We are nothing after our death. Let us donate our body organs for the poor.

Be not afraid of anything. You will do marvelous work The moment you fear, you are nobody - Swamy Vivekananda

If you think safety is expensive, try an accident... - O.P.Kharbanda

Preventable accidents, if they are not prevented due to our negligence, it is nothing short of a murder - Dr. Sarvepalli Radha Krishna, 2nd President of India

Zero accidents through zero unsafe behaviors. Do not be complacent that there are no accidents. There may be near miss accidents (NMAs). With luck/chance, somebody escaped knowingly or unknown to the person. But, we can't be safe, if we depend upon the luck.

Safety culture is how the organization behaves when no one is watching.

We make No compromise with respect to Morality, Ethics, or Safety. If a design or work practice is perceived to be unsafe, we do not proceed until the issue is resolved. - Mission statement by S&B Engineers & Consultants Ltd. http://www.sbec.com/safety/

Human meat gets least priority - A doctor's comment on accidents

CSB video excerpts from Dr.Trevor Kletz, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQn5fL62KL8

Showing posts with label Factories Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Factories Act. Show all posts

Dec 8, 2019

Poor concepts on safety

Many managerial position officials think that safety means using personal protective equipment (PPE) like safety shoe, helmet, safety belt, etc.
But, it is a fact that PPE is a last line of defense to the persons. 
This is what told repeatedly by safety professionals and once people understand, they will agree.
The basis issues to be looked into start from plan, design and implementation of work area, equipment, etc where by incorporating safety as an inherent part, hazards can be taken care so that they do not lead to any unsafe conditions.
If the above fails, then PPE will help the person to minimize the consequence, if not protecting in total.
It is sad that even those persons who work in shopfloor and are likely to come in contact with hazards too do not care about their own personal safety.
People do not try to identify the hazards existing or arising in work place or even if they are known, not taken to the notice of line managers effectively either because of not giving importance or because of fear of facing rebuke. But, who will suffer.
If the line managers do not act or do not take the information on hazards properly, then they should be made to understand by complaining to next level or taking to the notice of safety department. 
The problems lies with line managers too. If they go to shopfloor everyday and see the areas with proper perspective, they too can understand as they are accountable for shopfloor safety as per Factories Act or other such legislations. If nothing else is applicable, we have IPC sections under which one can be charged under 302, 304, 304-A etc.
Once persons understand and initiative is taken, they also see to it that it is implemented at the earliest and one should not take umbrella under the pretext of delays from other agencies. It all depends on how much convinced the line manager is and his willingness to act further.

Aug 20, 2015

A reason to restrict 8 hours a day of work

As per a study report, working for 55 hours a week causes the risk of stroke by 33% compared to working hours of 35-40 hours a week.

May be studies are also required patterns for continuous hours of work, number of hours of work a day, etc to have more reliable data. 

As per Factories Act and Rules, 125 hours of overtime in a quarter is permitted. But, it is quite common for many persons  to put more hours at work, particularly in unorganized sector like in construction industry. For earning more also, it is quite natural for persons to work for more hours though it leads to strain. 

It will be difficult for anybody to control working hours unless it is practiced by the individual himself. In case of forceful work, then unions have to take the responsibility to protect the persons from the risks.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Working-over-8-hrs-a-day-raises-stroke-risk-by-33/articleshow/48550484.cms

Sep 16, 2011

Proposal of amendments to Factories Act 1948 by Government of India

The Ministry of Labour and Employment proposes 52 amendments to The Factories Act, 1948. The proposed amendments were uploaded at http://labour.nic.in/main/dgfasli.pdf and comments/suggestions were invited at http://labour.nic.in/main/AmendmentsAct,%201948.pdf within 45 days from 06.09.2011.

Sep 1, 2011

Autonomous body for nuclear safety

A news item that appeared on Times of India on 31.08.2011 (Wednesday) states about cabinet approval for setting up an autonomous independent regulatory authority for monitoring nuclear safety. The Government of India decided for such authority in the wake of Fukushima incident caused by a series of failures after earthquake induced tsunami and to ensure safety and create confidence in the minds of all interested parties on nuclear power programme. 
The powers stated in the article are in line with The Factories Act, 1948.

Aug 19, 2011

Product safety: who’s watching? - Columns - livemint.com

Today an article on consumer product safety was published in MINT. I learned about product safety when I did my safety diploma few years ago. The Factories Act 1948 Section 7B is about product safety but for use in a factory. Apart from this, time to time we see awareness campaigns in the media by Ministry of Consumer Affairs under JAGO GRAHAK JAGO on various topics. But, as the author says in the MINT article, there is no agency for monitoring and implementation similar to Consumer Product Safety Commission of US. After purchase, we find the item with defects, not as per specifications, less weight, poor quality etc.Of late however, few online shopping websites are offering replacement guaranty within specified period. Some retail outlets also offer exchange, if brought within specified period. Hope this will spread and lead to practices as followed in US.

