Scenario: What do you do when you have the most work fatalities?
December 15, 2009 by Fred HosierPosted in: Fatality, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, OSHA news, Research on safety, Safety training
Imagine your state has the highest workplace fatality rate in the nation. What would you recommend to change that?
A panel in Wyoming, which does have the highest worker death rate, has made four recommendations:
- Increase OSHA fines
- Form a stronger alliance between Wyoming’s state OSHA and industries
- Significantly increase front-line safety training, and
- Hire an expert to create a database and track trends in workplace fatalities.
Wyoming’s occupational death rate is 17.1 per 100,000 workers, which is more than four times the national average.
The Wyoming Worker Fatality Prevention Task Force recently found that insufficient penalties and the state’s proud culture of independence and toughness were two major reasons the state has the highest death rate.
One state lawmaker recently noted that the fines are much higher for poaching a moose out of season than for reckless violation of OSHA rules that result in a worker’s death.
What do you think of the four recommendations? Which will be most effective in reducing worker deaths? Let us know in the Comments Box below.
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: task force, worker fatalities, Wyoming
Loading ...
December 15th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
This scenario sounds typical of the “we have done this for years and it was never a problem before” mindset. I believe that with stronger regulation and enhanced awareness on the part of the employer, this problem can be reversed.
Without knowing all of the factors that combined to produce this death rate, one cannot go wrong with a stronger and more visible safety culture. This means spending some capitol but it will more than pay for itself in the short and long run in this case.
I know I am speaking to the chior on this but we all know in the safety field that what usually causes these types of negative numbers to appear is, no buy-in from employers, no enforced regulations or programs, lack of training, no safety culture and little or no company safety representation on the sites to name a few.
Safety is the first to lose funding when there is a financial crunch because safety has a difficult time proving that the safety program saved anything or kept anything bad from happening. This mindset is adapted from the “I do not need a fire ext. because I have never needed one before” culture.
Ok guys and gals add anything or everything to this one and keep it going. I always learn something from these threads.
December 15th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
You mention that the state has a “…proud culture of independence and toughness..”. That is a Culture that can be changed positively to honor the value of good work and the value of life and making a living. There are many ways to create a new culture using the best attributes of an old culture. I would recommend incorporating the principles and methodologies of HROs. That is the best bet for seating and sustaining a new more effetive approach to safety at work and maintain the sensibilities of the group culture.
Good Luck
Mark Cullen
December 17th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Refresher training seems noticeably absent from the list of recommendations. I don’t think refresher training falls into the “front-line” category, but perhaps I am mistaken. It is important to keep employees constantly aware of their surroundings, new equipment, new policies, etc., and refresher training can be helpful in solidifying the sought-after Safety Culture. It seems that many incidents happen when companies get comfortable with the status quo, and as Les points out, when they “have done this for years and it was never a problem before” - it soon becomes a problem.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Les, what more can be said? I would only ask, at which industry these deaths are occuring most? We can better put together a definitave plan, for a statastic like that surely need to be turned around. Training and accountability
is for sure number one. For a lot of companies training is there, but accountability lacking. I don’t always agree with increased fines, except for when violations are willful. What I have also found is that a lot of Safety trainers are lacking information necessary to produce an appropiate safety culture, because companies are not investing in Safety because of economic times. This makes it harder for trainier, and supervisors to simply “use what you got” to make Safety happen. Good luck to Wyoming.
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Safety costs money up front - that’s why it’s neglected. The only way to bring it into the cost of doing business for EVERYONE is to
1. mandage/legislate a safety professional or program for industry.
2. make usuable sample programs available so that every company doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel
3. easy benchmarks to meet - that are trackable - that will start the “buy in” process
4. Start with the most agreegeous offenders first
January 3rd, 2010 at 12:46 pm
I have been in the safety business in Wyoming for the past 25 years.
I think what everyone is missing is the risk that is associated with the work. most of the jobs are Oil and Gas. Drilling wells, constructionand maintenance of process facilties, and pipeline construction and repair. Not only do workers face the “normal” hazards but throw in a little H2S, Metane and Nitrogen and the odds go up.
Most contractors I know in Wyoming train their workers to a high degree of knowledge, but it has been very hard to hire and retain workers until the last year and one half. Several oil and gas service companies dropped their drug testing requirement so they could hire employees.
January 4th, 2010 at 4:40 pm
Randy
Because the work is risky and hazardous with added toxic gases and combustibles as complications to conducting the work is not a reason to drop safegaurds!
(Several oil and gas service companies dropped their drug testing requirement so they could hire employees)
Would additional fines “cure” this high accident/death rate? Does the second time higher fine for speeding slow you down? For Good? I don’t think so.
Removing the stipulation that you be sober and attentioanally unimpaired as a criteria for employment is…………….well, it is stupid and should be liably criminal to knowingly hire someone like that. Just higher people from out of state if you can’t find available responsible people near by. I can give you the name of many companies who would be glad to send people up there to do the work.
Randy there is a whole class of organizations - fire fighters, chemical/oil spills, trauma surgery, nuclear aircraft carriers, emergency responders and many, many more that have operationally stellar results with far more resident hazards than those you describe.
And yes the circumstances you mention are formidable to be sure. I know, Iworked off shore on drilling barges for awhile as a ROV (Remotely Operated Vehicle) pilot and was uncomfortably paranoid the whole time I was out there because of the people and circumstances I saw working around me. I became the safety officer for offshore because of it (there was no such thing until then).
Yet these organizations are leading the way to superior results in spite of the highest level of difficultiy in performing their work. There is a name for them - HROs (High Reliability Organizations). I have researched and studied them since they got on my radar. I was an Oil Spill/Emergency Response Consultant then and have followed their developments ever since. There is a LinkedIn group you should check out.
Essentially they are organizations that cannot afford to fail because of the catastrophic results of that failure. I highly recommend Randy that you do some research and you will find innumerable ways to improve your circumstances. Wyoming is wide in territory and sparse in population. You may have to hire from outside. But there are ways to do the work you are charged with in a responsibly safe manner. That you are seeking an answer from this forum means you know there are alternatives. Yeah, the work is hazardous and out right deadly.
But there is a better way, Randy. There always is.
Mark
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:58 am
Statistics only reveal what the preparer reveals. We have to examine the actual nature of the job as having a high risk then compare that specific job to a sampling of like jobs nation wide. You may discover that based on sampling the ratios may be similar. If the stats are still higher in Wyoming after the sampling has been verified, the employer should have crossfeeds and open communication with other business leaders and safety specialists that deal specifically with that particular job to find best practices in an effort to lower their stats. This appears to be a case of poor planning, poor communication, and poor safety protocols (enforcement or availability). Oh yeah add an analyst to your budget and a seasoned safety person if you don’t know how to make the calls, perform research, and keep your folks safe. I have zero tolerance for oblivious owners and managers. The ultimate answer to this question, I’d quit!
November 24th, 2010 at 11:45 am
I’ve lived next door to Wyoming all my life and have visited there on several occasions. It is my opinion that they are likely all in such a hurry to get the job done and go somewhere, anywhere else that maybe they skip the safety stuff? … Just a thought.
(I know, safety is a serious matter and I shouldn’t be making jokes about it.)