|
Worker
Protection Programs in Construction -
Final Report
|
|
|
Meridian Research,
Inc
OSHA
Office of Construction & Engineering
eLCOSH
Editor's note: This is a large document. You may find it
helpful using your browser's "Find in Page" feature (Control/F,
or Edit/Find on Page). For example, to locate information
on joint safety and health committees, press Control/F and
enter "committees" as the search text, then click on the
"Find Next" button to locate the next occurrence of "committees."
|
Prepared
For:
Office
of Program Evaluation Occupational Safety and Health Administration
200 Constitution Avenue,
NW Washington, DC 20210
This
report was produced for OSHA by a research company that
no longer is in business. The copy was scanned from a hard
copy; page numbers do not correspond to page numbers on
the original. However, every effort has been made to reproduce
the text accurately. |
January
14, 1994
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
I.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
II.
CONSTRUCTION SAFETY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND
CODES OF PRACTICE
III.
DESCRIPTIONS AND DEFINITIONS OF WORKER PROTECTION
PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Safety
and Health Programs/Plans
Safety and Health Responsibilities
and Accountability
Employee Involvement
Fitness for Duty
Hazard Analysis
Hazard Prevention and Control/Abatement
Inspections
Emergency Response Plans
First-Aid/Medical Requirements
Accident Investigation, Reporting, and Analysis
Training/Safety Meetings
Joint Safety and Health Committees
Contractor/Subcontractor Relationship
for Safety and Health Activities
Summary
IV. WORKER PROTECTION PROGRAM SUCCESS STORIES
V.
COSTS AND BENEFITS OF WORKER PROTECTION PROGRAMS
IN CONSTRUCTION
VI.
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX
A. REVIEW OF THE RECENT CONSTRUCTION SAFETY
MANAGEMENT LITERATURE
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Although injury and fatality rates in many industry sectors have
declined significantly
in the twenty-three years since the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)
came into being, this has not been the case in construction, the
country's largest industry and
one that has consistently registered high rates of workplace accidents.
OSHA has had little
success in reducing injuries and fatalities among construction
workers, despite the fact that it
channels a large portion of its resources into the enforcement
of health and safety standards
on construction sites. Construction workers are exposed to a wider
variety of hazards and
face a greater risk of work-related injury or fatality than employees
in any other U.S.
industry; in 1992, according to the most recent annual Bureau
of Labor Statistics data, the
lost-workday case rate for the construction industry was 5.7 per
l00 full-time workers, the
highest of any major economic sector. To address the problem of
recalcitrant injury and
fatality rates in construction, OSHA has recently undertaken a
number of initiatives,
including creation within the Agency of an Office of Construction
and Engineering and
redesign of the targeting system used to schedule on-site inspections
in this sector.
Within this
framework, OSHA's Office of Program Evaluation contracted with
Meridian Research to:
- Review
the recent business and trade literature to identify successful
accident
prevention programs in the construction industry;
- Compare
the safety management practices applied or recommended by
government agencies, States, and national and international
organizations for
the construction projects they fund and/or oversee;
- Describe
the impact of worker protection programs on the accident and
injury
rates of construction companies that have implemented these
programs; and
- Analyze
the recent literature to identify any secondary benefits--such
as
reduced costs, improved employee morale, and enhanced productivity-
generated by successful worker protection programs.
Meridian's research found general agreement among authors--from
both the academic community and the construction industry--that
well-designed safety and health management programs can indeed
cut accident rates dramatically and stem increases in workers'
compensation costs. Cost-benefit data generated by companies implementing
such programs confirm their "bottom line" advantages
For example, Gulf States, Inc., a large specialty trade contractor,
estimates that its worker protection program prevented 267 lost-workday
injuries and saved $5.3 million in costs in a 3-year period, and
the M.B. Kahn Construction Company, a much smaller general contractor,
reports savings of $725,000 over 3 years and an 80 percent decline
in its OSHA recordable incident rate since implementation of its
program.
The costs
associated with the development and implementation of worker protection
programs are minimal compared with the benefits returned by these
programs. For example, the Pizzagalli Construction Company estimates
that it spends about $100,000 annually on its program but saves
six times as much in workers' compensation costs alone. The Corps
of Engineers, whose exemplary worker protection program has achieved
injury rates approximately one-fifth the national average, estimates
that these programs save contractors a minimum of 0.5 to 1.0 percent
of total project costs. For the construction industry as a whole,
the net cost savings associated with worker protection programs
could be as high as $16 billion per year. Construction industry
employers should thus regard worker protection programs as opportunities
for reducing the death and injury toll in construction while simultaneously
realizing substantial cost savings.
I.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Occupational
safety and health professionals have consistently stressed the
importance of effective management practices in reducing workplace
injury and illness. Of the many OSHA initiatives aimed at promoting
effective worker protection programs, two merit special attention
in the framework of the present study:
- Publication,
in 1989, of voluntary Safety and Health Program Management
Guidelines (54 FR 3904) for employers in general industry,
shipyards, marine
terminals, and long shoring activities;
- Creation
of the Voluntary Protection Program (VPP), designed to give
public
recognition to businesses that have established exemplary occupational
safety
and health programs and achieved outstanding results in the
drive to eliminate work site accidents and injuries.
Both the
Guidelines and the VPP believe that the following elements
are essential to an effective worker protection program:
- Management
commitment;
- Employee
involvement;
- Work
site analysis;
- Hazard
prevention and control;
- Safety
and health training.
In recent
years, interest in worker protection programs (also called accident
prevention programs and comprehensive occupational safety and
health programs) has increased at the State level and in the US
Congress. Since 1990, several States (e.g., North Carolina, Tennessee,
Nevada, and Minnesota) have passed laws and regulations mandating
the development and implementation of such programs, and two other
States (Oregon and California) have redefined and revitalized
their existing program requirements. Bills that would require
comprehensive accident prevention programs in most workplaces
were introduced in the last two Congresses; similar bills are
under consideration in the present Congress. Proponents of these
measures hope to reduce the number of injuries, occupational illnesses,
and fatalities that occur in American workplaces, as well as to
stem the ever-increasing growth in workers' compensation claims.
No business
sector would appear to have more to gain from these efforts than
the construction industry, which has been characterized historically
by the highest injury and fatality rates of any economic sector
in the United States except mining. The human suffering behind
the statistics defies quantitative measurement: not so the cost
of workers' compensation, which has more than tripled over the
last 10 years. To address this problem, individual States, some
agencies, and a number of national and international organizations
with construction oversight authority have used the five elements
set forth on the preceding page as a cornerstone for the development
and implementation of accident prevention policies and procedures
tailored specifically to this high-risk business. The Mecklenburg,
North Carolina Engineering Department, for example, has succeeded
in reducing its work-related injuries-- and their associated cost--
by two-thirds over the 1985-1990 period, largely by implementing
a comprehensive team safety program. On the single-company level,
excellent results have also been achieved within the framework
of a comparable program implemented on the opposite side of the
country: thanks to a rigorous safety management program adopted
at all of its work sites, a Vermont-based heavy construction firm
has reduced its lost-workday case rate by 33 percent and its workers'
compensation costs by 76 percent, all within a three year period.
Persuasive
evidence in favor of comprehensive worker protection programs
in construction is also to be found in the injury and illness
records of firms working under contract to the US Corps of Engineers.
The Corps imposes contractual requirements on its contractors
for written safety and health programs, work site analyses, hazard
prevention and control measures, and safety and health training.
It ensures compliance with these provisions by reviewing each
contractor's program documentation at all major project stages,
conducting frequent on-site inspections, and requiring regular,
on-going training for all employees and supervisors. The results
of the Corps' program have been dramatic: between 1984 and 1988,
US Corps of Engineers contractors registered an average lost-workday
case rate of 1.34 to 1.54 per 100 full-time workers, compared
with a national construction industry average of 6.8 to 6.9 per
100 full-time workers.
In the industry
at large, a growing number of business leaders and construction
firms are vigorously moving to address the human costs associated
with high injury and fatality rates; the spiraling workers' compensation
costs associated with construction accidents have also become
a major issue. In addition, the recent construction management
literature stresses the mechanisms available to make workplace
safety a priority and thus implicitly acknowledges the importance
of management commitment to the creation of safe working environments.
The emphasis in these articles is placed on management's responsibilities,
such as compiling and analyzing accident statistics by contractor
(including subcontractors), by facility, and by project; reviewing
safety performance by tracking accident rates and their costs--
both direct and indirect-- and evaluating the accident records
of all bidders during the course of the procurement process to
avoid the use of high-risk contractors and subcontractors.
Behavioral
research in the construction safety field focuses on such issues
as the effectiveness of feedback mechanisms, the influence of
unions, and the benefits of training. There is a consensus among
authors that involving employees in accident prevention programs
and providing safety training to all workers on the site are essential
to success.
Examples
of the training efforts and research studies pertaining to this
industry include:
- A program
developed by the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners
of America to reduce injuries and lower workers' compensation
rates on specific jobs; the union negotiates with the contractor
for comprehensive worker safety training, including frequent
tool box meetings. If insurance premium dollars are returned
to the contractor because injury losses are lower than expected,
the program calls for splitting the savings with workers as
an incentive (BNA 1990).
- A study
that shows that workers' use of safe practices increases if
positive feedback is provided on a regular basis (Fellner and
Sulzer-Azaroff 1984). These authors found that the use of safe
practices increased from 4 to 30 percent when feedback was provided,
and a modest but statistically significant reduction in injuries
was also observed over the course of the study. Feedback programs
are inexpensive to develop and implement, and could be adapted
easily to the construction setting.
There is
general agreement in the literature that younger workers and new
hires are particularly vulnerable to injuries, and that reaching
these groups requires special effort (Eastern Research Group 1991).
One author has suggested that non-unionized workers are exposed
to heightened risks: he argues that OSHA regulations are more
strictly enforced at unionized work sites, OSHA inspections are
more likely to occur at such sites, and OSHA inspections are more
thorough at union compared with non-union work sites (Weil 1992).
The literature
on the effectiveness of worker protection programs in construction
is largely anecdotal and pertains primarily to large companies.
One of the best-documented studies of this type describes the
experience of the Pizzagalli Construction Company, a Vermont-based
heavy construction firm with approximately 30 work sites in 10
States along the East coast (Bruening 1989). In the two years
after Pizzagalli implemented a proactive safety management program,
recordable injuries were reduced by almost 48 percent, and the
company's lost-workday case rate fell by 33 percent. Improved
training, including an orientation program for new employees and
weekly safety talks for all workers, was considered the key to
the success of this project. Other important elements were visible
management leadership of the program, incentives for safety performance,
and equipment inspections that were both more comprehensive and
more frequent than those required by OSHA.
A common
thread running through the recent literature is the importance
of management commitment in guaranteeing work site safety. Management's
role may be even more important in construction than in general
industry because of the dynamic nature of construction work: the
changes in hazards and work crews associated with the various
phases of a construction project make proactive, vigorous, and
continuous management involvement essential throughout the life
of each project. Annual compliance self-inspections performed
by the employer may be adequate for the fixed-site operations
typical of most general industry production facilities, but daily
(and sometimes even more frequent) inspections are necessary on
most construction sites.
The following
sections of this report describe the safety management practices
endorsed by various organizations with interest in or oversight
authority for worker protection on construction sites, demonstrate
the successes various organizations have achieved by implementing
these programs and practices, and summarize the available cost
and benefit data on these programs.
II.
CONSTRUCTION SAFETY MANAGEMENT PRACTICE AND CODES OF PRACTICE
Some agencies,
national and international organizations, and trade associations
involved in construction have developed recommendations or requirements
for management practices designed to reduce hazards and protect
the safety and health of construction workers. Exhibit 1 summarizes
these provisions in a format that permits a comparison of requirements
across organizational lines; Exhibit 2 sets forth individual requirements
in detail. The safety codes summarized in this section have been
excerpted from:
- OSHA
(29 CFR Part 1926), Construction Standards;
- Corps
of Engineers (1992), Safety and Health Requirements Manual;
- Bureau
of Reclamation (1987), Construction Safety Standards;
- Department
of Energy (1993), Construction Project Safety and Health
Management Order (draft);
- American
National Standards, Basic Elements of an Employer Program to
Provide a Safe and Healthful Work Environment, ANSI A10.38-1991;
- American
National Standard for Construction and Demolition Operations-
Safety and Health Program Requirements for Multi-Employer Projects,
ANSI
A10.33-1992;
- Association
of General Contractors (AGC) (1992), Manual of Accident
Prevention in Construction;
- International
Labour Organization (ILO) (1992), Safety and Health in
Construction: A Code of Practice; and
- Council
of the European Communities (EC) Directive 92/57/EEC (1992),
Implementation of Minimum Safety and Health Requirements at
Temporary or
Mobile Construction Sites.
As Exhibit
1 shows, most of these codes emphasize safety and health program
and plan development, hazard prevention and control, work site
inspections, and employee training. The programs, practices, and
procedures described in the standards, safety manuals, and publications
of these organizations are outlined on the following pages.
EXHIBIT
1. Overview of Construction Safety Management Practices Required
or Recommended by Major Organizations
(Note* Browsers may not display wide tables conveniently : Use
PDF's for viewing/printing)
|
PROGRAM
ELEMENTS
SPECIFICALLY
MENTIONED
|
OSHA
CONSTRUCTION
STANDARDS (29 CFR 1926)
1971
|
CORPS OF
ENGINEERS SAFETY AND HEALTH REQUIREMENTS
1992
|
BUREAU OF
RECLAMATION CONSTRUCTION SAFETY STANDARDS 1987
|
DOE CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT SAFETY AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT ORDER 5480.9
|
ANSI
A10.38
BASIC
ELEMENTS
OF
CONSTRICT-
TION PROGRAMS
1991
|
ANSI
A10.33
PROGRAM REQUIRE-
MENTS FOR MULTI- EMPLOYER PROJECTS
1992
|
ASSOCIATED
GENERAL CONTRAC-
TORS MANUAL OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION IN CONSTRUCTION 1992
|
ILO CODE
OF PRACTICE, SAFETY AND HEALTH IN CONSTRUCTION 1992
|
EC DIRECTIVE
FOR CONSTRUCTION SITES 1992
|
Safety and
Health Programs/Plans
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Safety and
Health Responsibilities and Accountability
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Employee
Involvement |
|
*
|
|
*
|
|
*
|
|
*
|
*
|
Fitness
for Duty |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Hazard
Analysis |
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Hazard
Prevention and Control/Abatement |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Self-Inspections |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
Emergency
Response Plans |
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
First
Aid/Medical Requirements |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Accident
Investigation, Reporting, and Analysis |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
Recording
and Reporting of Injuries and Illnesses |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
Training/Safety
Meetings |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
Joint
Safety Committees |
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Contractor/Subcontraction
Relationship for Safety and Health |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Exhibit
2. Safety Management Practices Reflected in the Construction Standards
and Guidelines of Major Organizations
Management Practice
|
OSHA
CONSTRUCTION
STANDARDS (29 CFR 1926)
1971
|
CORPS OF ENGINEERS SAFETY AND HEALTH REQUIREMENTS
1992
|
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CONSTRUCTION SAFETY STANDARDS 1987
|
DOE CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT SAFETY AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT ORDER 5480.9
|
ANSI
A10.38
BASIC
ELEMENTS
OF
CONSTRICT-
TION PROGRAMS
1991
|
ANSI
A10.33
PROGRAM REQUIRE-
MENTS FOR MULTI- EMPLOYER PROJECTS
1992
|
ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRAC-
TORS MANUAL OF ACCIDENT PREVENTION IN CONSTRUCTION 1992
|
ILO CODE OF PRACTICE, SAFETY AND HEALTH IN CONSTRUCTION 1992
|
EC DIRECTIVE FOR CONSTRUCTION SITES 1992
|
Safety and Health Programs/Plans
- Provisions of plan to employees
|
Employer must initiate and
maintain programs necessary to ensure safe working conditions. |
Development of a safety and health program shall be considered
for all activities other than office/administrative activities;
The employer is responsible for initiating and maintaining a safety
and health program; and
The prince contractor is to prepare and submit a written accident
plan for approval before the initiation of work
|
Prime contractor is to prepare a comprehensive written safety program
covering all aspects of on site construction operations and activities
associated with each contract.
The contractors's written safety program is to be reviewed in detail
during the preconstruction safety meeting.
Every new employee is to be given a copy of the pertinent provisions
of the contractor's safety program
|
Construction contractor is to establish and maintain a program
to protect the safety and health of all persons on the work site,
including:
- Employees; and
- Employees of other contractors and sub-contractors, visitors,
the public.
A written project safety plan must be submitted to and approved
by the construction manager prior to commencement of any activity
on the worksite. Employees shall be told of the location and means
of accessing the approved project safety plan during orientation;
plan shall be available at work site
|
Project Constructor is to have a project safety and health program
specific to the scope of the work to be performed and that applies
to all contractors and individuals;
Contractors are responsible for developing, implementing, monitoring,
and enforcing their safety and health programs, unless these requirements
are performed by a higher tier contractor; and
A special safety and health plan is to be prepared when a contractor
has established a pattern of non-compliance with the project safety
and health program and/or laws and regulations. Each employee shall
receive a printed summary of the employer's safety and health program.
|
A concise safety policy statement should be disseminated to all
managers and supervisors. A procedure manual should be developed
from that policy statement.
