How many C-suite executives can actually discuss the safety controls/barriers/activities they invest in every year? We can NOT control the injury rates, but we CAN CONTROL those safety controls/barriers/activities that have been put into place to impact those injury rates. FOCUS on what we CAN CONTROL, and if our safety controls/barriers/activities follow the Hierarchy of […]
We often hear the terms “employee participation” and “employee engagement” used as if they are identical in their approach; nothing could be further from the truth. In safety, we need “employee participation,” not “employee engagement”. How different are these phrases? Oxford Dictionary defines them as: Participation – the action of taking part in something Engagement
When a situation exists that creates a loss of life, injury, and suffering; when it costs a king’s ransom annually; when its cure has been demonstrated to be practical; and when all are agreed that something can and should be done about it, it is time to stop talking, roll up the sleeves, and go
It is a standard error made in Behavior Based Safety Processes (BBSP)… we celebrate the % Safe while the real value lies in the % Unsafe. I am all for celebrating the successes once they have been validated as real; however, to get the potential value from our BBSP, we need to utilize the unsafe
We need to note the difference between blame (or guilt) and responsibility. A foreman need not hold himself morally guilty when an employee in his charge is injured, but he cannot and should not evade responsibility under any circumstances whatsoever. Remember that the authority to issue an order involves the responsibility to see that it
Each time the site director has been confronted with a contradiction between safety and production, he has chosen to favor safety, or on the contrary, he has accepted to “adapt” safety rules to achieve a production target. Each time an operator reaches a production target but has taken a risk to do so, the management
As I wrote last week, I am not a fan of the so-called “safety stand-downs” that seem to be all the rage these days. Our stand-downs in the 1990s and 2000s were entirely different approaches and were conducted following serious events. My post spurred a lot of great discussions about how they are conducted vs.
As the debate in OSH regarding metrics and lagging indicators rages on, there is one aspect to their use that far too many overlook. If your organization is setting goals using lagging indicators, it should at least be using them correctly. This means that BOTH FREQUENCY and SEVERITY need to be measured. I am sure
This week I had an enlighting discussion with another senior management group that was just way off base in their understanding of OSHA’s use of injury and illness rates. This company is in an industry that is certainly on OSHA’s radar, and their desire to improve safety is simply to reduce their injury and illness
With the latest news of the Appeals Court case that could cause 50 years of OSHA standards to be unwound, the UK’s HSE weekly newsletter reminds us of how safety should be managed. OSHA’s old compliance model has run its course. I am NOT advocating we do away with OSHA standards, as I believe they
I can remember “surviving” through safety stand-downs in my career and I can assure you, they were not coffee and donut parties! The stand-downs back then were TRUE stand-downs where the company halted the tasks/operations that were involved in the accident until the investigation was complete, the root cause analysis was complete, AND the corrective
Most of us know all too well the critical role near-miss reporting plays in achieving excellence in safety. But this BSEE Safety Alert really does a nice job demonstrating the IMPORTANCE of near-miss REPORTING AND the TRENDING of our near misses to identify opportunities to intervene before a consequence is realized. The alert also has
