Wait, that doesn’t apply only to working. It applies throughout life. Ask yourself how many times you drove over the speed limit, used a cell phone while driving in heavy traffic, didn’t take time to put on hearing protection while using a power tool at home – and the list goes on. We are all human and whether for sake of comfort or saving time, it’s easy to take shortcuts.

I’m as guilty as anyone but I’ve found that new thinking is helping me be more conscious of safety on a 24-7 basis. My discussions with Fred Rine and exposure to the FDRsafety training session on safety awareness has caused me to be much more thoughtful about what would happen to my family if I were seriously or fatally injured. I already know my major risks. They are driving and slips, trips and falls.

I’m one of these folks blessed with great health throughout my 64-plus years. No broken bones, no surgeries and I missed 4 hours of work in a 43-year career. But in the last few months, I took two tumbles – both from really stupid situations that were avoidable and I will not discuss. Both had to do with a “time” issue. I have done my self-assessment and made a commitment (to myself) to be more diligent.

Thinking from the heart

What’s important and the focus of this post is not what but why. I “want to be safer” because of my family. It’s thinking about safety from the heart – not the head. I know what to do from my head but the “want to” comes from the heart.

That takes me to thinking about my years in safety and what I read in all the professional journals and articles. We are simply missing the boat. The drive to reduce OSHA recordable cases is necessary but far from sufficient. 96% of accidental deaths are away from work. The offset of the natural inclination to take shortcuts – on and off the job – is to get folks to think about their families and make safety a 24-7 priority. That will also help improve safety in the homes and community if we do this right.

If we value someone’s safety and desire to have them “want to” be safe, we need to deal with the heart as well as the mind. Let’s expand our focus and start dealing with the real issues that are being ignored.

The past

The past four decades were a period focused mainly on OSHA compliance, with efforts geared to identifying hazards, implementing safeguards and lots of training. Most of the effort was program related, often confusing management and supervision as well as employees.

Lockout, slips, trips, falls, material handling, confined space, PPE, HazCom, and literally dozens of other regulations or safety programs were typically implemented as functional silos – all with their own terms. Along the way, we adopted OSHA recordkeeping as the primary means of tracking performance. The quest to continuously improve OSHA recordable cases for that elusive goal of “zero injuries” was a mantra often heard in the safety community. The question I would pose is, “Gee, what if I get to the top of the ladder and find out I’m on the wrong wall?”

The present

Unfortunately, we still have a strong OSHA focus. We bemoan that OSHA recordables are lagging indicators but do very little to develop new metrics for a more proactive look at things. Enlightened safety pros have moved to a systems approach that integrates the various programs into a cohesive system focused on continuous improvement.

Such systems demand leadership and employee participation and have proven to be successful when properly implemented. Concurrent with systems thinking has been the active use of risk assessment to complement traditional hazards assessment. Tools like task-based risk assessment recognize the realities of the workplace and do not skirt the issues where power must be on, work performed at elevation, etc. Through the application of the hierarchy of controls, risks can be mitigated allowing the work to be performed with acceptable risk. Those using the latest state of the art tools and thinking are making real headway — but still missing the real issue.

The future

The ghost of the future would probably ask, “Why do you folks insist on working on 4% of the problem? Is the “ghost of OSHA past” so strong that you cannot expand your focus and address the 96% of accidental deaths occurring off the job?” This is the real future of safety – tackling the bigger issue without abandoning the occupational focus.

In fact, you’ll find that making safety a 24-7 family driven value can do much to help your in-plant efforts. That is the opportunity. The challenge will come from the strategic initiatives of sustainability and corporate social responsibility that demand a broader focus of efforts geared to the family and society. If safety is not at the forefront, we will be pushed further to the back burner and CEOs will find other means and methods to address these strategic challenges.

Take stock of how you see and practice our profession. Are you in the past, the present or the future? When you climb the ladder of successfully reducing risk, make sure you are climbing the right wall – the wall of safety 24-7.

That is the premise of “Getting to Zero Accidents,” a new e-book by FDRsafety CEO Fred Rine that is available for free download.

“You cannot force a change in attitude, but you can get people to want to be safe – and to be accountable for their actions,” writes Rine. “You can help people conclude that they should change – all by selling the benefits of their own safety.”

The e-book is based on the thinking behind a safety awareness program designed by Rine that has been presented to more than 400,000 employees and managers at companies nationwide. This program complements other elements of an overall safety system and The program is credited by many organizations with reducing helping reduce their OSHA recordable rates.

In that program, Rine – who previously ran the well-regarded safety program at FedEx — has attendees talk about what is important to them. Invariably, one of the highest priorities workers cite is coming home each day in one piece to family and loved ones. Rine helps workers understand that working safely is a way for workers to achieve one of their personal top priorities.

The book also addresses the importance of safety off-the-job, which is where 96 percent of all fatal accidents occur.

To learn more about how to change workers attitudes, click here.