Project Constructor is to provide each employee and supervisor
with a summary of the project safety and health program
|
Employers should establish
a suitable program on a the safety and health of workers. |
Safety and health coordinator shall draw up a safety and health
plan setting out the rules applicable to the construction site,
taking into account the industrial activities taking place on the
site as well as extra-hazardous work operations.
Coordinator shall make any adjustments to the plan required to
take account of progress of the work or any changes that have occurred.
|
|
Safety and Health Responsibilities and Accountability
|
It shall be employer's responsibility
to initiate and maintain programs necessary to comply with this Part. |
Responsibilities and accountability of the personnel are to be
identified in an accident prevention plan; and
The prime contractor's accident prevention plan must be signed
by a representative of the contractor's project management team.
No supervisor shall decline to accept a report of injury form
a subordinate.
Individual employee responsibility for complying with safety and
health requirements is to be identified in the accident prevention
plan.
Each employee is responsible for complying with applicable safety
requirements, wearing prescribed safety equipment, preventing avoidable
accidents, and for reporting all injuries and occupationally related
illnesses to employer or supervisor.
|
The contractor is responsible for ensuring that all on-site activities,
equipment, and facilities- whether performed by the contractor,
subcontractor, or supplier--conform fully with these standards.
When the contract does not require the services of a full-time
employee, the contractor shall designate a competent and dependable
supervisory employee to administer his/her safety program. In no
case may work commence without Bureau approval of the contractor's
program.
Employees refusing or repeatedly failing to comply or supervisors
failing to enforce compliance shall be promptly terminated.
|
Construction contractor must state, in writing, that the construction
superintendent is assigned full responsibility and authority for
implementing the OSHA program.
Disciplinary procedures must be addresses in orientation of all
employees.
|
Safety and health program shall designate the individual responsible
for implementation of the program, establish procedures for coordinating
safety and health activities with other employers on job site, and
ensure that no work is performed on site unless designated competent
person is on site.
The construction employer is ultimately responsible for the implementation
of the safety and health program.
Program shall include procedures for disciplinary action for enforcement
of safety and health program.
All employees are responsible for complying with established safety
and health programs; failure to comply is basis for disciplinary
action.
|
Safety and health program must describe the responsibilities and
authority of a ll levels of supervision;
Senior Project Supervisor has final authority and responsibility
for the Project Safety and Health program; and
Senior Contractor Supervisor has the final authority and responsibility
for the Contractor Safety and Health Program.
Project Constructor is responsible for assessing qualifications
and performance of Senior Project Supervisor and Senior Contractor
Supervisor. Project Constructor shall establish disciplinary policy
and procedure for contractors, supervisors, and employees failing
to comply with program.
|
Management is responsible for accident prevention, with goals of
no accidents and lower operating costs.
Line management should be responsible for achieving the objectives
of the accident prevention program.
An individual with basic training in accident prevention should
be appointed by management to be responsible for loss control.
|
Employers should maintain conditions so that , as far as is reasonably
practical, there is no risk of accident or injury to health.
Employer should appoint qualified and experienced persons to promote
safety and health and should provide supervision that ensures that
workers will perform with due regard to their safety and health.
|
Client or supervisor shall appoint one or more coordinators for
safety and health matters.
Where a client or supervisor has appointed a coordinator for safety
and health, this does not relieve the client or the supervisor of
responsibility for safety and health responsibilities.
|
Employee Involvement |
|
Employees are to be involved in determining
the need for, and the performance of, Job Safety Analyses and Activity
Hazard Analyses. |
|
Employee involvement in the form of joint
committees required by DOE 5483.XX, OSH program foundation Order. |
|
When appropriate, employees involved in
operations should be consulted during preparation of pre-phase accident
prevention plans, and such plans should be discussed with the employees
who will perform the work |
|
Safety and health committees representative of employers and workers
shall be established;
Workers should participate in regular safety and health meetings;
Workers should have the right and the duty to participate in ensuring
safe working conditions to the extent of their control over the
equipment and methods of work; and
Arrangements such as committees should be made for the participation
of workers in ensuring safe working conditions.
|
Workers and/or their representatives shall be informed of all measures
to be taken concerning their safety and health on the construction
site.
Consultation participation of workers and/or their representatives
shall take place on matters covered by this directive.
|
Fitness for Duty
- Physical, mental, and medical qualifications
- Alcohol and drug abuse policy
- Equipment operator qualifications
|
Employer shall permit only those employees
qualified by training or experience to operate equipment and machinery |
All persons are to be physically, mentally, medically, and emotionally
qualified for performing the duties to which they are assigned.
The prevention of alcohol and drug abuse on the job is to be addressed
in the Accident Prevention Plan.
Employees found to be under the influence of or consuming alcohol,
narcotics, etc. are to be immediately re moved from the job site.
Operators of any equipment or vehicle shall be able to read and
understand signs, signals, and operating instructions.
Duty-time limitations are to be imposed on operators.
|
Employees are to be physically qualified to perform their assigned
duties in a safe manner.
Persons under the influence of alcohol or narcotics are not to
be permitted on the site.
Operators found to be under the influence of alcohol or narcotics
cannot operate equipment until satisfactory completing a medical
exam and found to be free from alcohol or drugs.
Operators of any equipment or vehicle shall be able to read and
understand signs, signals, and operating instructions.
Physical examinations are recommended for heavy equipment operators
and are required for crane and hoisting equipment operators.
|
Drug and alcohol abuse policy is to be
addressed in the work site safety orientation. |
|
|
Employees who will work safely should be identified and selected.
Preference should be given to applicants familiar with related safety
standards.
Al drivers should be required to demonstrate their driving ability
in the equipment they will be operating under actual job conditions.
Only qualified workers should be permitted to operate heavy equipment.
|
Employers are to assign workers only to employment for which they
are suited by their age, physique, state of health, and skill.
Only qualified and trained workers shall operate lifting equipment,
materials-handling and excavating equipment, and installations,
machinery and equipment.
|
|
Hazard Analysis |
|
A Job Hazard Analysis should be prepared and documented for each
position if warranted by the hazards of the job; and
Activity Hazard Analysis are to be prepared by the contractor prior
to the beginning of each major phase of work.
|
Unless covered in original plan, a supplementary detailed plan
is required prior to the start of each major phase of work.
The original and supplemental plans must include a timetable for
completing required, detailed, specific operating
|
An approved Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) is required before
commencement of work on the construction project; the PHA shall
identify:
- Anticipated construction phases;
- Types of hazards associated with anticipated operations or
phases of the project; and
- Operations or phases requiring further analysis or the design
of special protective measures.
An approved Activity Hazard Analysis (AHA) is required before
work begins on any phase of the project. The AHA:
- Identifies phase-specific hazards;
- Includes drawings and/or documentation of any corrective measures
needing to be designed by a PE or other component person;
- Identifies qualifications of competent person, or other individual
who will conduct inspection required by DOE standards or construction
project documents.
|
|
A hazard analysis is to be conducted at the initiation of a construction
project and for critical stages of work:
- Pre-phase Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) are to be conducted for
work operations performed by contractors;
- Pre-phase JHA should be developed by the contractor filed supervisory
personnel who will actually be running the job that is being pre-planned;
and
- Under no circumstances should work be allowed to begin before
the JHA has been approved by the Project Constructor
|
Supplemental safety program
for each specific job should be developed and distributed to all supervisors. |
Employer should have competent
person identify and assess health hazards of different operations. |
The coordinator for safety and
health shall implement the principles of prevention and safety during
the project planning stage for each stage of work. |
Hazard Prevention and Control/Abatement
|
The use of any machinery,
tool, material, or equipment which is not in compliance with any applicable
requirement of this Part is prohibited. Such machine tool, material,
or equipment shall either be tagged or locked out or shall be physically
removed from work site |
Identified safety and health issues and deficiencies, and the actions,
timetable, and responsibility for correcting those deficiencies,
shall be records in inspection reports. Follow-up inspections to
ensure correction of any identified deficiencies shall be conducted
and documented in a like manner.
Means must be provided to record in inspection reports those safety
and health deficiencies identified, along with corrective measures,
timetable for resolution, and responsibility for correcting deficiencies.
Follow-up inspections must be conducted to ensure hazard abatement.
No person shall be required or instructed to work in surroundings
under conditions that are unsafe or dangerous to health.
|
Contractor must ensure that all activities, equipment, and facilities
comply with standards.
Contractor must discuss, in detail, measures to control hazards
incident to major phases of work under contract in preconstruction
safety meeting.
Contractor shall not require any employee to work under conditions
that are hazardous or dangerous to safety or health.
|
A system is to be developed and maintained for tracking the status
of all hazards for which corrective action is not immediate or that
falls outside of the project scope.
All identified hazards shall be immediately corrected or eliminated.
If this is not possible:
- Interim control measures are to be implemented
- Warning signs are to be posted at location of hazard; and
- Employees are to be informed of hazard's location and the required
interim control measures.
Stop work authority contained in DOE 5483.XX, foundation OSH program
Order.
|
Employers must establish procedures to ensure correction or abatement
of all hazardous conditions and to ensure compliance with safety
and health program.
Construction employer shall monitor effectiveness of program and
take action to correct deficiencies, including development of procedures
to address particular hazards.
Supervisors, foremen, and construction safety and health coordinators
are to stop work that could place employees, equipment, or property
in imminent danger.
|
Written reports describing noncompliance with safety and health
standards, project safety and health programs, and hazardous conditions
are to be submitted to the Senior Project Supervisor;
Senior Project Supervisor is to ensure the correction and abatement
of all hazardous conditions and compliance with the safety and health
program and is to monitor regularly for potentially hazardous conditions;
and
All hazards or potentially hazardous conditions and non-compliances
observed during daily inspections are to be documented and corrected.
Imminent danger conditions are to be reported for immediate correction.
|
Unsafe acts/conditions should be corrected immediately
. Adequate funds should be allocated for traffic control, evacuation
protective systems, barricades, signs, PPE, adequate work platforms,
housekeeping, and other items necessary for the protection of employees,
property, equipment, materials, and the general public.
|
All appropriate precautions should be taken to ensure that the
workplace is safe and without risk for injury to worker safety and
health, and to protect persons present at or in the vicinity of
the site from risks. When acquiring plant equipment or machinery,
employers should ensure that it takes account of ergonomic principles,
safety, and health.
Employers should have a competent person assess health hazards
and take appropriate preventive or control measures.
Preventive measures should eliminate or reduce the hazard at the
source whenever possible.
Buildings, plants, equipment, tools, machinery or workplaces in
which a dangerous defect has been found should not be used until
the defect is remedied.
Employer should take immediate steps to stop work in cases of imminent
danger.
|
|
Self-Inspections |
Safety programs shall provide
for frequent and regular inspections of job sites, material, and equipment. |
Frequent safety inspections are to be performed by competent personnel-to
include work sites, material, and equipment;
Contractor Quality Control personnel are to conduct and document
daily inspections; and
Follow-up inspections shall be conducted and documented.
|
Contractor is to ensure frequent and regular safety inspections
of work sites, materials, equipment by competent employees; and
Detailed written inspection records are to be maintained.
|
Daily inspections of active construction work sites are to be conducted;
All noted hazards and corrective actions are to be documented in
required daily inspection records;
At least weekly, construction manager is to accompany construction
contractor on one of these daily work site safety inspections;
For all projects valued at more than $500,000, project manager
is to conduct inspections on at least a weekly basis; and for projects
valued at less than $500,000, an inspection schedule is to be prepared
that assures that a representative sample of ongoing construction
projects is inspected on at least a monthly basis.
|
At least daily inspections
are required for detection of hazardous conditions or work performance. |
The Senior Contractor Supervisor, or representative, is to conduct,
or cause to have conducted, daily inspections.
Written reports of these inspections are required.
|
Periodic job-site inspections
should be made. |
Employers should arrange for regular inspections by competent persons
at suitable intervals.
Buildings, plants, equipment, tools, machinery, workplaces, and
systems of work are to be covered by inspections.
|
Safety and health coordinator
shall coordinate arrangements to check that the working procedures
ate being implemented correctly. |
Emergency Response Plans |
|
Emergency response capabilities are to be addressed in the accident
plan.
Written emergency plans are to be reviewed with all affected employees,
and the plans tested to ensure their effectiveness.
Emergency telephone numbers and reporting instructions must be
posted at the work-site
|
Contractor's safety program is to consider and incorporate provisions
for safely and expeditiously handling possible emergency situations.
Responsibilities for handling emergencies are to be assigned and
proper training provided for personnel handling emergencies.
Warning systems must be installed and tested and emergency telephone
numbers and reporting instructions posted at the job-site
|
Employee safety and health
orientation must include information on firefighting and other emergency
procedures. |
The employer's safety and health
program must include and emergency response plan specifying procedures
for handling serious injuries, fatalities, structural failures, or
other emergencies, including administration of first-aid and other
medical treatment. |
A project-specific emergency plan and communications system is
to be prepared by the Project Constructor; and
Procedures are to be described for events involving serious injuries,
fatalities, structural failures, and other emergencies.
|
At the start of each job, names and locations of nearby emergency
medical facilities should be contacted to explain nature of work
and type of injuries that could occur.
All supervisors should be knowledgeable about emergency procedures.
Contact information for emergency personnel should be posted at
job-site
|
Worker training should include
training in emergency procedures and location of first-aid facilities. |
|
First Aid/Medical Requirements |
Employer shall ensure availability of medical personnel for advice
and consultation; provisions shall be made prior to startups for
prompt medical attention in case of serious injury.
First aid supplies shall be accessible when required.
|
Prior to start of work, arrangements shall be made for medical
facilities and personnel to provide prompt medical attention and
consultation.
Where medical facility of physician is not accessible within 5
minutes to a group of 2 or more employees, at least 2 employees
per shift shall be first-aid and CPR certified.
Individuals who work alone in remote areas must be trained in first-aid.
Where fewer than 100 persons are employed, at least on e 16-unit
first -aid kit/25 persons is required.
Where 100-300 persons are employed, a first-aid station with first
-aid attendant is required.
Where 300 or more persons are employed, an infirmary and properly
equipped emergency vehicle or mobile first-aid unit is required.
A full time RN, EMT, or LPN shall be assigned to the infirmary.
Where 1,000 or more persons are employed, the full-time services
of a licensed physician are required; an EMT in direct communication
with a physician is unavailable.
First-aid stations and infirmaries shall be equipped according
to the proximity of other medical services.
|
Prior to start of operations, contractor shall arrange for prompt
medical attention in conformance with this standard. At a minimum,
contractor will provide:
- Where fewer than 100 workers/shift, first-aid supplies in the
form of one 16-unit kit/25 employees, and at least one employee
certified in first-aid per shift.
- Where 300-1,000 workers are employed, an infirmary equipped
to handle outpatient treatment and staffed by nurse or EMT full
time.
- Where more than 1,000 workers are employed, infirmary equipped
to handle short-term inpatient care, with ambulance service, and
staffed by full-time physician and adequate nursing staff.
- Dependable ambulance services, regardless of project size, with
certified vehicle operators capable of administering first-aid.
|
First aid and medical requirements
must be addressed in orientation of all employees. |
Where applicable, program shall
establish procedures for first-aid and to address occupational health
and environmental hazards. |
First-aid equipment needs will
vary by size and location of job. At least one properly trained person
per job-site should have first-aid responsibilities and supplies. |
Employer should provide access to occupational health services
consistent with the objectives and principles of Occupational Health
Services Convention, 1985 (No.161) and Recommendation (No.171)
Employer should ensure that first-aid, including trained personnel,
is available. National laws or regulations should prescribe manner
for providing first-aid services.
|
Employer must ensure that first
aid can be provided and that staff trained to provide it can be called
upon at any time. Address and phone number of local emergency services
must be clearly displayed. |
|
Accident Investigation,
Reporting, and Analysis |
Must be performed in accordance
with 29 CFR 1904 |
All accidents that occur incident to the operation, project, or
facility will be investigated, reported, and analyzed.
On contract operations, prime contractor must record and report
all accident exposure and experience of contractor and his/her subcontractors.
At minimum, these will be OSHA 200
Logs. Records of exposure to toxic substances shall be kept, and
employees and designated authority notified of any excessive exposure.
Prime contractor must also maintain access to project's Workers'
Compensation Claims Report.
A daily record of first-aid treatment not otherwise reportable
must be maintained on prescribed forms. Employees are responsible
for reporting injuries and illnesses to the supervisor as soon as
possible. Supervisor must report these to designated authority within
24 hours.
|
Serious accidents are to be reported immediately. Contractor shall,
when ordered by Bureau, conduct a complete independent investigation
at own expense, and submit written report of findings.
Non-serious accidents/incidents to be reported immediately and
investigated. A comprehensive narrative report and Bureau accident
form must be submitted within 3 working days. Such accidents/incidents
include all other accidents except first-aid cases and property
damage amounting to between $2,500 and $250,000.
Potentially serious accidents must be reported immediately. The
equipment and/or work site involved must be secured until an investigation
has been completed by the contractor. Report to Bureau must be submitted
within 5 days.
|
Contractor is to comply with the accident investigation, reporting,
and analysis requirements identified in DOE 5483.XX or contained
in contract documents. (These conform fully with OSHA reporting
and investigation requirements.)
