PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONVENTION

By ROBERT LOPEZ

SUMMARY REFERENCES CHAPTER ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY INTRODUCTION THE SAFETY AND HEALTH PROFESSIONAL THE LINE SUPERVISOR USING THE SUPERVISOR EVALUATION FORM THE WORKER MOTIVATING SAFETY AND HEALTH PLANNING THE MOTIVATIONAL APPROACH SUPERVISORS SELF-MOTIVATED WORKERS CHANGING BEHAVIOR BEHAVIOR-BASED SAFETY IDENTIFYING CRITICAL BEHAVIORS GATHERING DATA TWO-WAY FEEDBACK CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT FACTORS AFFECTING MOTIVATION SAFETY CULTURE DEFINING SAFETY CULTURE DEVELOPING OR CHANGING A SAFETY CULTURE DESCRIBING A SAFETY CULTURE POSITIVE SAFETY CULTURE TRYING TO IMPROVE SAFETY ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS ASSESSING SAFETY CULTURE VISUAL MOTIVATORS NONFINANCIAL INCENTIVES ACCIDENT/INCIDENT ANALYSIS BREAKDOWN OF CAUSES DIRECT CAUSE INDIRECT CAUSES BASIC CAUSES CAUSE BREAKDOWN REVIEW MISHAP PROBABILITY ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS PHASE I: DATA COLLECTION PHASE II: ASSESSMENT ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS METHODS PHASE III: CORRECTIVE ACTIONS PHASE IV: INFORM PHASE V: FOLLOW-UP CAUSAL FACTOR ANALYSIS DEFINITION DETERMINING CAUSAL FACTORS DIRECT CAUSES CONTRIBUTING CAUSES ROOT (BASIC) CAUSES EVENT FACTOR CHAINS (CHARTING) AND EXPLANATION EVENTS CONDITIONS CONTRIBUTING FACTORS SECONDARY EVENT BENEFITS OF EVENTS AND CAUSAL FACTORS CHARTING USING CAUSAL FACTOR ANALYSIS (EVENT FACTOR CHAINS OR CHARTING) CONSTRUCTING THE CHART CHARTING SYMBOLS CAUSAL FACTOR WORKSHEETS CHAPTER 10 CHANGE ANALYSIS WHEN TO USE CHANGE ANALYSIS HOW TO USE CHANGE ANALYSIS STRUCTURING THE ANALYSIS CHAPTER 11 BARRIER ANALYSIS PHYSICAL BARRIER ANALYSIS EXPLANATION OF PBA HUMAN BARRIER ANALYSIS INFORMATION TOOLS OR EQUIPMENT KNOWLEDGE CAPACITY INCENTIVE PERFORMING THE HUMAN BARRIER ANALYSIS WRAP-UP OF PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION OF PBA AND HBA CHAPTER 12 JOB SAFETY/HAZARD ANALYSIS PERFORMING A JSA/JHA FOUR BASIC STEPS OF A JSA/JHA SELECTING A JOB TO ANALYZE ACCIDENT FREQUENCY ACCIDENT SEVERITY JUDGMENT AND EXPERIENCE NEW JOBS, NONROUTINE JOBS, OR JOB CHANGES ROUTINE JOBS THE JOB SAFETY/HAZARD ANALYSIS WORKSHEET SEPARATING THE JOB INTO ITS BASIC STEPS SEQUENCE OF BASIC JOB STEPS IDENTIFYING THE HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH JOB STEP STRUCK-AGAINST TYPE OF ACCIDENTS STRUCK-BY TYPE OF ACCIDENTS CONTACT-WITH AND CONTACT-BY TYPES OF ACCIDENTS CAUGHT-IN, CAUGHT-ON, AND CAUGHT-BETWEEN TYPES OF ACCIDENTS FALL-TO-SAME-LEVEL AND FALL-TO-BELOW TYPES OF ACCIDENTS OVEREXERTION AND EXPOSURE TYPES OF ACCIDENTS CONSIDER HUMAN PROBLEMS IN THE JSA/JHA PROCESS ELIMINATING OR CONTROLLING THE HAZARDS CHANGE JOB PROCEDURES CHANGE THE FREQUENCY OF PERFORMING THE JOB PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT CHAPTER 13 SAFE OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOPS) COMPONENTS OF AN SOP GUIDELINES FOR WRITING AN SOP HOW SOPS WORK CHAPTER 14 JOB SAFETY OBSERVATION PURPOSE OF JOB SAFETY OBSERVATION TYPES OF JOB SAFETY OBSERVATIONS INCIDENTAL SAFETY OBSERVATIONS PLANNED SAFETY OBSERVATIONS SELECTING A JOB OR TASK FOR A PLANNED JOB SAFETY OBSERVATION SELECTION BASED ON JOBS SELECTION BASED ON INDIVIDUAL NEEDS EXPERIENCED EMPLOYEES INEXPERIENCED EMPLOYEES PREPARING FOR A PLANNED SAFETY OBSERVATION CHECKLIST OF ACTIVITIES TO OBSERVE UNSAFE PROCEDURES THE OBSERVATION AFTER THE OBSERVATION DEALING WITH UNSAFE BEHAVIORS OR POOR PERFORMANCE CHAPTER 15 SAFETY AND HEALTH AUDITS THE NEED FOR AN AUDIT WHEN TO AUDIT WHAT TO AUDIT TYPES OF AUDIT INSTRUMENTS DEVELOP AND EVALUATE AUDIT SCORES QUALIFICATIONS OF AUDITORS CHAPTER 16 FLEET SAFETY PROGRAM WRITTEN FLEET SAFETY PROGRAM VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE REGULATIONS AND MOTOR VEHICLES OTHER AGENCY OVERVIEW FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA) FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (FMSCA) DRIVERS DRIVER ILLNESSES AND INJURIES COMMON DRIVER INJURIES