China doesn’t lack workplace safety regulations. The problem for workers is that they’re not enforced.

It’s often up to local authorities in China to enforce the country’s safety laws, according to the article in The Washington Times. Local officials are often paid off by factory owners to ignore serious injuries and even deaths.

This gives Chinese manufacturing a short-term advantage over the U.S., but the cost is life and limb.

Example: The China Labor Bulletin (CLB) recently reported on a worker who got a finger caught in some equipment and was sent to a hospital. It was cheaper for the company to compensate the unconscious worker for a lost hand than to surgically repair his finger.

When the worker woke up, his hand was gone.

The CLB also reports, “It is much more cost-effective for coal mine owners to buy off the families … than risk closure by reporting an accident,” leaving many deaths overlooked. Local governments often pressure bereaved families into signing compensation agreements.

The owners’ priority: Keep production moving.

And here’s another interesting factoid from the article: Some labor laws put into effect in China in 2008 used input from U.S. laws.

A Wall Street Journal article discusses the backgrounds of some of the selections.

President Obama’s latest choice, Joseph Main to oversee the Mining Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), continues a strong trend toward choosing labor over management and increased regulation over the Bush administration’s more hands-off approach.

Main was for many years a union official and mine-safety advocate. He began his career working in coal mines.

If approved, he’ll join Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, who had a well-documented pro-union background, and temporary OSHA head Jordan Barab, who previously worked for the AFL-CIO and who was fiercely critical of Bush’s labor policies.

In contrast, previous Labor Secretary Elaine Chao worked for Citicorp and BankAmerica and was considered anti-regulation and a staunch ally of business. Previous OSHA head Edwin Foulke Jr. was a management-side labor lawyer.

Main would be the first confirmed head of MSHA since 2004. Richard Stickler, who filled the post under President Bush, was a controversial former Bethlehem Steel executive who was installed as a recess appointment after failing to win approval from the Senate.

Mining-association groups say they expect Main, if approved, to be tough. But, they add, they know him and can work with him.

He may have his work cut out for him. Public Citizen, a consumer-advocacy group, says the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission has a backlog of 13,000 mine-safety disputes.

What do you expect from President Obama’s nominees? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

Michael Coleman, Manufacturing Specialty Administrator for the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) says the company he works for knows that by not cutting safety and health programs during the economic downturn, U.S. companies are holding onto and gaining in market share worldwide.

“However, those that reduce their safety and health budgets and programs are looking at losing that competitive edge,” Coleman said.

Coleman will discuss how safety programs help manufacturers stay competitive at this year’s ASSE Professional Development Conference and Expo, June 28-July 1 in San Antonio, TX.

Check in with SafetyNewsAlert.com next week for stories from the conference.

Other key presenters include acting OSHA administrator Jordan Barab and U.S. Department of Labor Secretary Hilda Solis.

“How do I get all my employees to wear their safety gear all the time?” It’s one of the top challenges safety pros face year after year. So we asked 290 of your peers about their experiences to find out the top reasons workers give for not wearing PPE.

And we also asked safety managers how they deal with the problem. Here are the results:

Fit/comfort

“It doesn’t fit right,” or “it’s uncomfortable” are the reasons 30% of safety pros hear most often when they ask workers why they aren’t wearing their PPE.

Solution: Get workers involved in PPE choice. Ask what the comfort and fit issues are with their safety gear.

Work with a few select employees to order several different trial samples of regulatory-compliant gear.

Then have these employees test it. If there isn’t a consensus, note whether people with certain physical characteristics prefer certain types. You may have to order more than one type to satisfy your workers.

‘I didn’t know’

Some workers will try to put the blame for their lack of PPE on someone else – many times their supervisors or trainers.

“I didn’t know I needed safety gear” was the top reason heard by 10% of safety pros.

Solution: When safety gear training is given, have workers sign a paper stating that they’ve received and understand the training.

To make this policy work, supervisors will have to follow up with disciplinary action when workers don’t wear PPE.

Time factor

“I didn’t have time,” or “it takes too much time” are the main reasons 18% of safety pros hear as excuses from workers without PPE.

The first step to solve this problem: Ask workers why and listen carefully to their answers. You may have a conflict between production and safety. In that case, ask production supervisors to emphasize that work doesn’t start until safety gear is on.

You may also find out these workers weren’t properly trained about donning PPE. Another possibility is that workers are rushing to get to their stations on time because of tardiness. Disciplinary measures may be necessary in those cases.

They’re invincible

“I won’t get in an accident” is heard most often by 8% of managers.

Oddly enough, this sentiment is expressed by two very different groups.

Young workers often think they’re invincible — that nothing bad will ever happen to them. If they haven’t been exposed to a serious injury, it may seem to them like “that only happens to other people.”

More experienced workers who have gone their entire career without a serious workplace injury adopt this rationale: I’ve always done it this way and haven’t been hurt so far.

Solution: Show them how it has happened. Invite someone who suffered a serious — and possibly debilitating — workplace injury to speak to an all-hands safety meeting.

Ask the person to explain in detail how the injury has affected his life — how everyday activities others take for granted are now much more difficult for him.

Another tactic: Tell employees to put an arm behind their back. Now, ask them to perform a simple task such as tying their shoes.

Memory lapse

The rest, 34%, say “I just forgot.” Check first if fit, comfort or time is a factor before accepting this excuse.

This is where a strong safety policy comes into play. Each workplace has to decide how often it’s acceptable for someone to “just forget” and what will happen to the employee each time. Universal enforcement — up to dismissal if appropriate — will send a message to others to always wear their PPE.

What’s the biggest excuse you hear from employees when they don’t wear their PPE? What has — and hasn’t — worked for you to make sure they wear it? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

The answer is through other signs. Sure, no one posts contradictory signs that say, “Production First.” But the signs take other forms such as output graphs, production pressures and reward programs that suggest production is the real No. 1 priority.

Only when employees understand the proper integration of safety and production are they able to make the right choices to make sure it really is “Safety First” at your company.

So how do you get them to do that? It’s all about communication.

Learning to choose

It’s clearly not enough to tell them that safety comes first – if that were the case, the signs would be all you need.

Employees have to learn how the consequences of their choices can impact the things they value most. That’s according to Tania Van der Stap, founder and a safety consultant with Align Strategic Management Services in Australia, who spoke at this year’s ASSE Safety 2008 conference.

She suggests speaking to employees in small groups that have structure but provide plenty of time for open discussion. Include supervisors and managers to show all levels of employees are involved in this discussion.

An effective start is to ask workers to talk about current perceptions about workplace challenges such as safety versus production and what drives risk-taking.

Then discuss the nature of hazards at your workplace. What are the risks associated with them? What are the potential consequences of these risks?

The point is to acknowledge the hazards and how important it is to manage them well, not just by mechanical controls, but also through personal behavior (choices).

Personalize it

All this needs to be personalized. Ask employees about their personal work/life goals. Example: Employees’ No. 1 priority might be to spend more time with or provide well for their families.

How do employees reach these goals? What would be the impact on these goals if the employee had a workplace accident?

Next to last step: Relate all this back to safety and making choices. Challenge employees to reconsider benefits versus consequences of risk-taking.

To reinforce this discussion, have some real-life stories ready about workplace accidents and how they affected the victims.

What do you think of this suggested approach? How do you handle the clash between safety and production at your workplace? Let us know in the Comments Box below.