Helping Supervisors and Safety Managers Navigate Unfamiliar Waters: Part 1

Posted by Editor on Apr 12, 2011 in career booster, content can, content usa | Comments Off

Editor’s note: This is the first story in a two-part series on how supervisors/safety managers can get their feet wet when they are starting a new job. Part one will look at some do’s and don’ts, while the second story in the November issue of Safe Supervisor will tell you who you need to get to know to make your job easier.

Veteran Environment, Health and Safety (EH&S) Manager Gerald Edgar says safety people often ask him, “What’s the best thing I can do in those first few days on a job?”

“First, let me tell you what not to do,” says Edgar. “An experienced safety manager once advised me not to try to do too much when you first start.”

It is human nature to want to quickly prove your worth to the new boss and make that person feel justified in hiring you. That motivation prompts many new safety managers to try to come up with all sorts of ambitious suggestions and observations during their first few days on the job. Unfortunately, that approach almost never works.

“The aggressive, in-your-face approach from Day 1 tends to backfire,” says Edgar. “In addition to making you come off looking like a know-it-all, this attitude steps on toes and displays insensitivity to the local circumstances and policies. If you see an obvious problem, there’s probably some explanation for it.”

Edgar says it’s important to slow down and ease into the job.

“By all means, after you make the round of introductions, you should conduct your own inspection of the facilities. However, unless you find some blatant safety violation or serious environmental problem that simply can’t wait, resist the temptation to immediately report it. File away the observation in your to-do list.”

So, what should you do in your first days as safety manager?

“Spend the time getting to know your peers and how you can work together to accomplish your mutual goals.”

Safety Committees Have Mixed Results in Preventing Injuries

Posted by Editor on Apr 11, 2011 in content can, content usa, Lead | Comments Off

Do companies with government certified workplace safety committees report fewer injuries than companies without such committees? In Pennsylvania at least, the answer seems to be “no.”

The Rand Corporation looked into several years’ worth of worker injury data for 9,000 Pennsylvania companies that have state-certified workplace safety committee in place. Setting up such committees saves Pennsylvania employers five percent on their workers’ compensation insurance premiums.

Based on data collected from 1996 to 2007, Rand found that injury rates at companies with certified safety committees did not decline more than injury rates at non-participating businesses.

“We found that firms that joined the Certified Safety Committee (CSC) program did not, on average, experience reductions in injury rates compared to similar firms that did not join,” states a Rand report on the study. “In fact, there was evidence that injury rates actually decreased less for CSC participants. The injury rate for participants declined by an average of .06 per 100 employees, while the rate for the matched non-participants decreased by 1.01 per 100 employees.”

One reason for Rand’s findings could be that safety committee members are not meeting training requirements. More than half the companies that had safety committees in place did not comply with training provisions.

Another finding was that some companies that already had safety committees in place joined the state program to save five percent on their workers’ compensation premiums, but after joining, did not make any changes that resulted in fewer workplace injuries.

“We should be clear that we do not doubt that, because of the CSC, some firms made considerable strides in injury prevention by establishing safety committees and carrying out the activities required by the CSC,” the report states. “Because over 80 percent of the audited firms had deficiencies and an additional five percent had no operating committee at all, our findings suggest that the absence of an overall benefit was largely, although not entirely, due to non-compliance with effective program elements.”

Safety committee requirements in Pennsylvania include having a minimum of two company and two employee representatives who meet monthly. All members require training on safety committee operation, hazard inspection and accident investigation, offered free by the state.

Rand says program compliance could be better enforced, especially on some key program requirements such as that all committee members receive annual training in three specified areas. However, the downside is that a more extensive audit program would reduce participation and more audits would require more staff, increasing public costs.

What to Do When You Can’t be Everywhere at One Time

Posted by Editor on Apr 11, 2011 in content can, Lead | Comments Off

It’s a scenario nearly all supervisors have experienced: While most workers follow your instructions, such as wearing PPE or tying off while working at heights, there’s always someone who will cheerfully agree to do what you’re asking and then do the opposite the moment your back is turned.