Procedures for reporting accidents and incidents are addressed
in the orientation for all employees.
|
Health and Safety Program shall contain: Procedures for recording
and reporting incidents in accordance with OSHA requirements;
- Procedures for investigating job-related accidents and illness
to determine possible cause;
- Specific designation of management person responsible for review
of injuries and illness reports; and
- Procedures to determine that accident, injury, and illness records
are accurate and complete.
The safety and health program must designate procedures for investigating
job-related illnesses to determine possible cause and a management
person responsible for viewing injury and illness reports.
|
Senior Project Supervisor shall maintain all illness and accident
records for entire project with sub-records of same for each Contractor.
This shall be kept in a daily Project Safety and Health Log.
Senior Contractor Supervisor, or representative, is to ensure that
all accidents ate investigated and measures implemented to prevent
recurrence.
Safety and health program to provide for accurate and complete
accident, injury, and illness records;
A project Safety and Health Record/Log is to be maintained; and
All injuries, illnesses, and accidents for the entire project are
to be recorded with sub-records of same for each contractor.
|
All accidents, especially serious injuries and fatalities, should
be investigated to determine cause and future prevention. Employees
are expected to report all injuries immediately and contractor is
advised to record, post, and report incident as required by Federal
and State law.
Employees should report injuries immediately to supervisor. Injuries
should be recorded on appropriate forms and posted as required.
The contractor should make provisions to comply with applicable
Federal and State OSHA requirements for reporting fatal injuries
and accidents requiring hospitalization
|
All occupational accidents and diseases should be reported in accordance
with national laws or regulations.
All accidents to workers causing loss of life or serious injury
should be reported...and an investigation of the accidents(s) should
be made.
Other injuries causing incapacity for work for periods of time...should
be reported.
Dangerous occurrences such as explosions, collapse of buildings,
cranes, or other structures should be reported to the public authority
even if personal injury has not occurred.
|
|
Training/Safety Meetings |
Employer shall avail him/herself
of training programs provided by the Secretary of Labor. Employer
shall provide job-specific training. Specialized training is specifically
required for those handling toxic substances, plants or animals and
for employees entering confined spaces. |
Employees must receive indoctrination and continuing training.
All OSH programs, documents, and labels must be provided in language
understood by the worker.
Minimum contents of that training are specified:
- General OSH policy and pertinent provisions of Corps manual;
- Accident-reporting requirements;
- Facilities and procedures for emergency response and medical
treatment;
- Unsafe conditions reporting and correcting; and
- Job-specific hazards and control measures.
Safety meetings shall be held at least weekly for all workers,
and meetings must be documented. Employees shall be trained to handle
emergency situations. Safety meetings are to be conducted at least
once a month for all supervisors; once a week by supervisors or
foremen for all workers.
Meetings shall include safety and health training, review of past
activities, and planning for new/changed operations
|
On-site supervisors, including foreman, are to receive an annual
4-hour classroom review of applicable safety and health requirements.
Contractor shall provide first-aid training for all contractor foremen
so that they maintain current first-aid certification.
Each employee shall receive training in the recognition and avoidance
of job-specific hazards prior to initiating job assignment. On-site
training will be provided to those handling specific hazardous materials
or tools;
Scheduled monthly safety meetings with the Contracting Officer's
Representative are to be held to review the effectiveness of the
contractor's safety effort, to resolve safety and health problems,
and provide a forum for planning safe future construction activities;
Supervisors are to conduct regularly scheduled meetings at least
monthly; and
A minimum of one "on-the-job" or "tool box" safety meeting is to
be conducted weekly for employees by each field supervisor or foreman.
|
Each employee must be trained, experienced, and/or certified as
having the skills and knowledge needed to perform assigned tasks
safely.
Each employee is to receive initial work site safety orientations
and continued safety and health training;
Pre-phase training is to be conducted and documented for all employees
on the affected work crews; training shall be based on the AHA for
that phase;
"Tool Box" safety training is to be conducted and documented at
least weekly for all employees on the work site
Additional pre-phase safety training must be conducted for new
employees, under changing site conditions, or at the discretion
of the construction manager if deemed necessary to reinforce project
safety requirements.
All training records are to be maintained by the construction
contractor on the construction work site
|
Construction employer shall be responsible for employee safety
and health training. This shall include:
- Supervisory Training;
- New-Hire Training;
- Job-Specific Training;
- Site-specific training; and
- Safety meetings (to be conducted on a regularly scheduled periodic
basis).
|
Contractors are responsible for the safety and health training
of their employees.
Supervisory employees are to be trained to carry out their safety
and health responsibilities.
Non-supervisory employee training shall include:
- New-hire orientation;
- Job-specific training;
- Site-specific training
- Safety meetings.
Safety meetings shall be held for all non-supervisory working
employees to provide safety training and compliance review on a
regularly scheduled, periodic basis.
|
Training is an important responsibility of management.
Supervisors should be competent instructors and should be given
supervisory training.
Employees should receive orientation in company's safety policies,
craft training, and job-specific training.
Pre-Job Meeting: Management and safety staff discuss safety after
bid documents are received.
Start of Job Meeting: Supervisory personnel review safety plans
and delegate responsibilities for safety.
Supervisory Meetings: Held on a regular basis for review of accidents
and hazardous conditions.
Tool Box Safety Talks: Held regularly with employees for review
of safe methods, accidents, and near accidents.
|
Safety delegates and safety and health committee members should
be trained.
All workers should be suitably instructed in the hazards connected
with their work and environment and in measures for the Prevention
and control, and protection against, those hazards.
Training should be provided in language understood by the worker.
Specialized training needs should be identified and training provided.
|
|
Joint Safety Committees |
|
|
|
Employer/ employee OSH Committees
are required by DOE 5483.XX, foundation OSH program Order. |
|
|
|
Employers should establish committees
with representatives of workers and management, or make other arrangements
consistent with national laws and regulations, for the participation
of workers in ensuring safe working conditions. |
|
Contractor/Subcontraction
Relationship for Safety and Health |
The Prime contractor and any subcontractor may make their own arrangements
with respect to obligations which might be more appropriately treated
on a job-site rather than individually... In no case shall the prime
contractor be relieved of overall responsibility for compliance
with the requirements of this Part for all work performed under
the contract.
To the extent that a subcontractor of any tier agrees to perform
any part of the contract, he also assumes responsibility for complying
with the standards in this Part. Thus, prime contractor assumes
the entire responsibility..and subcontractor assumes responsibility
with respect to his portion of the work.
|
Requires prime contractor t o include subcontracted work in Accident
Prevention Plan as well as measures contractor will take to control
hazards. Prime contractor shall coordinate and control subcontractor
work and shall specify requirements for subcontractor to carry out
Accident Prevention Plan.
Plan is to be job-specific and include work to be performed by
subcontractors and measures to be taken by contractor to control
hazards associated with materials, etc., provided by suppliers.
|
Contractor is responsible for ensuring that all on-site activities,
equipment, and facilities, including those of subcontractors, conform
fully with requirements of the Bureau.
Contractors must include provisions for compliance with the requirements
of the manual in the terms and conditions of all contracts, subcontracts,
and supply contracts.
|
Contractor's safety program must protect the safety and health
of all persons on site; including subcontractors, and must assure
compliance by all work site subcontractors with DOE Order 5483.XX
and safety program requirements.
Constructions contractor must coordinate with project subcontractors
and other site contractors concerning those OSH program elements
addressing hazards.
|
Safety and health program shall
establish procedures for coordinating safety and health activities
with other employees on site. |
A pre-phase planning meeting shall be held to coordinate and assign
responsibility for all items identified in the hazard analysis;
all affected contractors must attend.
Senior contractor, supervisor or designated representative shall:
- Evaluate contractor safety and health programs and monitor their
implementation
- Ensure contractor compliance with A10.33 and abatement of hazardous
conditions; and
- Audit contractor safety and health documents at least monthly.
|
Prime contractor advised to
review subcontractor safety program and history before bidding and
during construction; to include subcontractor areas in inspections
and audits; and to require subs to correct any recognized hazards. |
Principal contractor should
be responsible for planning and coordinating safety and health measures
and for ensuring compliance. If principal contractor is not present
at site, should nominate competent person to fulfill that responsibility
on contractor's behalf |
The safety and health coordinator shall coordinate implementation
of the plan by employers and self-employed persons and ensure that
the principles of safety and prevention are applied in a consistent
manner.
The coordinator shall organize cooperation between employers, including
successive employers on the same site, with a view toward protecting
workers and preventing accidents and occupational health hazards.
|
Safety and Health Programs/Plans
Authors writing
in the trade literature and in academic publications agree that
the starting point for any program designed to foster safety on
construction work sites is the commitment of management to safety
and health. This means that management must consider worker protection
the company's top priority and be willing to spend time and money
on program development, safety equipment, and employee training.
One of the
best ways management can demonstrate its commitment to safety is
the development of a comprehensive, written safety and health program
that is performance oriented and general enough to cover the complete
range of projects conducted by the company or organization. This
document should establish and communicate a clear goal for the program
and define objectives for meeting that goal. To unequivocally demonstrate
its commitment, top management must actively participate and be
"visible" during program implementation.
Copies of
the document outlining the program should be distributed to all
employees. The written information should include the basics of
personal protective equipment, the proper use of tools and power
equipment, safe work practices, and any company policies that exceed
OSHA requirements (e.g., employees must wear hard hats from project
start to finish, even if there is no threat of injury from falling
objects). The written program should also outline procedures for
formally evaluating or auditing the occupational safety and health
program's effectiveness at least once a year.
A written,
site-specific safety plan should also be kept at each work site
At a minimum, this plan should include information on safety responsibilities,
emergency procedures, and provisions for hazard communication, accident
prevention, inspections, grounded electrical systems, record keeping,
personal protective equipment, and housekeeping. Many employers
append operation-specific safety procedures for various phases of
construction activities, e.g., hoisting and rigging, or demolition.
This plan should be readily available to all employees at the work
site
All of the
organizations whose programs are summarized in Exhibit 2 require
that the prime contractor (also called the construction employer
or constructor) develop a safety and health program and safe operating
procedures. Although the requirements of each plan vary, most designate
administrative procedures, responsible personnel, methods of controlling
and coordinating the work of subcontractors, inspection plans, specific
safety programs (e.g., fire protection, fall protection), and plans
for conducting hazard analyses as the project progresses.
The corresponding
OSHA requirement (29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1)) does not require a written
safety and health program.
Safety and Health Responsibilities and Accountability
To ensure
that safety is consistently given priority in decision-making, the
responsibilities of each member of the organization--from top management
to individual construction worker--must be spelled out in the safety
and health program. But merely assigning responsibility does not
suffice: each person must be held accountable for his/her safety
performance, and each individual assigned such responsibilities
must be given adequate authority and resources to meet them. Control
systems to ensure that responsibilities are being met must therefore
be in place. There are different ways of achieving this objective:
some companies require that the recordable injury rate for each
supervisor be factored into annual review and promotion decisions,
while others use a formal tracking system that allows supervisors
with good safety records to earn bonuses (LaBar 1992; Walters 1983).
Employees must
also be held accountable for complying with safety policies and
procedures. The company's overall program should contain a disciplinary
component that is clearly expressed, and employees who violate safety
procedures should be subject to disciplinary action. The program
should establish a hierarchy of disciplinary measures, beginning
with verbal and written warnings, proceeding to formal meetings
with management, followed by suspension, and, ultimately, by termination.
As Exhibit
2 shows, all of the organizations whose policies were reviewed
for this study have requirements governing the designation of personnel
responsible for project safety. The Associated General Contractors
(AGC) Manual of Accident Prevention in Construction states
simply that "line management should be responsible for reviewing
the objectives of the accident prevention program," while the
Corps of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual
states that the responsibilities of all personnel involved in the
worker protection program must be set forth in writing, and that
each employee's area of accountability must be delineated in the
accident prevention plan.
The corresponding
OSHA requirement (29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1)) is nonspecific on this point.
Employee
Involvement
There is general
agreement in the literature and among safety professionals that
employee involvement in the design and operation of the safety and
health program is critically important. Workers are the ultimate
"shareholders" in work site safety and health; their familiarity
with their jobs and with conditions at the site can translate into
a unique contribution to safety and health decision-making and to
accident prevention. Informed workers who are involved in the program
assume responsibility for conducting their work safely and for fostering
safe work practices across the site. Employee involvement can take
a variety of forms: participation in the development of safety programs
and in workplace inspections, membership on joint labor/management
committees, and active participation in accident and "near-miss"
investigations.
Many of the
organizations whose programs are outlined in Exhibit
2 actively encourage employee participation. For example, the
International Labour Organization (ILO), the Council of the European
Communities (EC), the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Energy,
and the ANSI standard for multi-employer work sites all stress the
importance of employee involvement. Joint labor/management committees
are required by the Department of Energy's major occupational safety
and health Order (DOE 5483.XX, still in draft) and are encouraged
by the ILO, while the Corps of Engineers and the ANSI multi-employer
standard both recommend employee input in the development of job
safety analyses and activity hazard analyses.
There are no
specific requirements for employee involvement in OSHA's construction
standards.
Fitness for Duty
The construction
environment is complex, physically demanding, and hazardous, and
workers engaged in construction operations must be physically, mentally,
and emotionally qualified to perform their jobs safely. Employee
fitness can affect the worker's own safety as well as that of coworkers.
Most of the policies outlined in Exhibit 2
make at least a general statement on the importance of overall fitness;
some standards, manuals, and codes also specifically prohibit alcohol
and drug use on site, and some set specific requirements for operators
of specialized equipment, e.g., cranes and excavators.
OSHA has a
general requirement (29 CFR 1926.20(b)(4)) stating that employers
shall permit only qualified employees to operate machinery and equipment.
Hazard
Analysis
Hazard identification
begins with analyses of the specific hazards associated with various
operations. Through a study of all work site conditions as well
as of each worker's job and each major phase of activity, work site
analyses identify the specific safety, health, and ergonomic hazards
associated with a particular operation or process. When the tasks
performed by workers assigned to a specific job are analyzed, the
result is a "Job Hazard Analysis" (JHA) or "Job Safety
Analysis" (JSA); a preliminary review of a major phase of project
activity is called an "Activity Hazard Analysis," or AHA.
Some organizations also mandate a "Preliminary Hazard Analysis,"
or PHA; by definition, a PHA is performed before any work on the
project begins.
The objectives
of hazard analysis are to:
- Identify
the hazards associated with a particular job, work activity, or
phase of the project;
- Identify
the control measures and procedures necessary to protect employees
from these hazards;
- Identify
activities or phases of work that require further analysis or
the development of specifically designed protective measures;
and
- Designate
and identify the qualifications of the competent person, authority,
or engineer who will conduct work site inspections.
The standards
and codes of practice developed by the Corps, the Bureau of Reclamation,
the Department of Energy, and ANSI require that each contractor
responsible for conducting a particular phase of work (e.g., trenching,
concrete work, and masonry) develop an operation- or phase-specific
preliminary hazard analysis describing the hazards associated with
that phase of the project, methods of reducing or eliminating them,
equipment to be used and inspection requirements for equipment,
and phase-specific training requirements.
OSHA has no
corresponding requirements.
Hazard
Prevention and Control/Abatement
Managing work
site hazards effectively is perhaps the single most important element
in reducing occupational injuries and fatalities. It is also essential
that safe work procedures be established and communicated to employees.
In the dynamic atmosphere of a construction work site, hazard prevention
and control require careful planning, analysis of the hazards associated
with each major phase of the project (see "Hazard
Analysis," above), the design and application of the controls
necessary to eliminate or mitigate identified hazards, and routine
inspections of the work site and enforcement of safety rules to
ensure that equipment is being maintained and that site conditions
pose no unnecessary risks.
Provisions
must also be made to abate any hazards identified through implementation
of corrective actions; in all but a few cases, abatement should
occur immediately so that work can continue safely. In those cases
where immediate hazard abatement is not possible, interim measures
that provide employees with full protection should be implemented,
and signs should be posted to warn employees of the danger.
Although 29
CFR 1926 does not address hazard prevention and control by name,
it does contain a few provisions--such as those for frequent inspections
and housekeeping--that address this issue (see, for example, 29
CFR 1926.20(b)(2) and 1926.25). As Exhibit 2 shows, most of the
codes and standards developed later by other organizations contain
specific requirements or recommendations addressing hazard prevention
and control.
Inspections
Frequent work
site inspections are essential to maintaining safe conditions on
construction sites. These should be conducted by competent persons
and should include inspections of the work site, equipment, and
all materials to be used in performance of the job. Workers should
be encouraged to report unsafe conditions to their supervisors promptly,
and any unsafe practices identified should be immediately corrected.
Many organizations
recommend or require daily inspections because of the dynamic nature
of construction work sites, and some require documentation of the
results, along with immediate correction of any deficiencies identified.
OSHA, the ILO, the EC, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the AGC do
not specify inspection frequencies, suggesting only that such audits
be conducted at "frequent" or "periodic" intervals.
Emergency
Response Plans
Because hazards
may develop quickly on construction work sites and accidents may
involve more than one employee, emergency response planning is essential.
Most of the publications reviewed for this project require that
the accident prevention or safety plan specifically address foreseeable
emergencies; most also require that all employees at the site be
made aware of appropriate emergency procedures. Some, such as the
Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation manuals, require that
employees be trained in these procedures and that the procedures
be tested, through drills or other exercises, to ensure their effectiveness.
