Do workers worry about safety or that they’ll get caught breaking rules?
November 14, 2008 by Fred HosierPosted in: In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Research on safety, Safety training, What Would You Do?
PDF Just how cynical are some employees about workplace safety?
A recent Purdue University study may provide some clues.
When it comes to speeding, many people don’t worry about safety. They just worry about getting caught.
That’s one of the messages researchers took away from surveying almost 1,000 people.
They also found this correlation: The faster people think they can go before getting a ticket, the more likely they are to think safety’s not compromised at higher speeds.
As a safety pro, you know what happens after employees complete safety training. Many workers take the training to heart and follow the rules, such as always wearing their protective gear, or locking and tagging out equipment every time they perform maintenance.
But there’s always at least one in a crowd who has rationalized not following the rules. They think they’ll never get hurt. The only reason they might follow a safety rule is because of stiff consequences if they don’t.
Another finding by the researchers may be even more troubling. Getting stopped for speeding didn’t seem to have an effect on whether or not someone speeds again.
The researchers say this is probably because people who habitually speed aren’t significantly deterred by being stopped. Those who are inherently more conservative are more likely to slow down after getting a ticket.
What’s the lesson here? Perhaps it’s a call for a “two strikes and you’re out” policy when it comes to safety rules. Depending on the nature of the infraction, a second chance might be in order when a worker violates a safety rule.
But if they break the rule again, you may have someone who doesn’t care about safety - all they care about is whether they’ll get caught. Since no one can watch these workers every minute while they’re at work, the second strike may be a sign to let the worker go.
What do you think? Let us know in the Comments Box.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: getting caught, protective gear, Safety training, speeding, ticket
Loading ...
November 17th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
I definitely agree “There should be consequences to not following the rules”, but two strikes and you’re out may be alittle harsh for a minor violation. I would think it would definitely depend on the severity of the violation.
Example: If a maintenance man is in an articulating boom lift 25′ up and he’s unhooked his lanyard to enable him to climb up and straddle the top rail to achieve maximum height, that’s pretty severe.
On the other hand, if someone was in a restricted area without their safety glasses or hearing protection on, that seems somewhat minor to me. Don’t get me wrong, I still think there should be consequences to even minor incidents, but not necessarily termination unless it continues even after suspension without pay.
I continuously hear my co-workers complaining about our companies policies to enforce our safety rules and they think if they’re willing to take a minor risk, they should be able too. What they don’t understand is when an accident happens, not only does it impact the company financially, but every employee ends up paying out of their pockets as well, whether it be in higher insurance cost or lack of pay increases, profit sharing not being there, etc.
November 17th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Many safety people feel that to do their jobs, they need programs for everything. Lots of highly visible effort and hoopla. The real issue has always been that until you can influence your workers to be safe because it is important to them personally every day, you may be getting good grades for compliance, but the work force is only marginally safer. Humans have evolved to be willing risk takers (or we would not be what we are today). Overcoming that is the biggest challenge in safety. If a company safety program can’t adequately influence their employees to care about their own safety, under the two strikes proposal, they will be losing a lot of people.
November 17th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I am glad to see an article about this issue. As a new Plant Manager hire replacing an incumbent it has been hard for me to impress upon our workforce the importance of “personal choice” when it comes to safety. We have an outstanding safety program, Corporate support, and local management buy-in. When I reviewed the safety reports with our plant level Safety Manager it was very clear that all of our accidents/incidents were due to the employee making the personal choice to not follow the safety guidelines we have in place. In response to this we have increased our internal actions for the disciplinary side. We are beginning to go to the extreme by taking a person to a 2nd written disciplinary. The next step is suspension, then termination.
November 18th, 2008 at 7:57 am
The Purdue study confirms what the resy of us already know. There are always a handful of employees who compromise the rules for some reason. Many times it’s for a good reason in the employee’s mind, saving time for instance, but it can’t be tolerated in any case. We try to follow a “firm but fair” policy. If we see a rule being broken, we approach the employee, make them understand what rule is being broken, then reinforce the purpose of the rule. Repeated violation results in progressive discipline, however I can’t remember ever terminating anyone for a safety violation. I have had someone quit because he didn’t want to follow the rules, but that was his choice. People usually get the message.
