Why only safety department should see the deficiencies? why not the line staff?

It is a misconception in several industries that safety is the responsibility of safety department. Production staff feel that their job is only production. They do not give a thought for ensuring safety in their work, i.e. keeping the work areas free from hazards. They may be seeing these hazards, day in and day out, but little action is taken in addressing the same. The safety department when points the same, no action or little action is taken. And, when some incident happens, that time production department puts a sorry face or blame game is kicked off. They say that it is not their job or they have given request to maintenance department or why safety department did not caution in advance or even if cautioned why they did not tell about the consequences and so on.

Persons, should not concentrate only on production activities at the cost of lack of safety, for the sake of furthering their careers. They should not ignore safety and allow things to go unsafely in their domain of work. Just ordering subordinates to ensure safety is not sufficient. Doing work unsafely will not enhance productivity in the long run. May be in a project, there were no accidents inspite of unsafe work culture. But, that is because of some luck i.e. all unsafe parameters did not converge, by fluke. But, this can not be a norm. And, safe practices do not delay the work. In fact, in the long run, safety will enhance the productivity. If it is found such arrogant managers are there, management should sack them without hesitation. Because, these are the persons who do not mind in jumping the ship in case of change of situation. Visibility of the managers in shopfloor and interaction with field staff frequently is required. This will help the managers to see the things as it is and also learn what are the issues faced by field personnel so that appropriate actions and allocation of resources can be done. 

In general, safety departments anywhere do not have the authority to cut power supply or prevent persons from doing the work where hazards are present. As it is, safety department functions in advisory capacity only. Only those managements which do understand the importance of having safety in the workplace lend an ear to the safety department. And in these places, employees too will be happy and join hands for higher productivity.

How many organizations stop the work if a hazard is spotted and restart only after taking corrective and preventive actions is debatable. One may tell that safety is first. But, I am not sure in how many places really it receives top priority.

In general, production, quality and safety take slots from top to bottom in that order. Even those who got statutory powers to enforce safety also will have second thoughts before taking the violating organizations to court of law. This can be said firmly due to the accidents taking place in the production facilities and how many of these were found guilty and taken to task in inspections. Under staffing and having support facilities to regulators is also one of the reasons for this. 

What is required is self discipline and strict implementation of statutory provisions and strengthening of the hands of regulators. Any violation should lead to total stoppage of the facility. Any person in the organization should be able to tell hazards in the place and take to the notice of concerned for rectification. Persons identifying shall not be ridiculed or punished. 

Similarly, one should not think that punishing by fines or paying compensation will control the situation. Just ordering fines is not enough. It is said nobody can put a value to the life. It is not a commodity to assign a value. The compensations offered for an injury or death during accidents really do not have any meaning. It is to be seen by life value assessors in the perspective that what value they find for their own life in case of an injury or fatality. A person earning something may earn many times of it either in the same company or different company or by self employment. There are many cases where persons started career as peons, paper boys, etc have become millionaires and provided employment to many. Then what is the value for emotional attachment with family and friends. 

Some thoughts on fall of safety standards - forgetfulness, over-confidence, complacency, arrogance

Anybody or any organization, immediately after an event not to like to happen will have several commitments to itself. I/we will do this or that, now on wards.
Even a student also makes such resolutions in or after an examination, which he did not do better.
But, in most of the cases, nothing will be done.
Some will start, but, the steam is lost.
Very few will sustain to a great extent. Even in such persons/organization will make exemptions, here and there.

This week, I attended a meet organized by a regulator. It was told in the opening remarks that regulators have to do the act of listening, observe the things and make informed decisions. This is applicable even to all those who are in the job of monitoring / advising and they need not be necessarily the designated regulators.

In case of individuals also, we are our own regulators and doers. As a proverb goes, we have one mouth, two ears and two eyes, indicating see and hear more, but talk less.

Coming back to the title, I observed that even in those entities who have developed highest standards, became role models and even are in the business of training, events have taken place for simple reasons which can be avoided / addressed totally before the occurrence of the event. Events in these places make me to think that whether they are wrong in the lessons learnt i.e. whether the lessons learnt for implementation are impracticable.

In many post accident recommendations, training and supervision aspects are listed routinely. Even if the training is good, absorption of the knowledge and its use in the day-to-day affairs is highly doubtful factor. Even those who understood the information too do not implement inspite of knowing that this may lead to incidents.

Like in financial sector, as I read somewhere, risk and returns are proportional. Low risk investments yield less returns and so high risk investments generate huge returns. I had my own experience in share market investment at two different periods and on both occasions, I had the opportunity (!) to learn the lessons to come out with some loss.

