Saturday, July 26, 2014

Safety Management Tips

The Top 10 Ways to Improve
Safety Management.

A panel of safety experts offer their advice to improve the management of the safety process and foster leadership.
 **********************************************************************

Safety management can be a touchy topic. Disagreements abound: Should companies go the route of behavior-based safety, or follow a systems approach? Should safety be management-driven or employee-driven? What metrics should be used to assess the safety process?

We recently spoke to a number of experts in the occupational safety and health field. Though some of their recommendations seem at odds with each other and they approach safety from different perspectives, two themes reverberated throughout the comments. The first was the need for safety leadership, not just safety management. The second was the need to incorporate safety into the organizational structure of the business and not treat it as a separate function.

Here is what they had to say:

1) Recognize the difference between managing and leading Tom Krause, Ph.D., CEO of Behavioral Science Technology Inc.
Krause, who along with John Hidley, M.D., pioneered the application of behavioral science methods to safety with Behavioral Advanced Performance Process (BAPP) technology, says organizations can improve safety management by recognizing the difference between managing and leading, and should place more emphasis on leading. "By managing, organizations make things happen. It's a linear, practical function," says Krause. "By leading, organizations show employees why safety matters, why they should be motivated to get behind it and want to do it."

He has found that most companies are very strong on the managing side. They know how to make things happen. On the leading side, however, "there are usually significant opportunities" for improvement, says Krause.

"It is so pivotal to understand the difference between managing and leading, especially at the senior level," says Krause. "If senior leadership gets it right, then the culture will change. If senior management doesn't get it right, then everything else is like swimming upstream. It's a struggle."

2) Integrate all aspects of the safety "program" into a single comprehensive management system Richard Fulwiler, Sc.D., CIH, president, Technology Leadership Associates
 After retiring as global director of health and safety for Procter & Gamble with 28 years of service, Fulwiler became president of Technology Leadership Associates, which specializes in increasing individual effectiveness and improving organizational capacity in the safety area. He advises, "Don't have a number of stand-alone programs such as lockout/tagout, job safety analysis, behavior-based safety, confined space entry, etc. Instead, be sure that all elements of the safety program are integrated into a single management system that is owned by line management."

Fulwiler suggests developing and deploying a "before-the-fact" metric for measuring safety performance that leads to predictable and desired results. "In other words, focus on a system that prevents problems versus just solving problems, much the way fire prevention (before the fact) is superior to fire fighting (after the fact)," he says.

3) "POLICE" your safety program James "Skipper" Kendrick, CSP, president, American Society of Safety Engineers and manager, Industrial Safety & Hygiene, Bell Helicopter Textron Inc.
"Management does not need to do anything special to improve the integration of occupational safety, health and the environment into the business realm," says Kendrick. "Safety needs to be managed at the same degree as every other aspect of business. The same amount of management skill and effort needs to be applied to safety as with quality, cost, schedule, production, etc."
He suggests using the acronym POLICE Plan, Organize, Lead, Inspect, Correct, Evaluate to focus on safety management.

He offers this description of POLICE:
Plan "Plan for safety, health and the environment (SH&E) in everything you do."
Organize "Organize so that SH&E is an equal player with all other business entities."
Lead "Lead by example, walk the talk. As one executive said to me recently, 'If you want to know my position on safety, watch my shoes.'"
Inspect/Investigate "Look for hazards and press for a timely corrective action. Investigate why the conditions exist, look for root cause and again drive for mistake-proof solutions."
Correct/Coach/Commend "Correct items/situations found in a timely manner. Actively coach for safe performance. Commend safe activity and performance."
Evaluate "How is the system/program functioning? Evaluate, develop solutions and press for continued improvement."

4) Integrate safety into the processes of the business Donald J. Eckenfelder, CSP. P.E., principal consultant, Profit Protection Consultants
"Don't have anything beginning with the word 'safety'," counsels Eckenfelder, author of Values-Driven Safety. "Don't have safety meetings, safety processes, safety committees." In other words, have production meetings, manufacturing processes and work committees, because otherwise, "you isolate safety and when it's treated separately, it tends to be subordinated," he says.

Eckenfelder, a past president of the American Society of Safety Engineers, says one characteristic shared by companies that have world-class safety is "they tend not to have safety professionals or safety meetings. Those are integrated into the business process. The outcome is that the responsibility for safety is shared by everyone."

