Slide 1

Safety Management Systems and Culture

Fenkins ChowIndustrial Centre

Jan 20141- A Management Game2- You are working for this companyTechnicians (10) Engineering ManagerEngineers (5)DirectorGeneral Office (4)Form a group of 5:1 acts as the Director1 as the Manager1 as Engineer2 as Technicians

31. What is System4To celebrate the 21st anniversary of the Hubble Space Telescope's deployment into space, astronomers at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, Md., pointed Hubble's eye at an especially photogenic pair of interacting galaxies called Arp 273. The larger of the spiral galaxies, known as UGC 1810, has a disk that is distorted into a rose-like shape by the gravitational tidal pull of the companion galaxy below it, known as UGC 1813. This image is a composite of Hubble Wide Field Camera 3 data taken on December 17, 2010, with three separate filters that allow a broad range of wavelengths covering the ultraviolet, blue, and red portions of the spectrum.

Hubble was launched April 24, 1990, aboard Discovery's STS-31 mission. Hubble discoveries revolutionized nearly all areas of current astronomical research from planetary science to cosmology.

PDCA ConceptPlan: establish the objectives and processes necessary to deliver results in accordance with the organizations OH&S policy.

Do: implement the processes.

Check: monitor and measure processes against OH&S policy, objectives, legal and other requirements, and report the results.

Act: take actions to continually improve OH&S performance. ReferenceBS OHSAS 18001: 2007, Occupational health and safety management systems Requirements, page vi5ObjectivesHazard IdentificationRisk AssessmentPolicyMonitoring/Audit ReviewCorrective / Preventive ActionImplementationProceduresProgrammesPlanActDoCheck- Another example6M/C OperatorMachineSafe M/COperationShop SupervisorMachinesSafe M/Cs OperationM/C OperatorMachineSafe M/COperationM/C OperatorMachineSafe M/COperation7- How to ensure safety?Shop SupervisorMachinesSafe M/CsOperationOperation observed by inspectorInspector compares observation with safety standards.Manager to make any corrective actions.8- Universal OHSMS Model

Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems, Review and Analysis of International, National, and Regional Systems and Proposals for a New International Document, 1998, prepared for ILO by The International Occupational Hygiene Association, available at http://www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/safework/cis/managmnt/ioha/index.htm Reference92. Is it chaotic10This mosaic image, one of the largest ever taken by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope of the Crab Nebula, is a six-light-year-wide expanding remnant of a star's supernova explosion. Japanese and Chinese astronomers witnessed this violent event nearly 1,000 years ago in 1054, as did, almost certainly, Native Americans.

The orange filaments are the tattered remains of the star and consist mostly of hydrogen. The rapidly spinning neutron star embedded in the center of the nebula is the dynamo powering the nebula's eerie interior bluish glow. The blue light comes from electrons whirling at nearly the speed of light around magnetic field lines from the neutron star. The neutron star, the crushed ultra-dense core of the exploded star, like a lighthouse, ejects twin beams of radiation that appear to pulse 30 times a second due to the neutron star's rotation. The colors in the image indicate the different elements that were expelled during the explosion. Blue in the filaments in the outer part of the nebula represents neutral oxygen, green is singly-ionized sulfur, and red indicates doubly-ionized oxygen.

Image Credit: NASA, ESA, J. Hester (Arizona State University)

What is the force behind11SMS is a human systemEveryone has their operation/processEveryone has their role/responsibilityEveryone will interact with each other

InputOutputOutputInputInput12Roles, Responsibilities and AccountabilityEvery member of a company should own at least part of the system, then s/he has a role. Once you have a role, you should exercise your responsibilities.Whether you can run your responsibilities well or not, you are accountable for the role assigned.You can delegate responsibility to others, but you cant delegate your accountability (ultimate responsibility) to other position.

13Illustration to explain Accountability & ResponsibilityAccountability Ultimate ResponsibilityResponsibility AResponsibility BResponsibility CResponsibility DResponsibility EResponsibility FAccountability 1Accountability 2Responsibility AResponsibility BResponsibility CResponsibility DResponsibility E

Accountability 3Responsibility A

Accountability 4

Responsibility CResponsibility D14- Roles and OwnershipExample:As a role of machine operator, he should own the machine, including its safe use. As a role of machine shop supervisor, he should own all the machines, including provision of safe environment for the machine operation.

