Safety management software provides a more powerful alternative to paper-based systems and spreadsheets. It helps to identify trends, determine the root causes of incidents and oversee planned actions.
To be quite honest, gathering safety data, is very easy. The hard part is making sense of it of the captured data. Most organisations do a wonderful job with capturing safety data. Common methods include good old-fashioned paper or a combination of digital files and spreadsheets.
However, few companies are effectively able to convert the gathered data into centralised, actionable insight. Without actionable insight, all the data in the world is useless. It is what can be done with the data that is more important.
While spreadsheets may seem like the best course of action, issues like re-entry errors can actually lead to spotty information and other inefficiencies. Paper documents can easily be misplaced or improperly filed. All these are common drawbacks of traditional safety management systems and none of them provides actionable insights.
The role of safety management software
Safety management software provides a more efficient alternative to traditional methods of safety management. The software automatically manages data and allow for trends, root causes and plan actions to all be identified in real time.
One of the core components of any risk reduction program is safety data analysis. However, identification and corrective actions also play a significant role. It is quite unfortunate, though; that these efforts can quickly become useless when there is lack of proper communication channels.
Beakon’s safety management software provides proper identification of risks to enable the appropriate people within the organization take corrective actions. As these violations are amended, the possibility to help your safety team validate the accuracy of the Corrective Action plans and also capture all the visual evidence of safe conditions makes it a very useful tool.
Communication methods of safety management systems
One of the most effective ways of keeping your safety team accountable for safety is continuous communication. However, effective communication can be very time-consuming especially when it comes to managing it alongside everyday tasks and deadlines.
The more specific and tailored the communication is, the more impact it has and the more it sticks to your members. Beakon’s safety management software has a reporting feature that can easily automate all communication tasks as well as provide other additional benefits.
The first step towards driving change and improvement in your organisation is by making sense of your safety data. The right software ensures accurate safety data is available to those who need it, when they need it. Take advantage of Beakon’s safety management software by signing up for a free trial today.
Being a safety manager, dealing with difficult decisions every day is probably something you are already used to. From ensuring employees are up to date on all safety protocol to on-boarding new contractors, chances are your hands are already quite full.
Deciding whether to use software to manage your organisation’s health and safety needs or not, should not be a difficult decision. Technology makes everything easier, including managing your OH&S systems. Unfortunately, many businesses still rely on the traditional method of using documentation. In addition, deciding on how to implement the software in the organisation is also an issue.
While it is easy to be bogged down in details when researching safety management software, it is important to know what it is you need in your organization. This article looks at four critical mistakes safety managers make when deciding to use safety management software so you can avoid it.
Mistake #1 – Failure to determine safety objectives before deciding on safety modules
The number one mistake many safety managers make is not properly outlining their safety objectives before reviewing safety modules on the software they are researching.
Without first being aware of your needs and goals, you will never be able to list out your safety needs.
To do that, you need to ask yourself questions like:
What improvements do we want to achieve?
How can we quantify these improvements?
What is working well at the moment and what can be improved upon?
These questions will help you make clear decisions because now you know what your objectives are, and you only need to look for software (such as Beakon’s) that presents these data in an intuitive way with reports, dashboards, notifications, etc.
Mistake #2 – Failure to present a strong business case for investing in safety management software
Another mistake safety managers make is failing to present a strong business case for investing in software to make their job more efficient. When the case is presented poorly, the approval to migrate to more robust safety management software is often denied.
Either most companies rely on paper records to manage their safety program, or they use software that does not properly cater to their needs. Whichever the case, they will be reluctant to switch to a modern solution. The best way to make your case is to highlight the fact a properly implemented safety plan reduces injury rate, which in turn lowers your “Experience Modification Rate“ or EMR.
Mistake #3 – Failure to design an implementation plan
Finally, another mistake safety managers make is not properly planning an implementation or rollout plan. They assume the hard part is getting management on-board but in fact, rolling out the entire safety program across the entire organisation (and locations) is much harder.
When you fail to outline these steps, poor adoption of your safety program and managerial headache are some of what you can expect. You have two options when it comes to an implementation plan. The first option is to rollout the software once across the entire organization. The other option is to use a phased approach and roll out segments of the program over a period of time.