Left unchallenged, such behavior brings bad consequences. Either a worker is injured or killed or a government safety and health inspector who springs a surprise visit on your worksite observes someone breaking safety rules and starts writing up violations.

An Ontario subscriber to Safe Supervisor expressed concern to us about what he sees as an increased tendency for workplace safety authorities to charge companies and supervisors with failure to adequately supervisor workers. He told us that supervisors are stretched thin and can’t be in all places at all times to “babysit” all workers.

We posed his concerns to two OHS experts for their opinions and advice as to what stretched supervisors need to be doing. Their short answer was: As long as you are showing due diligence (doing your homework) in maintaining a safe workplace, you don’t have to be a babysitter.

Ryan J. Conlin, an OH&S lawyer and partner in Toronto-based Stringer Brisbin Humphrey Management Lawyers, agrees there seems to be a trend in Ontario toward charging and convicting not just companies, but also supervisors, for health and safety infractions.

“It seems that prosecutors aren’t as willing to drop charges against supervisors when companies (that employ them) plead guilty to OH&S charges,” says Conlin, adding that it isn’t uncommon for both a company and a supervisor or director to be convicted and fined.

Unless you are supervising a tiny crew, it’s not possible to be everywhere at once while attempting to balance production demands, keep up with paperwork and ensure that workers are properly trained and working safely.

The good news is that supervisors don’t need to be everywhere at once. They must, however:

• Ensure that safety training and safety meetings are conducted and documented (signed by all attending workers) and,
• Ensure that all workers understand safety rules and are held accountable for following them.

If supervisors are doing both those things, they can raise a strong defense against OHS charges if an inspector observes unsafe or unhealthy conditions at a worksite.

Conlin says supervisors who are overwhelmed by their job pressures need to talk to their managers and be able to provide clear examples of any tasks that are falling through the cracks and potential negative consequences, such as worker injuries/fatalities or occupational safety and health charges.

“If one person is doing the work of two, it may be impossible for a company to meet due diligence standards,” he says.

Workers tend to bend the rules once a supervisor is out of sight or when supervisors are lax about enforcing safety rules, according to Conlin.

“If you find contraventions, you’ve got to come down on workers. For example, if you are having issues with a group of workers with respect to (using) fall protection, you’re going to have to ramp up enforcement (through a progressive discipline process),” he says.

Conlin says there’s no law stating that supervisors must simultaneously watch all employees at all times to ensure they are working safely. Indeed, doing so would be impossible.

Wayne Pardy, a safety consultant and vice-president of Quality Plus Inc., a management consulting firm based in St. John’s, NL, agrees.

“The acts and regulations require you to be diligent. They don’t require you to be perfect,” says Pardy, adding that it is unreasonable to expect that a supervisor can monitor all employees at all times.

Conlin related an Ontario case where a site supervisor had ensured that everyone was properly tied off when working at heights. Unfortunately, when a safety inspector showed up, it was obvious that one of the workers was no longer tied off.

The supervisor was charged, but the charge didn’t stick because solid evidence was provided that all workers had been tied off when the supervisor had observed them earlier, and before his attention had been requested by the inspector, who asked to tour the site.

However, Pardy says supervisors who witness unsafe acts and let them slide certainly aren’t showing due diligence and they won’t have a credible defense if an OHS inspector observes infractions and starts asking questions.

OSHA Introduces Severe Violator Enforcement Program

Posted by Editor on Apr 11, 2011 in content usa, Lead | Comments Off

In an attempt to address what it terms “urgent safety and health problems facing Americans in the workplace,” OSHA has announced a Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP), along with higher civil penalty amounts.

SVEP will focus OSHA’s enforcement resources on employers who endanger workers by demonstrating resistance to their safety and health responsibilities under the law. The program includes:

• Increased OSHA inspections in such worksites,
• Mandatory follow-up inspections, and
• Inspections of other worksites of the same employer where similar hazards and deficiencies may be present.