EVENTS OR EXPOSURES LEADING TO TRUCKER INJURY OPERATOR RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION RECORDS TO MAINTAIN OPERATOR TRAINING COMPANY OPERATOR’S MANUAL PRE-OPERATION INSPECTION DRIVING TASKS SAFE DRIVING RECOGNITION PLANNING SCHEDULES, LOADS, AND ROUTES PREVENTING ACCIDENTS CHAPTER 17 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS COMPONENTS OF A PMP PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT’S ROLE THE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (PMP) OPERATORS’ INSPECTIONS BRAKE SAFETY TIRE SAFETY WHEEL ASSEMBLY SAFETY STEERING SYSTEM SAFETY TRAILER HITCH SAFETY HITCH AND AXLE SAFETY DRIVING LIGHT SAFETY LOAD SAFETY LOAD SECURING SAFETY MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY CHAPTER 18 SPECIAL EMPHASIS PROGRAMS LADDER SAFETY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT’S COMMITMENT HAZARD IDENTIFICATION CONTROL AND PREVENTION TRAINING INCENTIVES CHAPTER 19 USING SAFETY AND HEALTH CONSULTANTS NEED FOR A CONSULTANT CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEW SCOPE OF WORK FINAL HIRING STEPS CHAPTER 20 SAFETY AND HEALTH TRAINING WHEN TO TRAIN TRAINING NEW HIRES TRAINING SUPERVISORS TRAINING EMPLOYEES DOCUMENTING SAFETY AND HEALTH TRAINING AFTER THE TRAINING SAFETY TALKS SAFETY TALKS AND MEETINGS OSHA TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OSHA TRAINING GUIDELINES LEGAL ASPECT OF TRAINING OSHA TRAINING MODEL DETERMINING IF TRAINING IS NEEDED IDENTIFYING TRAINING NEEDS IDENTIFYING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES DEVELOPING LEARNING ACTIVITIES CONDUCTING THE TRAINING EVALUATING PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS IMPROVING THE PROGRAM MATCHING TRAINING TO EMPLOYEES IDENTIFYING EMPLOYEES AT RISK TRAINING EMPLOYEES AT RISK CHAPTER 21 ANALYZING ACCIDENT DATA OSHA RECORDKEEPING COMPANY RECORDS IMPORTANT ANCILLARY DATA NEEDED FOR MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS HEALTH AND SAFETY STATISTICS DATA STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR COMPARISONS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COST OF ACCIDENTS CHAPTER 22 PREVENTION AND OSHA REGULATIONS FEDERAL LAWS OSHACT CONTENT OF THE OSHACT REGULATION PROCESS FEDERAL REGISTER PURPOSE OF OSHA CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS CFR NUMBERING SYSTEM 29 CFR 1910 110 (B)(13)(II)(B)(7)(III) OSHA STANDARDS COVERED COPIES OF THE OSHA STANDARDS RELIEF (VARIANCE) FROM AN OSHA STANDARD OSHACT PROTECTS ROLE OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (NIOSH) ROLE OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION (OSHRC) EMPLOYERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKERS’ SAFETY AND HEALTH WORKERS’ RIGHTS WORKERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE LAW THE RIGHT NOT TO BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST THE RIGHT TO KNOW ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING RESULTS PERSONAL PROTECTIVE CLOTHING OSHA INSPECTIONS OSHA RECEIVES A COMPLAINT CITATIONS TYPES OF VIOLATIONS CHALLENGING CITATIONS, PENALTIES, AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT MEASURES WORKERS GET THE RESULTS OF AN INSPECTION DETERMINING PENALTIES STATE PROGRAMS WORKERS’ TRAINING OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES MEDICAL AND EXPOSURE RECORDS POSTING WHAT TO DO WHEN OSHA COMES KNOCKING INSPECTION PROCESS MITIGATING THE DAMAGE CLOSING CONFERENCE AFTER THE INSPECTOR LEAVES MAKE THE INSPECTION A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE CHAPTER 23 HEALTH HAZARD PREVENTION ASBESTOS BACK INJURIES BLOODBORNE PATHOGENS CARCINOGENS COLD STRESS ERGONOMICS HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS HAZARDOUS WASTE HEAT STRESS IONIZING RADIATION LASERS LEAD NOISE-INDUCED HEARING LOSS NONIONIZING RADIATION VIBRATION WORKPLACE STRESS CHAPTER 24 CONTROLS AND PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT CONTROLLING HAZARDS ENGINEERING CONTROLS AWARENESS DEVICES WORK PRACTICES ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS MANAGEMENT CONTROLS ESTABLISHING A PPE PROGRAM HAZARD ASSESSMENT EYE AND FACE PROTECTION HEAD PROTECTION FOOT AND LEG PROTECTION HAND AND ARM PROTECTION METAL MESH, LEATHER, OR CANVAS GLOVES FABRIC AND COATED FABRIC GLOVES CHEMICAL- AND LIQUID-RESISTANT GLOVES BODY PROTECTION PROTECTIVE CLOTHING APPLICATIONS SELECTION OF PROTECTIVE CLOTHING ENSEMBLE SELECTION FACTORS CLASSIFICATION OF PROTECTIVE CLOTHING HEARING PROTECTION RESPIRATORY PROTECTION BASIC RESPIRATORY PROTECTION SAFETY PROCEDURES RESPIRATOR USER POLICIES SELECTION OF RESPIRATORS IDENTIFICATION OF FILTERS AND CARTRIDGES RESPIRATOR FILTER AND CANISTER REPLACEMENT FILTER AND CARTRIDGE CHANGE SCHEDULE RESPIRATORY PROTECTION SCHEDULE BY JOB AND WORKING CONDITION PHYSICAL AND MEDICAL QUALIFICATIONS ADDITIONAL MEDICAL EVALUATIONS RESPIRATOR FIT TESTING TYPES OF FIT TESTS RESPIRATOR OPERATION AND USE CONTINUING EFFECTIVENESS OF RESPIRATORS PROCEDURES FOR IDLH ATMOSPHERES CLEANING AND DISINFECTING RESPIRATOR INSPECTION RESPIRATOR STORAGE RESPIRATOR REPAIRS 1 INTRODUCTION THE OBJECTIVES OF HEALTHY PEOPLE 2020 HAVE NOT CHANGED BUT WILL EXPERIENCE SOME MODIFICATIONSTHE 2020 OBJECTIVES FOR WORK-RELATED INJURIES WILL BE TO REDUCE DEATH FROM WORK-RELATED INJURIES REDUCE NONFATAL WORK-RELATED INJURIES REDUCE WORK-RELATED ASSAULTS REDUCE WORK-RELATED HOMICIDES REDUCE OCCUPATIONAL NEEDLE-STICK INJURIES AMONG HOSPITAL-BASED HEALTH- CARE WORKERS ALTHOUGH PROGRESS WAS MADE REGARDING OCCUPATION INJURIES AND TRAUMA DEATHS, NEW DATA AND GOAL PROJECTIONS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR 2020 AT THIS TIMETHE 2010 GOALS FOR INJURIES, TRAUMA DEATHS, AND NEEDLE-STICK INJURIES ACHIEVED APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THE GOALS WHILE ASSAULTS GOALS DID NOT MAKE PROGRESSTHE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPHS SET OUT THE BASELINES FOR 2010 HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010 OBJECTIVES FROM THE U SDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (DHHS) HAS MADE THE FACTS AVAILABLE RELEVANT TO OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES EVERY FIVE SECONDS A WORKER IS INJURED EVERY TEN SECONDS A WORKER IS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY DISABLEDEACH DAY, AN AVERAGE OF 137 PERSONS DIE FROM WORK-RELATED DISEASES, AND AN ADDITIONAL 17 DIE FROM WORKPLACE INJURIES ON THE JOB EACH YEAR, ABOUT 70 YOUTHS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE DIE FROM INJURIES AT WORK AND 70,000 REQUIRE TREATMENT IN A HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOMIN 1996, AN ESTIMATED 11,000 WORKERS WERE DISABLED EACH DAY DUE TO WORK-RELATED INJURIESTHAT SAME YEAR, THE NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL ESTIMATED THAT ON-THE-JOB INJURIES COST SOCIETY $121 BILLION, INCLUDING LOST WAGES, LOST PRODUCTIVITY, ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES, HEALTH CARE, AND OTHER COSTS (NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL INJURY FACTS, 2010)A STUDY PUBLISHED IN JULY 1997 REPORTS THAT THE 1992 COMBINED U SECONOMICBURDEN FOR OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESSES AND INJURIES WAS AN ESTIMATED $171 BILLION (U SDEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, WWW COMMERCE GOV, 2001) A NUMBER OF DATA SYSTEMS AND ESTIMATES EXIST TO DESCRIBE THE NATURE AND MAGNI- TUDE OF OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES, ALL OF WHICH HAVE ADVANTAGES AS WELL AS LIMITATIONSIN 1996, INFORMATION FROM DEATH CERTIFICATES AND OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS INDICATED THAT AT LEAST 6,112 WORKERS DIED FROM WORK-RELATED INJURIES (BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, WWW BLS GOV, 2000)NO REPORTING SYSTEM FOR NATIONAL OCCU- PATIONAL CHRONIC DISEASE AND MORTALITY CURRENTLY EXISTS IN THIS COUNTRYTHEREFORE, SCIENTISTS AND POLICYMAKERS MUST RELY ON ESTIMATES TO UNDERSTAND THE MAGNITUDE OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE GENERATED FROM A NUMBER OF DATA SOURCES AND PUBLISHED EPIDE- MIOLOGIC (OR POPULATION-BASED) STUDIESESTIMATES