Those companies also care as much about employees' off-the-job safety as on-the-job safety, and they focus on the process, rather than the numbers. "If you ask someone at a company with world-class safety about accident and injury rates, often, they can't answer you because they don't know," says Eckenfelder. "But they can speak to you at length about the integration of safety into the business."

5) Identify clients and internal customers who see value in your services and make those customers your boss Larry Hansen, CSP, ARM, principal of L2H Speaking of Safety Inc., and Dan Zahlis, president of Emprise Inc.
No one will accuse Hansen or Zahlis of being shrinking violets when it comes to their opinions about safety management. Noting that almost 80 percent of safety professionals polled in a recent readers' survey indicated they're dissatisfied with their jobs, they pointed out: "What is buried in these statistics... is that safety professionals complain they aren't supported, aren't listened to, and haven't received their due respect from senior management. Yet, in the next breath, they openly acknowledge that they haven't expanded their knowledge base, explored new strategies, dug-in their heels of conviction, and are fearful of 'pushing back' in their organizations. They simply accept their plight and rationalize their boss's view of them as window dressing, or a necessary expense (for now), and then have the nerve to claim they're underpaid!"

Hansen, the creator/author of "The Architecture of Safety Excellence" and author of ROC Your Organization: Fifty-Two Ways to Instigate Radical Organizational Change for Safety Excellence, and Zahlis the creator of "Active Agenda," a Web-enabled automated risk management data technology, and author of The Hidden Agenda and CAUTION: Beware OSHA Statistics recommend those 80 percent of safety professionals who are dissatisfied with their jobs "identify those clients and/or internal customers that see value in your services, and concentrate your time and energy on them. Do so, even if your boss gets pissed... and do so even more if it gets you fired. Make your customers your boss, rather than the Accounting Department, corporate rules trolls or the corpse that signs your paycheck (it's likely a rubber stamp anyway)."

6) Don't make safety a "priority" Michael S. Deak, corporate director, Safety and Health, Compliance Process Safety and Fire Prevention, E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.
World-class safety performance and safety management requires leadership from the CEO and every other employee, says Deak, who celebrates his 40th anniversary at DuPont in May 2004.

"At DuPont, safety is a core business and organizational value. Don't talk about safety as a priority," Deak counsels. "Think back to Sept. 11, 2001. The priorities of most organizations changed. At DuPont, our business priorities changed, but because safety, health and environment is a core value, it didn't change. It's going to be there next year, it's there now, it was there last year."

Since priorities can change, organizations that include safety as a priority create a culture of people who hide out in foxholes, Deak believes. "They hide and think, 'This too shall pass.' They don't participate, because eventually, there will be a different set of priorities."

7) Management commitment and leadership and employee participation are key to safety management Neal M. Leonhard CIH, CSP, manager, Safety Systems, MeadWestvaco Corp.
"With the increasing emphasis on social responsibility, many Fortune 500 companies are focusing on improving their injury/illness prevention systems," says Leonhard, "Collectively, they are facing the same questions that have been asked since the industrial revolution. What makes a difference in safety, particularly in today's global environment? Management commitment and leadership can make a difference in achieving sustainable results in injury/illness prevention."

MeadWestvaco has communicated a policy to set clear expectations of the current management team regarding safe and healthful work practices and conditions in the business unit. Goals and objectives are established and aligned throughout the organization to drive improvements in safety performance. Leonhard says MeadWestvaco managers are as conversant with safety as they are with other business issues such as production and quality.

"Management leads consistently with a philosophy that all occupational injuries and illnesses are preventable. Management's commitment to safety excellence is demonstrated through visible leadership, such as regular participation in safety activities, and encouragement of employee participation in safety efforts," he adds.

At MeadWestvaco, management provides for and encourages "meaningful employee involvement in the accident prevention system," he notes. "Employees are given the opportunity and are encouraged to provide input into the design and operation of safety processes/programs and the decisions that affect their safety and health. Employee input is valued and used."

8) Take a rational, disciplined approach to safety Donald Eckenfelder
"Safety should not be an emotional subject any more than anything else in business. Take a rational, disciplined approach," suggests Eckenfelder. Many companies try to play on the emotional aspect of injuries, i.e., the impact an injury could have on the lives of employees and their families. "That might work for a while," he says, "but not for long and not consistently."