The following factors will affect your decision:
The maturity of your organisation’s current safety management program
Your organisation’s history of adoption and tolerance for change
The general sense of urgency you are getting from top-level management
These factors will help you make the right decision when trying to choose the perfect implementation plan to use when you start using new safety software for your organisation.
Reducing your organisation’s safety risk is a top priority and using safety management software will make your job a whole lot easier. Take advantage of a free trial of our safety management software today to start enjoying the benefits.
Using safety audit software could be one of the best decisions you can make for your organisation. This piece of software can literally catapult your company into the “best in class” category effortlessly. Using this software is the only way to ensure that your company’s processes are compliant with necessary health and safety laws.
What is safety audit software?
A safety auditing software, such as Beakon’s, allows you to streamline your organisation’s health and safety auditing process. The software helps you easily conduct audits and safety inspections from the field, using your either your tablet or mobile phone. Furthermore, the safety audit software helps you synchronise your data securely allowing you to share your audits in real-time from anywhere.
What are the benefits of using safety audit software?
There are several benefits of using safety audit software in your organisation. When you streamline your auditing, a lot of manual processes automatically become extinct. These include paper trails and documentation that could easily be misplaced.
Some of the benefits you can expect when you deploy a safety audit software in your organisation include:
Increased operational efficiency
Standardises safety practices by location, auditor, and project
Measures the quality and effectiveness of your safety program
Helps to save time and money on all safety initiatives
In addition to these benefits, the level of stress associated with external health and safety auditors are reduced significantly. No longer will your employees have to feel anxious about auditing. Now they can look forward to it confidently and possibly achieve the “best in class” status.
What does “best in class” mean for your company?
Companies that constantly ace their safety and health audits are those considered by the Aberdeen Report as “best in class” in safety. This means the companies report fewer incidents, while also saving money by being more efficient and still maintain project deadlines.
According to the report, these companies are more likely to have a centralised auditing system, have the ability to conduct digital audits at each site and collect data automatically. Additionally, these companies are twice more likely to use mobile devices when they are in the field.
Using software on mobile devices makes audit reporting much easier regardless of location. This in turn enables field workers to provide feedback on any issues they encounter in real-time. This immediate feedback helps your organisation be more proactive when it comes to safety issues, instead of being reactive.
In conclusion, using software for your company’s safety audit helps to hold your team more accountable to international standards. Beakon’s audit software is top-class when it comes to safety. Take advantage of a free trial today and start your journey towards a more efficient audit processing.
Written safety policies do not ensure a culture of safety at a company. Although putting a foundation of safety policies and best practices in writing is essential to a successful safety management system, a collection of policies alone cannot create an environment where employees feel safe and instinctively make safe choices.
Creating a culture of safety takes time and begins with real commitment from all levels of management—not just a Safety First sign as you enter the building or verbal commitment to safety by the CEO or facility manager, but an active commitment that leadership demonstrates every day in the decisions they make and the actions they take. Frontline supervisors set the tone because they have to make quick decisions throughout the day, including corrective action when a hazard is identified. Their first priority is safety.
The decision to make safety a priority must be fully supported, encouraged, and rewarded by managers and executives to consistently reinforce that making safe decisions is most important among all levels of leadership. Taking action to correct unsafe conditions or using a positive approach to coaching team members on safe behavior deepens the internal commitment to following safe-work practices.
Fostering a culture of safety also requires a facility that is clean, organized, and well maintained. It is difficult to expect employees to commit to safe-work practices if the facility in which they work is dirty, unorganized, and in disrepair. On the contrary, employees are much more likely to feel their company values safety and remain engaged to continue to work safely if the environment around them is well-lit, orderly, and properly maintained and if signage clearly indicates safety requirements and expectations and employees are provided with high-quality safety equipment and personal protective equipment, when necessary.
Third-Party Evaluation Provides a Benchmark To begin to understand where a facility is in its journey to provide a safe environment, it makes sense to engage a third party to visit a workplace, provide an unbiased facility safety evaluation, and gauge the safety culture of the organization through safety behavior observation and employee interviews. Too often a company functions under the “we’ve always done it this way” mantra or has become blind to unsafe working conditions or hazards hidden in plain sight.