Emergency telephone numbers (e.g., to obtain medical aid, police
assistance) must generally be available at the work site
First-Aid/Medical
Requirements
First-aid
facilities are common on construction sites; however, the presence
of medical personnel or medical facilities is generally reserved
for exceptionally large sites or for those located in remote areas.
All of the safety manuals and standards reviewed, except the ANSI
multi-employer standard, require that first aid be available. Requirements
range from the broad statement that procedures for first aid shall
be established (in the ANSI standard (A10.38)) to the detailed requirements
of the Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation manuals, which
reflect the fact that these agencies often oversee projects in remote
areas and must therefore provide on-site medical facilities and
personnel.
Accident
Investigation, Reporting, and Analysis
Almost all
of the organizations whose programs are summarized in Exhibit 2
recognize the importance of accurate accident reporting, investigation,
and analysis of reports to identify trends and determine the root
causes of workplace accidents. Some go beyond OSHA requirements
and mandate or recommend that the accident history of each contractor
and subcontractor be reported separately (see, for example, the
Corps of Engineers Manual, the draft DOE Order, and the ANSI
multi-employer standard). These more specific accident recording
and reporting requirements recognize that the failure to break down
injury statistics by contractor and subcontractor can mask the poor
safety performance of particular contractors or subcontractors;
the maintenance of separate statistics for each contractor and subcontractor
is a practice recommended by the construction safety literature
and increasingly practiced in the industry. An equally important
element of accurate reporting is consistency among contractors and
subcontractors in ways of defining lost-time injuries.
Training/Safety
Meetings
Training is
an essential component of any safety and health program; its effectiveness
often depends on the degree to which it is tailored to the hazards
of the particular work site and job. Supervisors, who have day-to-day
responsibility for safety and health, must be trained in hazard
identification and control as well as in methods of encouraging
safe practices and providing effective feedback.
Almost all
of the organizations whose policies are outlined in Exhibit
2 recognize the importance of employee training, although some
spell out their requirements in greater detail than others. Several
require that different kinds of training be offered at different
times during the project. For example, some employers may require
an initial, formal orientation session, followed by informal weekly
"tool box" meetings that address safety or health topics
directly relevant to the work being undertaken at the time. The
Corps, Bureau of Reclamation, both ANSI standards, and the AGC also
require supervisor safety training, and several of these groups
mandate job-specific training for high-hazard work assignments or
conditions (e.g., toxic substance handling, unusual heat or cold,
exposure to ionizing radiation). A feature unique among the training
programs analyzed is a requirement in the draft DOE construction
safety management Order that all employees engaged in a particular
phase of a project receive training in the hazards identified in
a phase-specific Activity Hazard Analysis. On Corps, DOE, and Bureau
of Reclamation sites, attendance at training sessions must also
be documented.
Joint
Safety and Health Committees
Joint labor-management
safety committees provide a frequently used and widely recommended
vehicle for encouraging employee involvement in the safety and health
program. Such committees provide a means for employees to actively
participate in safety and health decision-making, receive additional
training in hazard identification and control methods, and share
their knowledge of hazards and related problems with management.
Informed workers also provide an excellent way of leveraging scarce
occupational safety and health resources effectively. For example,
members of some committees carry out regular inspections of the
construction site and make recommendations for hazard control. For
joint committees to be successful, they must encourage and reward
open discussion of health and safety issues and candid two-way communication
between workers and management. These committees should have direct
access to top management, hold regularly scheduled meetings, work
from an established agenda, keep minutes, and distribute health
and safety information to the employees they represent.
Contractor/Subcontractor
Relationship for Safety and Health Activities
Maintaining
safety and health on construction projects is complicated by the
presence on site of many employers, work crews, and tradespeople,
as well as by the ever-changing nature of construction work. The
contractual and working relationships among these entities and individuals
are also complex, and lines of authority, reporting relationships,
and work activities must be carefully coordinated if appropriate
attention is to be paid to worker safety and health.
To ensure overall project safety, the trend in recent years has
been toward greater prime contractor responsibility for subcontractor
performance in this area. The justification for this trend is that
on the multi-employer project typical of construction work, it is
important that safety be uniformly and consistently emphasized by
all employers on the site and that the same safety and health policies
and procedures be enforced across the site.
Prime contractors
are increasingly reviewing the safety records and programs of subcontractors
before contracting with them; in some cases, the prime contractor
develops a project-specific safety plan that is binding on all subcontractors
working on the project. In other cases, the prime contractor conducts
weekly safety talks with various subcontractor work crews. Another
approach is to have the prime contractor conduct frequent (daily
to weekly) inspections of subcontractor work areas and to stop work
if serious deficiencies are identified.
All of the
publications and standards surveyed for this study address contractor/subcontractor
relationships, although the amount of attention dedicated to the
topic varies widely. OSHA has no requirements for contractor/subcontractor
coordination for the industry as a whole, although specific construction
standards, e.g., the construction industry Hazard Communication
Standard, contain requirements for multi-employer coordination.
Summary
As demonstrated
by this review of the requirements and recommendations of the major
organizations involved in construction, increasing emphasis is being
placed on the implementation of a defined set of safety management
practices; this trend is exemplified by the manual developed by
the Corps of Engineers. The following section of this study reports
on the effectiveness of a number of health and safety programs already
in place.
Although the
development of safety and health programs, plans, and procedures
is the essential first step in construction safety and health, effective
implementation and enforcement of these policies must follow if
measurable results are to be achieved. The Corps of Engineers has
a reputation for effective oversight of its projects and for achieving
accident
and injury rates
substantially below the national average for comparable construction
work. This reputation is backed up by hard evidence: OSHA recently
reported (OSHA 1992) that the Corps achieved a lost workday case rate
of between 1.34 and 1.54 per 100 full-time workers in the period 1984-1988.
In other words, by insisting that all of its contractors develop,
implement, and enforce comprehensive worker protection programs on
all of its sites, the Corps of Engineers achieved a lost-workday case
rate 70 to 80 percent below the national average for the construction
industry in the same period (6.8 to 6.9 cases per 100 full-time workers).
To determine what practices the Corps actually implements on site,
Meridian interviewed personnel from the Corps National Office (personal
communications, Donald Pettenger, February 1993).
First, the
Corps uses the Federal Acquisition Regulations, which govern
Corps contracts, to incorporate safety into the procurement process
from the very beginning. For exarnple, it requires that its contractors
"have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and
operations controls, and technical skills...including...safety programs"
in place, and that all contracts include a clause requiring compliance
with the Corps' Health and Safety Requirements Manual. Inclusion
of this clause gives the Contracting Officer authority to stop work
if a contractor fails to take corrective action for any hazard that
poses a serious or imminent danger to employee safety and health.
The Corps'
direct involvement with a contractor's construction safety management
program begins even before work is initiated. A contractor must
submit and receive Corps
approval of its accident prevention plan before work on a site can
begin. Hazard analysis for each phase of the project must also be
submitted before work can be initiated on that phase. In addition,
an accident report must be filed for all lost work-time injuries,
a record must be kept of the contractor's self-inspections, and
lost-time injury and illness rates are tracked by the Corps on a
project-by-project basis.
In addition,
every project has an assigned Corps quality control officer whose
duties include project safety. For larger projects, the quality
control officer is generally on site at all times during the project;
even for smaller projects, he/she can be expected to inspect the
site at least once a week. The work of each quality control officer
is also routinely and regularly reviewed by a safety professional
in each Corps district, and there are trained and experienced safety
professionals at each level of the Corps hierarchy.
Thus, the Corps
ensures compliance with its construction safety management requirements
through:
- Contractual
requirements with stop work authority if the requirements are
not met;
- Review
of written plans before initiation and at each phase of a project;
- Review
of self-inspection records;
- Accident
report reviews;
- On- site
inspections; and
- Higher
level reviews of the work of on-site inspectors.
The Corps has
found that rigorous implementation and enforcement of its policies
ensure that construction safety and health goes beyond mere lip service.
Other success
stories from the literature include:
- Bechtel
Construction Company, of San Francisco, which employs some 32,000
workers and has won the National Contractors Association's annual
accident pre vention award in 35 of the last 36 years. More than
130 of Bechtel's projects around the world have exceeded 1 million
person-hours of work without a lost time accident. Bechtel works
only with subcontractors who have implemented safety and health
programs and have maintained good safety records. Once Bechtel
has selected a subcontractor, it develops a site safety and health
program that is contractually binding on all employers on the
project; if a subcontractor does not comply with these safety
requirements, Bechtel cancels the contract. Bechtel's safety manager
states that requiring every contractor to have a written safety
and health program is a top priority: "Just by having a program
and practicing what they preach, [contractors] are going to eliminate
some accidents"(LaBar 1992).
- BE&K
Construction Company, a general contractor based in Birmingham
and em ploying 5,700 workers, has received special honors for
projects conducted on sev eral sites, e.g., the firm's expansion
of a DuPont titanium dioxide plant in DeLisle, Mississippi, earned
the site membership (at the Star level) in OSHA's Voluntary Protection
Program. At another DuPont site, BE&K employees have not had
a lost-workday case in more than seven years. The company's injury/illness
incidence rate is less than one-third of the industry average
of 14.2 per 100 full- time employees. BE&K's safety director
notes that "you can't have the top guy saying safety's important
and hold the bottom guy [the laborer] responsible without having
the people in the middle-- program superintendents, foremen, and
line supervisors-- believing it, too. We hold them responsible.
I can tell you the recordable injury rate for any supervisor in
this company." BE&K refuses to accept the usual excuses
for the high accident rate in this industry; instead, the company's
safety director says that "accidents are not surprises out
of the blue. We know what the hazards are, and we know how to
control them. It's time for the industry to do what it knows is
the right thing to do. We're continuously striving for safety
excellence, and it makes sense for everyone else in the industry,
too" ( LaBar 1992).
- Brown &
Root Braun, the petroleum and chemicals business unit of Brown
& Root, Inc., a subsidiary of Dallas-based Halliburton Co.,
has established a safety enhancement program designed to engineer
fall hazards out of a project before construction begins. Practices
employed in the 100 Percent Fall Prevention Program at this company
include the use of remotely actuated pin extractors and full body
protection harnesses. Pin extractors reduce fall exposures by
eliminating the need for workers to climb or be lifted to the
top of a vessel to disconnect rigging after a lift has been completed.
Large load pin extraction is performed hydraulically, and small
pin extraction is completed using ropes (one rope releases a safety
latch and the second extracts the pin). The company strives to
provide continuous fall protection, using retractable lines, for
all work performed at elevated heights. Compared with the older
waist-belt harnesses, a full-body harness redistributes loads
associated with fall deceleration across the body's pelvic region,
dramatically reducing the risk of injury. Safety innovations such
as these have enabled Brown & Root Braun to maintain a safety
record for recordable injuries that is more than five times better
than the national average (Occupational Health & Safety 1992).
- The Mecklenburg
County (NC) Engineering Department, a 200-person group responsible
for drainage, landfill and other maintenance and construction
jobs, reduced the number of work- related injuries by 52 percent
and cut associated costs by 92 percent in fiscal year 1986. To
boost employee morale and curb the increase in occupational injuries,
the Department introduced quality circles, an incentive plan,
and a team safety program. The safety program includes tool box
safety meetings, display of safety performance data, and incentives--
in the form of time off-- for excellent safety performance. The
experience is particularly interesting in that the team safety
concept was applied section by section, in groups of approximately
50 workers, over a period of several years; this allowed for comparison
of accident trends between covered and non-covered groups of employees.
Between 1985 and 1990 for the Department as a whole, the number
of injuries fell from 73 to 27, and associated costs dropped from
$52,848 to $15,448 (Lanier 1992).
These cases,
as well as other success stories, are illustrated in summary form
in Exhibit 3, which follows this section
of the report.
Exhibit
3. Worker Protection Program Success Stories in Construction
|
COMPANY
NAME
|
DESCRIPTION
|
SUCCESS
MEASURE(S)
|
KEY ASPECTS
OF PROGRAM
|
Bechtel
Construction co. |
International
contractor with 32,000 workers
130+projects
|
Over
1 million worker hours without a lost-time accident
Recipient of
National Constructors Association Annual Accident Prevention Award
in 35 of 36 years
|
On-site
safety professional
Site safety
and health program contractually binding on all employers on project;
will dissolve contract if subcontractor found to be in noncompliance
Written safety
and health program
Supervisors
attend safety and health workshop at beginning of each project and
during peak activity
|
Gulf
States, Inc. |
Specialty trade
contractor
2,000 employees
on construction and maintenance projects in United States
1989 CISE
Constructor Award Recipient*
|
EMR=
0.88 in 1986
EMR = 0.55 in 1989
Estimated
savings to Gulf States and construction industry (1986-89):
$5.3 million
267 lost workdays avoided
|
Continuos
Improvement Process (CIP): all employees responsible for instituting
organized change
On-going training
emphasis
Drug program:
screening conducted pre-assignment, at random, and post accident
Selection of
subcontractors includes consideration of safety record: OSHA Form
200 incident rate, drug and safety program
Management
commitment to setting goals and measuring performance
Complete accident/incident
data, including near-misses, must be reported by employees, subcontractors,
suppliers, vendors and owners with written report to corporate level
in 24 hours; investigation required
Weekly safety
meetings
Hazardous work
permits
Equipment
inspected before each use
Monthly safe
audits
|
M.
B. Kahn Construction |
General
contractor and construction manager, based in Columbia, SC
500+ employees
|
Medical
incidents level:
28--1987
9--1991 Three-year estimated program savings of $725,000; yearly distribution
of $30,000 + in awards and bonuses |
Management
commitment
Written safety
program
In-house competition,
recognition and wards that capitalize on strong competitive spirit
among construction workers including:
- quarterly
newsletter and safety report
- published
list of superintendent and project managers in order of safety
performance
- employee
recognition in newsletter
- President's
Quarterly Safety Award for superintendent who demonstrates superior
safety performance
- annual
accident prevention
- safety
awards breakfast for all supervisory employees
|
Mecklenburg
County (NC) Engineering Department |
County
government department responsible for maintaining waterways, landfills,
and performing some construction
200 employees
working in 4 separate teams
|
Work-
related injuries reduced from 73 in 1985 to 29 in 1990
Associated
costs reduced form $53,000 to $15,000
|
Preliminary
hazard analysis by management preceded implementation
Tool box safety
meetings at frequency decided by work crew
Safety performance
awards-vacation time-given quarterly to entire team, not individual
workers
Display of
injury records on daily basis Annual prize to team with best safety
performance
|
Monsanto
Chemical Co. |
Chemicals,
detergents, man-made fibers, and some construction operations
200+ union
and open shop contractors
1989 CISE
Owner Award Recipient*
|
50%
reduction in total injuries since 1986
OSHA recordable
incident rate:
4.0-1985
2.3-1989
Estimated
savings to Mosanto and industry: $22 million in direct and indirect
costs
|
Adopted
Business Roundtable recommendations from A-3 Report
Decentralized
management: site managers have primary responsibility for safety
in field
Instituted
comprehensive safety management program including:
- construction
review
- contractor
selection
- safety requirements
in contract
- daily construction
audits
- substance
abuse policy
- on-site
safety coordinator
- safety
permit system for hazardous activity
- worker
orientation
- safety
training
- safety recognition
and awards
- weekly
safety walk-throughs and meetings
- accident
investigation and reports
|
Pizzagalli
Construction Co. |
Heavy
construction firm
30 work sites
in 10 states
|
Annual
worker compensation costs reduced 76% from 1986 to 1988
General liability
costs dropped 96% from 1986-88
Approximately
$1 million returned in worker compensation premiums in 1988 due
to improved safety record
|
Training,
including mandatory site orientation and weekly safety meetings
Awards and
incentives, including monthly safe project award, yearly superintendent
award and savings bonds for hourly field employees
Drug and alcohol
testing when accident occurs
Personal safety
equipment inspection program
Management
commitment to safety
|
Shamrock
Farrell Construction Co. |
General
contractor, Houston-based
150 employees
CISE* and National Safety Award winner
|
Low
worker compensation costs; increased productivity |
Free
flow of communication between hourly workers, supervisors, and managers,
in keeping with modern management principles
Management
reviews every accident, including first-aid incidents
Tool box safety
talks daily and whenever workers move to new site
Weekly safety
training sessions
Local safety
council used for low-cost consulting and training
Gift certificates
and small gifts to reward safety excellence
|
Sheil
Oil Co. |
Oil,
gas, and chemical company
30,000 + employees
1990 CISE Owner
Award Recipient*
|
OSHA
1989 incident rate: 1/10th national average
Lost-workday
rate steadily declining since 1985
Estimated
savings/per year for Shell and contractors:
$2 million
85 lost workday cases
|
Total
quality management
Comprehensive
construction safety program including:
- ensuring
safety in design
- contractor
screening: EMR of 1.0 or less
- safety requirements
written into contract
- owner participation
in and management of field safety program
- contractor
safety results reported weekly and quarterly
Safety representative
for every project
Weekly and
quarterly safety meetings
Accident reporting
to management within 48 hours; investigation required
|
*Construction Industry Safety
Excellence Award, given by the Business Roundtable
.
This chapter analyzes the costs and benefits of implementing a comprehensive
worker protection program in the construction industry. It also
estimates the potential net benefits and rates of return associated
with such programs.