Line ownership of the safety agenda is a direct extension of management commitment. (p.185, Stewart) ReferenceStewart, J.M., 2001, Managing for World Class Safety, John Wiley & Sons, USA 15Every owner should be held accountable (to be responsible) for his owned system and the associated sub-systems. The owner isrequired to exercise responsibilities accountable for a task is responsible for ensuring that it is completed in a manner which meets all expectations for it.

- Ownership and Responsibilities16Accountability: Accepting the consequences, good or bad, for the outcome of a situation for which you are responsible. when you are held accountable, your performance is measured in relation to goals or objectives that may result in certain positive or negative consequences (OSHA, quoted by Roughton et al, p 153) ReferenceRoughton, J.E., Mercurio, J.J., 2002, Developing an Effective Safety Culture: A Leadership Approach, Butterworth-Heinemann. - Responsibilities and Accountability17- DelegationReport of the Somalia Commission of Inquiry, Accountability, National Defence and the Canadian Forces:A person who delegates authority is also responsible, and hence accountable, not for the form of direct supervision that a supervisor is expected to exercise but, rather, for control over the delegate and, ultimately, for the actual acts performed by the delegate.

The act of delegation to another does not relieve the responsible official of the duty to account. While one can delegate the authority to act, one cannot thereby delegate one's assigned responsibility in relation to the proper performance of such acts.

Issue No. 3 of Reporting Year 2010/11 (21 December 2010), Office of The Ombudsman, Hong Kong:Although it was the developer or contractor that installed/replaced the water meters and recorded the meter numbers, WSD had the ultimate responsibility to cross-check those data to ensure accuracy. It should not have shifted its responsibility onto others.

18Roles should be clearly definedBefore you can hold management/employees accountable for their actions, make sure that they know what is expected. (Roughton et al, p 152)In larger org, managers must develop a MS for clearly assigning safety responsibilities and authority, and providing the necessary resources to get this accomplished. (Roughton et al, p 139)

ReferenceRoughton, J.E., Mercurio, J.J., 2002, Developing an Effective Safety Culture: A Leadership Approach, Butterworth-Heinemann 19Accountability - ExamplesTaking a roleEnsuring that the target is achievedApplying discretion and judgement to enable others to get to the end of the pathThe buck stops hereMonitoring that responsibilities are carried out and acting where they areExamples from BS OHSAS 18001, p. 8:Top management shall take ultimate responsibility for OH&S and the OH&S management system. (p. 8)Top management shall .. b) defining roles, allocating responsibilities and accountabilities and delegating authorities.The top management appointee may delegate some of their duties to a subordinate management representative(s) while still retaining accountability. 20A Railway-Industry Case in UKRailtrack was the owner of a railwayIt contracted out the maintenance of the track to Amey RailA derailment occurred.One of the major causes was the failure to maintain, which was Amey Rails responsibilityRailtrack sought to put its failure into context by pointing out that Amey Rail employed 2250 people on maintenance in the region of the accident, whereas Railtrack had only 25 supervising track engineers.

21Sec. 3 of HSWA, UKGeneral duties of employers and self-employed to persons other than their employees:3(1) It shall be the duty of every employer to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons not in his employment who may be affected thereby are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety.223. Is the system running23ExpectationsIn many companies, safety responsibilities are not clearly defined.

While not defined, people in the org. will have certain expectations in relation to safety.

24Commitments are shown by actions /supportsSupport must be present before expectation comesIn other words, support must be present before responsibility can be exercised

For example:Frontiers are expected to wear ear protectors in noisy env.If so, they should be told by the supervisors when and how to wear ear protectors.The manager should ensure there is budget for ear protectors and that budget is used.

