Safety Rules and Regulations - there will be blood stains behind

It is quite common for safety professionals to be at receiving end, bombarded with questions, when suggestion / advice is given based on rules and regulations. Leave apart general advice when given, safety professionals are questioned for the basis. 

But, everybody should remember that nobody is interested in slowing down the work pace. Nobody is interested in doing additional work. Nobody wants to take blame, knowing fully well that any safety advice communicated will have questions directed back to them. Still, it is rendered for the reasons of doing their mandated job. A safety professional is not a namesake fellow  to be shown to factory inspectors during their visits. There are some good organizations, national and multinational, who follow safety in toto. And, they proved that in the end, safety aids in increased production. 

But, to realize this, we have to sweat initially, should have thinking and application in the conceptual and design stage itself. Okay, it is not there initially. Then, let us struggle for some extra time, to implement during operational stage. 

But, during this stage, if incharge sees this work of implementing safety retards production during his period and he will not be recognized, then it should be made known to this incharge by top management that goals will be set considering all factors. Give, sometime for seeing the results of implementation of safety procedures (if implemented late, not required if implemented during design stage itself). Do not encourage the ideas of shopfloor employees to bypass safety systems for achieving higher production in a short time. This will be shortsightedness. One will get higher production initially for some time, as there may not be deterioration of culture quickly. However, with time, with changing mindset and taking roots, joining of new recruits who learn such bad practices from first day, one can see the signs of near misses and later accidents resulting in injuries and property damage.

Study of such accidents leads to internal regulations which when published and / or goes to the notice of regulators, will turn into legislations. Slowly, one forgets the reasons for a rule or regulation and then questioning of basis for such rule begins (wheel needs to reinvented).

This becomes like one chanting mantras and then getting involved in all acts against the meaning of these great mantras (pseudoism).

Safety department in the plant – boon or bane?

Governments made it mandatory to have a dedicated safety department in every plant/facility conforming to certain minimum conditions considered as hazardous. Generally, the role of the safety officer specified in the applicable legislations is to advice and assist the plant officials to carryout –

hazard identification, job hazard studies, accident investigation, procurement of safety devices, conduct of safety promotional campaigns, safety competitions, etc.

Further, it should also conduct monitoring inspections to evaluate safety performance, investigate select accidents/near misses, maintain records, etc.

However, when we hear/read from media about occurrence of accidents everyday at some plant or the other, it appears that the safety departments in these facilities are not effective by themselves or concerned plant managements are not heeding to their advice.

Having a separate safety department in every facility along with other departments like production, maintenance, quality, HR, administration, security, etc may be giving the impression to the other departments that safety in the work area is not their job(work/headache). And these departments may also be of the view that it is the safety department which should identify the hazardous conditions and ALSO to rectify them WITHOUT bothering them (i.e production, etc).

Such views are against the role specified by the legislations and clearly the importance of safety department is lost when such views are also supported by the top management. Clearly, safety department cannot go hand in glove situation with other departments, they confrontation is not the solution. Safety department should act tough with erring departments. If the role of safety department is limited by not listening to their advice, then the safety in the concerned facility is doomed and accidents will be just waiting to happen.

One should realize that safety is a line function i.e everybody in the organization should make it happen and not that of staff function i.e it is not the duty of safety department staff alone. If any plant management thinks it is staff function, then safety will not improve in that plant and the expenditure on safety department staff (salaries) is waste. May be they can only show to visitors that they are complying with legislations, they are spending so much, etc and make them scapegoats in case of any accident. This is true, as of late, filing cases on safety department officials along with other department officials is on the rise. It is easy to tell that the safety officer did not caution them about the hazards though clearly, it is the responsibility of the work area in-charge. 

The occurrence of accidents at work places that come to our notice through media, and the possible reasons as above sometimes lead to the conclusion that it is better to abolish the safety department by legislation and to make concerned plant management responsible for ensuring safety. Nobody should be designated as safety officer or person responsible for safety, even within each department as the results will be same.

The responsibilities of every department in-charge should include safety also, apart from other responsibilities. The issues to be discussed   in every review meeting should include all issues like, production, quality, safety, maintenance, developmental activities, projects, etc (need not be in that order, but all issues should be reviewed without fail).

Such procedure will make the in-charges to give equal time to all issues and ensure a safe work place for all.

Person dies after long hours of work

An intern died after reportedly spending long hours of work. Legislations specify certain number of hours of work per day, per week, etc and limits on overtime hours also. However, these rules are mostly applied to factory workers and I am not sure whether they are applied to supervisors and blue collared employees in the same organization. 