Documented
information on the costs of implementing worker protection programs
in construction is scarce, although some work has been done in this
area. For example, the Pizzagalli Construction Company estimates
that its program costs about $100,000 annually. The Business Roundtable,
citing data collected from a significant sample of contractors working
at various construction sites in 1980, reports that "the cost
of administering a construction safety and health program usually
amounts to about 2.5 percent of direct labor costs. Among the costs
of administering such a program, the Roundtable lists salaries for
safety, medical, and clerical personnel and the costs of conducting
safety meetings, inspecting tools and equipment, conducting orientation
sessions, carrying out inspections, providing personal protective
equipment, and providing miscellaneous supplies and equipment. Projecting
to 1990 on the basis of the Roundtable's data, the cost of such
programs for the industry as a whole would have been approximately
$2 billion.
The most direct
way of estimating the benefits potentially associated with worker
protection programs in this industry is to look at the costs of
the work-related construction injuries these programs would prevent.
There is substantial agreement among unions, industry representatives,
and academic researchers about the unacceptably high human costs
of current injury and fatality rates in the construction industry.
There are, however, some differences of opinion on how best to measure
the economic impact of work-related accidents. Hinze and Applegate
(1991) calculated an average direct cost of $519.14 for every medical
case injury and an average direct cost of $6,909.98 for every restricted-activity/lost-workday
case; they calculated the ratio of indirect to direct costs as 4:1
for medical-case injuries and 20:1 for restricted-activity/lost-workday
cases. Among the indirect costs associated with construction accidents
are those related to lost productivity, disrupted work schedules,
administrative time for investigations and reports, training replacement
personnel, paying wages to injured workers and other workers for
time not worked, cleaning up and repairing damages, adverse publicity,
and third-party liability claims against the contractor (Chaney
1991). If these authors' estimates of the direct costs of injuries
and lost workdays are projected to the construction industry as
a whole, the total direct costs in 1991 would have been $2.1 billion;
the total direct and indirect costs of work-related injuries for
the industry as a whole in 1990 would have been $40.4 billion. The
Business Roundtable (1982) reports that the ratio between indirect
and direct costs ranges from 4:1 to 17:1, depending on the particular
study. Overall, the Roundtable's Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness
Project estimates that accident costs account for 6.5 percent of
industrial, utility, and commercial construction costs. If this
percentage is projected to the construction industry as a whole,
the total costs of accidents in 1990 would have been $28.2 billion.
Thus, these sources agree that work related accidents and injuries
are costing employers in this sector between $28 and $40 billion
annually.
Several studies
suggest that accident and injury costs can be significantly reduced
by the implementation of effective worker protection programs. For
example, the Business Roundtable found that, for a sample of contractors
with good construction safety and health programs, the average OSHA
recordable injury incidence rate for 1977 to 1980 was only 36 percent
of the average rate for the construction industry as a whole (as
published by the National Safety Council). In 1980, according to
the Roundtable, these contractors had workers' compensation losses
averaging 6.1 cents per hour worked; had they experienced losses
at the national average, their losses would have been 16.9 cents
per hour, almost 3 times as much (Business Roundtable, January 1982).
If implementing comparable programs industry-wide is assumed to
reduce injury rates for the construction industry as a whole by
a comparable percentage, the savings would be between $10.3 billion
(using the Hinze and Applegate estimate) and $18.0 billion (using
the Roundtable estimate). The experience reported by one Vermont-based
construction company--Pizzagalli Construction-confirms the benefits
of these programs. Since 1986, their worker protection program has
reduced the company's workers' compensation costs by 76 percent,
from $896,603 annually to $213,328, for a $683,275 per-year saving;
between 1986 and 1988, the firm's general liability insurance costs
dropped by 96 percent, from $407,867 to $16,731, for a savings of
$391,136 in a 3-year period.
The potential
net savings of worker protection programs in this sector are thus
substantial. Based on Business Roundtable data, industry-wide programs
costing $2 billion per year could achieve cost savings of $10.3
to $18 billion per year, for a net savings of $8.3 to $16 billion
per year for the construction industry as a whole. The ratio of
cost savings to program costs for these programs is thus between
five to one and nine to one. The work of Barrie and Pulsion (1984)
confirms this estimate: these authors report that, for each dollar
invested in safety, a $4 to $8 return can be expected. Other estimates
of the potential net savings of these programs are more conservative
but still impressive. For example, Levitt and Samuelson (1987) state
that "the minimum net savings to be expected from introducing
an effective safety management program is 4 percent of direct labor
costs." If this percentage is extrapolated to the construction
industry as a whole, such programs would have saved $4.4 billion
in costs in 1990. The US Corps of Engineers reports that compliance
with its safety standards achieves a minimum cost savings for its
contractors of 0.5 to 1.0 percent of total project costs, mostly
in the form of reduced workers' compensation costs (personal communication,
Dan Peterson, Corps of Engineers, February 1993). If extrapolated
to the construction industry as a whole, this would mean a net cost
savings in 1990 dollars of $2.2 to $4.4 billion.
Aside from
cost savings, effective worker protection programs in construction
have been credited with a number of indirect benefits, including
improved communication within the organization (Mattila and Hyodyomaa
1988), increases in productivity and production due to a decrease
in accidents and injuries (Lattanzio 1991), and a beneficial effect
on labor management relations (Boden, Hall, Levenstein, and Punnett
1984).
These case
studies and qualitative assessments of the practices of some major
organizations active in construction demonstrate that introducing
safe management practices can have dramatic impacts on accident
and injury rates. In addition, the experience of many firms and
organizations indicates that the costs of implementing such programs
are only a fraction of those associated with work site accidents.
In summary, worker protection programs that are characterized by
management commitment, employee involvement, work site analysis,
hazard prevention and control, and safety and health training offer
the best hope of breaking the cycle of injury, death, and spiraling
costs that threatens to overwhelm this industry.
.
American National
Standards Institute (ANSI). American National Standard, Construction
and Demolition Operations--Safety and Health Program Requirements
for Multi-Employer Projects. ANSI A10.33-1992.
American National Standards Institute (ANSI). American National
Standard, Basic Elements of an Employer Program to Provide a Safe
and Healthful Work Environment. ANSI
A10.38-1991.
Arden, P. Subcontract for safety first. Safety & Health, pp.
44-47, November 1992.
Associated General Contractors of America. Manual of Accident Prevention
in Construction.
Washington, DC: Associated General Contractors of America, 1992.
Boden, L., Hall, J., Levenstein, C., and Punnett, L. The impact
of safety and health
committees. Journal of Occupational Medicine, pp. 829-834, November
1984.
Britt, P.
Owners own up to contractor safety. Safety & Health. National
Safety Council,
pp. 44-48, December 1993.
Bruening,
J. Pizzagalli construction: Performance-oriented safety pays off.
Occupational
Hazards, pp. 45-48, June 1989.
Burati, J.L.,
Matthews, M.F., and Kalidindi, S.N. Quality management in construction
industry. Journal of Construction Engineering Management 117(2):341-359,
1991.
Business Roundtable.
Model for an owner safety process. Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
1988 Owner Award Recipient. Construction Industry Safety Excellence
Award Program.
June 1988.
Business Roundtable.
Construction industry cost effectiveness (CICE) project report:
CICE:
The next five years and beyond. May 1988.
Business Roundtable.
Absenteeism and turnover: A construction industry cost effectiveness
project report. Report C-6, September 1989.
Business Roundtable.
Model for a construction safety process. Gulf States, Inc. 1989.
Construction Award Recipient (SIC 17), Construction Industry Safety
Excellence Award
Program.
Business Roundtable. Model for an owner safety program. Monsanto
Company. 1989
Owner Award Recipient, Construction Industry Safety Excellence Award
Program.
November 1989.
Business Roundtable.
Model for an owner safety program. Shell Oil Company. 1990
Owner Award Recipient, Construction Industry Safety Excellence Award
Program.
Business Roundtable. Construction labor motivation: A construction
industry cost
effectiveness project report. Report A-2, March 1992.
Business Roundtable.
Improving construction safety performance: A construction industry
cost effectiveness project report. Report A-3, January 1982.
Business Roundtable.
The workers' compensation crisis...Safety excellence will make a
difference. 1991.
Buskin, S.
and Paulozzi, L. Fatal injuries in the construction industry in
Washington state. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 11:453-460,
1987.
Chaney, P.
The hidden costs of job-site accidents. Constructor 73(4):40-41,
April 1991.
Code of Federal
Registrations (CFR). 29 CFR Part 1926, Safety and Health Regulations
for Construction. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration.
Council of
the European Communities (EC3. Implementation of Minimum Safety
and Health Requirements at Temporary or Mobile Construction Sites.
Directive 92/57/EEC, 1992.
Culver, C.
Build a safer construction site. Safety & Health, pp. 74-76,
March 1993.
Davies, V.J.
and Tomasin, K. Construction Safety Handbook. London: Thomas Telford
Ltd., 1990.
Dedobbeleer,
N., et al. Safety perforrnance among union and non-union workers
in the
construction industry. Journal of Occupational Medicine 32(11):1099-1103,
November 1990.
Dedobbeleer,
N. and Beland, F. A safety climate measure for construction sites.
Journal of
Safety Research 22:97-103, 1991.
Dedobbeleer, N. and German, P. Safety practices in the construction
industry. Journal of
Occupational Medicine 29(11):863-868, November 1987.
DeJoy, D.M. Attributional processes and hazard control management
in industry. Journal
of Safety Research 16(2):61-71, Summer 1985.
DeJoy, D.M. Supervisor attributions and responses for multi-causal
workplace accidents.
Journal of Occupational Accidents 9:213-223, 1987.
Denton, D.K. Safety
Management: Improving Performance. New York: McGraw-Hill,
Inc., 1982.
Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) Analysis of Causation Patterns
for Accidents;
Emphasis on the Construction Industry. Draft report. Performed for
the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration under Contract No. J-9-F-8-0035,
Option Year 1, Task
Order No. 2, 1991.
Fellner, D.J. and Sulzer-Azaroff, B. Increasing industrial safety
practices and conditions
through posted feedback. Journal of Safety Research 15:7-21, Spring
1984.
Freeman, S. Control of construction site safety. In: Proceedings
of the National Conference on Construction Safety and Health,
sponsored by the AFL-CIO and NIOSH, Seattle, WA,
September 25-27, 1990.
Fullman, J.B.
Construction Safety, Security and Loss Prevention. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1984.
Gorman, E.J.,
III. Workers' compensation: Labor/management proposals to reduce
injuries and illness. In: Proceedings of the National Conference
on Construction Safety and Health, Seattle, WA, September 25-27,
1990.
Hinze, J.
and Applegate, L. Cost of construction injuries. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management 117(3):537-550, 1991.
Hislop, R.D.
A construction safety program. Professional Safety, pp. 14-20, September
1991.
International
Labour Office. Safety and Health in Construction: An ILO Code of
Practice.Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Office, 1992.
LaBar, G.
Breaking new ground in construction safety. Occupational Hazards,
pp. 58-63, May 1992.
Landeweerd,
J., et al. Risk taking tendency among construction workers. Journal
of Occupational Accidents 11:183-196, February 1990.
Lanier, E.
Reducing injuries and costs through team safety. Professional Safety.
American
Society of Safety Engineers, 7:21-25, July 1992.
Lattanzio,
R. Managing construction site safety. Occupational Health and Safety,
pp. 38
39, February 1991.
Levitt, RE.
and Samuelson, N.M. Construction Safety Management. New York McGraw-
Hill, 1987.
Mattila, M. and Hyodynmaa, M. Promoting job safety in building:
An experiment on the
behavior analysis approach. Journal of Occupational Accidents 9:26-267,
1988.
Occupational Safety and Health Reporter. Safety through lower insurance
rates. Bureau of
National Affairs 20(18):807, October 3, 1990.
Occupational Safety and Health Reporter. Workplace deaths drops
in Washington state.
Bureau of National Affairs 21(49):3, May 13, 1992.
Occupational
Health & Safety Staff. Nobody takes a fall. Occupational Health
and Safety,
p. 57, January 1992.
Peterson,
D. Interview. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. February 1993.
Pettenger,
D. Interview. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. February 1993.
Rademaker,
K. Activate your fall protection defenses. Occupational Hazards,
pp. 40-439 December 1991.
Robinson,
J. Workplace hazards and workers' desires for union representation.
Journal of Labor Research 9(3):238-249, Summer 1988.
Robinson,
J.C. The rising long-term trend in occupational injury rates. American
Journal of Public Health78(3):276-281, 1988.
Smith, G.
and Roth, R. Safety programs and the construction manager. Journal
of Construction Engineering and Management 117(2):360-371, June
1991.
Suruda, A.,
et al. Deaths from Trench cave-ins in the construction industry.
Journal of Occupational Medicine 30(7):552-555, 1988.
Synnett, R.J.
C:onshucDon safety: A turnaround program. Professional Safety, pp.
33-37, October l992.
Trent, R.
and Wyant, W. Fatal hand tool injuries in construction. Journal
of Occupational
Medicine 32(8):711-714, 1990.
U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Safety and Health Requirements Manual. EM385-1-1.
Washington, DC: 1992.
U.S. Department
of Energy. Office of Occupational Safety. DOE 5480.9, 2-8-93 Draft
Construction Project Safety and Health Management, 1993.
U.S. Department
of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. Construction Safety Standards
Denver, CO: Division of Safety, Engineering and Research Center,
1987.
Walters, N.K.
Safety management accountability process: An effective approach
at DuPont Professional Safety, pp. 35-38, August 1983.
Ward, S.C.,
et al. Advantages of management contracting--critical analysis.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 117(2):195-211,
June 1991.
Weil, D. Building
Safety: The role of construction unions in the enforcement of OSHA
Journal of Labor Research 13(1):121-132, Winter 1992.
Zohar, D.
Promoting the use of personal protective equipment by behavior modification
techniques. Journal of Safety Research 12(2):78-85, Summer 1980.
OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
A review of the recent (post-1980) construction industry literature*
reveals that, like OSHA, firms in this sector are concerned with
the human costs associated with high injury and fatality rates;
the spiraling workers' compensation costs associated with construction
accidents are also a major issue. The recent literature can be classified
under three headings:
- Business
and trade literature, which focuses on the implementation of safe
management practices;
- Behavioral
studies, which address the attitudes of workers and managers to
safety issues and ways of changing them; and
- Articles
describing specific construction safety management programs.
The business
and trade literature emphasizes mechanisms for making workplace
safety a management priority, and thus implicitly acknowledges the
importance of management commitment to the achievement of a safe
working environment. Topics covered include:
- The importance
of compiling accident statistics by individual contractor,
facility, and project;
- The importance
of reviewing safety performance by quantifying and analyzing
accident rates, workers' compensation costs, and the indirect
costs of accidents; and
- The savings
that can be generated by evaluating the safety records of contractors
during the bidding process.
In general,
studies in the business management literature focus on the safety
performance of specific companies rather than on the relative effectiveness
of any particular component of the company's program. The authors'
main objective is to encourage construction managers to emulate
the practices of the best firms in the industry or to emphasize
the importance of considering safety performance when choosing a
contractor.
The behavioral
research studies focus on issues such as the effectiveness of
feedback mechanisms, attitudes toward safety, the influence of unionization
on safety practices, and the effectiveness of training. There is
general agreement among authors that involving employees in accident
prevention programs and providing safety training to all workers
on the site are essential to success. The literature recognizes
that younger workers and nonunionized workers are particularly vulnerable
to injuries and that reaching these groups requires special effort
(Eastern Research Group 1991). .
__________________
* Appendix A contains a brief overview of the recent literature,
abstracts of the articles and books reviewed for this study, and
a bibliography of these sources.
__________________
The literature
on construction management practices tends to be anecdotal,
and it is primarily concerned with "success stories."
For example, one of the better studies of this kind describes the
experience of the Pizzagalli Construction Company, a Vermont-based
heavy construction firm with approximately 30 worksites in 10 States
along the East coast (Bruening 1989). In the three years after Pizzagalli
implemented a construction safety management program, recordable
injuries were reduced by almost 48 percent, the lost-workday rate
fell by 33 percent, and workers' compensation costs were cut by
76 percent. Improved training, including an initial orientation
program for new employees and weekly safety talks for all employees,
was considered the key to the success of this program. Other important
elements, according to Pizzagalli, were a drug and alcohol abuse
program, incentive awards for safety performance, and equipment
inspections that were both more detailed and more frequent than
those required by OSHA.
In summary,
the recent literature on the construction industry is unanimous
in emphasizing the importance of management's role in achieving
worksite safety. This focus is even more appropriate in construction
than in general industry because of the dynamic nature of construction
work: the changes in hazards and work crews associated with the
various phases of a construction project make active and continuous
management involvement and oversight essential if a safe work environment
is to be maintained. For example, annual compliance self-inspections
performed by the employer may be adequate for the fixed-work- station,
steady-state operations typical of most general-industry production
facilities, but daily (and sometimes even more frequent) inspections
are necessary on most construction sites.
All of the
articles and publications reviewed here were published after 1980.
For ease of discussion, the literature is grouped into the three
categories identified previously: business management literature,
behavioral research studies, and reviews of construction safety
and health programs. The first category includes literature on construction
cost accounting, insurance, liability, and the bidding process.