How about if:the manager does not set the budget or does not mind about the use of the budgetthe supervisors never make order of the ear protectorsthe frontiers never ask for ear protectors

254 Levels of StaffFrontier Employees at Operation LevelExpected to complying with rules and proceduresNeed rules and procedures explainedSupervisors at Tactical LevelSelect between fixed choices from a limited set of options, e.g. distribute tasksNeed resources providedNB: Competent supervisor can mode frontiers into a team directed at common goalManagers at Strategic LevelMake decisions about resources required and allocate the resourcesNeed directionTop Management at Strategic LevelGive direction and make decisions on levels of investmentNeed supports from the key stakeholders26Conditions for running27Safety Climate vs Safety CultureSafety climate - expressed attitudes towards safety within an organization (Flin et al., 2000)Climate as surface manifestation of culture and that culture manifests itself in deeper levels of unconscious assumptions (Schein, 1990)Culture less tractable and more complex than climateCulture measured by qualitative methods whereas climate measured by quantitative methods such as through questionnaire-based survey (Denison, 1996) Although an organization has the same policies and procedures, individuals may interpret them differently. Why? See the following slides.

ReferencesFlin, R., Mearns, K., O'Conner, P. & Bryden, R., 2000, Measuring safetyClimate: Identifying the common features Safety Science, Safety Science, v34, pp 177-192Schein, E., 1990, Organizational culture, American Psychologist, v45, pp 109119Denison, D., 1996, Academy of Management Review, What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A natives point of view on a decade of paradigm wars, Academy of Management Review v21, pp 61965428Albert Banduras Model of Reciprocal DeterminismAn individuals internal psychological factors, the environment they are situated, and the behaviours they engage in, all operate as interacting determinants that influence each other bi-directionally

PersonBehaviourSituationInternal Psychological FactorsExternal Observable Factors29Application of Banduras Model toSafety Climate and Safety CulturePersonSafety Climate Workforce attitudes to mgt Mgt attitudes to workforce Informedness about true state of affairsBehaviourSafety Behaviour Mgt style On-site behaviour Priority settingSituationSafety Management Practices Procedures Environment Design

Internal Psychological FactorsExternal Observable FactorsSafety Culture30What is Health and Safety Culture product of individual and group values, attitudes, competencies and patterns of behaviour that determine the commitment to, and the style and proficiency of, an organizations approach to health and safety ReferenceBS 18004:2008, Guide to achieving effective occupational health and safety performance, Sec. 3.2231Pathological The organisation cares as long as it is not caught. This means:people dont really care about safety, and are only driven by regulatory compliance and not getting caught People would say, Of course we have accidents, it is dangerous business.Bad news is ignored.

32ReactiveThe organisation looks for fixes to accidents and incidents after they happen.This means:safety only gets sufficient attention after things have already gone wrong Management say they take safety seriously about safety but feels frustrated. They need to be forced compliance.

33CalculativeThe organisation has systems in place to manage hazards, however the system is applied mechanically.Staff and management follow the procedures but do not necessarily believe those procedures are critically important to their jobs or the operation.Lots of audits in order to force people to comply with procedures. Safety personnel shoulders a lot of safety responsibilities.34ProactiveStaff and management have begun to acquire beliefs that safety is genuinely worthwhile.Looking forward. Consider what might go wrong in future and take steps before being forced to. Line management takes over the safety function, while the safety personnel provide advice rather than execution.Indicators become increasingly process-oriented rather than just focused on incidents. The level of trust increases with people offering to accept accountabilities (you can count on me) rather than just being told they will be held accountable for some outcome. Workforce knows exactly what managers expect.

35GenerativeSafety behaviour is fully integrated into everything the organisation does. The value system associated with safety and safe working is fully internalised as beliefs, almost to the point of invisibility.

Phenomena:Organizations set very high standards and attempt to exceed them rather than be satisfied with minimum complianceThey dont just expect to get it right, they expect to get better.Risks are not only controlled, but unforeseen risks are also anticipated. Out-of-the-box innovations are needed rather than doing things better (Zwetsloot et al, Spring 2013 cited in Green Cross, 2013).Like to learn and adapt.

ReferenceGreen Cross, 2013, The Zero Accidents Vision a commitment strategy for safety, vol. 23, no. 2, p. 6. 364. Run to where37Culture + SystemsSafety management systems are still driven by paperMinimum standards can be defined but this is not the best way to obtain the extra benefits.A good safety culture fills in the gaps.

