3. SAFETY MANAGEMENT:
The goal of any safety management system is as
Follows
1) Zero accidents
2) Zero harm to people
3) Zero environmental damage
4. SAYINGS:
NASP (The National Association of Safety Professional)
says
The creation of a comprehensive safety culture within an
organization requires that the whole organization is involved from
the Managing Director and down to workers.
5. PRINCIPLES OF SAFETY:
Six principles to be followed to achieve safety in a work
place are as follows
Ethical responsibility
Culture
Management responsibility
Employee must be trained
Condition for employement
All injuries are preventable
6. ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY
At its core, ethics holds up a positive vision of what is right and what is
good.
It defines what is "worth" pursuing as guidance for our decisions and
actions.
Workplace injuries and deaths are too often seen in the abstract as
statistics. But when it happens to someone we love, we suddenly see the
reality of the horrible pain and suffering and its widespread effect.
It is our ethical responsibility to do what is necessary to protect
employees from death, injury, and illness in the workplace.
This is the only foundation upon which a true safety culture can be
established in any workplace.
7. CULTURE NOT A PROGRAM
The combined commitment and participation of the entire organization is
necessary to create and maintain an effective safety culture.
Every person in the organization, from the top management of the
corporation to the newest employee, is responsible and accountable for
preventing injuries.
8. MANAGEMENT IS RESPONSIBLE
Management's responsibility is to lead the safety effort in a sustained and
consistent way, establishing safety goals, demanding accountability for
safety performance.
And providing the resources necessary for a safe workplace.
Managing safety is the responsibility of every supervisor, from the first
line supervisor to the Chairman of the Board.
9. EMPLOYEES MUST BE TRAINED:
Awareness of safety does not come naturally; we all need to be trained to
work safely.
Effective training programs both teach and motivate employees to be a
productive part of the safety culture.
10. CONDITION FOR EMPLOYMENT
The employer must exhaust every reasonable means to lead, motivate,
train, and provision employees to maintain a safe workplace.
But, in the event the employee refuses to take the actions required to work
safely, the employer must utilize a system of progressive discipline to
enforce safety requirements and ensure the cooperation of the employee,
or the removal of the employee from the workplace in order to protect the
employee and their coworkers
11. ALL INJURIES ARE PREVENTABLE
Sometimes accidents occur without the apparent indication of
fault or blame.
But there is always some chain of events that occurred leading up
to the accident that, had we realized the eventual outcome,
someone could have interceded.
The fundamental belief that injuries are, by their nature,
preventable is a catalyst that encourages us to prevent injuries
12. ALL INJURIES ARE PREVENTABLE
Reducing workplace injuries and illnesses reduces the costs
of workers' compensation, medical expenses, potential
government fines, and the expenses of litigation.
Never forget: Company value (share prices) usually fall
when things go wrong
Effective workplace safety is not an expense; it
is an asset
13. CASE STUDY:
ABSTRACT:
A growing body of research supports the importance of supervisors’safety
leadership in promoting employees’ engagement in safety. However, the factors that
give rise to these safety leadership behaviours are under-explored.
The current study addressed this void by adopting a Job Demands-Resources
framework to identify contextual influences on supervisors’safety leadership
behaviours.
Focus group data from sixty-nine supervisors recruited from the UK construction
industry showed that role overload, production demands, formal procedures, and
workforce characteristics hindered supervisors’ engagement in safety leadership.
In contrast, social support (especially from the organization and co-workers) and
perceived autonomy promoted supervisors’ engagement in safety leadership.
Exploration around these issues highlighted a need for more training for supervisors
in this role and the development of a supportive environment between supervisors
affiliated with different parent companies.
14. METHODOLOGY:
Each focus group comprised between 6 and 10 supervisors and took place
in a private conference room on site. All participants were given an
information sheet at the start of the focus group outlining he topic for
discussion and their right to withdraw at anytime.
All supervisors agreed to participate and gave their permission for the
discussion to be digitally recorded and later transcribed verbatim
(omitting any information that would allow an individual, or their
company, to be identified).
Each focus group was designed to be as open as possible, beginning with
the broad question of ‘‘in your opinion, what defines good safety
leadership?’’ followed by ‘‘what factors help supervisors to engage in
good safety leadership?’’ and ‘‘what factors make it difficult for (i.e.,
hinder) supervisors to engage in good safety leadership?’’
15. METHODOLOGY:
These questions were shown in two pilot focus groups, which were carried out
with15 supervisors (n = 7 and 8) on two different project sites, to be effective
in stimulating discussion while avoiding subjectivity from the group facilitator.
To encourage conversation during the focus groups, and to provide a point of
reference for all group participants, each supervisor was asked to provide one
factor that helped and one factor that hindered engagement in safety leadership.
Supervisors were informed that these factors did not have to be restricted to the
current project, or the current project’s main operating company, but could
include any of those things experienced during their time as a supervisor. The
factors that were identified by each supervisor was discussed at a group level,
in which each factor was probed in detail to establish if it was perceived by
supervisors as being among the most important influences on safety leadership
behaviors. Each focus group lasted between 40 and 90 min.
16. RESULT:
‘Good’ safety leadership within construction
Hindrance demands: role overload, production pressure,
workforce characteristics.
Helpful resources: social support and autonomy
discussion
17. CONCLUSION:
A number of studies have focused on factors that impact safety behaviours
within industry. The majority of these studies focus on front-line employees.
The current study adopted a different focus and concentrated on supervisors’
safety leadership behaviours.
Through focus group discussions with first-line supervisors within the
construction industry we identified role overload, production pressure and
certain workforce characteristics as hindrances on supervisors safety leadership
behaviours. The findings suggest that
reducing demands.
the negative effects of demands may be reduced by increasing support between
supervisors and offering training in a supervisory role.
In doing this, organizations may expect to see an increase in safety leadership
behaviours.
18. REFERENCES:
A paper on Supervisors’ engagement In safety leadership: Factors that help
and hinder.
Bommer, W.H., Rubin, R.S., Baldwin, T.T., 2004. Setting the stage for
effectiveleadership: antecedents of transformational leadership behavior.
TheLeadership Quarterly 15, 195–210.