This leads to spending long hours at work place by these people, either by force, or even if there is no requirement, may be to learn the work, or to get attention of higher authorities. This type of work is not possible forever. If somebody joins as trainee/apprentice and even for regular employees, managements of any establishment should strictly enforce working hours, instead of being a passive onlooker. Only then, these types of incidents can be avoided at the work place. It is all in work culture which is guided by safety culture of the organization. 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/aug/21/bank-intern-death-working-hours

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/Intern-at-a-London-bank-dies-after-working-for-72-hours/articleshow/21947167.cms

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/20/bank-of-america-intern-dies-after-working-three-straight-days.html

Bank employee takes a nap on keyboard, transfers millions | The Hindu

Bank employee takes a nap on keyboard, transfers millions | The Hindu

293 million US dollars were transferred by a bank employee who was asleep while on the job. Imagine what can happen if somebody on the job in the control room of a chemical plant sleeps.

All plant employees should be healthy, and had sufficient rest before attending their duty. In some plants, workers have long working hours and on few occasions, they have to continue if reliever does not come, doing overtime.

Legislations specify number of working hours (8-9.5 hr) with rest in between and also the number of hours which a person can work continuously in a day and number of hours in a week, quarter and so on to ensure that they get sufficient rest and are not forced or lured for extra money they get. It is not possible to work more hours continuously and this will lead to mistakes and accidents.

Safety legislations - management support

Sometimes, it becomes very difficult when production people question the safety officer about the basis for particular requirement mentioned in legislations or good practices. For example, 15 meter distance between hot work area and combustibles, or 1.05 m extension of ladder above landing, or 4:1 for vertical to horizontal of a ladder, etc. Though one can explain about flying of sparks / proper support for the person to walk on to the landing / prevent fall of persons as reason for these requirements, still one questions in meeting the requirements exactly. Similarly, testing of equipment in the specified period, say once in four years for pressure vessels. Questions will be like, whether pressure vessel will fail, if not tested after 4 years. Such questions look silly and safety professional will loose control of his patience. Further with his role as advisor, he can't reply authoritatively unless top management supports safety officer. If such support is extended, then whatever safety officer says will be obliged, though production people will be unhappy internally. So, legislations alone will not help in improving safety culture in an organization. Legislations or not,what is required is top management support expressed in public and supported to the core.

Safety Legislations – History and Provisions

“Preventable accidents, if they are not prevented due to our negligence, it is nothing short of a murder” - Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, 1st Vice President and 2nd President of India.

Any factory that employs more than 10 persons and uses power for its operations is governed by Factories Act, 1948 and the Rules made there under. In addition, a factory has also to comply with other legislations for different activities in its premises. Many of us do not know about these legislations though with common sense we comply with some of the requirements of these legislations. Many managers, shop floor in-charges and even technicians feel that their productivity is hampered by legislations without which they would have produced much more.

However, it must be realized that laws are not formulated overnight. These are formulated based upon the experience of earlier accidents and its consequences, concern of all stake holders, concerted efforts by various persons, organizations some times even extending to decades. The legislations are compilation of lessons learnt from various past accidents in the world, not necessarily from the same country and thus a source of rich knowledge. By enactment in the parliament, compliance of provisions of legislations was made mandatory. I was told during my study of safety course by one faculty that "We have to learn the law in its letter and spirit to understand and apply to the work environment. Letter can be found in books for reading and spirit can be found from history".

Factory legislations in India are formulated by our pre-independence rulers i.e. Britishers and thus history is linked to development of legislations in the land our erstwhile rulers. The factories in UK during 18th century employed a number of people without basic amenities like water, clean air, ventilation, washing facility, illumination, toilets, etc and were forced to work in most dangerous conditions. Persons were forced to work for 12-16 hours without rest and even children were also employed in these conditions. At that time, most of the factories were cotton mills and many got injured, incapacitated, died due to lack of proper machine guards. With the advent of steam engine, the situation became worse. There were many steam leaks, burn injuries, boiler explosions, etc. Owners of these factories have no accountability for the loss of life and persons were removed if they got injured and not capable of doing the work. These incapacitated persons were not compensated and their lives were miserable. These conditions along with movement by workers and organizations lead to the enactment of first act in 1802 in UK and followed with many amendments by including many provisions for the betterment of working conditions. Factory inspectorates were also formed to monitor compliance with these legislations and were authorized to take necessary action.