Safety consultants, insurance representatives, corporate safety teams, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) compliance specialists, industry peers, and other companies that participate in OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program (VPP) are well equipped to conduct a safety audit to provide a company with a benchmark, indicating where the company can improve or where it excels.
A comprehensive safety analysis should not be limited to the facility. It should also include a review of all tasks and processes, giving priority to such high-risk areas as fall protection, lockout/tagout, confined spaces, electrical safety, lifting and rigging, and heavy equipment use, because failures in those areas can have serious consequences. Evaluate the hazards of each task and develop safe solutions to correct them. This means phasing out “we have always done it this way” processes and replacing them with best practices that use hazard analysis as a guide for development of new work processes. It also means implementing solutions to ensure the right equipment is being used for the right job. For example, if a company is striving to prevent falls, which are consistently one of the most frequently cited OSHA violations and a serious hazard in any line of work, an extension ladder or makeshift scaffold may not be the best choice for workers who need to use hand tools to access a motor or filter high above the shop floor.
Employee Engagement is Key If a company wants to have success in safety, it is critical that it actively engage its employees to ensure that a strong safety culture can survive and grow. This means sharing the vision for safety and inviting and encouraging each employee to participate in shaping and achieving that vision.
Employee engagement can be accomplished in a number of ways, beginning with the establishment of employee-led safety committees and inviting all team members to join the committees. Participating in regularly scheduled meetings puts the pulse of shop floor employees in front of any safety initiative. Companies can also provide employees the opportunity to become voluntary first responders who are trained in emergency first aid, CPR, the use of automated external defibrillators, and other emergency response protocols.
Other employee engagement activities also contribute to a culture of safety, among them safety poster or calendar contests that employees can share with their families, small work teams for identifying and making safety improvements through facility safety audits or safety behavior observations, safety mentor programs that assign mentors to new team members, or, in the case of JLG Industries, Inc., a Safety Action Tracker. This program tracks safety opportunities as employees identify them, providing a description of the item and a photograph if one is available, describing the corrective action to be taken, identifying a target date for completion, and assigning an employee responsibility for taking the corrective action. This information is posted and available to all employees, supporting transparency, encouraging communications, and directing the appropriate resources to make a safety improvement in a timely manner.
JLG Industries also engages employees in activities designed to identify workers performing tasks in awkward postures or positions where ergonomics could be improved. The goal is to recognize these situations and propose solutions to remedy them. Additionally, these small work teams identify opportunities, such as maintaining work material within a self-regulated “power zone” of 15 to 60 inches. Known as the 15/60 rule, this rule ensures no product or materials necessary to perform a manufacturing job require an employee to reach down below 15 inches or above 60 inches. This simple guideline can improve ergonomics, while providing a well-organized and safer workstation.
Training Supports a Culture of Safety Ongoing education and training also support a culture of safety. Although employers can develop their own safety training programs, OSHA offers a number of training resources for both employers and employees. The OSHA Outreach Training Program provides training for workers and employers on the recognition, avoidance, abatement, and prevention of safety and health hazards in workplaces. Through this program, workers can attend 10- or 30-hour classes delivered by OSHA-authorized trainers. The 10-hour class is intended to provide workers with awareness of common job-related safety and health hazards, while the 30-hour class is more appropriate for supervisors or workers with some safety responsibility.
Of even greater value are hands-on training programs that simulate the work environment. Programs like this provide training essentials in a setting that mimics the workplace but eliminates workplace pressures. They are especially useful as part of new employee training programs that teach job skills and ergonomic practices prior to an employee’s introduction to the production environment.
VPP Assesses Safety and Health Systems Companies that want to be recognized for their commitment to workplace safety can participate in OSHA’s VPP. It sets performance-based criteria for a managed safety and health system, invites sites to apply, and then assesses applicants against these criteria. OSHA’s verification includes an application review and a rigorous on-site evaluation by a team of OSHA safety and health experts. OSHA approves qualified sites to one of three programs:
Star: The Star Program is designed for exemplary work sites with comprehensive, successful safety and health management systems.
Merit: Merit is an effective stepping stone to Star. Merit sites have good safety and health management systems, but these systems need some improvement to be judged excellent. Merit sites demonstrate the potential and the commitment to meet goals tailored to each site and to achieve Star quality within three years.