Sound systems, practices and procedures are not adequate if merely practised mechanically. They require an effective safety culture to flourish.

So we need Safety Management Systems AND a Safety Culture.

ReferenceHudson, P., Achieving a Safety Culture in Aviation, Leiden University38PrioritiesWhat top management considers important will get done.People see what is really important by what they see their bosses DO, not from what they hear them say.Customers are in increasingly buying on safety as well as price.

ReferenceHudson, P., 2007, CAAS Aviation Safety Forum39LeadershipStaff commitment is influenced by their perceptions of their supervisors commitment.Top management are the ultimate supervisors.If their commitment is genuine, sustained, and manifested in their taking a keen professional interest in OHS, their attitudes and behaviours should cascade down the organization. ReferenceBS 18004:2008, Guide to achieving effective occupational health and safety performance, p. 5540Some Characteristics of Positive Health and Safety Culture shown by LeadershipDemonstrate visible OHS commitment, including their personal behaviour, showing leadership by example. Make it clear that they are keen to hear the bad news as well as good news and will take action on the information they receive. Senior staff and supervisors spend time discussing and promoting OHS in the work environment; commend safe behaviour and express concern if OHS procedures are not being followed. They do so even when the discussions primarily concern operational matters.OHS is managed with the same determination as other key business objectives.Health and safety representatives carry out their functions actively with the support of managementOHS advisers have high status within the organization with direct access to top managementOHS committees have high status, are proactive, are regularly attended by senior staff, and publicize their work throughout the organization ReferenceBS 18004:2008, Guide to achieving effective occupational health and safety performance, p. 53414. Status Review gives references4242Changes that affect EHSInternal Factors:Changes in staffing and org. structuresChanges in products, plant and processesProcess and software modifications

External Factors:New or pending legislation, standards, or guidanceNew knowledge and technologyCommunity / Clients new expectations43Before PDCA starts,OHSAS 18001 requires:4.1 General Requirements: shall establish, document, implement, maintain and continually improve an OHS management system The organization shall define and document the scope of its OHS management system.

4.2 OH&S Policy: Top management shall define and authorize the organizations OHS policy ReferenceBS OHSAS 18001: 2007, Occupational health and safety management systems Requirements44Functions of Status ReviewReview of the OHS arrangements and procedures already in place (Smith et al., 2000)Gives information of where the organization is now in managing OH&S issues (Smith et al., 2000)Indicates where the organization stands in relation to managing risks (BS 18004:2008)Most importantly, to answer what they are now and what can be done.

BS8800:2004, Occupational Health & Safety Management Systems GuideSmith, D., Hunt, G., Green, C., 2000, Managing Safety the Systems Way, BSI References45Information SoughtApplicable legislative requirements dealing with OHS issues Stakeholders requirementsOHS risks faced by the organizationExisting OHS practicesBest practices within the organizations employment sectorEfficiency and effectiveness of existing resources devoted to OHS management

46Approaches of Status ReviewQuestionnaire survey to gather the opinions from the employeesMeetings with the employees to understand the existing OHS issues and arrangementsMeetings with stakeholders, such as sub-contractors and clients, to understand the needs for OHS managementSafety inspection to measure and verify the existing OHS issues and arrangementsDocument review to find out the existing OHS arrangements, traces of implementation of OHS measures and other OHS requirements

Please read: David Smith, Geoff Hunt, Clive Green, 2000, Managing Safety the Systems Way, Ch. 2, BSI, 2000

47Relation between Initial SR and Periodic SRPSRs are a regular review of the OH&S systemISR is a one-off exercise at the start of a new system designPSR and ISR share similar approachesBoth should refer to external factors

485. Legal requirements on SMS49What shall theSpecified Proprietors / Contractors doDevelop, implement and maintain a Safety Management System (SMS) which contains the specified elements ReferenceFactories and Industrial Undertakings (Safety Management) Regulation, Section 8

50What shall theSpecified Proprietors / Contractors doDevelop, implement and maintain a Safety Management System (SMS) which contains the specified elements ReferenceFactories and Industrial Undertakings (Safety Management) Regulation, Section 8