I agree with Wendell, that each violation must be evaluated on its own merit. I also agree that many don’t understand the full consequences of their behavior. That’s where we come in. As safety professionals we have to make judgements and insure that all employees understand who, what, when, where and why.
November 18th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Our company has the two strikes policy for any violations relating to LOTO specifically.” although they also have an exception to the two strikes if the LOTO if the violation is “deliberate, malicious, or willfull.” Meaning it wasn’t that the employee just forgot to put his lock on, but that he realized he didn’t have his lock on and that was what he meant to be doing.
On the other hand, for “minor violations” such as failure to wear PPE, it would fall under the usual 4 strike rule our company follows for most other disciplinary actions. This involves a sequence of steps involving verbal warning-written warning-three day suspension- and finally termination.
November 18th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Safety rules and equipment are there for a reason - why equivocate?
November 18th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Wendell nailed it. In any policy, you need to have some flexibility. The severity of the infraction and the previous experience with that employee must be considered along with any other extenuating circumstances. Zero tolerance and other inflexible policies often lead to situations which were not foreseen. This could cause you to severely discipline someone that may not need it in order to keep a previously disciplined employee from filing a legal grievance.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Personally I’m a strong advocate of holding people responsible for their actions, including myself. I do agree tho that sometimes you have to look at the whole picture and not just part of it to fully appreciate the reasons why a safety rule or procedure is being violated. I tend to lean toward harsh disciplinary actions if the violation is one that can result in serious injury or worse and is a no brainer. My concern is if serious violations are not addressed accordingly and well documented and the person ends up injurying himself or a co-worker and a lawsuit follows, how will you defend yourself/company in court when it comes out that repeated violations were allowed or you merely slapped the violator(s) on the hand. I’ve been in the situation where an employee willfully walked on top of a conveyor and stepped into an opening he didn’t see and had to have his mangled leg amputated. Believe me the trial lawyers can and will make you look like total idiots if they can establish you’re guilty of letting a “few” safety rules (no matter how minor) being repeatedly violated with no severe disciplinary actions taken.
November 25th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I agree that there has to be some consequences to not following safety rules and policies. If you don’t have some type of serious disciplinary action for violators the employees will continue to not take their safety as a priority in their job task. We normally do a written discussion report on minor violations such as PPE and then a final warning if the employee has an repeat violation. If the violation seriousness is more sever such as not using LOTO, reaching into running equipment to retrieve parts ect… then a final warning is issued and repeat violation warrants termination. Again you have to review each case and always be consistent with the method of disciplinary to prevent the chances of lawsuits.
February 3rd, 2009 at 1:42 pm
If your just starting your safety program the fear of getting caught is what drives most people. After the ‘culture’ changes and safety naturally becomes part of the activity from the beginning then you see the rewards of true safety program. The growing pains require punitive actions to some extent. Many times its just reminding people continuously of the requirements. This lets them know your watching and care about there safety. Consistency is key. For those that buck the programs and leadership you must have methods to make them responsible for their actions. I know that when I send a supervisor home, without pay, for a safety violation my whole company tightens up. Word spreads fast. I have some workers that start hollering “SAFETY MAN IS COMING” whenever I enter their work area. Originally they thought it would get my goat. I turned it around on them. If knowing I am in the area makes someone safer I am thankful for the free publicity. I know in time following my direction will become the standard. It takes 90 days to change one persons thoughts about one issue. It can take 2-3 years to stand up a safety program. Consistency, patience, thick skin, sense of humor and a reality check are required. You get what you train to, expect and inspect.
March 11th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Excerpt/Example…
On a regular basis, the COMPANY shall review and evaluate the ongoing safety and health performance of CONTRACTORS who work on site. Long-term CONTRACTORS routinely working on site will normally be evaluated on an annual basis. CONTRACTORS who do short term jobs throughout the year will be evaluated annually. Other short-term CONTRACTORS who perform a specific short-term job shall be evaluated at the end of the contract.