One such emerging issue is the safety and health needs of a workforce that is growing older. Issues like an aging workforce are not tidal waves because you don’t see the wave. With a tsunami, when you see the wave it is too late.

An aging workforce is more than a socially responsible issue for many companies. The theme I heard in recent presentations from both CNA Insurance and NIOSH is – believe it or not – that many companies will be facing a major labor shortage in the next few years. I place a lot of value on actuarial tables used by insurance companies and other experts studying demographics. The data suggest that many companies will be faced with employing aging workers to stay in business or grow their business – it’s not a question of doing something nice for older workers – it’s about survival in the workplace utilizing the talents and skills of an older workforce.

I know it’s hard to believe with the current economy, but I hear employers complaining that they can’t find workers with necessary skills. Many older workers meet their requirements – - with this caveat — older workers pose new health, safety and ergonomic challenges.

A 1/8-inch difference in the floor may not be a problem for young workers but could become a trip hazard for an older worker. Lighting and visual acuity is another challenge. Workers who could handle lifting and bending in their younger years may not be able to handle similar stresses in their old age.

When/if your company hires aging workers or keeps older workers on the payroll, will you have the necessary hazard prevention processes in place to keep them healthy and well?

Is the incessant focus on OSHA recordable injury rates keeping us from planning on strategic issues that will impact our organizations? It’s all about long-term sustainable growth folks. Let’s make sure that we adding real value and deal with emerging issues like an aging workforce.

All of the attendees were immersed in using “lean” to improve operational performance in their organizations. Many healthcare organizations are beset with challenges to reduce errors, cut costs and provide faster services. Do those sound familiar to the management challenges laid out in your own organization?

“Lean” is the term used to describe Toyota’s production system in the 1991 book, “The Machine that Changed the World.” Lean thinking and tools focus on the identification and elimination of waste, allowing any business process or system to be faster, better and cheaper. Over the years, many companies and industries like healthcare have learned that “lean” works in offices and any kind/size of business.

History buffs may know that Toyota created tools and problem solving processes to follow the teaching of W. Edwards Deming. Deming, often credited with being one of the key figures for the modern quality movement, did not preach lean. His 14 Points or principles simply laid out the foundation for leadership that allowed every member of the organization to be involved with organizational transformation.

Leadership with engaged employees – sounds a lot like what we in safety are always striving for.

You cannot be lean without being safe

My message was “You cannot be lean without being safe.” It is a given that healthcare professionals are focused on patient safety. Healthcare organizations that are several years into their “lean journey” for organizational transformation have impressive case studies demonstrating improvement in operational excellence. Yet, only a few of these organizations have included employee safety in their processes to improve work.

How can this be? Needle sticks, blood borne pathogens and a myriad of ergonomic issues are just some of the hazards that confront nurses and other healthcare workers. For the lean folks, is it someone else’s responsibility to handle employee safety?

Is this the same thinking that safety folks use when we say, “Lean or production is someone else’s responsibility.” Do our paradigms about roles and responsibilities constrain taking advantage of opportunities that would make things run faster, better, cheaper – - and safer?

Whether your company uses “lean” or some other form of continuous improvement, we in safety have a golden opportunity to help our leaders understand that injury and illness is waste. If we value our employees, then we need to make safety 24-7. When we do this, we have made the first step onto the path where lean and safety are carried out as an integrated process.

If you are a boss:

• Do your direct reports trust you?
• Do their direct reports trust them?
• How do you know?
• Do you cross your fingers hoping that organizational members trust each other?

Trust is the foundation for teamwork, and the challenge for many companies is creating an organizational culture of teamwork. If you are working on teamwork without addressing the trust issue, you are missing the boat.

Let’s see if a “5 Why” problem analysis can be of value:

1. Why isn’t our organizational performance where we want it to be?
Answer: We suffer from a lack of teamwork

2. Why don’t we have better teamwork?
Answer: Though not spoken, we believe there is a lack of trust

3. Why is there a lack of trust?
Answer: One reason is that employees don’t feel like we care about their personal well-being

4. Why don’t employees feel like management cares about their well-being?
Answer: Safety is not viewed as an organizational value

5. Why isn’t safety viewed as a value?
Answer: Because management confuses the organization with statements and actions like:

• Safety is #1
• Safety is only in the workplace
• Not communicating the concept of “safety is a 24-7 value”

Improving performance

Here’s the message:

• You cannot have a high-performing organization without teamwork and trust
• You cannot build trust without safety as an integral part of daily business
• You cannot get people to “want to” be safe without establishing that safety is a personal responsibility extending beyond the worksite

If you want an organizational culture of teamwork and continuous improvement, you need to have safety as a value – not a priority that conflicts with other priorities. When that value is driven by senior leaders as part of their daily business, you are taking the first steps in a very long journey to building trust – and a sustainable organization.

Unfortunately, safety is only a small part of the standard. This lack of emphasis should concern safety professionals and is all-the-more reason to make sure that safety is integrated into your organization’s strategic efforts. When boards and senior executives become aware of new initiatives, it is sometimes the trigger to get on board, and social responsibility is certainly getting a lot of attention, particularly in Europe.

