FDRsafety brings unmatched expertise to
a full range of safety consulting services.
We get results!

Today’s consumers seek organizations that demonstrate socially responsible business practices. ISO, the International Organization for Standardization, has been working on the issue for many years and has decided to launch an International Standard providing guidelines for social responsibility (SR). It will be available October 15.

ISO notes a need for organizations in both public and private sectors to behave in a socially responsible way is becoming a generalized requirement of society. The stakeholder groups that are participating in the in the development of this standard include industry, government, labor, consumers, nongovernmental organizations and others, in addition to geographical and gender-based balance.

The guidance standard will be published as ISO 26000 and be voluntary to use. It will not include requirements and will thus not be a certification standard. It will focus on seven key aspects of social responsibility: organizational governance, community involvement and development, environment, fair operating practices, consumer issues, labor practices, and human rights.

There is a range of opinions as to the right approach, ranging from strict legislation at one end to complete freedom at the other. ISO says it is looking for a middle road that promotes respect and responsibility based on known reference documents without stifling creativity and development. ISO’s guideline is designed to encourage voluntary commitment to social responsibility that will lead to common guidance on concepts, definitions and methods of evaluation.

The document is 100+ pages (including the annexes). For those who are interested, a website developed by representatives of EU industry can be found here.

The site is designed to help understand ISO 26000 without needing consultancy or other external services. The recommendations are developed from a user perspective, and may be particularly interesting for small and medium organizations.

ASQ, American Society for Quality, notes that increasing consumer demand leaves many asking, “Do we have what it takes?” As part of its growing effort to assume a leadership role locally and internationally in the SR movement, ASQ created the Socially Responsible Organization (SRO). If interested, you can join the community.

A recent AAA Living Article entitled “Losing the Drinking Game” had some interesting statistics:

• Every 45 minutes, someone in the US dies because of alcohol-impaired driving.
• 2.5 million parents drive under the influence of alcohol yearly
• About ½ of children killed in alcohol-related crashes are in the car with the impaired driver
• $51 billion is the estimated annual cost of drunk-driving crashes

Lest you think that this blog is about drunk driving, it isn’t. The human tragedy and DUI numbers speak for themselves.

What perplexes me is why industry and the safety profession spends most or all of its energy on safety in the workplace. The workplace accounts for only 4% of fatalities. Last year, 39,000 people died on our highways, many from alcohol but others for a host of other causes. Another 76,000-plus accidental deaths occurred in the home and public.

These tragedies do not show up in OSHA recordable rates, another reason why more proactive and meaningful safety metrics are needed. I know the old adage “What gets measured, gets done” so perhaps we need to add some process metrics that will encourage management to deal with situations where 96% of all fatalities occur.

Why would we not begin to address these off-the job-issues in some manner? Not only are industries losing the services of valued employees, but, in many cases, the company ends up paying for healthcare one way or another. I am not suggesting that managers become responsible or accountable for employee health and well-being when not at work. I am suggesting that we begin to devote some small percentage of time and resources to address off-the-job safety.

FDRsafety has trained hundreds of thousands employees in safety awareness. I can assure you that making safety a 24-7 value and getting employees to think about the consequences that their unsafe actions could have on their family resonates with the most cynical of employees. This is not behavior-based safety, nor is it preaching or telling them what they “have to” do. Respect for people and talking to them in an honest and forthright manner helps them come to understand that “wanting to” be safe for the sake of their families can do much for on and off the job safety.

It is high time the safety profession started to infuse “safety is a 24-7 value” into their safety awareness training.

Penalties for violation of OSHA standards are not high enough to discourage some employers from violating the law and they ought to be increased, according to the agency’s new director.

“Most employers want to do the right thing. But many others will only comply with OSHA rules if there are strong incentives to do so,” Dr. David Michaels testified to a congressional subcommittee yesterday. “OSHA’s current penalties are often not large enough to provide adequate incentives, and we are very low in comparison with those of other public health agencies,” Michaels said.

Michaels testimony was to the House Education and Labor Committee’s Subcommittee on Workforce Protections. The subcommittee is holding hearings on the proposed Protecting America’s Workers Act, which would make a number of revisions to workplace health and safety law.

Michaels said that environmental laws carry much heavier penalties than penalties under the Occupational Safety and Health Act. For example, in 2001 a tank of sulphuric acid exploded at a Delaware oil refinery, killing an employee. The OSHA penalty was $175,000, Michaels said. Yet in the same incident, thousands of dead fish and crabs were discovered, allowing an Environmental Protection Agency Clean Water Act citation of $10 million.