Though similar pathetic conditions existed in Indian factories, it is not until 1881 that the Factories Act was passed in India and further in 1891, 1911, 1934 by including restricted hours of work for men and women, age of children to be employed, rest periods, hours of overtime in a week, employment of full time factory inspectors, paid holidays, etc. The Factories Act (FA) 1948 provides the minimum requirements with regards to i) obtaining licence for setting up of the factory, operating licence, need for authorization of changes in process; ii) health – cleanliness, disposal of wastes and effluents, ventilation, lighting, drinking water, toilets; iii) safety – machine guarding, maintenance and testing of hoists and lifts, pressure vessels, proper means of access, manual handling, work permit system, fire protection and fighting measures, guarding of openings, personal protective equipment, safety of buildings and machinery and iv) welfare – provision for washing, sitting, first aid, rest rooms, lunch rooms, canteen, etc. The amended FA, 1976 included safety of contract labour in the definition of workers and vested more powers with the factory inspectors.

The Bhopal accident in 1984 shook the entire world to relook into suitability of legislations in their land and provide for stringent requirements for compliance by industrial establishments.

Major amendments were made to the Indian Factories Act in 1987 by assigning the responsibilities for the occupier (Section 7-A), for the manufacturer (Sec 7-B), special provisions for hazardous processes (Chapter IV-A), onus of proving limits practicable (Sec 104-A) along with other provisions like safety policy, safe operating procedures, supervision, disclosure of information, medical examination, house keeping, training, emergency preparedness, accident reporting within the period and investigation, conduct of safety meetings, maintenance of permissible limits of chemicals, etc.

Similarly, penalties were made more stringent to force the establishments and its employees at all levels to ensure safe working conditions. The punishments for violation of each and any of the safety provisions of Factories Act and its Rules extended upto 2 years / fine and for special provisions (Chapter IV-A), upto 10 years. Even obstruction of factory inspector or failure to maintain / show registers or documents invites penalty upto 6 months and or fine.

Apart from the Factories Act, there are other legislations for handling of boilers, gas cylinders, chemicals, emissions / discharges, radioactive materials, electricity, disposal of effluents and wastes, noise, contract labour, etc. Penalties are also specified for violation of provisions under these legislations as well as under Indian Penal Code

Some of the best companies / manufacturing facilities issue safety regulations beyond what is required by Factories Act and others from time to time for various activities, sometimes even such a thing is not thought off by the government.

It must be noted that each and every activity in the work premises is governed by one regulation or other and employees at all levels are responsible for ensuring safety at the work place. Ignorance of law is not an excuse and law of the land is applicable.

We have to prevent accidents at the work place not only because of legislations but also because of also on humanitarian grounds and also the enormous economic impact of such accidents on the persons, organization and the country. It is our moral responsibility to prevent accidents so that at the end of the day, all of us reach our homes safely and take care of our beloved family members and smiles in their faces.

Electrocutions - A Story that repeats

Of late, there were many news paper reports almost on every alternate day about the death of the persons and sometimes animals (mostly) and injuries due to contact of the living being with some cable or wire carrying electricity. The job in hand at the time of the incident involving victim were mostly, repair of a domestic water pump in the sump / repair of connections on the street light pole / touching an electric street light pole / moving near loosely hanging cables or wire / drawing electricity by illegal connection by a greedy person / etc.

For genuine repairs, it is the minimum requirement to cut off power supply and also ensure line clearance from respective agenices and display CAUTION BOARD for not switching ON power supply. It is best to use locking arrangement and keep the key with the person carrying out the work. A supervisor is a must and hazards in the job should be assessed and safety measures for identified hazards should be in place before start of work. This is applicable for jobs executed by agencies.

For repair works at home, it is common practice for the resident to do him self and get shock. All this to save few rupees at the cost of risking life and thus endangering the livelihood of his dependents also. It is best to call experts in the field for repairs even if it appears a small and known job.

Reports say most of the time line clearance is not obtained and the person mostly engaged on the job will be a casual worker. He may be skilled in his work but the responsibility of ensuring isolation of power supply lies with the department person and as it appears from so many deaths, this supervisor simply washes off his responsibility by allocating the job and it is doubtful whether the job is supervised even for some time.

When we learn from these costly deaths, not in terms of money, but that of making the dependents of the deceased to struggle for their livelihood apart from mental agony and pain of losing their dear ones.

Enforcing strict penalties by settingup special fast track courts only to handle the cases of violations of industry related legislations like Factores Act, Environment Protection Act, Indian Electricty Act, Explosives Act, etc and Rules framed under these Acts will bring a sense of responsibility when responsible persons become aware of punishments. It is mostly the lack of application of stick that is making persons irresponsible and fail to ensure safety in their areas of control.

Though we say stick is useful only to some extent, the incidents recurring at regular frequency shows that still we have not yet developed out of this DANDOPAYAM.