51Who are the Specified Proprietors / Contractors do ReferenceFactories and Industrial Undertakings (Safety Management) Regulation, Schedule 3, Sec. 2, 8, 9, 12Part 2Construction contractor / factory / shipyard business / designated undertaking having 50 to 99 workers in a day working in a site / factory / shipyard / workplace. Part 4Construction contractor / factory, shipyard business / designated undertaking having 50 to 99 workers in a day working in 2 or more sites / factories / shipyards / workplaces. Develop, implement and maintainan SMS which contains the first 8 elements

Appoint competent safety review officer to conduct Safety Review annually (half-yearly for construction work)

Read, countersign and date the Safety Review Report

Draw up and submit a plan based on any recommendations

IU involving (a) generation, transformation and transmission of electricity; (b) the generation and transmission of town gas, or liquefied petroleum gas; or (c) container handling;

52Part 1 (First 6 Elements):

Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, p. 15Promoted by Gov't as "Personal Protection Programme". See Sec.1(K)(vii), Reg. 15, CAP 59Z: to assist in conducting safety promotion, health assurance and personal protection programmes 53Part 1 (Last 2 Elements):

Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, p. 1554Who are the Specified Proprietors / Contractors do ReferenceFactories and Industrial Undertakings (Safety Management) Regulation, Schedule 3, Sec. 2, 8, 13, 16Part 1Construction contractor / factory, shipyard business / designated undertaking having 100 or more workers in a day working in a site / factory / shipyard / workplace. Or construction contractor with a contract value of $100 million or more.Part 3Construction contractor / factory, shipyard business / designated undertaking having 100 or more workers in a day working in 2 or more sites / factories / shipyards / workplaces. Develop, implement and maintainan SMS which contains the first 10 elements

Appoint a registered safety auditor to conduct a Safety Audit annually (half-yearly for construction work)

Read, countersign and date the Safety Audit Report

Draw up and submit a plan based on any recommendations

IU involving (a) generation, transformation and transmission of electricity; (b) the generation and transmission of town gas, or liquefied petroleum gas; or (c) container handling;

55Part 2 (2 elements):

Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, p. 1556How many audits?A construction contractor has 4 constructions sites. Each of which has 100 workers. How many audits do they need to take per year?

57

Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, Sec. 4.458

Development:Status analysis (review) and risk assessment to identify what should be accomplishedSet safety policy and plan to show how to accomplish the objectives setImplementation:Prescribe relationships between people and resources by making arrangements and identifying competenciesExecute control plansMaintenance:Routine proactive and reactive monitoring to check performance against agreed standardsAssess performance to ensure continued efficiency, effectiveness and reliability of the system Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, Sec. 4.1 to 4.4

59Promoted by Gov't as "Safety Promotion Programme". See Sec.1(K)(vii), Reg. 15, CAP 59Z: to assist in conducting safety promotion, health assurance and personal protection programmes

Part 3 (First 2 elements, yet implemented):

Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, p. 1560Part 3 (Last 2 elements, yet implemented):

Promoted by Gov't as Process Control Programme". See Sec. 5.13, CoP on Safety Management: This element refers to a process control programme

Promoted by Gov't as Health Assurance Programme". See Sec.1(K)(vii), Reg. 15, CAP 59Z: to assist in conducting safety promotion, health assurance and personal protection programmes

Reference: Labour Department, 2002, CoP on Safety Management, p. 156114 Elements = System

4.5 Application of the management model to individual elements of a safety management system

The above management model should be adopted not only in the development, implementation and maintenance of a safety management system, but also in the development, implementation and maintenance of each and every element as specified in Schedule 4 of the Safety Management Regulation constituting the system.

The law only requires to develop, implement and maintain a safety management system which contains the elements specified The law does not specify any system.We should not just match the 14 elements with specific block of the system in the CoP. Why?