Product safety: who’s watching? - Columns - livemint.com

LINK

Jun 4, 2011

Fall and death of a boy in corn machine


As mentioned in a local news paper report, a boy died due to fall in the corn processing machine while adding corn to the machine. The 14 year old boy went to fields with his buffaloes and he was engaged in the machine feeding job. The boy's head and part of the body got crushed in the machine. As per the picture, it appears that there is no proper access and platform for doing the job, and no guard rail/barricade to prevent fall of persons. I am not clear whether Factories Act and Rules can be applied or not, but the spirit of the rules can be followed in all walks of life. As per the rules, children should not be engaged for work on or near moving machinery. Even local government rules prohibit engaging child labour. The news paper report in local language can be read here

Jun 26, 2010

Poisonous fumes from incinerator near Indore - six lost vision?

Y’day a scrolling news item in TV channels and news reports today mentioned about six labourers losing part of their vision because of toxic fumes from an incineration plant in Pithampur, while cleaning solid waste. It is stated that all labourers suffered symptoms of insecticide poisoning (organo phosphorous) like blurred vision, vomiting. Before taking up any chemical handling work, engineers and supervisors should refer to Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) of the chemicals to be handled. It will give information on nature of hazards, handling methods, personal protective equipment (PPE) to be used, etc. It is mentioned that workers did not use any PPE, though the company that engaged the persons is a reputed one.


If the companies do not follow safe procedures and do not ensure supervision, public will lose faith in the industry and whatever they do later will be of no use.

Further, such accidents will show that more inspectors are required to inspect more frequently the premises of the organizations, audit their systems and the findings have to be put in public domain. It may be remembered that though the auditors from head quarters of UCC reported serious nature of hazards in the Bhopal unit, as the report was not known to many, the inaction could not be questioned in time and only after the worst chemical disaster, all concerned started questioning.

Therefore, it should be made mandatory about making availability of audit findings (by regulators as well as certifying agencies) also public like the provisions of Factories Act 1948 under Chapter IV-A and should attract penal provisions like those for violations of Sec 41-B,C,H

Jun 13, 2010

Who is responsible for safety?

After the last week verdict on Bhopal tragedy for fixing the responsibility, so many people in responsible positions commented about the verdict. The Factories Act 1948 amended after this 1984 accident fixes the responsibility for ensuring safety at the work place on the occupier as well as the manager. It also says (Sec 101) that if the occupier is able to prove that he has given full responsiblity and resources to others down below and that the accident occurred because of deeds of his subordinates without his knowledge, then the said person can be held responsible.

Someone commented that a car owner can't be held responsible, if his driver makes an accident. It is forgotten that the driver was put into job by the owner of the car and nobody else (unless car was stolen and is not reported in the police station).

If managements employ less qualified or unsuitable persons for the job, then there is every possibility that accidents / incidents can take place. In risk assessment, human error is also a factor. In fact, experts say that systems should be designed and put in place such that even a fool can not meddle and lead to accidents.

In the case of Bhopal accident, it is mentioned that the some of the workers, superviors and managers were brought from Battery Division and do not have proper training / exposure to run the plant. Even the audit report of Union Carbide warned about imminent dangers, a few years before the accident. Few accidents occurred earlier also support that a major accident will not occur all of a sudden, but will be preceded by few near misses and minor accidents.

As the plant was not in operation for few months before the accident, poorly trained managers and supervisors decided to switch off the refrigeration system thinking that when plant is not running, nothing will happen (because of lack of knowledge on hazards). Persons were not informed about the hazards, neither they had interest to learn on their own, about what can happen in their day-to-day activities. All of us will be careful to caution our children about their safety when they go to school or college. But we do not follow the same at our work place.

Apart from deactivating refrigeration system, the srubbing unit and flare tower were not kept in working condition. To prove Murphy law, every safety system went wrong simulataneously (neither functional nor available at the time of accident). The water sprinkler, a last resort, had limitations of spraying water upto a height of only 15 m where as the gas eascaped from the flare tower at a height more than this.

There are provisions and punishments for causing deaths due to negligence, callous attitude and accused should be awarded compunded punishments. If the wrong doers are not punished severely, this will send a wrong message to all greedy corporates that nothing will happen to them and they can find some scapegoats at lower levels for the minor punishments.  In the famous novel God Father by Mario Puzo, it is mentioned that underworld people keep some persons with opposing gangs as a surity for the persons from these gangs attending meetings so that they can participate the meetings and leave the place safely. Scapegoats will be found like in the underworld system.

The entire property of the owners of the factory causing such large scale deaths should be confiscated and it is better for governments to work toward making international laws to confiscate properties of the owners in other countries also.






