The purpose of this study is to compare representative posture classification schemes of OWAS, RULA and REBA in terms of correctness for postural load. The comparison was based on the evaluation results by the three methods for 224 working postures sampled from steel, electronics, automotive, and chemical industries. The results showed that OWAS and REBA generally underestimated postural stress than RULA irrespective of industry type, work performed and whether or not leg posture is balanced. While about $71\%;and;73\%$ of the 224 posture were evaluated with the action category/level 1 or 2 by OWAS and REBA respectively, about $60\%$ of the postures were classified into the action level of 3 or 4 by RULA. The coincidence rate of postural stress category between OWAS and RULA was just $33.5\%$, while the rate between RULA and REBA was $46.0\%$. It is concluded from the findings of this study and the previous research that compared to OWAS and REBA, RULA more precisely evaluates postural stress.