4. The terms “Shutdown” “Turnaround” and “Outage” are often used interchangeably. There is no clear discernible difference between them, but some terms are used more by some industry sectors than they are in others. For example, in a power plant a shutdown might often be called an outage, while in a paper plant a shutdown might be called a turnaround. However, both would also know them as shutdowns.
Jimmie Hinze (first slide) Our project team conducted Two separate studies. One was conducted with large construction firms and the second was conducted with large construction projects. The study of large construction firms consisted of a mailed survey that was sent to the ENR 400 or the largest 400 construction firms in the United States. Over 100 firms participated in this study.
Hinze (page 2) The study of large construction projects consisted of in-depth interviews conducted on 38 large construction projects that ranged in value from $50 million to $600 million. These projects were of various types and were located throughout the United States.
(pdeforge first slide) John: Paul, management commitment has been around since the time of the pyramids, what exactly are these slides telling us? Paul: John, you are correct and it’s a very good question. I will review only 3 of the findings that have a significant impact on improving RIR. I’m sure that if you were to ask any SVP/VP/Director or manager if they were committed to their safety program , the answer would be an emphatic “YES” However, John, the key word here is “ DEMONSTRATED ” The data here shows that there is a significant improvement in the recordable injury rate in top performing companies that use “top management participation in the investigation of ALL recordable injuries. Their RIR is 1.2 The data further validates the finding where top management participation in recordable injury investigations is 50% or less. Their RIR 6.9 The importance here is the delta of 5,2
The original focus on injury investigation made no mention of management involvement. This slide reinforces Paul’s comments about top management’s commitment to safety, demonstrated by their participation in incident investigations.
Front end loading for safety is as important as FEL for any other phase of a project. In fact, planning for safety was identified in the 1993 study as a best practice. Not surprisingly, our study revealed that the more tailored the plan, the more site specific the plan, the better you safety performance will be. You can see from this slide that the recordable rate for projects with safety plans, specific to the site, is pretty drastic compared to sites without a site specific plan. Think of it this way, the difference in these rates represents twenty-five more people injured on a 500 person site.
Once a good site specific plan is in place it is time to move to the next step -- pre-task planning. To me this is one of the most important piece, if not the most important piece, of any safety process. Pre-task meetings should address the potential hazards associated with a specific task. If the conversation is not specific to the task to be done then it is not really a plan. And the best pre-task meetings involve a discussion between the supervisor and those who will perform the work. There must be a two way conversation. If there is no dialogue then the supervisor can't tell if an understanding has been reached. So, the bottom line around the overall "planning for safety" process is: 1) The more specific and detailed the site plan, the better your safety performance. 2) The more task specific and detailed the pre-task safety discussions are, the better your safety performance.
Once a good site specific plan is in place it is time to move to the next step -- pre-task planning. To me this is one of the most important piece, if not the most important piece, of any safety process. Pre-task meetings should address the potential hazards associated with a specific task. If the conversation is not specific to the task to be done then it is not really a plan. And the best pre-task meetings involve a discussion between the supervisor and those who will perform the work. There must be a two way conversation. If there is no dialogue then the supervisor can't tell if an understanding has been reached. So, the bottom line around the overall "planning for safety" process is: 1) The more specific and detailed the site plan, the better your safety performance. 2) The more task specific and detailed the pre-task safety discussions are, the better your safety performance.
Opening: The next level of safety performance for our industry rest in the education and training of our greatest resource, our employees. Their acceptance and participation in this new safety culture requires the knowledge to perform at a successful level. The companies identified in this study that excelled, have developed a comprehensive safety education system that includes budgeting, regular on-going employee, supervisor & project manager education and toolbox or task training, all leading to a positive return on the training investment and improved safety performance. Slide 1: The impact of the inclusion of safety training as a line item within the budget is highlighted by this slide. The findings support the conclusion that when safety training is funded as part of the budget the results are a successful long-term accident prevention program. This clearly demonstrates management commitment and promotes employee involvement.
The original focus on injury investigation made no mention of management involvement. This slide reinforces Paul’s comments about top management’s commitment to safety, demonstrated by their participation in incident investigations.
Exercise - 38 people from the audience stand up to use as an example during talking point.
![Nine Industry Best Practices ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()