The second category consists largely of experimental studies that
evaluate the effectiveness of behavior modification techniques in
improving safety performance. The final category includes articles
underlining the need for safety management and reports describing
specific practices that can be incorporated into worksite safety
and health programs. Some of the comprehensive texts cited span
all three categories. In these cases, cross-references to other
categories are provided. The review highlights key management concepts
and practices; for details on methodology or program implementation,
the reader is directed to the original text. This appendix first
discusses the major themes that emerge in each category of literature,
while the final section contains reviews of the major articles and
publications, grouped by category.
BUSINESS MANAGEMENT LITERATURE
One of the
most comprehensive sources of business management literature on
construction safety is the Business Roundtable. The Roundtable is
a 215-member association representing some of the largest firms
in all business sectors, including major buyers of construction
services. In the early 1980s, the Business Roundtable launched an
ambitious study, the "Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness
Project" (Business Roundtable 1982) in an attempt to analyze
and improve cost effectiveness in this industry. Safety was one
of the topics studied, and safety and skills training have since
been identified as the two areas likeliest to lead to the greatest
improvements in cost effectiveness. An important aspect of the Business
Roundtable's 1982 report, and a topic which is also discussed in
Levitt and Samelson's (1987) text on construction safety management,
is the role buyers of construction services can play in influencing
safety. Dick Kibben, head of the Business Roundtable's construction
research project, states that the Roundtable emphasizes construction
purchasers for two reasons. The first is group membership: many
Roundtable members are major buyers of construction services; the
second, and perhaps more significant, has to do with the structure
of the construction industry, which is characterized by numerous
small firms. Ninety percent of all construction firms--general contractors,
heavy construction contractors, and subcontractors--have fewer than
20 employees. These firms account for 44 percent of the 5 million
construction employees counted by the Census Bureau in 1987. Only
23 percent of all construction employers, or fewer than 1 percent
of firms, are represented by establishments of 100 or more employees.*
According to Kibben, a surprising number of contractors do not know
their own experience modification rate (EMR), a multiplier applied
to the contractor's workers' compensation premium based on past
safety performance. Because the technical capabilities necessary
to manage costs and track safety performance may not be readily
available at small firms, the Roundtable and other analysts view
construction services purchasers as a leverage point in safety management.
By making a contractor's safety record part of the competitive bidding
process, construction buyers indirectly manage safety by awarding
contracts to those firms with the best safety performance. Safety
performance is reflected in a firm's EMR, OSHA incidence rates for
recordable injuries and illnesses, and formal safety management
policies. When safety is well-managed, injury and lost-time incidence
rates can be reduced to a fraction of those reported by the National
Safety Council; firms chosen by Roundtable members have an injury
incidence rate of approximately 3/200,000 exposure hours and a lost-time
incidence rate of 0.02/200,000 exposure hours, compared with national
averages of 14 and 6 per 200,000 exposure hours, respectively. The
Roundtable estimates that the savings potentially achievable through
effective safety management are approximately 4 percent of project
costs (Business Roundtable 1982).
In a follow-up
companion publication to the 1983 Report, "The Workers' Compensation
Crisis... Safety Excellence Will Make a Difference" (Business
Roundtable 1991), the Roundtable offered the following recommendations
for owners or construction services buyers:
- Understand
how the workers' compensation premium is affected by work site
accidents;
- Require
contractors to provide, for the past three years, their State
workers' compensation insurance rate sheets and OSHA 200 logs;
- Establish
target EMR's and injury and lost-time incidence rates to prequalify
contractors, and allow only those contractors who meet these targets
to bid;
- Ensure
that all contractors bidding have and implement on-site safety
perform- ance programs;
- Commit
to a "zero injury" goal at the highest management level,
encourage the same commitment in contractor companies, and require
routine and frequent safety performance reports be sent to the
CEO;
- Following
a lost-time accident, conduct a site visit within 24 hours with
top management from owner and contractor companies to review accident
plan,
preventive measures;
- Reward
safe performance; and
- Maintain
separate accident statistics for each contractor on the site.
__________________
* These figures are from the Construction Statistics Division of
the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
An establishment is a physical business location; a single firm
may have multiple establishments.
__________________
In its publications
on construction cost-effectiveness, the Business Roundtable does
not discuss the use of accounting methods that will reflect the
true costs of accidents. This issue was addressed by Stanford University,
however, in a 2-year study in which 13 companies agreed to use the
Stanford Accident Cost Accounting System, designed to highlight
accident costs. (The results of this study are discussed in Levitt
and Samelson (1987). Although participating companies found that
the accounting system only captured direct costs, its use increased
management awareness of the high pnce of accidents. Circulating
an accounting report that reflected accident costs to project managers
and supervisors also increased the sense of accountability for safety.
Levitt and Samelson, as well as other authors, enumerate the indirect
costs of accidents, which may include delays and overtime; loss
of work crew efficiency; training of replacement workers; clean-up,
repair, or replacement of damaged equipment; work rescheduling;
costs for safety and clerical personnel time related to the accident;
OSHA fines; and the cost of legal assistance. Studies of the ratio
of direct to indirect costs, as reported in this literature review,
indicate that this ratio can range from 4:1 for medical injury cases
to 20:1 for restricted-activity or lost-time injuries in construction.
Contractor
liability for overall site safety is also a significant management
concern. Although there is some disagreement among authors on the
best method for handling liability when negotiating for the services
of contractors and subcontractors, a recurring point is that construction
managers cannot shield themselves from liability for safety and
that the best way to avoid liability is for management to be an
active participant in the safety program, as demonstrated by written
policies and actions. This emphasis on management commitment, considered
one of the most important components of any safety program, is echoed
in the behavioral research and occupational safety and health program
literature.
BEHAVIORAL
RESEARCH
The two major themes explored in construction safety behavioral
research are causal attribution and motivation. As it relates to
safety management, attribution research examines how the perception
of causality for an accident affects the structure of a safety program.
Generally speaking, individuals tend to "over attribute"
accidents to workers, or in other words to assume that greater care
by the worker could have prevented an accident even in cases where
this is obviously not true. This attitude often finds expression
in punitive safety programs with numerous rules and regulations,
but little communication between labor and management. In a review
article on attribution research, DeJoy (1985) summarizes its implications
for safety programs: (1) workplace accidents should be investigated
by a qualified person from outside the workgroup and not tied to
line management; (2) summaries of all accident investigations should
be disseminated to all workers and managers involved; (3) safety
messages in all forms should be carefully developed to take into
account the sources of bias that may influence the recipient's interpretation
of the message; (4) a plan should be developed for reporting and
analyzing near-miss and minor-loss accidents; (5) supervisor safety
training should touch on the issue of attributional bias and its
implications for accident investigations; and (6) managers need
to be made aware of the multi-causal nature of accidents and the
need to integrate safety into the total management system.
Recent studies
(Fellner and Sulzer-Azaroff 1984; Zohar 1980) on motivating safe
performance suggest that immediate, posted feedback is an effective,
economical way to improve performance and increase the use of personal
protective equipment. In the studies cited, the immediate posting
of inspection results in a location accessible to workers significantly
improved work conditions and practices, and immediate posting of
auditory test results significantly increased earplug usage, even
among new workers. Researchers suggest that posting feedback heightens
awareness and improves communication, encouraging safe behavior
among both workers and management.
WORKER PROTECTION PROGRAMS IN CONSTRUCTION
This heading covers literature that provides company and industry
statistics on the need for safety management as well as articles
that identify specific safe management practices. In a Business
Roundtable study (1989) of worker absenteeism and turnover, unsafe
conditions were found to be the primary factor leading to worker
absences. Unsafe behavior and ignorance about safe practices were
found by two authors to be more common among young workers, although
a study of fatal construction injuries in Washington State found
higher mortality from injuries among older workers (Buskin 1987).
The importance of man aging safety is summarized in a recent article
by LaBar: more than 2,000 deaths and 630,000 injuries result yearly
from construction accidents, for an annual cost to the industry
of $30 billion. LaBar's 1992 article and several others offer specific
management recommendations, some of which were provided to the authors
by companies with successful safety records.
Throughout the literature, the importance of demonstrating management
commitment to safety is emphasized. For example, Dedobbeleer (1987)
found that a worker's attitude toward safe performance might be
less related to training than to management's attitude toward safety.
A second key element of effective safety management was a written
site safety program. The most succinct summary of effective safety
management practices is provided by the Business Roundtable's 1991
publication, "The Workers' Compensation Crisis...Safety Excellence
Will Make a Difference." In future editions of this publication,
the Roundtable will track the experience of 11 owner firms and 32
contractor firms it has recognized in its Construction Industry
Safety Excellence Award Program. All of these companies set a zero-injury
goal and use some or all of the following practices to achieve it:
- Prequalification
of potential contractors;
- Safety
performance hurdle rates for qualifying contractors;
- Safety-specific
contract language;
- Substance
abuse program;
- Absentee
and turnover audits;
- Safety
orientation, which includes:
- Orientation:
- Accident/incident
reporting requirements;
- Emergency
phone system/numbers; and
- Emergency
alarms/responses;
- Safety
training, which covers:
- Basic
safety rules and emergency procedures;
- Hazard
communication (Right To Know);
- Lock-out/tag-out
procedures;
- Proper
use of respirators; and
- Heavy
equipment certification;
- Supervisory
training, covering:
- Attitude
and behavior;
- Disciplinary
guidelines;
- Accident/incident
reporting and investigation; and
- Incentives/recognition
programs;
- Weekly Safety
Meetings
- Site safety
inspections;
- Hazardous
work permits;
- Constructor
safety performance evaluation;
- Statistical
reporting and feedback; and
- Recognition
of superior safety performance.
This report's
specific recommendations for owner firms or buyers of construction
services are listed in the business management section of this summary.
Below are some of the specific suggestions for contractor firms:
Construction
contractors should:
- Understand
the total workers' compensation insurance premium (WCIP) concept
and how it is affected by worksite accidents.
- Ascertain
that the manual rate classification codes used to calculate the
WCIP accurately represent the work of the crafts employed.
- Set Experience
Modification, Total Recordable Incidence and Total Lost Work-
day Incidence "Hurdle Rates" as targets of acceptability
for prequalifying sub- contractors, and allow only prequalified
subcontractors to bid.
-
Start
every meeting with emphasis on the safety performance of the
company. Ensure that people at all levels understand that safety
is of paramount importance.
- Ensure
that accident and injury reporting is immediate and has the highest
pro file. The CEO should promptly receive a personal call when
a lost-time, or potential lost-time, injury occurs.
- Insist
that a jobsite visit by senior level executives of subcontractor,
contrac tor, and owner occur no later than the day following a
lost-time accident to re-> view what occurred and plan steps to
prevent further incidents.
- Determine
that dynamic safety programs are operational on the worksite at
all times.
- Consider
incentives for safety performance. Put a project level "cents
per hour" incentive in place to reward craftspeople for lost-time
and injury-free work.
- Ensure
that management at all levels is evaluated on safety performance
as well as other critical evaluation factors.
- Develop
means to ensure that the costs of safety non-performance are charged
to each project before the profit or loss generated by that project
is calculated.
- Make the
goal of zero accidents a direct line management responsibility
from the CEO down to and including the workers at the jobsite.
DETAILED
LITERATURE REVIEW
BUSINESS
MANAGEMENT LITERATURE
Arden, P. Subcontract for safety first. Safety & Health,
pp. 44-47. November, 1992.
This article discusses the importance of subcontractor safety to
overall construction safety and particularly to the success of the
prime contractor's work on any given project. Ways to ensure that
subcontractors are serious about safety include:
- Making
them complete a prequalifications questionnaire dealing with their
safety record;
- Evaluating
their Experience Modification Rate;
- Reviewing
the subcontractor's OSHA 200 logs;
- Reviewing
the subcontractor's formal safety program;
- Visiting
a worksite of the subcontractor;
- Documenting
the subcontractor's safety responsibilities in writing;
- Including
safety requirements in contract documents;
- Requiring
subcontractors to develop site-specific safety plans;
- Building
awards or penalties for safe performance into the contract;
- Requiring
subcontractors to have safety specialists; and
- Monitoring/auditing
subcontractor's worksites regularly.
Britt, P.
Owners own up to contractor safety. Safety & Health. National
Safety Council, pp. 44-48, December 1993.
This article
describes efforts to improve contract labor safety and health in
the petrochemical industry since 1989. It discusses the opinion,
reflected in recent court decisions and OSHA cases, that the company
that hires the contractor is responsible for the contractor's job
safety experience and also holds contractors responsible for subcontractor
job safety and health. OSHA penalties for the owner are "likely
to be double or triple that assessed against a guilty contractor,"
according to an attorney practicing before OSHRC.
Examples of how safety pays include Mobil Oil Corporation's experience
at its Joliet Refinery: Mobil requires prospective contractors to
fill out a questionnaire on workers' compensation/insurance experience
and to furnish a written copy of their safety program. In addition,
contractors must provide Mobil with Material Safety Data Sheets
(MSDSs) for all materials they intend to bring on site. Some companies
require prospective contractors to pass a written safety and health
proficiency examination.
Mobil credits
a cooperative company/contractor safety training program for reducing
incidence rates to one-quarter the published industry average at
the Joliet Refinery. Incidents dropped 75 percent over 3 years after
the implementation of strict safety rules. This plant is a VPP site.
On a recently completed large construction project, the refinery's
incidents were one-seventh the industry's national average.
Burati, J.L., Matthews, M.F., and Kalidini, SN. Quality management
in construction industry. Journal of Construction Engineering Management
117(2):341-359,1991
This article reports on a study of the management practices in place
at 19 owner and contractor firms involved in heavy industrial, manufacturing,
and commercial construction. It documents the introduction of total
quality management (TQM) in the construction industry. A majority
of the companies participating in the study have implemented or
are implementing TQM techniques. A major finding was that personnel
interviewed believe that safety, deadlines, cost, and quality are
all equally important and are interdependent, i.e., that safe, high-quality
projects are more likely than others to be on budget and on schedule.
If personnel ranked these items separately, they ranked safety first,
followed by quality, deadlines, and cost. Principal findings of
the study were:
- Management
participation in the implementation process is essential; and
- Topics
and examples used in training should be integrated with the work
processes of the individuals being trained.
Business
Roundtable. 1988. Improving Construction Safety Performance: A Construction
Industry Cost Effectiveness Project Report. Report A-3, January
1982.
This is the second report from the Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness
Project. Among the information provided is a list of steps owners
can take to improve the on-the job safety performance of contractors.
All owners with better-than-average construction safety records
require their contractors to obtain work permits for specific activities.
In awarding contracts, owners with good safety performance consider
the contractor's safety record. During construction, "safe owners"
conduct formal site inspections and regularly audit con- tractors'
safety practices. They use goal-setting with contractors to reduce
accidents and they keep statistics separately by contractor. Safe
owners establish construction safety departments to monitor and
confer with contractors, and stress safety during pre-bid activities
and at site visits. Contract specifications of safe owners often
surpass OSHA regulations, and the owners themselves are frequently
involved in training sessions on hazards and safety procedures for
construction site supervisors and workers. This report reviews a
Stanford University survey of experience modification rates (EMRs)
for workers' compensation to identify the potential percentage variation
in insurance costs (and hence total project costs) that occur as
a result of variations in safety performance. The EMR, as a multiplier
for worker compensation rates, varied in this study from 50 to 205
percent. A form was developed for use by owners to prequalify contractors
according to their safety attitudes and practices; that form is
included in the printed report.
Business
Roundtable. The Workers' Compensation Crisis...Safety Excellence
Will Make A Difference. Companion Publication to CICE Project Report
A-3, 1991.
This safety
management report from the Business Roundtable was published 9 years
after the A-3 report. As the authors point out, despite efforts
to reduce injury frequency, the OSHA Recordable Incidence Rates
and Lost-Time Frequency Incidence Rates have not improved significantly
since the original A-3 report was published in 1982. The report
provides a brief history of worker compensation insurance and rate
trends since 1979. Detailed explanations are given for calculating
worker compensation insurance premiums in construction; these rates
are based on 1) the EMR; 2) the manual rate (an insurance premium
based on the type of work performed; and 3) payroll units (calculated
by dividing the employer's total annual direct labor cost by 100).
Manual rates vary widely among States and construction crafts. The
average manual rate by craft--which suggests relative hazard--and
a 50-State comparison of manual rates are provided. The report also
describes briefly how workers' compensation insurance is provided
in each State: with State as sole source, through State programs
and specifically licensed companies, or through insurance companies
alone. The equation for calculating the EMR is given and the effect
of accidents on the EMR is discussed. Finally, using the safety
programs of owner and contractor forms that have received the Roundtable's
Award for Safety Excellence, the report lists the elements of an
effective construction safety program. It then provides separate
lists of management practice recommendations for owner and contractor
companies.
Chaney,
P. The hidden costs of jobsite accidents. Constructor 73(4):4~41,
April 1991.
Chaney discusses
the Experience Modification Rate (EMR), which is used in calculating
workers' compensation premiums. The EMR is multiplied by a standard
rate associated with a particular type of construction, and the
EMR for a particular company is then determined by dividing the
expected number of losses (as determined by the insurance industry)
by the company's actual losses. The lower the EMR, the lower the
company's workers' compensation rate.
A list of
indirect cost elements is provided and an example is used to illustrate
how the total cost of an accident compares with the amount paid
out by workers' compensation. Contractors are advised that owners
may consider a bidder's safety record and EMR when awarding contracts,
and that an effective safety program (lower EMR) will make a bidder
more competitive.
