Eileen P. BetitDirector, Research to Practice

CPWR-The Center for Construction Research and Training

Leveraging an Evidence-based Approachto Communicate Safety and Health

Information to Small Employers and their Employees

Industry is decentralized and fragmented

10.110.7 11.2 11.7 11.8

10.99.7

9.1 9.1 8.9 9.39.8 9.9 10.3

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Num

ber o

f em

ploy

ees

(in m

illio

ns)

Year

Construction Employees

Ø Multiple and changing worksitesØ Seasonal and cyclical work

Source:U.S.BureauofLaborStatistics,CPWR1st Quarter2017QuarterlyDataReport,

High number of fatalities

1,1711,278 1,243 1,297 1,239

1,016879

802 781 849 856933 985

0

300

600

900

1,200

1,500

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Num

ber o

f dea

ths

Year

Number of Construction Fatalities

Note: In 2011, the CFOI switched to OIICS version 2.01 which categorizes slips, trips, and falls together. In previous years, slips and trips were categorized elsewhere..Source:U.S.BureauofLaborStatistics,CPWR1st Quarter2017QuarterlyDataReport.; “Data Mining, Analysis, and V isualization for Construction Fatality Prevention.” Kleiner, July 2016.

Source:U.S.BureauofLaborStatistics,2003-2015SurveyofOccupationalInjuriesandIllnesses.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Rateper10,00

0FTEs

Num

berofinjuries(inth

ousand

s)

Year

Number and Rate of Construction Injuries

Numberofinjuries Rateofinjuries

High injury rate

Dominated by small employers

Ø 90% have <20 employees

Ø About 80% have <10 employees

Ø Most have low profit-margins and are under-resourced

Sources:U.SCensusBureau;CPWRConstructionChartBook5th Edition;CPWR2nd Quarter2015QuarterlyDataReport

Mobile and diverse workforce

Ø Multiple employers and projects in a year

Ø 30% Hispanic

Ø Roughly 14% are employed by temp agencies

Sources:U.SCensusBureau;CPWRConstructionChartBook5th Edition;CPWR2nd Quarter2015QuarterlyDataReport;photocourtesyofeLCOSH andHoarConstruction

Challenges to communicating safety & health information to small employers

Ø Limited safety & health knowledge Ø Perception that regulations are costlyØ Lack of resources for formal training

Can toolbox talks address the challenges and be an effective method to communicate S&H

information to small construction employers and their employees?

Toolbox Talks (also called tailgate talks) are:

Ø Used in construction for decadesØ Focused on a specific hazardØ Brief (10-20 minutes) Ø Conducted on a job-site in preparation for the

days workØ Delivered by the employer (foreman, etc.)Ø Used as sign-in sheet to document attendanceØ Affordable & accessible

Can toolbox talks address the challenges and be an effective method to communicate safety?

What the research says…Ø “Effective tailgate trainings (brief job site safety

meetings) can be a powerful tool to promotehazard awareness and safe work practices.” (Harrington, et.al., 2008)

Ø “Done well, these talks can improve communication, empower workers, reduce injuries and improve safety.” (Kaskutas, et.al., 2016; Gillen, et.al., 2013)

What the industry says…

ØDodge Data Analytics –contractor surveys:

ü30% or more of respondents <50 employees

ØWays to communicate safety to jobsite workers:üToolbox Talks most often usedüToolbox Talks most effective

method 8%

13%

38%

41%

6%

16%

30%

48%

9%

16%

31%

44%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other(text,email,etc)

ChainofCommand

Training

ToolboxTalks

2017(p)(n=334) 2015(n=254)

2012(n=263)

Top-3MostEffectiveCommunicationMethods%RankedFirst

What the industry says…

36%

83%

45%

89%

44%

85%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

VeryPositiveImpact

SomewhattoVeryPositive

2017p 2014 2011

Masonrycontractorssurveyed2011=145;2014=152;2017(p)=132

Useoftoolboxtalksonalljobs:2011=76%;2014=76%;2017(p)=74%

What makes an effective toolbox talk?

Ø Brief, scripted textØ Developed with input from stakeholdersØ Relevant to the jobsiteØ Includes visualØ Culturally relevant Ø Available in native languageØ Narratives that include ‘real-life’ storiesØ Prompts to encourage discussion &

problem solving

NIOSH Study: Value of toolbox talks with case studies & discussion questions

ØDeveloped case studies with stakeholder inputØCreated 2 formats:

1. “Treatment Group” Toolbox Talks - contained a graphic, case study, discussion questions, safety information, sign-in sheet.

2. “Conventional Group” Toolbox Talks – excluded the case studies and discussion questions

NIOSH findings shared with CPWR

Ø 52 Draft Toolbox Talks Ø Case studies & discussion questions

increased workers’ safety knowledge and influenced safety attitudes

Ø Needed - Research on other techniques to enhance the impact of toolbox talks

CPWR built on the research findings

Ø Modified the formatØ Revised the content for readability and

technical accuracy

Moving research into practice

Ø Posted on websiteØ Translated into Spanish

Evidence of use…

Promoted - August 2013 – August 2017

Website–Downloads768,318

HardCopiesDistributed4,025

CPWRUpdate10shortarticles

ExampleofReach–1/2015“ColdWeather”

1,657downloads

772,343

Evidence of use…January 2014 – August 2017 – 46 posts

December9,2015“Scaffolds”

130downloads

June14,2016“WorkinginHeat”750downloads

April27,2017“FallProtection”141downloads

Building on the research – New Directions

Building on the research – New Directions

Developing and testing microgames

Building on the research – New Directions

Supporting New NIOSH Research

“Adapting NIOSH-CPWR toolbox talks for Spanish-speaking construction workers”

Evaluating microgames

Questions?