CONTRACTOR shall remain on the approved contractors list based on a review of the updated PQF and satisfactory evaluation of onsite safety and health performance.
SAFETY VIOLATIONS
(a) Violation of these instructions, government regulations or facility policies and procedures may result in immediate expulsion of involved CONTRACTOR company and/or employee(s). Poor safety performance, unsatisfactory audit results, and serious, repeat, or blatant violations may result in the CONTRACTOR receiving written warnings, suspensions, termination of contract, and/or removal from the facilitiy’s Approved Contractor List. Examples of Zero Tolerance safety infractions are found below and are not all inclusive.
1.1 Smoking in unauthorized areas.
1.2 Violation of facility Drug and Alcohol Policy.
1.3 Knowing/willful violation of a facility safety procedure, which could place someone in imminent danger. Examples include but are not limited to entering a permit-required confined space without a permit, confined space entry without an appropriate attendant, failure to obtain proper LOTO, working without a permit, etc.
1.4 Failure to follow 100% tie off requirement.
1.5 Egregious Safety or Traffic Violations
1.6 Bringing firearms or weapons into the facility.
1.7 Bypassing/altering/defacing safety devices/equipment
1.8 Fighting and horseplay that results in injury or theft.
1.9 Connection to facility utilities without permission.
1.10 Security threats.
b) The CONTRACTOR whose employee has been expelled for a violation covered in (a) shall submit a written report to the COMPANY within 24 hours of the violation. At a minimum, the CONTRACTOR employee shall be prohibited from working on site for a period of 30 days or longer.
c) Reinstatement of work privileges for CONTRACTOR employees removed from the facility for safety violations will be handled on a case-by-case basis. The CONTRACTOR or employee wishing to reinstate these privileges must make a written request to the Maintenance Director. Upon concurrence of the Maintenance Director and endorsement from the HSE Director or designee, a meeting with the following personnel will be set: the HSE Director (or designee), Maintenance Director or other COMPANY Department representative, the involved CONTRACTOR employee and a representative of CONTRACTOR management and/or the Business Agent. The HSE Director will communicate the final determination on when or whether an employee will be allowed to return to the facility.
d) CONTRACTOR employees with repeat offenses of safety procedures and policy may be expelled with no possibility for reinstatement.
April 13th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
This is a great topic. I have been in Safety for more than 10 years. I’ve heard every excuse in the book you could a gamine. I agree most employees could care less about safety; all they care about is getting the job done. I came from the field. I know what they think. First you need to change the mindset of the top Managers. They talk a good show but never produce. Take them out to the field & show them how it works & how PPE is a MUST. Show them how dangerous it is not wearing PPE is then the correct way. Their EYE will open wide. Then have tem bring in a picture of something they love. Ask them what will happen if I do not wear my PPE. You get the correct answer. THERE IS NO SECOND CHANCES IN SAFETY.
April 20th, 2009 at 11:44 am
I am sorry for not finding this topic sooner, because this is a great topic! I deal with Union employees so I function off of the premise of ATTITUDE, KNOWLEDGE, and BEHAVIOR. This model places the responsibiilty of SAFETY on everyone’s shoulders and if I have to discipline an employee for a Safety related issue they tend to support the company because we have addressed the reasonal aspects of making the workplace safer. If, as a Safety Professional know I have provided the knowledge to the employee, monitored and corrected the behavior of the employee, then I have to address the issue of attitude and if the employee isn’t willing to go along with the program, well it is time we part waves. This, also, holds true for Managers and Supervisors. As you can see the three aspects are interconnected and most importantly this model acts a personal checks and balance for me. If I am not doing my job then why should I expect others to be doing their’s.