Freeman,
S. 1990. Control of construction site safety. In: Proceedings
of the National Conference on Construction Safety and Health,
sponsored by the AFL-CIO and NIOSH, Seattle, WA, September 25-27,
1990.
Freeman's
paper is a general discussion of the issue of contractor versus
subcontractor management of project safety and the associated liability.
He lists the pros and cons of general contractor control of subcontractor
safety, and legal remedies that may protect thecontractor from excessive
liability. He also offers a "Blueprint for Control of Construction
Site Safety" that enumerates the safety responsibilities of
construction managers (which could include general contractors,
prime contractors, owners, engineers, or architects), and sub contractors.
The Blueprint specifies and defines key job functions in the safety
plan, including those of the project manager, safety professionals,
subcontractor manager, crew supervisors, owners, architects, and
engineers.
Hinze,
J. and Applegate, L. Cost of construction injuries. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management 117(3):537-550, 1991.
and
Gorman, E.J., m. Workers' compensation: Labor/management proposals
to reduce injuries and illness. In: Proceedings of the National
Conference on Construction Health and Safety, Seattle, WA, September
25-27, 1990.
Both of these
papers discuss the same study; they differ only in some of the comparisons
they draw from the data. The goal of the study was to calculate
the indirect costs of accidents: Heinrich suggested a four-to-one
ratio of indirect to direct costs for construction in a 1931 paper;
the more recent analysis was an attempt to re-examine that ratio.
Participation was sought from member firms of the Construction Industry
Institute, Associated Builders and Contractors, the National Constructors
Association, and other contractor associations. A total of 573 injury
reports from 103 construction firms were used for this analysis.
A survey form that allowed calculation of indirect costs was developed
and used for each accident report (this form is reprinted in the
Hinze and Applegate paper). The figures that were derived show a
ratio of 4:1 for medical injury cases and 20:1 for restricted activity
or lost workday injuries. Cost comparisons by construction trade
yielded no statistically significant differences, nor did comparisons
between the ratios for merit shop and union shop projects. When
stratified by type of contract, the data indicated that indirect
to direct cost ratios tended to be higher on cost-reimbursable contracts
than on lump sum contracts, and on larger projects overall.
Lattanzio,
R. 1991. Managing construction site safety. Occupational Health
and Safety, pp. 38-39, February 1991.
This article
provides a brief summary of the daily responsibilities of site safety
management in terms of compliance with safety standards. It lists
the benefits of employing an independent safety professional: reductions
in violations and insurance premiums and claims payouts, increases
in productivity, freeing the construction manager or general contractor
to attend to construction, and access to additional liability insurance
that a contractor cannot otherwise obtain.
Smith, G.
and Roth, R. Safety programs and the construction manager. Journal
of Construction Engineering and Management 117(2):36-371, June 1991.
In this paper,
Smith and Roth discuss how the construction manager's liability
is defined in contract documents. They review the responsibilities
of the construction manager as defined in contracts by the American
Institute of Architects, Associated General Contractors, National
Society of Professional Engineers, and Construction Management Association
of America. They then discuss recent case law regarding construction
manager liability for safety, emphasizing that this is a relatively
new area. The authors close with the assertion that since construction
managers cannot shield themselves from liability, the best idea
is to become an active participant in the safety program. Among
the factors listed which decrease construction manager liability
are: a safety program that decreases the risk of accidents, a contract
that clearly delineates the safety responsibilities of all parties,
a contract clause that indemnifies the construction manager from
negligent acts of others, and making every reasonable effort to
prevent and correct safety deficiencies. Factors that increase construction
manager liability and requirements for contractors are also specified.
Synnett,
RJ. Construction safety: A turnaround program. Professional Safety,
pp. 33-37, October 1992.
This article
describes the experience of the M.B. Kahn Construction Company,
a general contractor and construction manager that employed more
than 500 people and had a sales volume of $243 million in 1991.
In 1988, the company's sales volume was $105 million; its workers'
compensation premium that year was $500,000, and its Experience
Modification Rate (EMR) was 1.49 (1.00 is the standard). To address
this problem, in 1988 the company introduced an accident prevention
and safety program and simultaneously began to self-insure its workers'
compensation program. Previously, by its own admission, the prevailing
attitude in the company toward safety was "poor." The
new program emphasizes management commitment, the safety responsibilities
of key employees, training for new hires, accident investigation
and reporting procedures, frequent job-site inspections, refresher
training, and a close working relationship with OSHA. The company
credits in-house competition, recognition, incentives, and management
commitment with the program's success. Savings for the overall program
are estimated to be $725,000 over 3 years.
Ward, S.C.,
et al. Advantages of management contracting--critical analysis.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 117(2):195-211,
June 1991.
A management
contracting system is one in which an outside organization is retained
to coordinate the design and construction phases of a project and
to control construction. Four types of management contracting systems
are listed, although the article focuses on the situation in which
the management contractor directly employs work contractors to undertake
all construction packages. No construction work is done by the management
contractor, but this contractor firm does provide coordination and
time, cost, and quality control. The advantages for safety of this
approach include better planning and control, which can mean improved
safety performance if an effective safety management program exists,
and fewer documented claims. The disadvantages include blurring
of lines of liability and whatever increased risks may arise as
a result. The authors discuss the types of projects for which management
contracting is best suited: large or complex projects, ones which
require flexibility because of rapidly-changing technology, or ones
for which there is a strong economic advantage to early start and
completion. They conclude with a list of provisos that ought to
accompany any such management agreement.
BEHAVIORAL
RESEARCH
Business
Roundtable. Construction Labor Motivation: A Construction Industry
Cost
Effectiveness Project Report. Report A-2, March 1992.
This is a
general report on worker motivation prepared on the basis of a review
of both construction and general industry literature. In a specific
section on safety, the report states that workers will be motivated
if top management expresses strong concern for project safety. Safety
incentive programs that reward project managers or supervisors for
their safety record are also cited as a means of improving the morale
of both supervisors and workers. Job orientation for new workers,
regular job safety meetings, and supervisor awareness of hazards
were all found to be motivating factors. The studies supporting
these claims are referenced.
Dedobbeleer,
N. and Beland, F. A safety climate measure for construction sites.
Journal of Safety Research 22:97-103, 1991.
This study
tests a safety climate model developed for production workers or
construction workers. Climate was defined as "molar perceptions
people have of their work settings." A self-administered questionnaire
was used to survey 384 non-residential construction workers in Baltimore,
MD, and the response rate was 71 percent. The survey assessed workers'
perceptions of management's commitment to safety and workers' perceptions
of their own involvement in safety. The study revealed that construction
workers, unlike production workers, perceive management's words
and deeds as a single dimension, and that these workers perceive
safety as a joint responsibility between workers and management.
Based on these results, the authors conclude that "management's
safety concerns and actions should be highly publicized among the
workers," and that "workers' involvement can include participation
in the development of safety programs, conduct of safety audits,
and identification of solutions."
DeJoy, D.M.
Attributional processes and hazard control management in industry.
Journal of Safety Research 16(2):61-71, Summer 1985.
DeJoy reviews
attribution theory research in this paper and provides a useful
summary of its implications for safety management programs. Perceptions
of causality influence how workers appraise workplace hazards and
influence the design of safety programs. A safety program with punitive
enforcement measures, extensive rules and regulations, and little
two-way communication between labor and management suggests that
management views most accidents as the result of the worker and
reflects the belief that little attention needs to be given to environmental
factors. The policies and actions of top management influence the
perceptions of workers and first-line supervisors as well. If causal
attribution is incorrect, it can lead to inappropriate safety policies
and programs that may magnify rather than correct the problem.
DeJoy cites
studies that identify strong management commitment to safety. Safety
programs in these companies typically share the following features:
safety matters are given a high priority at company meetings and
planned activities; top managers are personally involved in safety
activities; safety officers are given relatively high rank and status
in the company; open, two-way communication exists between labor
and management on safety issues; importance is given to safety inspections,
environmental control, and general housekeeping; and distinctive
methods are used to promote safety awareness.
In summarizing
the implications of attribution research for safety programs, DeJoy
offers the following recommendations: (1) workplace accidents should
be investigated by a qualified person outside the workgroup and
not directly tied to line management; (2) summaries of all accident
investigations should be distributed to all workers and managers
involved; (3) safety messages of all forms should be carefully developed
to take into account the sources of bias that may influence the
recipient's interpretation of the message; (4) a program should
be developed for reporting and analyzing near-miss and minor-loss
accidents; (5) supervisor safety training programs should inform
supervisors of the types of attributional bias likely to operate
in accident assessment and the implications of such bias; and (6)
managers need to be made aware of the multi-causal nature of accidents
and the need to integrate safety into the total management system.
Dejoy, D.M.
Supervisor attributions and responses for multi-causal workplace
accidents. Journal of Occupational Accidents 9:213-223,1987.
This paper
is a study of how those in supervisory roles attribute responsibility
for and respond to workplace accidents. Subjects read industrial
accident reports that varied in terms of the description of cause
(e.g., worker failure versus machine failure) and severity of outcome.
Severity of outcome did not substantially affect how evaluators
attributed responsibility or selected remedies. The gender of the
study subjects also had no observable effect on decision-making.
Overall, however, subjects "overattributed" accidents
to lack of effort on the worker's part; that is, when worker ability
or task difficulty were apparently related to the accident, they
stressed that greater worker effort, rather than improved supervision
or management, might have remedied the situation. The researchers
suggest that this behavioral tendency shifts the responsibility
to the worker and is likely to result in a safety climate in which
little training, task analysis, or hazard control is attempted,
and inadequate measures are used to control losses.
Denton,
D.K. Safety Management: Improving Performance. New York, McGraw-Hill,
Inc,1982.
This book
is based on the assumption that making safety management more employee
centered will improve safety performance by increasing worker awareness
of and responsibility for safety. Case studies to support this assumption
are supplied. The authors discuss management practices to shift
emphasis to the employee, as well as motivation theories, styles
of communication, decision-making, training, and statistical methods
for tracking safe performance. The information in this book will
be useful to the safety manager or trainer interested in improving
communication; some specific management practices described, such
as the creation of worker safety committees, may also be useful
in the development of standard operating procedures.
Fellner,
D.J. and Sulzer-Azaroff, B. Increasing industrial safety practices
and conditions through posted feedback. Journal of Safety Research
15:7-21, Spring 1984.
This concise
and interesting paper describes a well-documented study on the use
of posted feedback as a behavioral technique to improve safety performance.
The authors begin by reviewing the literature on the use of performance
feedback to promote safety. They cite a number of studies that have
found that individual or public feedback, accompanied by goal setting,
effectively increased safe conditions and practices. This particular
experiment was designed to determine whether positive and specific
feedback posted weekly would increase safe practices and conditions
and consequently decrease injuries. Although the study was conducted
in a paper mill, the techniques employed could be used in construction
operations.
The researchers
established baseline rates for safe conditions and practices in
the mill. They then conducted weekly inspections in each of 17 rooms
and posted feedback on safe conditions in an area visible to all
employees in that room. Brief (10-minute) meetings were held with
hourly and salaried employees to discuss the feedback. After four
months, a similar procedure was followed to give feedback on work
practices.
Statistically
significant improvements in working conditions were found in rooms
with posted feedback; safe practices increased from 4 percent to
30 percent; the percentage of nonhazardous work zones overall increased
from a baseline of 79 percent to 85 percent. Posted feedback also
increased safe practices overall from a baseline of 78 percent to
85 percent. There was a modest though significant reduction in injuries
over the course of the study.
The authors
emphasize that the program was inexpensive to develop and implement.
Additionally, although the feedback did not specifically address
injuries, the injury rate decreased after the program was implemented.
The study suggests that providing and displaying positive feedback
from construction inspections could be an effective, inexpensive
method for improving construction safety.
Landeweed,
J., et al. Risk taking tendency among construction workers. Journal
of Occupational Accidents 11:183-196, February 1990.
The behavior
of construction workers is often mentioned as one of the most important
micro-level factors in the occurrence of accidents. Intentionally
unsafe behavior at work and a willingness to take risks have been
considered significant risk factors. This study, conducted in the
Netherlands, evaluated construction workers' risk-taking tendencies
in relation to their involvement in accidents and their safety performance.
Risk-taking was also compared to that of male alpine skiers and
male patients of general practitioners. Statistical corrections
were made for gender, education, and age. Behavioral tests were
used to evaluate risk-taking tendencies. Construction workers did
not score higher on willingness-to take-risk measures than the male
patients, and construction workers also scored relatively low on
the TAS (Thrill and Adventure Seeking) scale and reported little
need to engage in risky physical activity. This was significantly
different from the findings for alpine skiers. As a result, the
authors indicate that safety campaigns in construction must involve
structural change at the worksite if improvements are to be expected.
They also indicate the need for further study and validation of
their results.
Lanier,
E. Reducing injuries and costs through team safety. Professional
Safety. American Society of Safety Engineers 7:21-2S, July 1992.
The author
describes the results achieved by the Mecklenburg County (NC) Engineering
Department in its attempts to cut occupational injuries through
implementation of a safety program based on the team concept popular
in modern management theory. The Department's managers decided to
deveIop the program in 1985, when the 200-person staff registered
73 injuries at a total cost to the County of over $50,000. Introduction
of the safety program was preceded by a hazard analysis conducted
by management. The decision was made to test the program first in
the 50-person drainage crew, which had consistently experienced
the highest number of injuries. The program consisted of tool box
safety meetings held on-site at a frequency determined by the workers
themselves. Injury results were recorded and displayed daily. On
a quarterly basis, rewards--in the form of time off-were given to
the team with the best safety performance. Based on the success
achieved in reducing injuries among members of the drainage crew,
management decided to extend the program to the landfill crew. The
results were disappointing. Management determined that the poor
results were due to the fact that landfill workers saw their work
as being more independent and skilled and resented being assigned
to teams. A second attempt, in which landfill workers picked their
own team members, yielded excellent results. In l990, following
extension of the program to the remaining two divisions, the Engineering
Department as a whole recorded only 29 injuries, at a cost of $15,448.
Mattila,
M. and Hyodyamoa, M. Promoting job safety in building: An experiment
on the behavior analysis approach. Journal of Occupational Accidents
9:266-267, 1988.
The aim of
this study was to determine whether behavioral methods can be effective
in improving safety in construction. Four building sites were selected--two
experimental sites and two control sites. A system of safety targets
and feedback was used at the experimental sites. Attainment of the
safety performance targets and the site's accident rate were used
as measures of success. Focusing on feedback during the inspection
process was judged to improve the safety inspection function overall.
Posting of graphic feedback was found to be more effective than
written feedback in achieving safety targets. Compared with the
control sites, accident rates at the experimental sites were lower,
and accidents were less serious. The researchers concluded that
behavioral methods and a simple safety goal-setting and feedback
program could be effective in improving construction safety conditions.
It is also conceivable that because experimental site participants
were told about the study, that additional attention alone yielded
improved safety behavior.
Zohar, D.
Promoting the use of personal protective equipment by behavior modification
techniques. Journal of Safety Research 12(2):78-85, Summer 1980.
This is a
review article that considers three studies in which behavioral
approaches were used to increase the use of personal protective
equipment. In the first study, pre- and post-shift audio grams were
used on a portion of a worker population to promote earplug usage.
Test results were both posted and given directly to individual workers.
This technique increased earplug usage from 35 percent to 85 percent
in a metal fabrication plant where group lectures, poster campaigns,
and disciplinary actions had already been tried. One of the most
important observations was that the 85 percent usage level was obtained
after the treatment phase of the experiment had ended. The interpretation
of this finding was that supervisor behavior had changed during
the course of the experiment; earplug usage was made compulsory
in production areas and punitive actions accompanied violations.
This change in the environment was thought to have reinforced desired
behavior.
Token economy
systems were used in the other two experiments reviewed in this
study. In one experiment, individual earplug usage recorded during
randomly timed daily tours of a textile plant was rewarded with
a token that could be exchanged for consumer goods. The second experiment
also rewarded earplug usage with tokens, but varied the value of
the tokens according to the total number of workers in compliance
in the department. In both of these studies, earplug usage increased
sharply and remained steady throughout a follow-up phase. Usage
levels were maintained at the higher levels over time despite high
employee turnover rates.In their discussion, the reviewers state
that a change in manager awareness and behavior results from being
called upon to develop and implement such a program. Maintenance
of modified behaviors seems to be reinforced by program success.
Earplug usage may also be self-reinforcing in that, after an initial
adaptation period, the noise reduction is appreciated by workers.
The reviewers admit that these studies may not be predictive for
other personal protective equipment, but they argue that the extremely
low cost of such a program warrants experimentation. As with posted
feedback studies, prompt access to test results or immediate reinforcement
of desired behavior may be necessary to reinforce desired behavior.
WORKER PROTECTION
IN CONSTRUCTION
Bruening,
J. Pizzagalli Construction: Performance-oriented safety pays off.
Occupational Hazards, pp. 45-48, June 1989.
This article
details the safety management practices of Pizzagalli Construction
Co., a firm that halved its recordable injury rate from 1986 to
1988 and reduced its lost workday rate from 7.9 to 5.2 over the
same period. As a result, the firm has achieved a 76 percent reduction
in workers' compensation costs and a 96 percent reduction in general
liability insurance costs. The safety manager attributes the program's
success to three components: training, awards and incentives, and
drug and alcohol testing. The article describes each of these aspects
of the overall safety program. Subcontractors are expected to meet
the same high standards and can be fined for non-compliance. Contrary
to frequently expressed concerns about drug and alcohol testing
programs, the safety program manager states that the majority of
employees support the program. The importance of a strong, positive
safety message from management is also stressed.