62RSO duties related to 14 elementsSafety Policy assist in establishing, revising and reviewing a safety and health policy (s. 1ki)assist in implementing safety and health plans, programmes, arrangements and measures (s. 1kiv, s. 1a)Safety Inspection Programmeinspect or direct safety supervisor to inspect the industrial undertaking (s. 1b)report the findings of the inspection to the proprietor and recommending what measures ought to be taken (s. 1c)Accident/Incident Investigation investigating and reporting, or causing to be investigated and reported to the proprietor, of any accident or dangerous occurrence or bodily injury and making recommendations (s. 1f, s. 1g, s. 1h)Safety Training assist in organizing a safety and health training programme (s. 1kii)In-house Safety Rules assist in devising in-house safety rules (s. 1kiii)Safety Committeesassist in establishing a safety committee and implementing its recommendations (s. 1kv) Job Hazard Analysis assist in job hazard analysis (s. 1kvi)Process Control Programmeadvise the proprietor in the interest of the safety and health of any repairs or maintenance that ought to be carried out (s. 1e) Safety Promotion Programme, Personal Protection Programme, Health Assurance Programme assist in conducting safety promotion, health assurance and personal protection programmes (s. 1kvii) Reference: Reg. 15, CAP 59Z63Summary of Major OSH Development in HK since 1986

1986: launch of F&IU (Safety Officers and Safety Supervisors) RAccident Rates per 1000 construction workers1989: launch of the General Duties of Proprietors and Persons Employed2000: pass of F&IU(SM)R1995: release of Consultation Paper on the Review of Industrial Safety in Hong Kong1997: launch of OSHO&R646. Opportunities for SMS6565Occasions favoured for SMSArrival of new top managerMajor reorganizationEnactment of goal setting legislationAftermath of a serious hazardous eventRegulatory agency actionFailure to obtain a contract or be placed on approved contractors list, as a result of clients reservations

ReferenceBS 18004:2008, Guide to achieving effective occupational health and safety performance. P. 56 (supersedes BS8800: 2004, Occupational Health and Safety Health Management Systems Guide, p. 26)66DoCheckActPlanPolicyLeadership / CultureConclusion: PDCA System led by positive leadership to nurture a safety culture67Chart21986310.91986198733319871988369.319881989374.419891990353.519901991364.3199128.02302.379.8424.12294.866.2924.3227567.123.64232.768.1921.5219.965.9623.48227.470.1324247.973.922.2198.466.923.4149.866.220.7114.661.518.885.254.715.768.149.617.560.351.5

Manufacturing IndustryConstruction IndustryCatering Industry

Sheet1Industrial Accident Rates of All Industries and Major Industries 92 - 98..19861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005Manufacturing Industry28.0224.1224.3223.6421.523.482422.223.420.718.815.717.5Construction Industry310.9333369.3374.4353.5364.3302.3294.8275232.7219.9227.4247.9198.4149.8114.685.268.160.3Catering Industry79.8466.2967.168.1965.9670.1373.966.966.261.554.749.651.5Figures in brackets give the number of fatalities, and figures not in brackets give the total number of industrial accidents.

Sheet1

Manufacturing IndustryConstruction IndustryCatering Industry

Sheet2Industrial Accident Rates of Major Manufacturing Industries 92 - 98Major Manufacturing Industries1992199319941995199619971998Electronics IndustryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases (a)767480542512394311360Fatal Cases (b)0000000Employment617895372246335440223417631188Accident rate/1000 workers (a)12.418.9311.7011.6311.539.97(b)0.000.000.000.000.000.00Metal Products IndustryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases (a)1842107812941113962977Fatal Cases (b)310010Employment403973559229670257142137419133Accident rate/1000 workers (a)45.6030.2943.6143.2845.0151.06(b)0.070.030.000.000.050.00Plastic IndustryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases (a)812522418277239248Fatal Cases (b)010001Employment363702778020449164481391011539Accident rate/1000 workers (a)22.3318.7920.4416.8417.1821.49(b)0.000.040.000.000.000.09Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing IndustryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases (a)740726682511346373Fatal Cases (b)113320Employment659766575912489938093444Accident rate/1000 workers (a)112.17109.06115.36104.3190.84108.30(b)0.150.150.510.610.530.00Textiles IndustryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases (a)30162161159012001061836Fatal Cases (b)111000Employment866277503171601589024948443502Accident rate/1000 workers (a)34.8228.8022.2120.3721.4419.22(b)0.010.010.010.000.000.00Wearing Apparel IndustryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases (a)16431241912687524450Fatal Cases (b)000000Employment159898136046102416836606721156734Accident rate/1000 workers (a)10.289.128.908.217.807.93(b)0.000.000.000.000.000.001000199219931994199519961997Electronics Industry767480542512394311Metal Products Industry1842107812941113962977Plastic Industry812522418277239248Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry740726682511346373Textiles Industry30162161159012001061836Wearing Apparel Industry16431241912687524450Industrial Accident Rates of Major Manufacturing Industries 92 - 97Figures in brackets give the number of fatalities, and figures not in brackets give the total number of industrial accidents.

