A recent issue of ENR caught my attention with its cover story about the personal safety records debate. The article and the viewpoints expressed in the Pro and Con discussions got me “musing” on the propriety of such a requirement.
On the one hand, such a personalized approach could lead to safer work places because the requirement may hit home. Workers required to keep such records and self report may very well heed OSHA warnings and employer safety requirements. On the other, would the reward from requiring employers to upgrade their safety programs, with the attendant cost, and hoping that OSHA could keep up with approximately 11 million of these reports outweigh the cost and administrative hassle that such reports would require?
As E. Collette Nelson of the American Subcontractors Association points out in the ENR article, contractors are interested in accurate safety information but balk at the thought of even more paperwork and potential privacy issues. Also, a big issue is what about injuries due to negligence of other trades or workers on a multi-employer job site (see a discussion of the unique nature of OSHA regulation of these sites here).
While statistics show that employee acts cause many accidents, I fall somewhere in the middle of the debate. I tend to agree with the position stated by Bradley Sant of the American Road & Transportation Builders Association who agrees that portable, personal safety records are a good idea, but more bureaucracy is not the way to go. Employers, at least in Virginia, have the right to require such reporting with or without OSHA regulation. Requiring such reporting, at least on a basic level, may be a good idea for construction employers who want to keep their job sites from negative VOSH and OSHA inspection results.
In any event, consult with a knowledgeable attorney or safety consultant when drafting (or hopefully updating) your job site safety program.
To weigh in on this debate, please comment below. Also, please subscribe to keep up with the latest Musings.
Great topic Chris. It seems like a lot of times, people are worried about a document trailing hanging them out to dry. More often than not, people inclined to document are generally well served by proving what they did with hard evidence.
I agree about deferring to the right expertise too though!
.-= Timothy R. Hughes´s last blog post .. LEEDing to Unintended Consequences – The Ghost of LEED Future =-.
Thanks for the comment Tim. As always it’s a cost versus benefit analysis. Paperwork and red tape can get overwhelming, but safety is important.
I’ve found that when you make the guys on a crew report on a form every single tiny mishap, inside a month your safety record is darned near spotless, and, perversely, there is less paperwork 😉
Two things happen: one, the guys get more careful. Two, real safety hazards that the crews have no control over get reported and dealt with.
A win-win in my book.
Erick
Thanks for the insight Erick. I have no problem with individual companies doing this as I think you are right. I am just unsure if OSHA has the staff to enforce a regulation about it.
Hi Christopher,
I read your article with interest. I am a builder in London, and over here we have yet to have any such forced measures. Although partly split on the issue, I think that a daily reporting system may actually be what is required. On a construction site so many things can go wrong, and making the lads think about it every day by having a report system, may just lead to fewer incidents.
Just my two cents.
Martin
Thanks for checking in Martin. Always good to hear from others to get their perspectives.