GENERATED FROM THESE SOURCES ARE GENERALLY THOUGHT TO UNDERESTIMATE THE TRUE EXTENT OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE, BUT THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY RECOGNIZES THESE ESTIMATES AS THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION SUCH COMPILATIONS INDICATE THAT AN ESTIMATED 50,000 TO 70,000 WORKERS DIE EACH YEAR FROM WORK-RELATED DISEASESA FURTHER DISCUSSION ON OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE IS FOUND IN CHAPTER 23 CURRENT DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO MONITOR DISPARITIES IN HEALTH- RELATED OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSESEFFORTS WILL BE MADE OVER THE COMING DECADE TO IMPROVE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS AND DATA POINTS THAT MAY ALLOW EVALUATION OF HEALTH DISPARITIES FOR WORK-RELATED ILLNESSES, INJURIES, AND DEATHSDATA FROM THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH’S (NIOSH) NATIONAL TRAUMATIC OCCUPATIONAL FATALITIES SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (NTOF), BASED ON DEATH CERTIFICATES FROM ACROSS THE UNITED STATES, DEMONSTRATE A GENERAL DECREASE IN OCCUPATIONAL MOR- TALITY OVER THE 15-YEAR PERIOD FROM 1980 TO 1994HOWEVER, THE NUMBER AND RATES OF FATAL INJURIES FROM 1990 THROUGH 1994 REMAINED RELATIVELY STABLE (AT OVER 5,000 DEATHS PER YEAR AND ABOUT 4 4 DEATHS PER 100,000 WORKERS)MOTOR VEHICLE-RELATED FATALI- TIES AT WORK, THE LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH FOR U SWORKERS SINCE 1980, ACCOUNTED FOR 23 PERCENT OF DEATHS DURING THE 15-YEAR PERIODWORKPLACE HOMICIDES BECAME THE SECOND LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH IN 1990, SURPASSING MACHINE-RELATED DEATHSWHILE THE RANKINGS OF INDIVIDUAL INDUSTRY DIVISIONS HAVE VARIED OVER THE YEARS, THE LARGEST NUMBER OF DEATHS IS CONSISTENTLY FOUND IN CONSTRUCTION, TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC UTILITIES, ANDMANUFACTURING, WHILE THOSE INDUSTRIES WITH THE HIGHEST FATALITY RATES PER 100,000 WORKERS ARE MINING, AGRICULTURE/FORESTRY/FISHING, AND CONSTRUCTIONDATA FROM THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS (BLS), DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, INDICATE THAT, FOR NONFATAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES, INCIDENCE RATES HAVE BEEN RELATIVELY STABLE SINCE 1980 THE RATE IN 1980 WAS 8 7 PER 100,000 WORKERS AND 8 4 PER 100,000 WORKERS IN 1994 INCIDENCE VARIED BETWEEN A LOW OF 7 7 PER 100,000 WORKERS (1982) AND A HIGH OF 8 9 PER 100,000 WORKERS (1992) OVER THE 15-YEAR PERIOD OF 1980 TO 1994 THE TOLL OF WORKPLACE INJURIES AND ILLNESSES CONTINUES TO HARM OUR COUNTRYSIX MILLION WORKERS IN THE UNITED STATES ARE EXPOSED TO WORKPLACE HAZARDS RANGING FROM FALLS FROM ELEVATIONS TO EXPOSURES TO LEADTHE HAZARDS VARY DEPENDING UPON THE TYPE OF INDUSTRY (E G , MANUFACTURING) AND THE TYPES OF WORK BEING PERFORMED BY WORKERS (E G , WELDING) THE CONSEQUENCES OF OCCUPATIONAL ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS HAVE RESULTED IN PAIN AND SUFFERING, EQUIPMENT DAMAGE, EXPOSURE OF THE PUBLIC TO HAZARDS, LOST PRODUCTION CAPACITY, AND LIABILITYNEEDLESS TO SAY, THESE OCCUPATIONALLY RELATED ACCIDENTS OR INCI- DENTS HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON PROFIT, WHICH IS COMMONLY CALLED THE “BOTTOM LINE ” WHY INJURY PREVENTION? THERE ARE VERY REAL ADVANTAGES FOR THOSE TRYING TO ADDRESS INJURY PREVENTION, ADVAN- TAGES THAT DO NOT EXIST WHEN TRYING TO ADDRESS ILLNESSES PREVENTION; THESE INCLUDE INJURIES OCCUR IN REAL-TIME WITH NO LATENCY PERIOD (AN IMMEDIATE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS) ACCIDENT OR INCIDENT OUTCOMES ARE READILY OBSERVABLE (MUST ONLY RECONSTRUCT A FEW MINUTES OR HOURS) ROOT OR BASIC CAUSES ARE MORE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED IT IS EASY TO DETECT CAUSE-AND-EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS INJURIES ARE NOT DIFFICULT TO DIAGNOSE INJURIES ARE HIGHLY PREVENTABLE PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS DEBATE OVER