Demonstration: The Star Demonstration program is designed for work sites with Star-quality safety and health protection to test alternatives to current Star eligibility and performance requirements. Star Demonstration program participants are evaluated every 12 to 18 months.
Always Evaluate and Re-Evaluate Whatever path a company chooses to follow as it strives to create a culture of safety, it is important to constantly monitor and evaluate the programs in place to ensure they are meeting the established benchmarks. It’s all about creating an environment that attracts new employees with the same safety mindset, while ensuring the safety of current employees—an evolving environment where safety is second nature to all employees and leadership, ingrained in their DNA, influencing every decision they make and action they take. In the end, a rigorous, comprehensive safety program, endorsed by management and employees alike and assessed by third-party experts, can help organizations achieve constant, continuous improvement.
An organization is a complex set of dynamically intertwined and interconnected elements (inputs, processes, outputs, feedback loops and environment) in which it operates. These elements are continuously changing, interacting, ebbing and flowing (Katz & Kahn, 1978).
Many safety initiatives fail to reach their potential because they are introduced and left to fend for themselves. Without the forethought to plan for sustaining new initiatives in this complex web of interconnectivity, companies often miss this valuable opportunity to make tremendous differences in peoples’ lives. When EHS professionals plan for their organizations’ safety evolution, they first need to build the climate for culture change.
Safety Climate vs Safety Culture
Organizational culture is a socially created construct. As a construct, culture is not easily quantified or measured. However, culture functions as a “control mechanism,” informally reinforcing or inhibiting some patterns of organizational assumptions or behaviors. These patterns of assumptions are so basic, so pervasive and so completely accepted as “the truth,” that no one thinks about or remembers them. They become “the way we have always done things around here.” (Schein, 2000)
Organizational climate, on the other hand, is what people see and report happening to them in organizational situations (Schneider, 2000). Safety climate focuses on the situation and on the perceptions of what the organization is like in terms of practices, policies, procedures, routines and rewards.
Climate describes “what” happens, whereas culture explains “why” people do the things they do. Thus, changing culture is more of a long-term process, where impacting climate can happen relatively quickly. Giving people year-end bonuses may influence the short-term climate, but fail to impact the long-term culture.
So, to create safety culture change, organizations first must positively influence their climate to ensure a long-term impact. With this clarification, to produce lasting change, EHS professionals need to focus on climate elements of new initiatives that will in the short-term influence the characteristics that need changing while at the same time, reinforce safety cultural norms that are maintaining the beneficial assumptions and behaviors that are keeping people safe.
3 Keys for Creating a Safety Evolution
Very seldom is a safety culture completely broken. Most of the time, companies either organizationally are complacent (few injuries, incidents, property damage, etc.) or have latent deficiencies and “drifted” but have not experienced any indicators. In either case, this is an ideal time to attempt organizational change, instead of waiting for someone to get hurt and risk looking reactive.
There are many methods for creating and sustaining organizational change (see Kotter, 1996, for one example). To create a safety step-change, however, there are three keys to ensure long-term success:
1) Make safety personal – Too often, organizations dehumanize safety by focusing on numbers or the recordable rate. The OSHA recordable rate, for instance, is one frequently used method of assessing safety performance. Whereas this recordable rate is an indicator, for high-performing organizations, it is an inadequate means for assessing safety culture because there are far too few instances to truly get a picture of performance.
Many companies only focus on injury statistics and not on safety statistics. To impact the safety climate, organizations never should quote the recordable rate to their employees. This reduces their experiences to numbers and minimizes the impact on the people with whom we work.
Furthermore, as we get closer to zero injuries, and the more the organization emphasizes these numbers, the more likely employees are to feel pressure to not report their injuries to avoid spoiling a perfect record. Achieving a safety milestone such as a zero recordable rate may positively influence the safety climate, but may negatively impact the culture if employees feel they must hide their injuries to receive recognition.
Safety is about people. To create the next safety step-change, organizations need to make safety personal again. When someone gets hurt, has a near miss, identifies property damage or makes a mistake, organizations have to respond in such a way that employees perceive this as a learning event and not an opportunity to shame and blame their coworkers.