&APage &P

Sheet2000000000000000000000000000000000000

&APage &PElectronics IndustryMetal Products IndustryPlastic IndustryShipbuilding and Shiprepairing IndustryTextiles IndustryWearing Apparel Industry394 (0)512 (0)542 (0)480 (0)767 (0)311 (0)962 (1)1113 (0)1294 (0)1078 (1)1842 (3)977 (0)239 (0)277 (0)418 (0)522 (1)812 (0)248 (1)346 (2)511 (3)682 (3)726 (1)740 (1)373 (0)1061 (0)1200 (0)1590 (1)2161 (1)3016 (1)836 (0)687 (0)912 (0)1643 (0)524 (0)450 (0)

Sheet3Industrial Accidents in All Industry in Years 92 - 98 Analysed by CauseCause1992199319941995199619971998MachineryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases4388270027252364232624702083Fatal Cases1024810341TransportNo. of AccidentTotal Cases818400303430523660425Fatal Cases2246221Explosion or fireNo. of AccidentTotal Cases48240837532627719196Fatal Cases6421210Hot or corrosive substancesNo. of AccidentTotal Cases4163360536623445354236033557Fatal Cases0000000Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substancesNo. of AccidentTotal Cases33303937332826Fatal Cases3200210ElectricityNo. of AccidentTotal Cases58596044527694Fatal Cases5755456Fall of personNo. of AccidentTotal Cases7343589558925571613165118345Fatal Cases26323433372835Stepping on, striking against or struck by objectNo. of AccidentTotal Cases15555170271336613637147741550414652Fatal Cases8645544Falling objectNo. of AccidentTotal Cases2367176521501807170715651191Fatal Cases31110169109Fall of groundNo. of AccidentTotal Cases1598212111Fatal Cases0301100Handling without machineryNo. of AccidentTotal Cases99778140102907658563365675917Fatal Cases0000000Hand toolNo. of AccidentTotal Cases7322570542395111485454465281Fatal Cases0000000MiscellaneousNo. of AccidentTotal Cases2822105410555693676731366Fatal Cases200013101997199819921993199419951996Machinery2470208343882700272523642326Transport660425818400303430523Explosion or fire19196482408375326277Hot or corrosive substances3603355741633605366234453542Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substances28263330393733Electricity76945859604452Fall of person6511834573435895589255716131Stepping on, striking against or struck by object15504146521555517027133661363714774Falling object1565119123671765215018071707Fall of ground1111598212Handling without machinery65675917997781401029076585633Hand tool5446528173225705423951114854Miscellaneous6731366282210541055569367Industrial Accidents in All Industry in Years 97 - 98 Analysed by CauseFigures in brackets give the number of fatalities, and figures not in brackets give the total number of industrial accidents.