USE OF THE TERM “ACCIDENTS” VERSUS “INCIDENTS” HAS BEEN A LONG AND CON- TINUING ONEALTHOUGH THESE TERMS ARE USED AS VIRTUALLY INTERCHANGEABLE IN THE CON- TEXT OF THIS BOOK, YOU SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWOACCIDENTS ARE USUALLY DEFINED AS UNEXPECTED, UNPLANNED, AND UNCONTROLLABLE EVENTS OR MISHAPS THESE UNDESIRED EVENTS RESULT IN PERSONAL INJURY, OR PROPERTY DAMAGE, OR EQUIPMENT FAILURE, OR SOME COMBINATION THEREOFAN INCIDENT IS ALL OF THE PREVIOUS AS WELL AS ADVERSE PRODUCTION EFFECTSACCIDENTS ARE A SUBSET OF INCIDENTS (SEE FIGURE 1 1) THIS DEFINITION OF AN ACCIDENT UNDERMINES THE BASIC PHILOSOPHY OF THIS BOOK, THAT WE CAN CONTROL THESE TYPES OF EVENTS OR MISHAPSTHIS IS WHY WE SPEND TIME IDENTIFY- ING HAZARDS AND DETERMINING RISKS WITH THE PROBABILITY THAT A HAZARD WILL RESULT IN AN ACCIDENT WITH DEFINABLE CONSEQUENCESTHUS, STRIVING FOR A SAFE WORKPLACE, WHERE THE ASSOCIATED RISKS ARE JUDGED TO BE ACCEPTABLE, IS A GOAL OF SAFETYTHIS WILL RESULT IN FREEDOM FROM CIRCUMSTANCES THAT CAN CAUSE INJURY OR DEATH TO WORKERS, AND DAMAGE TO OR LOSS OF EQUIPMENT OR PROPERTYTHIS IS ESSENTIALLY A DEFINITION OF SAFETY THE APPROACH TO THIS IS THAT WE CAN CONTROL FACTORS THAT ARE THE CAUSATIVE AGENTS OF ACCIDENTSWE CAN PREVENT ACCIDENTS BY USING THE TOOLS PROVIDED WITHIN THESE PAGES ACCIDENT/INCIDENT PREVENTION PROCESS AN ACCIDENT/INCIDENT PREVENTION PROCESS IS AS SIMPLISTIC AS IT SOUNDS WITHIN THE TEXT OF THIS BOOK THE ELEMENTS ARE PROVIDED FOR SUCH A PROCESSON THE PEOPLE SIDE OF THIS PROCESS, EMPLOYERS MUST COMMIT THEMSELVES AND ALL FACETS OF MANAGEMENT THE LEADERSHIP FOR THIS PROCESS COMES FROM MANAGEMENTTHIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE WORKFORCE SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE PROCESSTHE INVOLVEMENT OF EMPLOYEES MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROCESS IN ORDER TO ELICIT A COMMITMENT AND BUY-IN TO THE PREVENTION EFFORTTHIS IS AN IMPORTANT MOTIVATIONAL FACTOR FOR EMPLOYEES ANOTHER MAJOR AREA IS THE IDENTIFICATION, RANKING, AND CONTROLLING OF RISKTHIS PART OF THE PROCESS IS PARAMOUNT WHEN FACED WITH SERIOUS HAZARDS THAT CAN BE CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENTS INCIDENTS FIGURE 1 1 INCIDENTS PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND EVENTSANALYSIS OF EVENTS AND HAZARDS USING SUCH TOOLS AS ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS HELPS PROVIDE THE SOLUTION PART OF THE PROCESSFROM THESE EFFORTS, STANDARD OR SAFE OPERAT- ING PROCEDURES AS WELL AS SAFE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS CAN BE DEVELOPED TO STANDARD- IZE SAFE PRODUCTION CONSTANT EVALUATION AND MEASUREMENT ARE UTILIZED TO OVERSEE PROGRESS REGARDING PREVENTION SO THAT IMPROVEMENT AND UPDATING OF THE PROCESS CAN OCCUR COMMUNICATION IS CRITICAL IN PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO ALL INVOLVED ON AREAS THAT HAVE IMPROVED AND THOSE THAT NEED FURTHER ATTENTIONREINFORCEMENT SHOULD BE USED TO CONVEY WHAT HAS BEEN WORKING EFFECTIVELY TO PREVENT INCIDENTS AND IMPLEMENT ANY CORRECTIVE ACTION WHILE CONTINUING TO EVALUATEUPDATE AND IMPROVE THE ACCIDENT/ INCIDENT PREVENTION PROCESS COMPREHENSIVE ACCIDENT PREVENTION ACCIDENT PREVENTION IS VERY COMPLEX DUE TO INTERACTIONS THAT TRANSPIRE WITHIN THE WORKPLACE (SEE FIGURE 1 2)THESE INTERACTIONS ARE BETWEEN 1WORKERS 2MANAGEMENT 3EQUIPMENT AND MACHINES 4ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT WORKERS EQUIPMENT/ MACHINES WORKPLACE MISHAP ACCIDENT/INCIDENT (WORKER INJURY/ILLNESS) (EQUIPMENT DAMAGE) WORK TO BE COMPLETED FIGURE 1 2 INTERACTIVE FACTORS IN ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND THE INTERACTION BETWEEN WORKERS, MANAGEMENT, EQUIPMENT AND MACHINERY, AND THE WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT SEPARATELY ARE COMPLEX ENOUGH BY THEMSELVES MORE COMPLEXITY TRANSPIRES WHEN THEY ARE BLENDED TOGETHER TO BECOME A WORKPLACEBUT PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT IS NOT THE ONLY ENVIRONMENT IMPINGING ON THE ACCIDENT PREVEN- TION EFFORTS WITHIN