April 27th, 2009 at 11:39 am
I have enjoyed reading the comments on this subject and in fact decided to use this theme for my monthly safety poster. I would like to submit my comment on this subject also though. Having been in construction now for 45 years or dealing with contractors I have observed many mistakes, corrected many and I would say that most people do not ever think it will happen to them. What they don’t consider are the “what if’s” as we put it in our company. What if the truck slides on the snow, or what if the rope breaks, etc. Personally, when I got married, many of my ideas, changed because of the responsibilities I was accepting, especially once we started a family. Does the average worker ever think, what would me family do if I couldn’t work ever again? Many would think, I have lead a dull life because of the changes I’ve made, but I put my family first and the responsibility of providing for them. Consequently, I have paid attention to the safety meetings I’ve attended, plus as a safety instructor now for many years these changes have been reinforced. We have in the past even done a program on the amount of risk a person is willing to accept, which ties in with the attitude the habitual speeder has.
I will agree that some things may not be a big deal, but we can never forget the accident pyramid and the relationship the incidents have to the big one at the top. My people get very concerned when someone in the company has a minor accident as they realize that this puts them one incident near the big one. We could go a long way to making the work place safer if we could fine the violator immediately on site, and I’m talking about the employee not the employer. Until the employee is personally held responsible for his actions there will always be too many who will think it will never happen to them, or have the “to hell with the rules, I’m going to get this job done attitude.”
Those of us in the safety arena know all too well that we can spend hours in training and someone will go out there and immediately break the rules. He’s the one that needs to pay out of his pocket right then.
To defend and support OSHA now there are far too many companies out there that don’t care about safety as long as they don’t have an accident. These managers have that attitude like the speeder that doesn’t think he’ll get caught and as long as they’re making money they’ll keep ignoring safety, and these are the people OSHA should get after and fine them where necessary to get action. Well, I’ve said enough on this.
May 26th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
This is such a perplexing topic. As a Safety Professional with a public utility, “safety” and following safety rules/procedures is paramount for the consequences can be deadly in a second. When employees fail to follow even the smallest rule, it shows disrespect for themselves and their co-workers. But, a different perspective that I have not seen in some of these replies involves our frontline supervision. Yes, it is each individuals’ responsibility to work safely, but; ultimately, it is that frontline supervisor who is responsible to make sure that each of his/her workers are performing safely! He/she is overseeing the work and he/she is overseeing the work habits of their people; consequently, he/she “sets the example” for his/her workers and ultimately determines whether the work behavior is safe or not! I believe if Management sets the tone from day 1 of what is acceptable and what is not and the consequences associated, then there is no room for error on the part of the worker. The main thing is to be consistent, fair and firm; because, not only the company and worker’s family suffers, but the worker suffering the injury suffers the most!!!
June 22nd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Yes, yes, yes, you can’t second guess safety at any time. As a Security Supervisor, I see upper management break safety rules before your average employees. Any time that I see a safety issue, I take pictures and present my case. It ends up with “We will try to address the issue, the budget, or something related to that”. What really ticks my clock is when a VIP or client enters the facility, all rules change for them. Where they can park vehicles, smoke, load/unload, walk under lifts, etc…..The Company I work for has not had a fatality (Thank God) but it’s right around the corner. We have boom lifts, fork lifts, propane tanks, & dampers, the list goes on. I have seen a wrench fall from a boom lift (25 feet) and strike an employee in the head while walking underneath. I’m not blazing with my guns all fired up here, but it’s a slap in the face when your job is to provide security/safety and it’s placed on the back burner. I had an exhibitor that wanted to park his car by a propane cage & smoke - 2 violations. I told him that there’s no smoking with in 50 ft (also visible and posted on cage). He argued that nothing ever caught fire here/exploded and said you guys have stupid rules. Yep, no fire or explosion because I dont allow nuts like him to park or smoke near propane. I have been here for several years, and keep in mind that I am the Security Supervisor. When I asked upper Management (Genral Manager’s) If I could tow, ticket, verbal, written, suspend, terminate anyone who is not following the safety rules. It all depends on who the individual is, seems to me that a VIP can cause an injury or fatality just as an average employee. Think S-A-F-E-T-Y saves, arms, feet, eyes, toes, you.
December 29th, 2009 at 11:53 am
I have found that what you have said is absolutely right. Some do, some don’t. The “don’ts” need reinforcement to remind them that safety is important and is enforced.
Here in our plant we have three steps;
1. Write up
2. 3 day suspension
3. Termination
It does work!