LINK

Jan 11, 2009

Experience in Safety implementation

There is a saying that "Experience makes a man wise". Yes, this is true, but not in all respects. Sometimes, it is good if we do not get experience, for example, tasting a food item that is made by a first timer, or, learning 2-wheeler driving where there is every possibility of fall of person.

I like to taste a mango once again rather than getting injured first time or next time also.

The greatest safety professional, Mr. Kletz said in one of his books on industrial safety that, it is better to learn from others mistakes rather than experiencing all those by ourselves. By this, we can ensure a safe work for ourselves and our colleagues and public.

Information on accidents is available in various books, news papers, journals, websites. We should be interested in searching and getting all those information and then applying the lessons learnt to our work place.

Still, it is surprising to see that we do not learn from the accidents, leave those at other places, even from our own work place accidents, we refuse to learn. We are so lethargic and self centered that we do not want even to inform the people in our work place about accidents that are likely to occur. Every thing we leave it the wisdom of the shopfloor workers or Know Your Self way.

However, when an injury occurs, it is likely that the injured apart from pain has also be ready to receive admonishing from superiors by way of a memo / advise letter / explanation seeking letter for the injury. What the works manager or his supervisor does during regular plant visits is known only to the GOD, I suppose.

It is to be noted by all that apart from penalties (financial as well as sitting in a jail) listed in the Factories Act, there are provision listed even in the Constitution where by way of negligence, when failure to take protective measures is established, concerned in-charges are likely to be punished under constitution also.

Hence, one should not be relaxed that their work place does not come under Factories Act. Constitution contains all to see that persons are protected.

Sometimes, when safety supervisor / officer gives advise on safe acts / practices or stops an activity that is carried out in an unsafe manner, then the production in-charge asks the safety person to do the work or he will try to shift the safety person to that production activity or sees that he is removed. Of course, removal is not possible in a government organization, but it is always possible to shift safety person to production line as a punishment or teach a lesson for advising on safety.

The production fails to see why a safety person advises so. It is production in-charge who has to face questions, in case of an accident and he may have to be prepared even for a possible arrest by police. Instead of seeing or visualizing the situation, production in-charge questions safety department like, are you not belonging to the organization, don't you want a good name for the General Manger, etc.

Chief Executive / General Manger who is designated as Occupier should be careful against people like the above who want to get production somehow and want to claim for the production but not about the injuries. Such people should be thrown out of the organization or they should be sent to training programmes compulsorily on the statutory requirements with stress on penalties so that they MAY be able to see the implications. Even then if they do not learnt, better they are removed from the job itself so that workers will be protected and organization's name is not spoiled.

Mr Om P Kharbanda in one of his writings mentioned that SAFETY IS NOT ONLY FREE, BUT IT ALSO PAYS. Like quality brings down the cost of production, similarly safety also is cost reducing proposition. However, safety brings more tangible benefits when it is thought and implemented during the design stage itself. If it is implemented later as an ADD ON feature, then people may resist to follow unless until they see the reason clearly.

Though people say penalties do not have much effect in safety, I feel strongly that safety department should be given the authority to impose cash penalties where safety advisor can caution once and if the problem persists, then he can take evidence by photograph or other means and also impose penalty straight away. The penalty amount should be deducted from the concerned production department / agency Head of the Account to Safety Department which can be used as fund for safety promotion. Again, the facility in-charge should seek explanation from the concerned production department where penalty is recovered for the safety lapse.
When managers are questioned on penalties and is shown as a negative aspect, then only production mangers will realize the importance of safety.

Stopping the work by safety person will not have impact, because once the safety person leaves the shopfloor after advise / instruction, the work will be resumed in the same manner. This is true in most of the cases.

Sometimes, when shopfloor persons are questioned about unsafe practices, like doing maintenance on a running machine, or not wearing PPE, etc, they start complaining about the knowledge of the safety person or quality of PPE or need for getting an item of a particular brand, etc without justification so that safety person can be undermined and will be made to leave the place. It should be known that PPE of good quality meeting standards only will be recommended by safety person but not of brands. If there are more suppliers meeting the required standards, then supplier of the item meeting standards at lowest cost only will be recommended for purchase.

Sometimes, when workmen face problem with overtime, they they call safety persons on the pretext of unsafe conditions in the shopfloor. Once the manager agrees for giving overtime, then workmen forget about safety aspects and everybody disappears. At the end, you may see shopfloor in-charge and safety person arguing on the unsafe conditions, that may not be existing at all which were complained by workmen.

Workmen also should realize that if they do not follow safety, they can be punished under various provisions.

Finally, safety implementation requires commitment by shopfloor people and the production department. If they follow advise by Safety Department, then they can get benefited more. Else, it is they who have suffer the pain, not the safety persons.

Featured Post

Reduced my weight from 96 to 76 kg and tummy from 38-40 to 34-35 inches in about 9 months

I am working in the safety department of a government organization. As a part of the job, I used to go around and interact with person...