COMPANIESTHE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT IS ALSO AN INTERACTIVE FACTOR, AND ONE THAT ENCOMPASSES OUR LIVES AT WORK AND BEYONDGOVERNMENT ENTITIES ESTAB- LISH RULES AND REGULATIONS AND LEAVE THEIR MARK ON THE WORKPLACEOTHER ENTITIES IN THE SOCIAL ARENA PROVIDE PRESSURES IN THE WORKPLACE, SUCH AS UNIONS, FAMILY, PEER PRESSURE, FRIENDS, ASSOCIATES, ETCTHIS EXTENDS THE INTERACTIONS THAT MUST BE ATTENDED TO IN ORDER TO SUCCESSFULLY PREVENT ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT PREVENTION PREVENTION OF OCCUPATIONALLY RELATED ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS IS THE LAWTHE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OF 1970 (OSHACT) REQUIRES EMPLOYERS TO PROVIDE A WORKPLACE FREE FROM HAZARDS THAT COULD CAUSE SERIOUS HARM OR DEATHBEYOND THAT, IT MAKES GOOD BUSINESS SENSE TO PREVENT ACCIDENT/INCIDENTSMORE AND MORE COMPANIES HAVE COME TO REALIZE THAT THE OSHACT IS A HELPMATE, NOT A HINDRANCE, TO THEIR ACCIDENT/INCIDENT PRE- VENTION INITIATIVETHE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) SETS THE FOUNDATION AND ASSUMES THE ROLE OF LAW ENFORCER, ALLOWING THE EMPLOYER TO NOT BE VIEWED AS THE BAD GUY TO HIS OR HER EMPLOYEESEMPLOYERS CAN DEFLECT RESPONSIBILITY TO OSHA AS BUSINESS COMPETITION HAS INCREASED, LOSS CONTROL HAS BEEN SEEN AS A LOGICAL PLACE TO CURTAIL COSTS, ESPECIALLY DIRECT LOSSES FROM EQUIPMENT DAMAGE, MEDICAL COSTS, AND WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PREMIUMSPREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS RESULTS IN REAL, OBSERVABLE SAVINGSSAFETY EXPERTS APPROXIMATE THE HIDDEN COST OF ACCIDENTS AS BEING CONSERVA- TIVELY FIVE TO TEN TIMES THE DIRECT COST INCURREDHIDDEN COSTS INCLUDE LOST PRODUCTION, RETRAINING, AND SUPERVISOR’S TIME LOST, JUST TO NAME A FEW ACCIDENT PREVENTION BENEFITS YOU CAN EXPECT MANY BENEFITS FROM PREVENTING OCCUPATIONAL ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS SOME OF THE BENEFITS YOU MIGHT EXPECT ARE REDUCED INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE PREMIUM COSTS REDUCED INDIRECT COSTS OF ACCIDENTS FEWER COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS AND PENALTIES AVOIDANCE OF ADVERSE PUBLICITY FROM DEATHS OR MAJOR ACCIDENTS REDUCED LITIGATION AND LEGAL SETTLEMENTS LOWER EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE REDUCED PAIN AND SUFFERING BY INJURED WORKERS REDUCED LONG-TERM OR PERMANENT DISABILITY CASES INCREASED POTENTIAL FOR RETROSPECTIVE RATING REFUNDS INCREASED ACCEPTANCE OF BIDS (MORE JOBS) IMPROVED MORALE AND LOYALTY FROM INDIVIDUAL WORKERS INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY FROM WORKERS INCREASED PRIDE IN COMPANY PERSONNEL PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND ALTHOUGH THIS NOT AN ALL-INCLUSIVE LIST, IT CERTAINLY PROVIDES A SNAPSHOT OF WHY YOU SHOULD UNDERTAKE A LOSS CONTROL EFFORT FOR OCCUPATIONALLY RELATED INCIDENTS PREVENTING OCCUPATIONAL ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS SINCE THE ADVENT OF OSHA’S REGULATORY CONTROLS, SOME COMPANIES HAVE BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN OTHERS AT PREVENTING WORKER-RELATED ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS THESE COMPANIES HAVE PLACED OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ON AN EQUAL FOOTING WITH PRODUCTIONTHEY HAVE DEVELOPED PROGRAMS, USED ACCIDENT-PREVENTION TECHNIQUES, AND APPLIED THE PRINCIPLES OF MOTIVATION TO SAFETYIN DOING SO, THEY OFTEN HAVE DEVISED THEIR OWN UNIQUE APPROACH, SPECIFIC TO THEIR INDUSTRYONE EXAMPLE OF THIS IS DUPONT’S SAFE PROGRAMTHE SUCCESSES THESE COMPANIES HAVE EXPERIENCED HAVE MADE THEM THE SHINING EXAMPLES OF HOW SAFETY CAN BECOME A PART OF THE CULTURAL AND PHILOSOPHI- CAL APPROACH OF BUSINESSES EACH INDUSTRY IS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTWHAT WORKS WELL FOR ONE COMPANY MAY NOT DUPLICATE OR REPLICATE AT OTHER COMPANIES WITHOUT TAILORING TO FIT THE UNIQUE NEEDS OF THE LATTERUNIQUENESS IS OFTEN USED AS AN EXCUSE TO NOT TAKE ACTIONEXCUSES INCLUDE, “OUR INDUSTRY IS DIFFERENT,” OR “IT WON’T