Sheet300000000000000000000000000

19971998

Sheet4Accident Analysis using the Pareto PrincipleCause of Accident (1996)No of IncidentsPercent of TotalCumulative Percent1. Stepping on, striking against or struck by object1477436.70%36.70%2. Fall of person613115.23%52%3. Handling without machinery565314.04%66%4. Hand tool485412.06%78%5. Hot or corrosive substances35428.80%87%6. Machinery23265.78%93%7. Falling object17074.24%97%8. Transport5231.30%98%9. Miscellaneous3670.91%99%10. Explosion or fire2770.69%100%11. Electricity520.13%100%12. Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substances330.08%100%13. Fall of ground120.03%100%40251100.00%19961992199319941995Stepping on, striking against or struck by object1477415555170271336613637Handling without machinery563399778140102907658Fall of person61317343589558925571Hand tool48547322570542395111Hot or corrosive substances35424163360536623445Machinery23264388270027252364Falling object17072367176521501807Miscellaneous367282210541055569Transport523818400303430Explosion or fire277482408375326Electricity5258596044Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substances3333303937Fall of ground1215982136.72135.82522513663664784795875876936937977968988989999991010010100111001110012100121001310013100Accident Analysis using the Pareto PrincipleCause of Accident (1997)No of IncidentsPercent of TotalCumulative Percent1. Stepping on, striking against or struck by object1550435.80%35.80%2. Handling without machinery656715.16%51%3. Fall of person651115.04%66%4. Hand tool544612.58%79%5. Hot or corrosive substances36038.32%87%6. Machinery24705.70%93%7. Falling object15653.61%96%8. Miscellaneous6731.55%98%9. Transport6601.52%99%10. Explosion or fire1910.44%100%11. Electricity760.18%100%12. Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substances280.06%100%13. Fall of ground110.03%100%43305100.00%Carpenter1244%Steel bender/fixer519%Labourer311%Bricklayer/Plasterer311%Scaffolder27%Others(Plumber & Leveller)27%27100%8:00-8:5900.00%9:00-9:5900.00%10:00-10:59311.54%11:00-11:591246.15%12:00-12:5900.00%13:00-13:59311.54%14:00-14:59519.23%15:00-15:5927.69%16:00-16:5900.00%17:00-17:5913.85%26100.00%

Sheet40000000000000

&APage &PCausePercent

Sheet50000000000000

CausePercent

Sheet60000000000000

CausePercent

Sheet7000000

Sheet80000000000

No.of Cases13.85%27.69%519.23%311.54%311.54%12(1)46.15%

Sheet9Accident Analysis using the Pareto PrincipleCause of Accident (1996)No of Fatal CasesPercent of TotalCumulative Percent1. Fall of person3756.06%56.06%2. Falling object913.64%70%3. Stepping on, striking against or struck by object57.58%77%4. Electricity46.06%83%5. Machinery34.55%88%6. Transport23.03%91%7. Explosion or fire23.03%94%8. Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substances23.03%97%9. Miscellaneous11.52%98%10. Fall of ground11.52%100%11. Handling without machinery00.00%100%12. Hand tool00.00%100%13. Hot or corrosive substances00.00%100%66100.00%156.0627037748358869179489799810100111001210013100Accident Analysis using the Pareto PrincipleCause of Accident (1997)No of Fatal CasesPercent of TotalCumulative Percent1. Fall of person2848.28%48.28%2. Falling object1017.24%66%3. Electricity58.62%74%4. Stepping on, striking against or struck by object46.90%81%5. Machinery46.90%88%6. Miscellaneous35.17%93%7. Transport23.45%97%8. Explosion or fire11.72%98%9. Gassing, poisoning & other toxic substances11.72%100%10. Fall of ground00.00%100%11. Handling without machinery00.00%100%12. Hand tool00.00%100%13. Hot or corrosive substances00.00%100%58100.00%148.28266374481588693797898910010100111001210013100

&APage &P

Sheet956.067077838891949798100100100100

&APage &PCausePercent

Sheet1048.2866748188939798100100100100100

CausePercent

Sheet11ItemBody PartNo.of Cases% of total accident1Hand/arm/shoulder829.63%2Foot/toe518.52%3Eye414.81%4Back414.81%5Leg/ankle27.41%6Head27.41%7Chest13.70%8Multiple Injury13.70%27100%ItemNature of BodyNo. of Cases% of total accident1Strain1452%2Laceration622%3Contusion/crushing622%4Internal Injury14%27100%

&APage &P

Sheet12Jul-970Aug-970Sep-970Oct-970Nov-971Dec-970Jan-981Feb-981Mar-981Apr-982May-983Jun-983Jul-983Aug-986Sep-981Oct-983Nov-980Dec-982

&APage &P

Sheet12000010111233361302

Sheet13

&APage &P

Sheet14

&APage &P

Sheet15

&APage &P

Sheet16

&APage &P

&APage &P

&APage &P

&APage &P

&APage &P

&APage &P