This requires a change in our verbal behavior and how we communicate; we must portray these incidents as opportunities for system/process improvements. Using a one-on-one safety coaching, for instance, leaders should focus on the impact to the employee, their welfare, family, and livelihood, and not discuss if this would be considered a recordable incident. For organizations to move to the next level of safety performance, a focus on achievement-oriented safety statistics is essential.
2) Use safety analytics – As we move closer to cultures where injuries are rare occurrences, companies need to focus on achievement-oriented safety statistics to assess progress. This leading-indicator mentality has been the hot topic in safety for decades. However, few organizations know what to do with their leading indicators once they obtain them.
Counting the frequency and quality of leading indicators will not change the climate around safety.
To make lasting change, organizations need to use their safety intelligence to make proactive changes. These proactive changes can strengthen your initiative and thus strengthen your safety climate.
The safety field collects a plethora of safety intelligence, from training records to safety observations. Unfortunately, after an initial assessment, this critical safety analytics often is stored away and goes mostly unused. So, to impact our safety climates, we need to gather all our safety “big data,” put our safety analytics to use and get our leadership teams to become truly engaged in acting upon our valuable safety indicators.
Much of the safety data gathered by organizations comes from some sort of safety audit, inspection or observation. These processes are used to gather intelligence on the effectiveness of safety management systems. However, this information often is not trusted, is misused or is ignored.
Using safety analytics on the audits demonstrates to the organization that its participation in the safety process is needed and valued. Without using it, the collected data negatively can impact the long-term culture and lead to indifference and pencil-whipping.
To improve the climate for using observational data, organizations should develop a data usage plan to ensure safety intelligence is being reviewed, acted upon and communicated. A successful data use plan outlines who is going to get which report, at what frequencies, how they will share the information and what the value-add is for the organization.
The data usage plan should be rolled into a pre-existing leadership meeting, along with a week-look-back/week-look-ahead to help diagnose where the week’s inspections/observations should focus. These safety analytics help drive proactive change, demonstrate that safety gets a seat at the leadership table and help create a climate of continuous learning.
3) Build trust – By following the first two suggestions, the level of trust greatly should improve.
However, in many cultures where the primary focus only is on counting the number of inspections (checking off a box) – and failing to act upon the data is the norm – organizations begin to lose trust in their data. This “venomous cycle” often happens to the cultures that focus more on the numbers and less on the people-side of safety.
If employees do not trust that their safety audits are being reviewed, for instance, they may not put much effort in completing a quality observation. The leaders, in turn, receive safety data they do not trust and are hesitant to act upon it. This inaction leads to further pencil-whipping, more mistrust, and more inaction. To reverse this cycle, organizations need to act upon their safety analytics.
By using a data use plan, organizations can create a “virtuous circle” by acting on the observation intelligence provided and demonstrate the value of the information. This action and follow-up communication creates momentum that can produce a climate of discovery that eventually will lead to a culture of a learning organization.
Once your employees trust that the data they provide will be used to help their coworkers stay safe, the trust in the organizational processes grows and a cultural evolution begins to take shape. This empowering safety step-change can help organizations lay the foundations for decades of improvements, and eventually eliminate death on the job.
Most companies conduct periodic worksite safety inspections. This process is part of the traditional landscape of a comprehensive health and safety plan. At regular intervals, someone within the organization sets out to critically observe in an effort to identify and rectify hazards. But why are they done? Therein lies the interesting question.
Work site safety inspections can be a vital part of your injury prevention efforts if done well.
“Because we have to.”
Safety is often driven by compliance—either to a regulation or a company policy. Certainly, compliance is a factor and one that is often developed with a specific purpose in mind. OSHA has a clear imperative that employers are required to provide their employees with a place of employment that “is free from recognizable hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious harm to employees.” Worksite inspections serve as the vehicle to record hazards and document abatement.
As the saying goes—if it’s not documented, it didn’t happen. With that in mind, can companies meet the regulatory requirement by simply walking about every once in a while and fix what is found? Perhaps. While this satisfies a basic requirement, simply walking around and checking a box does not necessarily offer assurance that the workplace is free of recognizable hazards and meet the spirit and intent of the purpose the regulation is trying to express.
“Because we care.”