WORK IN OUR INDUSTRY ” GENERALLY, THESE ARE SEEN AS LAME EXCUSES AND A WAY OF SAYING THAT THEY JUST DON’T WANT TO TRY TO MAKE SAFETY A PRIORITYTHE PRINCIPLES OF PREVENTING ACCIDENTS ARE APPLICABLE TO ANY INDUSTRY SETTING IF ONE DESIRES TO MAKE ACCIDENT PREVENTION AN INTEGRAL PART OF DOING BUSINESS NOTHING NEW IN PREVENTION THERE IS NOTHING EARTHSHAKINGLY NEW IN THE ACCIDENT/INCIDENT PREVENTION ARENABASIC ACCIDENT/INCIDENT PREVENTION TECHNIQUES ESPOUSED IN THIS BOOK HAVE BEEN USED AND MODIFIED OVER DECADESFEW, IF ANY, DRAMATICALLY NEW APPROACHES HAVE BEEN DEVISED USING MORE MODERN TECHNIQUESTHUS, ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION, NO MATTER THE WORDS USEDHOWEVER, THE TOOLS AND PROCESSES UTILIZED FOR ACCIDENT PREVENTION HAVE EXPERIENCED MODIFICATION AND EVOLUTION AS ACCIDENT PREVEN- TION HAS BECOME AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE LOSS CONTROL INITIATIVES OF COMPANIES HOW MUCH PREVENTION? WORKPLACES HAVE HAZARDS THAT PRESENT A RISK OF INJURY OR ILLNESS FROM THE DANGERS THAT EXISTAT TIMES, THE HAZARDS CANNOT BE REMOVED AND THE DANGERS EXIST AND CAN RESULT IN AN ACCIDENTRISK IS THE PROBABILITY OF AN ACCIDENT OCCURRINGTHE AMOUNT OF RISK THAT YOU DEEM ACCEPTABLE WILL DO MUCH TO DEFINE THE EXTENT OF YOUR INJURY PREVENTION EFFORTRISK RELATED TO SAFETY AND HEALTH IS OFTEN A JUDGMENT CALLBUT, EVEN A JUDGMENT CALL CAN BE QUANTIFIED IF YOU DEVELOP CRITERIA AND PLACE VALUE UPON THEMFINE (1973) HAS PROVIDED A MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR CONDUCTING A RISK ASSESS- MENT THAT RESULTS IN A NUMERICAL VALUE THAT CAN BE USED TO COMPARE POTENTIAL RISKS FROM ACCIDENTS FINE’S FIRST COMPONENT IS A RISK SCORE THAT COMPILES NUMERICAL VALUES RELATED TO CONSEQUENCES, EXPOSURE, AND PROBABILITIESTO CALCULATE A RISK SCORE, EXTRACT THERATING VALUES FROM THE JUSTIFICATION FORMULA RATING SUMMARY SHEET FOUND IN TABLE 1 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND JUSTIFICATION FORMULA RATING SUMMARY SHEET FACTOR CLASSIFICATION RATING CONSEQUENCES CATASTROPHE; NUMEROUS FATALITIES; DAMAGE OVER $1,000,000; MAJOR DISRUPTION OF ACTIVITIES MINOR CUTS, BRUISES, BUMPS; MINOR DAMAGE EXPOSURE HAZARD-EVENT OCCURS: THE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF THE HAZARD EVENT: CONTINUOUSLY (OR MANY TIMES DAILY) FREQUENTLY (APPROXIMATELY ONCE DAILY) OCCASIONALLY (FROM ONCE PER WEEK TO ONCE PER MONTH) USUALLY (FROM ONCE PER MONTH TO ONCE PER YEAR) RARELY (IT HAS BEEN KNOWN TO OCCUR) PROBABILITY COMPLETE ACCIDENT SEQUENCE: LIKELIHOOD THAT ACCIDENT SEQUENCE WILL FOLLOW TO COMPLETION: IS THE MOST LIKELY AND EXPECTED RESULT IF THE HAZARD-EVENT TAKES PLACE IS QUITE POSSIBLE, NOT UNUSUAL, HAS AN EVEN 50/50 CHANCE WOULD BE AN UNUSUAL SEQUENCE OR COINCIDENCE WOULD BE A REMOTELY POSSIBLE COINCIDENCE DEGREE OF CORRECTION DEGREE TO WHICH HAZARD WILL BE REDUCED: HAZARD POSITIVELY ELIMINATED, 100% HAZARD REDUCED AT LEAST 75% HAZARD REDUCED 50% TO 75% HAZARD REDUCED BY 25% TO 50% SLIGHT EFFECT ON HAZARD (LESS THAN 25%) PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND THE VALUES DERIVED ARE PLACED IN THE RISK SCORE FORMULATHEN YOU WOULD CALCULATE A RISK SCORE RISK SCORE FORMULA CONSEQUENCES EXPOSURE PROBAB = × × ILITY ONCE YOU HAVE A RISK SCORE, YOU SHOULD COMPARE IT TO THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA TO DETERMINE THE NEED FOR ACTIONIF THE SCORE IS BETWEEN 18 AND 85, THE HAZARD SHOULD BE ELIMINATED WITHOUT DELAY, BUT THE SITUATION IS NOT AN EMERGENCY 90 AND 200, THIS IS URGENT AND REQUIRES ATTENTION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE 270 AND 1,500, THIS SCORE REQUIRES IMMEDIATE CORRECTIVE ACTIONALL ACTIVITY SHOULD BE DISCONTINUED UNTIL THE HAZARD IS REMOVED OR REDUCED A RISK SCORE WILL NOT NECESSARILY GARNER SUPPORT FOR THE REMOVAL OR REDUCTION OF A POTENTIAL HAZARDTHE QUESTIONS ASKED ARE, “HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?” AND “HOW MUCH HAZARD REDUCTION WILL BE DERIVED FROM FIXING THE DANGEROUS SITUATION?” FINE (1973) WENT BEYOND THE RISK SCORE AND DEVELOPED A JUSTIFICATION FORMULA