Business
Roundtable. Absenteeism and Turnover: A Construction Industry Cost
Effectiveness Project Report. Report C-6, September 1989.
The Construction
Industry Cost Effectiveness Project was a long-range effort to "develop
a comprehensive definition of the fundamental problems in the construction
industry and an accompanying program for resolution." It focuses
on the industrial, utility, and commercial sectors and was developed
from the point of view of the owners or users of construction. This
particular report is based on the results of a questionnaire developed
by owners and contractors and completed by more than 1,000 workers
at job sites ranging from 125 to 3,000 workers. The questionnaire
was designed to measure worker attitudes toward their jobs and reasons
for absenteeism or turnover.
The most significant
finding in relation to construction safety was that the No. 1 reason
cited by workers for absences from work was unsafe working conditions.
On a scale of relative strength of response, this was given a rank
of 9; followed by excessive rework and travel distance at rank 8;
poor craft supervision at rank 6; poor overall management at rank
5; and personal and family illness at rank 4. Safety was not among
the top factors affecting turnover. The reasons for turnover reported
by workers included their relationship with the boss (10); overtime
available on another job (7); poor craft supervision (6); poor overall
job management (5); poor planning (4); excessive surveillance by
owner (3); and inadequate tools and equipment (2).
There were
no significant differences in the ranks assigned to these factors
by union or non-union workers or by workers from different geographical
areas. The study also found that a relatively small fraction of
the workforce was responsible for most of the absenteeism and voluntary
job turnover. Among the report's conclusions were that most reasons
for absenteeism and turnover, including unsafe working conditions,
were controllable. The study team also attempts to calculate the
economic impact of absenteeism and turnover and provides formulas
for these calculations. Finally, recommendations for methods by
which contractors, owners, and unions can decrease absenteeism and
turnover are offered.
Buskin,
S. and Paulozzi, L. Fatal injuries in the construction industry
in Washington state. American Journal of Indus~trial Medicine 11:453-460,
1987.
Fatal injury
records for construction workers in Washington State were examined
for the period 1973-1983. Falls, cave-ins, and electrocution accounted
for almost half (45.4 percent) of these deaths. Mortality increased
significantly with decreasing company size, with the mortality rate
among companies with one to four employees being almost three times
that of the largest (1,000+) companies. Age-specific proportionate
mortality ratios (PMRs) indicated significantly higher mortality
among older workers. Drilling machine operators, welders, flame-cutters,
reinforcing-iron workers, and heavy equipment operators had the
highest PMRs. These data were lower overall than national data,
and the authors felt that under-estimation may have occurred because
a sizeable number of non-production workers were included in the
denominators (however, since the inclusion of non-production workers
is standard practice nationally as well, relative rates should not
be affected). The authors suggest that equipment redesign may be
one of the most effective means of reducing risk, since smaller
companies have limited resources to dedicate to safety.
Culver,
C. Build a safer construction site. Safety & Health, pp. 7-76,
March 1993.
In this article,
the head of OSHA's Office of Construction and Engineering presents
construction safety statistics taken from a 1990 study conducted
by that office. Databases used for the study included OSHA's records
of fatality investigations and records for construction injuries
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Army Corps of Engineers,
and the Bureau of Reclamation. The data showed that specialty trade
contractors experienced a higher percentage of injuries than general
contractors or heavy construction contractors. Low-workday injury
rates, however, were consistently higher for heavy construction.
Most injuries, including lost-workday injuries, occurred during
the peak period of construction, from June to October, and on Mondays.
Fewest injuries occurred on Fridays. The causes of injuries were
essentially the same for all three types of construction. Injury
rates were highest for young workers and decreased with worker age.
Injury rates were higher during the first few weeks on a job site,
regardless of worker age. Among the construction trades, carpenters
and laborers accounted for 40 percent of the injuries, although
this may be attributable to the composition of the workforce and
the number of workers engaged in each trade rather than to job-related
risks. The author recommends that these statistics be used by managers
to implement preventive measures.
Davies,
V.J. and Tomasin, K. Construction Safety Handbook. London: Thomas
Telford Ltd, 1990.
This book
is geared toward civil engineers and their work as managers of project
safety. The initial chapters present accident statistics, the legal
obligations of employers, and pertinent occupational health and
safety laws and their enforcement. The discussion focuses on laws
in the U.K. The next several chapters present the activity-specific
hazards of construction and offers suggestions on how to control
them. The final third of the book discusses management systems for
safe construction. Safety management policies for firms of varying
sizes and examples of safety audit forms and checklists are presented.
Brief descriptions of training, personal protective equipment, and
first aid are also provided.
Dedobbeleer,
N. and German, P. Safety practices in the construction industry.
Journal of Occupational Medicine 29(11):863-868, November 1987.
This paper
is part of a larger cross-sectional study of factors related to
construction workers' safety performance. Here, the authors examined
construction workers' safety practices in relation to individual
and situational factors. Multilinear regression was used to correlate
each of seventeen variables with safety performance; these variables
explain 51 percent of the variance. The "predisposing factors"
of age and attitude toward safety performance accounted for most
of the variance. Perceived control over personal safety and
training exposure also affected worker compliance with safety regulation.
The youngest construction workers were found to have low safety
performance scores, little knowledge of safety practices, and unfavorable
attitudes toward safety performance; the authors suggest that this
group of workers requires special attention and that mandatory safety
training before employment may be advisable. The findings also indicated
that attitude toward safety performance was only weakly related
to safety training and not related to attendance at safety meetings.
The authors therefore suggest a need for more effective safety initiatives
based on learning by observation.
Dedobbeleer,
N., et al. Safety performance among union and non-union workers
in the construction industry. Journal of Occupational Medicine 32(11):1099-1103,
November 1990.
The results
are part of a larger cross-sectional study of factors related to
construction workers' safety performance. A self-administered questionnaire
was used to collect data from 384 workers at nine non-residential
construction sites in the Baltimore area. Information was collected
on demographic and occupational characteristics, safety practices,
safety training, knowledge of safety practices, attitudes towards
safety practices, and other factors. The authors stratified their
sample based on union membership and observed several differences
between groups. Union members were likely to be older, have more
stable employment, and to have been exposed to more safety training
(76 percent of union members versus 33.7 percent of non-union workers).
Union members also reported more often that proper equipment was
available, that regular safety meetings were held, and that co-workers
had a favorable attitude toward safety. When the effect of age difference
was removed, however, there was no significant difference in the
on-site safety practice of union and nonunion workers.
Among the
authors' conclusions was that non-union construction sites need
special safety attention because they attract the youngest workers,
those most likely to exhibit poor safety performance; a second conclusion
was that unions serve the important functions of providing safety
training and increasing the workers' perception of control over
their safety on the job. Union and non-union perceptions of management's
safety attitudes and practices did not differ, and the authors theorize
that this may reflect the difficulties unions face in attempting
to influence management attitudes.
Fullman,
J.B. Construction Safety, Security and Loss Prevention. New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1984.
Fullman integrates
a knowledge of work-site hazards with an understanding of human
behavior in construction to provide a guidebook for construction
safety. As he discusses the various phases of construction, the
author describes the types of activity in each phase; provides a
profile of the associated job sectors and their accident statistics;
discusses some existing regulations, the physical hazards and personal
behavior which might lead to accidents during a given activity or
phase; and offers field examples and suggestions for management
practices. Included in these suggestions are descriptions of personal
protective equipment and sampling/testing devices. The author's
recommendations are based on his experience in the construction
industry, and specifically on observations regarding the risks associated
with common work-site hazards. The book does not set forth a code
of management safety practices; it does, however, offer suggestions
about the principles to keep in mind when planning for construction
safety.
Hislop,
R.D. A construction safety program. Professional Safety, pp. 1-20,
September 1991.
The author
is an environmental and safety manager at Argonne National Laboratory,
and his article is a succinct summary of construction safety program
components. He lists these components as: a company safety policy,
project constructibility reviews, contractor screening, a pre-bid
safety meeting, pre-construction meetings, employee orientation,
toolbox talks, manager-contractor meetings, safety inspections and
audits, accident reporting and investigation, housekeeping, and
safety cost accounting. Brief explanations of the nature and importance
of each component are provided.
LaBar,
G. Breaking new ground in construction safety. Occupational Hazards,
pp. 58-63, May 1992.
LaBar's article
is an overview of the issues behind the growing interest in construction
safety management, above all the annual toll of over 2,000 deaths
and 630,000 injuries, with a cost to the industry of about $30 billion,
or 6 to 9 percent of total project costs. He offers examples of
firms with excellent safety records, like Bechtel Construction and
BE & K Construction Co., and describes specific measures taken
by these companies to develop successful safety programs. Included
among these are (1) providing a general construction safety handbook
to all employees, (2) developing site-specific safety plans and
providing sitespecific safety training, and (3) ensuring that subcontractors
have a safety program in place. On-site managers are held accountable
for the safety of their projects, and injury rates are calculated
for each project supervisor and considered in promotion decisions.
Annual safety conferences or hazard awareness classes are offered
for managers, and supervisors attend a safety and health workshop
at the beginning of each new project and again during peak project
activity. The companies use either an on-site safety professional
or off-site safety professionals to conduct frequent inspections.
Recommendations
from OSHA, NIOSH, and other safety organizations are also offered.
Included among these is the suggestion that property owners pre-qualify
contractors by reviewing their safety records. After subcontractors
have been selected, Bechtel develops a site safety and health program
that is binding on all employers on the project. A smaller firm,
Pepper Construction, provides safety meetings and training for subcontractor
employees and gives its on-site safety officers authority to inspect
and require corrections of hazards in subcontractor work. Written
safety and health programs were the single most frequently recommended
tool in improving site safety.
Levitt,
R.E. and Samelson, N.M. Construction Safety Management. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1987.
This book
is a comprehensive manual for construction managers. Its purpose
is to demonstrate the cost savings of safety management and to provide
managers at all levels with proven effective techniques for safely
managing construction work. Research was carried out by the authors
and their colleagues at Stanford University's Civil Engineering
Department, and the techniques presented emphasize the behavioral
side of construction safety. The introductory chapters present cost
accounting methods that reflect the full financial burden of accidents.
Results of a Stanford Cost Accounting System study are presented;
the authors also discuss how modification of the accounting system
to reflect accidents can increase line awareness of safety issues.
Separate chapters on management techniques are provided for CEO's,
the job-site manager, the foreman, and safety professionals. Information
on training, communication' and incentive programs is included.
The final chapters address owners and the bidding process and offer
a questionnaire for evaluating contractor safety.
Occupational
Health & Safety Staff. Nobody takes a fall. Occupational Health
& Safety, p. 57, January 1992.
This article
describes a "safety enhancement" program initiated by
Brown & Root Braun, Inc. to eliminate fall hazards, which account
for 30-35 percent of construction fatalities. The program was developed
by a task force of representatives from all craft disciplines. Fall-prevention
engineering is used to create a safer working environment. Remotely
actuated pin extractors, full-body fall-protection harnesses and
retractable lines are used to provide continuous fall protection.
Brown & Root Braun's safety record is five times better than
the national average for recordable injuries, and the company's
"100 Percent Fall Prevention Program" exceeds the requirements
of OSHA's proposed fall protection construction standard.
Rademaker,
K. Activate your fall protection defenses. Occupational Hazards,
pp. 40-43, December 1991.
In both 1989
and 1990, falls were the second leading cause of death in the workplace.
Safety experts suggest that the fatality rate remains high because
both employees and supervisors mistakenly view falls as a random
occurrence. The article reviews and compares the advantages of safety
belts, harnesses, and retractable lifelines. The importance of safety
training is emphasized; employers are advised against assuming that
union workers from apprenticeship programs have received training
in fall protection. Regular maintenance of fall protection equipment
is also a priority.
Robinson,
J. Workplace hazards and workers' desires for union representation.
Journal of Labor Research 9(3):238-249, Summer 1988.
Using data
from three surveys conducted between 1977 and 1982, the researchers
found that workers exposed to significant health and safety risks
on the job were more likely to express a pro-union attitude than
were comparable workers not similarly exposed. The actual extent
of unionization, however, appeared to be related to management resistance
rather than to worker interest in unionization. Lack of promotions
was the second most influential factor in explaining workers' pro-union
stance, followed by injury rates, unpleasant surroundings, and lack
of training.
Robinson,
J.C. The rising long-term trend in occupational injury rates. American
Journal of Public Health 78(3):27-281, 1988.
This article
documents long-term trends in occupational injury rates in the manufacturing,
construction, and trade sectors. The period covered includes the
late 1950s through 1985; data were collected from the national establishment
survey published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the United
States as a whole and workers' compensation data for the State of
California. The article focuses on manufacturing but reports the
following for construction:
- Disabling
injuries per million hours worked in construction increased steadily
after 1975, both in the United States as a whole and in California;
- Injury
rates in manufacturing, construction, and the trade sectors have
fluctuated in recent years around levels not witnessed since the
1940s and 1950s or earlier; and
- Work-related
fatalities relate poorly to less serious work injuries.
Suruda,
A., et al. Deaths from trench cav~ins in the construction industry.
Journal of Occupational Medicine 30(7):552-555, 1988.
Information
from OSHA investigation reports, DOT files, and newspaper clippings
were used to characterize trench cave-in fatalities occurring
from 1974-1986. A total of 306 deaths for which sufficient data
were available for analysis were identified. The authors provide
a breakdown of fatalities by SIC code; most of the deaths occurred
in the sewer construction industry. Fatalities were skewed toward
the younger ages, although a standard-ized mortality ratio (SMR)
analysis indicated that this was statistically significant only
for the 20- to 24-year-old age group. Most deaths occurred in
shallow trenches, with a mean depth of 11.4 feet, and workers
in smaller firms had an increased risk of death. In only one death
was the employee killed while inside a trench box, and almost
all cases occurred in trenches without shoring. This study was
done in response to an OSHA call for comment on the need to revise
its standards for trenches and excavations. The authors point
to California as a State which has been able to cut its trench
cave-in fatalities by more than half, and suggest that the California
requirement that contractors obtain a permit from the Health Department
for any trench deeper than five feet may be significant.
Trent,
R. and Wyant, W. Fatal hand tool injuries in construction. Journal
of Occupational Medicine 32(8):711-714, 1990.
Although
there has been research on occupational hand tool injuries, this
study is the first to focus specifically on fatalities linked
to hand tools, as reported in 62 OSHA reports filed between 1979
and 1982. The researchers confirmed their hypothesis that fatalities,
like injuries, could be differentiated by source of energy contact.
But although non-fatal injuries occur mostly at the point of energy
transfer (e.g., drill points, saw blades, hammer faces, points
of torches, welders, steamers and irons), fatal injuries are caused
primarily by low voltage supply energy. The study also found that
most deaths caused by falls or being hit by objects are preventable
with the proper application of known protective measures. All
the reported electrocutions could have been prevented by the use
of a ground fault circuit interrupter. The authors cite the significant
risks of three hazards that are often not recognized on construction
sites: low-voltage energy, working at heights, or working with
unsupported overhead materials.
Walters,
N.K. Safety management accountability process: An effective approach
at DuPont. Professional Safety, pp. 35-38, August 1983.
Walters'
article provides a summary of safety management principles applicable
in any business setting. DuPont's safety record, at the time of
publication, was said to be 22 times better than that of the average
chemical company and 68 times better than the average industrial
company, using National Safety Council statistics. The company
has received NSC's Award of Honor 34 times.
The seven
safety principles cited by the author include: (1) all injuries
can be prevented, (2) management at all levels is responsible
for preventing injuries and illnesses, (3) all operating expenses
can be controlled, (4) safety is a condition of employment and
each employee must be responsible for working safely, (5) employees
must be thoroughly trained, (6) all deficiencies must be immediately
corrected, and (7) it is good business to prevent injuries and
illnesses.
DuPont develops
a safety program for every level of the company--corporate, departmental,
site and process--and workers are trained that safety is the number
one priority.
First-line
supervision is the primary conduit for all safety and health communications
from top management to hourly employees. Hazard communication
is described as a combination of active training and passive communication
through labeling and signage. A Safety Division exists to ensure
that all sites meet safety and health goals. Top management demonstrates
its commitment to safety frequently; the company reinforces safe
behavior throughout the organization by making safety a major
yardstick of management performance. Key elements of the DuPont
program include feedback mechanisms to identify weaknesses in
the system and open discussion of inspection results. At weekly
management meetings, safety is always the first topic on the agenda.
Lost-time injuries must be reported to the executive committee
within 24 hours, and fatalities must be reported immediately to
DuPont site managers worldwide. According to the author, the program
has resulted in improved operating effectiveness, high employee
morale, improved community relations, and cost savings.
This document appears in the eLCOSH website with the permission
of the author and/or copyright holder and may not be reproduced
without their consent. eLCOSH is an information clearinghouse. eLCOSH
and its sponsors are not responsible for the accuracy of information
provided on this web site, nor for its use or misuse.
eLCOSH | CDC
| NIOSH
| Site Map | Search
| Links | Help
| Contact Us | Privacy Policy
|
|