Conducting workplace safety inspections can serve a greater purpose than simply meeting a compliance requirement. In fact, work site safety inspections can be a vital part of your injury prevention efforts if done well. They can help reassure workers that the workplace is safe and help the company demonstrate that it cares.
In order for this to happen, a more robust process is necessary. The best methodology for this process is also one that is time tested and rooted in continuous improvement—the Deming cycle.
Define the purpose and set expectations.
Define an inspection strategy, collect observations, and perform the initial correction.
Periodically review data collected; identify gaps and trends.
Give feedback, develop action plans, and make data-driven decisions.
Let’s break this down by component:
The purpose of conducting work site safety inspections should be more than mere compliance. The purpose should be to prevent injuries. With that in mind, the expectations should be those inspections that detail critical observations of all areas should be conducted at a frequency that allows for sufficient trending of patterns.
With the expanded purpose and expectations, it may become clear that the frequency and breadth of current inspections are insufficient and may need to be expanded in order to meet the new requirements. In addition, a plan must be put in place to actually use the data collected, beyond checking the box and counting the “cards” submitted. Tracking and trending of findings are essential to meet the revised purpose of injury prevention.
Lastly, the planning elements must be communicated to everyone so that the purpose is clear.
The first step in this phase is the development of a comprehensive inspection strategy. This strategy should define who does inspections, when they occur, what is to be observed, and where they are to be done.
Who does inspections? A study was conducted that shows the probability of having an incident declines as the number and diversity of the people performing inspections increases. In fact, the study shows that having a large number of diverse inspectors doing a few inspections each is better than having a few inspectors doing a large number of inspections each, even if those inspectors are highly trained safety professionals. This inclusion helps to shift the ownership of safety away from the “safety” team and onto the entire organization.
When do they occur? An inspection is a snapshot in time. As the saying goes, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound? The same goes for safety inspections—if work occurs and there is nobody to evaluate it critically for safety, was the work done safely? It is best to schedule inspections to ensure good coverage across many days and shifts, as well as when infrequent work occurs, such as entering a confined space or performing lockout on energized equipment.
What is to be observed? This involves the task or category of hazard, such as PPE or fall protection. If the purpose is to prevent injuries, as defined in our Plan phase, then it is important to ensure each risk is observed enough to allow for trending and ultimately evaluation of risk. Typically, observers focus on the easier things to see, such as PPE, while the more difficult categories to evaluate, such as fall protection, receive fewer inspections. The fewer the inspections, the harder it is to evaluate risk, which ultimately leads to a diminishing ability to prevent those types of injuries.
Where is it to be done? Each project or location should be broken up into manageable areas and work groups to ensure each unique entity is observed. Ideally, each observation should be linked to both a location and a work group. In addition, each location and work group should have an expected number of inspections and/or observations within a given time period based on manpower and risk—the more manpower and the higher the risk, the more inspections necessary to ensure a safe working environment.
Collecting data in the previous stage is simply the beginning. Once data has been collected, the next step is to review the data. A data use plan is necessary to ensure that data are reviewed on a frequent and periodic basis and actions are taken to drive improvement. Think of it like this—if I stand on a scale and collect my weight each day and record it, will I lose weight? No! I must take the data, compare it against expectations, and then drive actions that will help improve the risk.
The idea is to look for gaps and trends in the data. A gap is something that is not being done that should be, such as observations in a particular category (e.g., electrical, confined space) or in a particular area. A trend is something that is seen over and over and will continue to repeat until the causal factors for the system are identified and remedied.
The last step in the continuous improvement loop is action. Without it, this is all simply wishful thinking or worse—a lesson in futility.
Action drives accountability. Action can include simple things, such as providing feedback or sharing information on trends that have been seen. It can also involve more complex solutions, such as a revision to the way in which work is performed or a pre-incident investigation based on at-risk trend information. It could even drive utilization of data as evidence in a data-driven decision, such as a request for a large capital expenditure.
Creating a Continuous Improvement Cycle
Too often safety programs have elements that are done because “That’s the way we’ve always done it” or, worse, “Because we have to.” Build into your program elements a noble purpose, and people will do them because they want to. Your inspections and observations allow the continuous improvement cycle to keep going, making your safety program that much better each time and ultimately helping to make sure that the entire workforce goes home safely at the end of the day.
