 300 - 500 lux is not a must. It applies in the situation where there is no task lamp in use.” (Emphasis theirs)
Does anyone know what the minimum and maximum lux ratings are for the US? How do we measure this?
Also, can eye strain be caused by low lighting?
Any other info I should know before I give my “ruling” to the Human Resources director?
Some people’s eyes are more sensitive than others, and others’s less. Some vision problems are aggravated by low light. As people age and develop presbyopia low lighting can make focusing on objects even more difficult (meaning employees over 40 may have more problems than younger people). So yes, ambient light that is too low can cause eyestrain in some people, even if not in all.
When a former employee reduced the ambient lighting there were a LOT of complaints and, after task-lights arrived, I’m not sure they saved any money. I also know that after a few years they went around and replaced bulbs with brighter ones.
That’s bullcrap. What is the fluorescent lighting costing your company? A few cents an hour per person? Fucking seriously? All the while bright ambient lighting is a big boost to morale?
Tell your company to save some money by firing the guy who thought of the idea. That will save them a LOT more than a few cents per hour.
I should stop my rant and let the point settle in, but a few cents an hour? Jesus christ, that is just an irrational optimization. There are so many things that could affect your workers’ productivity by a tenth of one percent one way or another, that caring about this is ridiculous.
Personally, I disagree. There’s nothing more torturous to me than walking into a “brightly lit” room full of fluorescent light. I have serious issues with fluorescents and have been known to develop a headache within a couple minutes of working under them.
I have the perfect office, since neither my office mate nor I like having the overheads on. We either open the blinds on our windows to let in natural light or use indirect task lighting.
It may be melancholy to you, but it’s the only way I can manage to work without developing a migraine.
If it were up to me, I’d have my company get rid of all overhead fluorescent lighting and let everyone use task lights.
I’ve worked in rooms where people did Computer Aided Design and Drafting and know for a fact that you can never please everyone no matter what you use for lighting (task lamps, over head fluorescent, dimmer swiches, ect . . .). Some like it fully lit like a tanning booth while others like it pitch dark and both will get into sceaming matches over how the lights are set. Both sides like to quote “supposed” authorities on the subject, including OHSHA and various vauge court rulings. One guy I l know (and hated) eventually got fired for physically modifying the switches to his preferred settings.
I work in in the middle of a building so natural lighting is scant at best. Several years ago I removed all the ceiling fluorescent tubes within a 20-radius of my desk because they are too bright (glare on my computer screens) and the color they irradiate screw up green-red color blindness. I don’t have any lighting at my desk.
I’ve been happy as a clam every since. No worries. No eye strain. The mushrooms at my desk are thriving as they are well-fed from the emails from my superiors.
If it’s a big company, this could be thousands of dollars a day. But your point is well taken. Maybe there’s an opportunity to save money without impacting morale, but too often short-sighted management types make cuts that have little cost benefit but significantly impact the quality of work life. If you work someplace like this, you ought to leave.
My wife works for a company without about 50 employees, and they announced that as a cost saving measure they would no longer be supplying plastic spoons in the breakroom. She went to Sam’s Club and bought a box of 1000, brought them in and posted a sign that said "spoons for employees only (not management), along with the receipt for $8. She and her co-workers were pissed, not because of their desperate need for spoons but because the gesture showed how little regard the management had for their employees. The time involved in making and announcing the No Spoons policy cost more than the spoons.
You can save money by reducing the thermostat, making people pay for coffee, or getting stingy with office supplies. But who wants to work at a place like that?
We’ve got 250 employees in this location. There are hundreds of overhead lamps - in some places there are two or three fixtures per employee. Reducing them from 3 bulbs to 1 might be a savings of dollars or tens of dollars per day. Certainly not the most cost-saving move a company can make, but I’m not a bean counter.
As far as I can tell, most of the employees either don’t care, or like the fact that it’s less bright in here. I haven’t heard a single complaint (and believe me, they are brought to me, and I can hear plenty from where I sit). I’ve only heard a “concern” from one manager who was asking me to find out if there might be long-term health or safety effects from less lighting.
The links provided in this thread suggest that lower light is healthier, especially since everyone here looks at a computer screen and not printed copy.
In my office, I’ve got two switches on the wall. One controls two bulbs per overhead lamp, the other controls the third bulb per overhead lamp. There are two fixtures in my office. So, if I flip both switches on, there are 6 bulbs lit up. Or I can flip one switch for 4, or the other switch for 2. I only ever flip the switch which lights up 2.
Essentially, the remainder of the company (the cubicle areas where 95% of the employees are) was adjusted to be lit the way my office is lit. (Other office dwellers also only turned on one switch instead of both.)
I’m guessing that it was too bright earlier and is more in line now. I was really just looking for some material to show the concerned manager to set his mind at ease.
You brought up interesting points about taking things away that we used to get. In the 80s and early 90s, we used to have a company nurse when I worked for an engineering firm. I understand that before the 80s, many large firms had a doctor on staff. Now I don’t know anyone that works for a company with a doctor or a nurse on hand - there might be a clinic up the street they can send you to. Things are definitely getting taken away from us.
This very company I work for has never provided spoons, forks, or knives. I started a tradition of going to Costco every few weeks to get them, and I take donations from people who want to use them. When I transferred departments, another person took over that tradition, and I often drive to Costco with him. The supply is often wholesale looted by people who do not donate, which is unfortunate…
That’s a good point. Everyone has their tastes. (And that goes for the thermostat… some people like it chilly.) Do you have several rooms? Can’t you set them up differently and let people choose?
10% or less have offices or “rooms”. The rest are in the cube farm.
If someone had a legitimate issue (such as needing to read copy, poor eyesight, etc.) we’d certainly accommodate, but not a single person has voiced anything other than approval at lowering the lighting. They seem to like it. This is definitely not a matter of preference, just one manager asking if lowering the lighting would cause a health or safety issue.
My land lord (at my request) just altered the lighting in my classroom. I picked up 6 strings of yellow leds from ikea and have them strung in a sort of 6 legged star on the ceiling and instead of harsh glaring florescent lighting I now have nice easy on the eyes zero glare lighting, and the students all like the change. I think at some point in the past when they thought reading in the dark was bad for your eyes the standards were set way to high.
