Low Cost Ways to Improve Construction Safety

Unfortunately, in today’s economic climate many construction companies face diminishing revenues and uncertain future.

As a result, budgets tighten and many initiatives, including those for safety, are put on hold or cut. However, it’s important to realize that significant safety improvement does not require substantial investment.

To be effective, safety must be managed like any other company function, regardless of economic conditions. Safety, quality and productivity must be held in constructive tension with one another. Focus on just any two and the third suffers. When production and quality control budgets are adjusted, the safety budget must be equally affected. Balance is the proven driving force behind success.

In searching for the most effective and time-tested method of improving safety, the traditional process found in all safety programs is based on compliance. Focus is on the minimum safe standards established by OSHA or industry best practices.

Focusing on compliance, the safety program stands alone, and safety is seen in the field as “something else we have to do.” Construction personnel, management and crafts-level employees are paid based on performance. When employees choose between productivity and safety, safety loses.

A New Foundation

Successful safety efforts must begin with active involvement of craft-level personnel with activities that are meaningful to the individual. Increasing employee participation in the safety process is the common denominator of sustained, continuous improvement efforts. This is the antithesis of the management by decree or directive methodology. It is also my experience that, although widely used, the directive method is the least productive.

Consider the following example, and ask yourself which has the potential for long-lasting change.

While walking the site, a supervisor observes an employee not wearing his safety glasses.

• Using the compliance program and managing by directive, the supervisor snaps at the craftsman, “Put your safety glasses on,” and perhaps issues a written warning. As a result, the worker puts on his glasses (at least while in the presence of the supervisor). Although there is a short term gain, the scenario ends with little future impact.
• Using an employee involvement process, the supervisor stops and asks the worker why his safety glasses are not being worn. The craftsman tells the supervisor that the safety glasses provided don’t work with the shape of his head, and as a result are difficult to keep on. The supervisor then asks the employee what he thinks he can do to fix the problem. The employee comes up with a couple ideas and they come to an understanding for the short term. Then, the supervisor makes a note and tells the craftsman that he’ll get the right glasses. Long term fix depends on follow-through. The supervisor must make sure an alternate safety glass style is part of the next safety supply order.

The differences are dramatic. The directive approach may fix the problem short term but fails to identify the root cause of non-compliance. As a result, recurrence is a high probability.

The involvement process fixes the problem in the short term and identifies the underlying cause. As long as the supervisor follows through, recurrence is a low probability, and the employee has a positive impact on the overall process as well as a sense of ownership.

Managing by directive puts responsibility for safety on the supervisor. The craftsman is dependent on someone else for safety. In the employee involvement process, responsibility for safety begins at the craft level. Safety becomes independent and is the base responsibility of the individual.

Improvement Recommendations

The following are two recommendations that will help you tap into the experience and creativity of the hourly worker while having minimal impact to the budget.

Recommendation 1

Create a safety steering committee made up of respected hourly employees. This is one of the easiest and most overlooked ways to encourage employee involvement in the safety process.

The Committee Should…

• Meet for up to thirty minutes at regular intervals as determined by need
• Review safety audit information, injury and near miss reports to discuss root causes and make recommendations to improve or prevent recurrence

Key Points:

• Supervisory personnel are excluded from serving on the committee. Intimidation, real or perceived, can drastically affect open and honest communication.
• Any recommendations produced by the committee should be reviewed by site management and corporate to determine if procedure or policy change is necessary.
• Membership to the committee must be voluntary. Members can be asked to join but cannot be elected or forced.
• Members must rely exclusively on their personal experience when offering recommendations or opinions.
• The committee is not formed to bargain with management, represent co-workers, discuss worker grievances or discuss issues beyond safety.
• The goal should be to provide everyone opportunity to serve on the committee. I recommend limiting membership to a twelve-month cycle.

Recommendation 2

Improve the pre-task meeting. Supervisors already hold meets, formal or informal, to make daily task assignments. Adding a safety component improves the meeting by increasing the opportunity for an hourly employee to voice safety related concerns or ask for clarification on accomplishing the task safely. This results in a feeling that those participating are making a real contribution to the company safety effort.

The Supervisor Should…

• Identify the task area and the assignment
• Ask crewmembers if there are any safety conditions that need to be addressed, any other trades they need to be aware of and if there are any tools or safety equipment needed to accomplish the task.
• Lead the crew through the steps necessary to do the job safely

Key Points:

• Productivity is improved when tools, unsafe conditions, the steps necessary to work safely and safety materials are identified before the employee goes to the work area.
• The supervisor must lead crewmembers to speak up during this meeting and acknowledge individual participation.

Anticipated Return

Implementation of the recommendations will not adversely affect the budget. In reality, they will go a long way towards:

• Preventing injuries that adversely impact the company bottom line
• Improving production and quality processes by increasing employee participation with safety
• Lowering injury frequency rates, resulting in lower insurance premiums and labor rate, thereby improving company competitiveness
• Creating an atmosphere of active involvement giving the hourly worker pride of ownership in the processes and improving worker morale-worker trust of the company improves
• Providing a process that will make it easier to meet schedule milestones, resulting in improved client relationships

Does It Work?

Several years ago, I was asked to assist a company that had a very poor safety record. They had been around for more than sixty years and used a top down safety by decree model of management. As a result, the craft employees were cut out from the safety process, and a valuable source of experiences were not used.

Focusing on the largest project they had, and after initial training, we implemented the site safety steering committee. At first, everyone from site management to the craft level employee, resisted. Management told me that the craft employees “could care less” about safety. Craft personnel didn’t think the idea would work because management “could care less” about anything they had to say. Obviously, we had a significant trust issue to overcome.

Our breakthrough was achieved when the committee reviewed reports indicating non-compliance with the company glove policy. They discovered that the gloves the company was providing were not only cheap to buy, but were cheaply made and prone to wear out quickly. The committee researched and even tested several products before making a recommendation that we change to another, more expensive glove.

Expecting the craft employee to have no consideration of the project budget, site management assumed the committee would want the most expensive gloves available. They were surprised to discover that although they had tested some expensive gloves, the request was for a product that was only 25 percent more than the glove currently provided but in field tests lasted twice as long. Implementation of their idea not only helped to control a safety concern, but also saved the project money.

As a result of this first action, the project changed significantly. Site management began asking the committee about various issues and openly acknowledged the value of their participation. The craft personnel knew that their input was valued and company trust improved.

While visiting the project a few months later, a member of the steering committee told me that although he had been with the company more than twenty years, “This was the first time anyone in management ever listened to him about anything.”

While the other improvement methods can be implemented, in the current economic situation, our efforts must be in line with sound business processes. Implementing these recommendations will go a long way toward, not only improving safety, but improving the company bottom line.

Construction Business Owner, September 2009