You have to meet your co-workers, learn the ins and outs of the company, and begin performing your duties.
Meanwhile, you have to stay safe. This can be a challenge for new workers: Employees in their first month on the job have more than 3 times the risk for a lost-time injury than workers who have been at their job for more than a year, according to research from the Toronto-based Institute for Work & Health.
Possible reasons for this? Peter Smith, IWH scientist, points out that new workers may be performing unfamiliar tasks – some of them hazardous. In addition, the workers may be unsure about their safety rights and responsibilities, and might feel uncomfortable speaking up about a hazard.
“We can only speculate on the ‘why,’” said Curtis Breslin, another IWH scientist who has collaborated with Smith on research about new worker safety. “One thing studies have shown is that there’s a lack of familiarity. That’s a common theme that could be contributing to new workers’ increased risk. The other possibility is that new workers might be encountering more hazards. Or their risk perception – they don’t have the knowledge and awareness, so they’re underestimating the risks. It could be issues with training, maybe they’re not being trained [or receiving] on-the-job, hard-knocks-type training that happens in the first or second month.”
IWH research has found that few new workers receive safety training – 1 out of 5 among a sample of Canadian workers, according to a 2007 study.
“The fact almost 80 percent of workers who were in their first year of employment could not remember receiving any workplace safety or orientation training is worrying for a few reasons,” Smith said. “This likely results in these workers being without important knowledge that could prevent them, or one of their co-workers, [from] getting injured.”
However, according to IWH, as novice workers gain job experience, their risk declines.
Looking at the numbers
In 2013, nearly one-third of the nonfatal occupational injuries or illnesses that involved time away from work were suffered by workers with less than one year of service, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Nearly one-quarter of these cases resulted in 31 or more days away from work, said Ken Kolosh, statistics manager at the National Safety Council.
Certain subgroups of new workers are at heightened injury risk. In the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry, 45.4 percent of the injuries and illnesses in 2013 occurred among workers with less than one year of experience. In the construction and extraction industry, it was 34.9 percent.
“That makes sense because a lot of those industries are cyclical; they’re seasonally employed,” Kolosh said. “Almost by definition, many of those workers are always going to be new employees. The construction industry has a lot of seasonal employment. It has a lot of contractor-type workers, so a larger proportion of that population by definition is going to have less than three months of service.”
Construction workers frequently change jobsites as well, which can present problems.
“Every day, you have to be aware of what’s going on. You have to have good communication,” said Scott Schneider, director of occupational safety and health at the Washington-based Laborers’ Health and Safety Fund of North America. “It’s less an issue on unionized sites, where people have a substantial amount of safety training in apprenticeship programs. They also, as apprentices, get mentored along the way. It’s still an issue in the sense you’re going to a different jobsite, and you may not be familiar with that jobsite.”
IWH research published in 2012 concluded that risk was higher among new workers who were older, men and workers in the “goods sector,” including construction and manufacturing. This may be because these jobs have more physical demands, and older workers might be more physically susceptible to injury, Breslin said.
According to new research in the Journal of Accounting and Economics, financial goals may be more important than employee safety.
UCLA Anderson of Management Associate Professor of Accounting Judson Caskey and UT Jindal School of Management Assistant Professor of Accounting N. Bugra Ozel collaborated on a study that examined 14 years of data on workplace safety from the OSHA, documenting any data that might show correlation between analysts’ forecasts and injury/illness rates.
Caskey and Ozel found that any changes in operations or production that are meant to increase earnings impacted the number of injuries in the company. Specifically, an increase in employee workloads and in abnormal reductions of discretionary expenses caused a rise in injury/illness rates when analyst forecasts were met or exceeded.
“Managers can indirectly, and perhaps inadvertently, detract from safety by increasing workloads, hours, or the desired speed of work flow,” the authors said. “For example, rushed employees may have more accidents, and increased workload and hours without additional rest and recovery time can increase stress-related injuries. Managers can also directly impact safety by cutting safety-related expenditures.”
Researchers also noted that the relation between benchmark beating and workplace safety is stronger when there is less union presence, when workers’ compensation premiums are less sensitive to injury claims and among firms with less government business.