Representing the consumer from his career days into his retirement opened a world of opportunities for standards volunteer George Gaberlavage. He combined his decades of public policy expertise in consumer protection and housing with his insights as a grandfather to contribute to standards development for greater society, working to improve safety across homes, household items, and electric toys.
Here, he shares insights and advice learned from his path to standards advocacy.
How did you first become involved in standards development?
I began my involvement in standards development prior to my retirement, when I was working at AARP as policy integration director for consumer and livable communities. In this role, I worked with AARP’s volunteer leaders to develop public policy positions addressing the needs of older adults. My first experience with standards development came about from trying to improve the consumer protections available to older purchasers and owners of manufactured homes or “mobile homes.” This work started right after Hurricane Andrew, a Category 5 storm, which hit the Southeast and exposed some serious problems with the construction quality and regulation of manufactured homes. Almost half of the owners of manufactured homes are ages 50 and older, and AARP received a lot of feedback about problems these owners were experiencing with their homes.
One specific goal for AARP to get involved was to assure that manufactured housing would be more compatible with site-built housing, which would increase its availability in communities where affordable housing was in short supply. Eventually, our recommendations for improvements in the code and consensus process were included in legislation adopted by Congress and signed into law. That was a satisfying experience.
After you retired from AARP, you remained active in standards development as a volunteer. What led you to join standards committees in this new capacity?
As a retired public policy professional with a background in consumer protection, I saw standards development as a meaningful way to continue to serve my community and be proactive in consumer protection. So many everyday products benefit from safety standards.
The first committee I joined focused on adult portable bed rails (ASTM F3186-17), which developed a standard that is now incorporated into law. Then, I participated in a committee on liquid laundry packets (ASTM F3159-15), aiming to improve packaging so that children could not access the contents. This committee was looking at ways to update the voluntary standard to strengthen safety provisions. Although most of the focus was on child safety, older adults with dementia and cognitive impairments are also at risk of accidental ingestion—so my AARP experience was particularly helpful here.
A major challenge for this committee was the scarcity of consumer injury data (particularly as it relates to older adults), which could help underscore the problem more thoroughly and allow for solutions. Much of the data we used came from Canada, as U.S. data was limited. In the future, I would like to focus some attention on how we can encourage additional research that would be useful in standards development.
These days, I participate in the UL Standards & Engagement (ULSE) Committee on Electric Toys. I have three grandchildren and electric toys are a part of their lives. Oftentimes, electric toys are also a part of the lives of older folks, as we have more leisure time. So, I am interested in making sure that these products are safe for all.
In addition to serving on committees, you contributed to other standards by reading drafts and offering your input from the perspective of a consumer. What was that like?
I provided consumer input to the Consumer Technology Association’s (CTA) Health, Fitness and Wellness (R11) Pulse Oximetry Monitoring Working Group (WG16) on a draft standard: CTA-2127, Performance Characteristics and Requirements for Consumer Pulse Oximetry Monitoring Solutions. One of the main issues I was asked to review was the understandability of the document for a general consumer audience. After working in consumer protection for over 30 years, I am familiar with consumer literacy and behavioral literature and was able to utilize some of those insights.
From a consumer perspective, there can be a discrepancy between how devices (both medical and over-the-counter) are intended to be used, and how consumers actually use them. For example, some non- FDA-cleared-devices intended for sport use are also recommended for health monitoring by consumer-oriented literature and online advice, because they perform just as well as more expensive devices labeled for medical use. I offered my opinion that the standard needed to take this into account, regardless of the differing regulatory requirements for the two types of devices.
I also relied heavily on my experience in “plain language” and labeling requirements, as a common issue is providing enough information so that the layperson reading the standard can understand the significance of a definition or term and why it is included in a standard.
Another suggestion I made for human factors testing was adding language to address use from a variety of intended users, taking into account the standpoints of age, gender, and ethnicity. This is especially important for oximeters, as skin pigmentation can be a significant factor in accuracy.
All of my comments were made from the perspective of a lay consumer who is researching these devices and attempting to make a purchasing decision. I feel this is where consumer representatives can make a significant contribution in the consensus and standard development process.
Why do you consider it critical for consumers to have a voice in the standards development process?
Consumers can offer valuable insights into how the average person might interpret a standard or use a product, or what they might value in a product. They might look at a product and see it in an entirely different light or use it in an entirely different way than what was originally intended.
Without standards, the marketplace can quickly become a race to the bottom, where products might be sold at the same price but vary significantly in safety or quality. That is unfair to consumers, and to manufacturers and retailers as well. With changes to the current regulatory structures, the voluntary consensus-based standards process becomes even more important as a source of continuity for manufacturers and retailers and assurance for consumers that someone is looking out for their interests and concerns.
What advice would you give to consumers or advocates who are interested in contributing to standards work?
Start by identifying an issue you care about, and investigate standards developing organizations that focus on those areas. Just being present, asking questions, and offering input from a user’s perspective can shift the conversation.
I would approach participation as a search for information: ask questions for understanding, as well as to raise issues that may concern you. Don’t be intimidated by the process! You don’t have to be an engineer or technical expert to make a meaningful contribution—just someone who is willing to speak up for the consumer perspective. You may be surprised that many technical and manufacturer representatives will have similar questions and want to work with you.
Consumers who participate should know that they have the power to effect change. It takes time and persistence, but your voice matters—and can lead to real improvements in safety and usability.
Are you an interested consumer and want to learn more about how to get involved? Visit ANSI’s Consumer Affairs Activities webpage or contact Cleo Stamatos, ANSI’s consumer and legislative outreach manager, at [email protected].
