 |
|
|
|
|
01/03/2002
OSHA Relations Committee Update
Over the last several months, I have had to wrestle with "safety" incentives and disciplinary issues. This is a deeply troubling issue with many aspects that defy easy analysis and demand chess-like concentration and consideration.
Consider non-compliance. If an employee disregards company policy, disciplinary actions are warranted. Right? Where the shades of gray begin to cloud the issue is the severity of the infraction.
Forgetting or actively not conforming is hard to distinguish. Forgetting a hardhat for a quick run outside to check on an inventory item verses climbing a tower without a hardhat seems simple enough. Repeatedly doing so, may be something completely different.
However, what if no one was working above this person? Then is this an overt violation?
I firmly believe through education, we can move forward toward better compliance.
Accidents can be reduced through education in the form of procedures to explain the right way and wrong way to perform a given task. That makes it necessary to write procedures. This is even more difficult when you consider that it is rare in this industry for people to have an abundance of writing skills.
When a procedure is written in a fashion to be easily understood, does it provide the protection a company needs if an accident happens? If the procedure is written to protect the company, can the workers still understand it and actually use it? Where is the line drawn to accomplish both? Who knows best? There are no lines drawn for us.
Years ago, I worked on a project for the U.S. Navy. I saw with my own eyes, an expansive draft of written procedures, everything from changing the top light bulb, installing a dish, to stacking a tower. Perhaps hundreds of procedures were literally written out in explicit (sometimes excruciating) detail, including what tools would be needed, how many workers would be recommended, and how long it would take. Brilliantly written, yet easily understood.
Think of it. Workers could easily read what to do and how to do it in simple easy-to-understand details, with sketches. Then, change certain aspects to cover site-specific conditions. Plus, the procedures were reviewed by the government’s best lawyers. That would be a start.
We (NATE) have tried to get copies of these documents for years, so far, to no avail. But we’ll keep trying. These could be very useful to our organization’s members.
There is no question that serious issues demand serious action.
In the end, the discipline should match the level of non-compliance with the potential for injury. There are workers who are lucky enough to suffer a "near-miss" and get a second chance, others aren’t and don’t.
Why don’t we start with education? Let’s ask the government for some help opening a few file cabinets. That’s one way to spell "Partnership."
By: Don Doty
Don serves as Chairman of the NATE OSHA Relations Committee and is the Senior Vice President, Director of Technical Services for SpectraSite Broadcast Group of Irving, Texas. He can be reached at 972-550-9504 or don.doty@spectrasitebg.com
Don Doty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