“For many employers, investing in job safety only happens when they have adequate incentive to comply with OSHA’s requirements. Higher penalties and more aggressive targeted enforcement will provide a greater deterrent and further encourage these employers to furnish safe and healthy workplaces for their employees,” says Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels.

He says SVEP will include “a more intense examination of an employer’s practices for systemic problems that would trigger additional mandatory inspections.”

Last year, OSHA assembled a work group to evaluate its penalty policies and found currently assessed penalties are too low to have an adequate deterrent effect. Michaels says OSHA will, over the next several months, increase the overall dollar amount of all penalties, but will maintain its policy of reducing penalties for small employers and those acting in good faith.

OSHA proposes increasing the average penalty for a serious violation to between $3,000 and $4,000, compared to $1,000 now. It also wants to raise the maximum penalty for a serious violation to $12,000 (from $7,000 now) and for a willful violation, to $250,000 (from $70,000 now).

“OSHA enforcement and penalties are not just a reaction to workplace tragedies,” says Michaels. “They serve an important preventive function. OSHA inspections and penalties must be large enough to discourage employers from cutting corners or underfunding safety programs to save a few dollars.”

Labor Secretary Says Days of Lax Oversight Over

Posted by Editor on Apr 11, 2011 in content usa, Lead | Comments Off

US Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis told a recent National Action Summit for Latino Worker Health and Safety in Houston that OSHA, under the direction of Dr. David Michaels, is moving “back toward an emphasis on protecting workers after eight years of lax oversight.”

Solis noted that more than 14 US workers lose their lives in preventable workplace incidents every day. Of the 100 workers dying across America every week, 14 are Latinos.

“The need for enforcement and oversight can no longer be regulated to the snail pace of the past. It is the right time to lift up workers’ rights and make this situation better,” she said.

With only 1,000 federal OSHA inspectors and about the same number in states running their own OSHA agencies, Solis said it would take more than 130 years to inspect all eight million US workplaces.

“So we have to leverage our resources, through large fines that send a message to every workplace that cutting corners on worker safety won’t be tolerated,” said Solis. “And we leverage our resources by making sure that workers have a voice in the workplace and they are fully involved in ensuring their workplaces are safe.”

Solis added that workers are the best judges of whether a job is safe and it is up to them to raise concerns with their employers when they feel they are being endangered on the job.

Workers across the United States, especially immigrant workers, continue to face dangerous workplace conditions. Solis told the conference about a Latina woman was crushed to death while cleaning a paving machine.

“She had not been trained on how to clean the machinery safely and had not been given the manual to read,” said Solis. “When the supervisor was asked why the employees had not been provided with the manual, he replied that the manual was not shared because a majority of the employees speak Spanish and could not read.”

Solis said an OSHA inspector tested the supervisor’s claim by translating the manufacturer’s operating instructions into Spanish within 15 minutes. The inspector found that the operators on site could easily read and understand the material, yet they had never seen it before.

Withholding safety information from employees on the presumption that they can’t read is reprehensible, she said.

Solis says a system is needed whereby:

• Workers have an obligation to recognize and address all hazards in their workplaces without the need for an OSHA inspection.
• OSHA’s compliance assistance services are improved so that regardless of what language they speak, workers understand the hazards they face, what their rights are and how to exercise them.
• All employers have the information they need, so no employer can claim ignorance of standards or safe work practices.

She said all workers, including undocumented workers, have the right to a safe workplace, adding that working in the US illegally should not be a death sentence for anyone.

According to Solis, too many workers, especially Latinos, do not report unsafe working conditions because they fear they will lose their jobs or be disciplined if they are injured at work. She urged Congress to pass the Protecting America’s Workers Act, which would:

• Give vulnerable workers more security when they spoke out to defend their lives,
• Raise OSHA penalties, and
• Make willful violations felonies instead of misdemeanors in cases where workers are killed or seriously injured on the job.

Since April 28, 2010, OSHA’s compliance officers have been checking to verify that training has been provided in a language and form that all workers can understand.

Solis says building inspectors are also being encouraged to report to OSHA any unsafe working conditions they observe at city worksites.