Coming-out parties for the international social responsibility standard ISO 26000 are all the rage in Europe. The French standards body Afnor sponsored roll-out events around the country in November, and The British Standards Institute hosted a meeting in London on November 24. The Netherlands Standardization Institute (Nederlands Normalisatie-instituut —NEN) is staging a high profile launch on December 9. Along with presentations of case studies of corporations and government organizations that have used the guidance standard, NEN will introduce a framework for a self declaration to the standard. The self declaration statement has not been finalized, and no further information has been made public.

If the issue of using ISO 26000 is raised in your company, you should have a fundamental understanding of what the standard is and is not.

ISO 26000 is not a management system standard, but opportunities to earn private, third-party accreditation have cropped up. Some view such activity as a breach of faith. The text of ISO 26000 strictly forbids using the guidance standard itself for third-party certification. A clause states:

“This international standard is not a management system standard. It is not intended or appropriate for certification purposes or regulatory or contractual use. Any offer to certify, or claims to be certified to ISO 26000 would be a misrepresentation of the intent and purpose and a misuse of this international standard.”

To underline the ban, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) recently published a statement jointly with International Accreditation Forum. IAF is the worldwide association of conformity assessment accreditation bodies. The two institutions say they will report anyone providing certification to the ISO Central Secretariat and their own members “who will be requested to communicate within their own countries to regulators, stakeholders, and industry.”

A task force within the ISO Working Group on Social Responsibility produced a note on the proper way for companies and others to communicate their use of ISO 26000. An organization can say it used the note as a reference document.

A proper self declaration should give companies and organizations an acceptable procedure to announce their application of the social responsibility standard. If you have questions on the standard or self declaration, feel free to contact me at mtaubitz@fdrsafety.com.

The simple message about the value of the group and voluntary standards is the protection they provide for consumers and employees. Look at the certification symbols on any electrical device and you will have an appreciation for how much it takes to provide proper safeguards as well as assuring inter-operability. Ditto, the ISO, IEC, ASTM, NFPA, AIHA, ASSE and assortment of ANSI standards used to prevent hazards coming into the workplace on new machinery, equipment and facilities.

Safety professionals should be cognizant of the ever-increasing emphasis on sustainable growth (often referred to as the triple bottom line of People, Planet and Profit) and social responsibility. Of concern is the lack of emphasis on occupational safety in both of these issues. In my keynote address, I noted that the 150 + pages of Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines have less than 2% of the overall requirements devoted to safety. GRI is the basis for companies that report on sustainability efforts. If you concur with the notion that, “what gets measured – gets managed,” our profession should be concerned. If you handle environmental issues, never fear for environment is a major emphasis of sustainable growth.

This is just a “heads up” that the world of “silos” is still active. Those who work on sustainability may not recognize the need to emphasize the importance of occupational safety. If your company is working on the strategic issues of sustainable growth and/or social responsibility, make sure that the health and well-being of your own workforce is forefront in the effort.

For more about the connection between safety and sustainability view the article archives in the Safe, Lean, Sustainable section of our website.

UL, Underwriter Laboratories, is a recognized global resource for product safety certification and compliance solutions.  UL has partnered with GreenBiz.com (parent organization for Greener World media), a West Coast organization, to develop a standard for assessing corporate policies and procedures.  The standard has a very short comment period and some industry groups are scrambling to provide comment.

The standard is ULE 880: Standard for Sustainable Manufacturers and it will be the first, organization-wide sustainability standard used to assess corporate policies and practices. Greener World Media is the producer of GreenBiz.com, the leading source for news, best practices, research, events, and other services related to the greening of mainstream business.

ULE 880 defines core sustainability metrics for manufacturing businesses within the following five domains:

Sustainability Governance: how an organization leads and manages itself in relation to its stakeholders, including its employees, investors, regulatory authorities, customers, and the communities in which it operates.

Environment: an organization’s environmental footprint across its policies, operations, products and services, including its resource use and emissions.

Workforce: issues related to employee working conditions, organization culture, and effectiveness.

Customers and Suppliers: issues related to an organization’s policies and practices on product safety, quality, pricing, and marketing as well as its supply chain policies and practices.

Social and Community Engagement: an organization’s impacts on its community in the areas of social equity, ethical conduct, and human rights.

UL Environment is seeking participation from a broad cross-section of stakeholders, including manufacturers, assessment and standards organizations, regulators, policy makers, procurement officers, sustainability professionals, the socially responsible investing community, and non-profit and for-profit sustainability interest groups.

But once again we find the complete absence of “employee safety.”  When you read about sustainability, you will always read about environmental issues, but, rarely, about occupational safety.

It is up to safety professionals to build a bridge with those driving sustainable growth, or we will be left on the sidelines.  Who or what group will take the lead?

For an archive of articles about the relationship between safety and sustainability see the Safe, Lean, Sustainable section of this site.

]]>