THE FORMULA INCLUDES FACTORS FOR COST AND THE DEGREE OF CORRECTIONTHE RESULTING RATINGVALUES FOR THE COST AND DEGREE OF CORRECTION FACTOR CAN BE EXTRACTED FROM TABLE 1 1THE JUSTIFICATION FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS: JUSTIFICATION FORMULA CONSEQUENCES EXPOSURE PRO = × × BABILITY (RISK SCORE) COST FACTOR DEGREE OF COR × RECTION FOR A CRITICAL JUSTIFICATION RATING GREATER THAN 10, FIXING THE HAZARD IS JUSTIFIEDFOR A SCORE OF LESS THAN 10, FIXING THE HAZARD IS NOT JUSTIFIED ANY TIME YOU CAN QUANTIFY SOMETHING, YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF PROVING YOUR POINT OR GAINING ACCEPTANCE FOR ITMOST MANAGERS AND OTHERS PAY MORE ATTENTION TO NUMBERS THAT SUPPORT A CASE FOR RISK REDUCTION THAN TO RHETORIC THUS, WHEN DISCUSSING RISKS RELATED TO OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH, BEING ABLE TO DETERMINE A VALUE THAT EQUATES TO THE DEGREE OF RISK GIVES EACH COMPANY A MEASURE FOR DECIDING HOW MUCH RISK IT IS WILLING TO ASSUMETHIS IS BEST ACCOMPLISHED USING A QUANTITATIVE APPROACH AS DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY RISK CONTROL THE KEY TO RISK CONTROL IS TO PREVENT EXPOSURE OF THOSE WHO COULD BE AT RISKIN THE WORKPLACE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO HAVE NO EXPOSURE IF ANYTHING IS GOING TO GET DONE IT IS IMPORTANT TO LIMIT THE POTENTIAL EXPOSURE OR AMOUNT OF EXPOSURETHE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PROTECTION FROM RADIATION EXPOSURE PROVIDE THE FOUNDATION FOR RISK CONTROLTHE THREE ELEMENTS OF EXPOSURE CONTROL ARE DISTANCE, TIME, AND SHIELDING DISTANCE PROVIDES THE BEST MECHANISM TO PREVENT EXPOSUREDISTANCE CAN BE PHYSICAL DISTANCE OR REMOTE DISTANCE WHERE ROBOTICS CAN PROVIDE THE DISTANCE AND LIMIT THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIEND EXPOSURETIME IS AN EXPOSURE LIMITER AND A MECHANISM THAT ALLOWS EMPLOYERS TO SPREAD EXPOSURE OVER SEVERAL WORKERSTHE TIME PART OF THE WORK CYCLE THAT ALLOWS FOR MINIMAL RISK EXPOSURE TO TRANSPIRE IS DURING A SHIFT WHEN FEWER EMPLOYEES ARE PRESENT TO BE EXPOSEDOFTEN, SECOND AND THIRD SHIFTS ARE TIMES WHEN FEWERWORKERS ARE PRESENTSHIELDING IS FREQUENTLY CONSIDERED THE LEAST ACCEPTABLE APPROACH TO RISK CONTROLBARRIERS OR PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT SHOULD BE THE RISK CONTROL OF LAST RESORTWITH OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH, OTHER APPROACHES TO RISK CONTROL ARE OFTEN EMPLOYED MANY WAYS TO CONTROL HAZARDS HAVE BEEN USED OVER THE YEARS BUT USUALLY THESE CAN BE BROKEN DOWN INTO FIVE PRIMARY APPROACHESTHE PREFERRED WAYS TO DO THIS ARE THROUGH ENGINEERING CONTROLS, AWARENESS DEVICES, PREDETERMINED SAFE WORK PRAC- TICES, AND ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLSWHEN THESE CONTROLS ARE NOT FEASIBLE OR DO NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT PROTECTION, AN ALTERNATIVE OR SUPPLEMENTARY METHOD OF PROTECTION IS TO PROVIDE WORKERS WITH PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (PPE) AND THE KNOW-HOW TO USE IT PROPERLY ENGINEERING CONTROLS WHEN A HAZARD IS IDENTIFIED IN THE WORKPLACE, EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO ELIMINATE IT SO THAT EMPLOYEES ARE NOT HARMEDELIMINATION MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY DESIGNING OR REDESIGNING A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT OR PROCESSTHIS COULD BE THE INSTALLATION OF A GUARD ON A PIECE OF MACHINERY THAT PREVENTS WORKERS FROM CONTACTING THE HAZARDTHE HAZARD CAN BE ENGINEERED OUT OF THE OPERATIONANOTHER WAY TO REDUCE OR CONTROL THE HAZARD IS TO ISOLATE THE PROCESS, SUCH AS IN THE MANUFACTURE OF VINYL CHLORIDE USED TO MAKE SUCH ITEMS AS PLASTIC MILK BOTTLES, WHERE THE ENTIRE PROCESS BECOMES A CLOSED CIRCUITTHIS WILL RESULT IN NO ONE BEING EXPOSED TO VINYL CHLORIDE GAS, WHICH IS KNOWN TO CAUSE CANCERTHUS, ANY PHYSICAL CONTROLS THAT ARE PUT IN PLACE ARE CONSIDERED THE BEST APPROACH FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVEKEEP IN MIND THAT YOU ARE A CONSUMER OF PRODUCTSTHUS, AT TIMES YOU CAN LEVERAGE THE M