I think, it is in human behavior to take risk when it comes our activities, let it be on the roads or work place. And, it is the other way when it comes to our home.

I commute to my work place which is at 13 km from my house, by bike and these thoughts do occur generally, but I am yet to get any reason.

In nuclear field, ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept is preached and is genrally followed to limit radiation dose to occupational workers and public. Whereas in industrial safety, it is ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable) implying that we have to be practicable in taking measures to ensure safety and health of the persons. This also implies (to me) that certain value is attached to human lives for dispensation. If an accident takes place leading to injuries / fatalities, generally we read declaration of compensation. Though enquiry takes place, hardly there are cases where the wrong doers i.e. those responsible for the occurrence of accidents are punished. Every year, lakhs of persons are dying in accidents (on the roads / work place), equal or similar number of persons responsible for these are not punished and it shows that human life got only some number and things will proceed as usual as if nothing happened. Reasons for recurrence are generally as in title of this post. This makes the job of the safety advisers / regulators, a difficult task.

If some disturbance takes place in an inhabited place, police will be blamed for not doing the job. If some emissions take place in a factory, pollution control authorities will be blamed that they are sleeping or accepted something. If some accident takes place, safety adviser will be blamed internally and factory inspectors externally. And so on.
But, little or no action is taken to identify the wrong doers and punish them.

Authorities for control of activities have a difficult task of facing pressures from all around and at the same time, not to succumb to these pressures. They have to be like stones not having any emotions to keep their health and family not to get affected by workplace pressures. Some will resign the post to look for different type of jobs or bade good bye forever (if they are financially resourceful to lead the rest of the life).

Any management would like to have highest productivity at minimal cost. Availability of qualified human resources is an issue face by many. Most of the educational institutions have become factories to churn out the students with good grades / marks but many of them fail miserably in getting suitable employment commensurate with the certificate as they can't answer the questions of the interviewers. Hence, they settle for jobs whatever they can get. They may get satisfied or may not. This can lead to dissatisfaction and doing the job for the sake of earning money only. It requires lot of efforts from the side of managements too train such people and I am not sure how many organizations have the policy of training their manpower before engaging them and then even doubtful case of retraining at regular intervals or change of job / modifications in workplace.

With these things, may be there is some optimal safe production i.e. under present set of conditions, it can deliver X numbers of their products. If we try to stretch production on higher side without commensurate additions / improvements, accidents / failures do take place, if not immediately, but definitely at a later date. This is because, it requires some time, even for the established systems to degrade. Now, if there is a change of management, persons at top can claim for success even at higher production in the beginning (higher production is initially possible because degradation also needs some time), but the person coming later can't deliver the same, because degradation process starts accelerating.

Hence, those with safety in mind have to conclude / decide what is their optimum safe production capacity and stick to it. Else, what we are seeing or reading in papers will continue to happen.

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.

Plant shutdown after reaching the target

I am surprised to read a old news item (see the link below) on the above title. The title of the news item is about an accident causing burn injuries to seven persons. In the last para of the news article, it is stated that the unit was shutdown after the target was reached.
Normally, operations will be continued as any excess production too will add to balance sheet. If it is to meet CFO (consent for operation) / factory licence conditions or any other reason is not known.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/City/Chennai/7-injured-in-naphtha-leak-at-Manali-ammonia-plant/articleshow/33631036.cms

Trade off between production and safety

Safety is our first concern, so say, everybody in public forums. But, there is also something called, ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable). What is the measure of this ALARP. What is ALARP for me need not be the same for others. Still, we have to put our wisdom so that we do not endanger the lives of workmen, public and the environment. One should not go by apparent/immediate effects. Instead, one should see for invisible but disastrous and also long term effects.
Mostly, shop floor managers see the the visible effects whereas safety professionals see the invisible effects. Here comes the friction and safety managers will be pressurized to yield to the arguments of "there are no effects and not to imagine wildly".
Safety managers are treated as untouchables / non-entities and ridiculed at every next opportunity. It is known that every known hazard will not lead to a disaster and this gives strength to the arguments of short sighted shop floor managers and safety managers have to watch in despair.
One does not try to learn from the case studies and safety managers are shouted when pointed about similar occurrences and may be branded as brainless fellows.
But, when something happens, the black sheep will be the safety manager. At that time, again, safety managers are ridiculed for not foreseeing the hazards and that they do nothing.

The solution is to fix responsibility. If safety manager is lax, he should be responsible. If production  manager doesn't listen in spite of pointing out by safety, he should be responsible. Management should not try to protect production managers in those situations. And, every near miss/incident, irrespective of its severity, should be investigated and responsibility should be fixed. Only then, I feel that everybody understands safety and its benefits.