He suggests devoting energy to finding the root cause of anything that goes wrong in a disciplined way. And don't be misled by red herrings: "What's investigated is usually the symptoms of the problem when the real problem is the culture," he notes. "The root cause of the Columbia shuttle crash wasn't stuff flaking off the outside of the shuttle. The root cause was the safety culture at NASA."

9) Make everyone accountable for safety Michael S. Deak
"Line management has to be held personally responsible for safety. That means they can be held accountable," says Deak. "In successful businesses, leaders are graded not only on a financial scorecard, but on their ability to integrate safety into the business process. At DuPont, safety is a core value, and core values are integrated into the day-to-day operations of the business."

Employee engagement is key here, he adds. And by "employee," he means all employees: "Everybody from the CEO down is an employee. Every one of our 79,000 employees at DuPont is engaged in the safety management process. If you don't engage all employees, you don't have a prayer at becoming a world-class company, in safety or in business," Deak insists.

He says DuPont engages line employees in safety through frequent communication of core values, by including them in incident investigations and by facilitating their participation on audit teams, among other things.

In addition, line employees see management "walking the talk," he adds, and that probably has the most positive influence on their safety performance.

"Very seldom in my 40 years at DuPont have I seen people not do what they think the organization wants them to do. If they see a manager carrying two armloads of boxes up a flight of stairs without holding onto the handrail, it doesn't matter if we tell them 100 times to hold onto the handrail. But if they see the manager holding onto the handrail, that makes all the difference."

10) Get results or get fired Larry Hansen and Dan Zahlis
"Get results or get fired, because it's only results that count," say Hansen and Zahlis, "and it's only results that will ultimately free your soul, and enable you to discover the real opportunities to make a difference in this profession, in your life and in the lives of those entrusted to your care and responsibility!"

 Source: http://ehstoday.com/safety/ehs_imp_36752

Thursday, July 17, 2014

OSHA CITED CASES. Part 2

Trade News Release Banner Image


Region 5 News Release: 14-1234-CHI
July 16, 2014
Contact: Scott Allen      Lauren North
Phone: 312-353-6976      202-693-4655
Email: allen.scott@dol.gov      north.lauren.a@dol.gov

Formed Fiber Technologies provides false abatement documentation,
continues to expose workers to serious hazards resulting in $816,500 fine OSHA previously cited Ohio fabric manufacturing plant in October 2013

SIDNEY, OhioAfter providing false documentation and making false representations claiming that previously cited hazards related to hydraulic presses had been corrected, Formed Fiber Technologies LLC has been issued 14 safety citations, including willful and repeat citations, as well as a notice of failure to abate with proposed fines totaling $816,500. The U.S. Labor Department"s Occupational Safety and Health Administration initiated the inspection as a follow-up inspection pursuant to its Severe Violators Enforcement Program

The Sidney plant, which produces motor vehicle interior trimmings for automotive manufacturers, including Toyota and General Motors, was issued one failure to abate, nine willful and four repeat safety violations for continuously exposing employees to amputations* and other hazards. 

"Formed Fiber Technologies apparently decided that production was more important than ensuring its workers" safety. They provided false abatement documentation to OSHA. They knew how hazardous these machines were without proper safeguards and also knew exactly how to fix those hazards," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "OSHA will not tolerate such blatant disregard for worker safety."

OSHA"s January follow-up inspection found that abatement documentation Formed Fiber provided to OSHA in December 2013 was false and that employees had been exposed to unguarded machines and unsafe maintenance procedures well after the employer"s abatement claims. Failing to protect workers from dangerous machinery is among the most frequently cited OSHA violations and injuries involving this type of machinery often result in death or permanent disability.

Nine willful citations were issued for failing to prevent the start up of multiple hydraulic thermoforming presses, laminator machines and robot cells while workers were performing set-up, service and maintenance inside the machines. The company also failed to develop proper lockout/tag out procedures and encouraged workers to use unsafe methods to stop machines for maintenance. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law"s requirement, or plain indifference to employee safety and health.

Four repeat violations cited also involve failing to train workers on how to properly stop machines before service and maintenance, which continuously exposed machine operators to laceration, amputation, burns and having parts of the machine strike or crush them. The company failed to have identifying information on devices to indicate hazards. 

A repeat violation exists when an employer has been previously cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years. 

OSHA previously cited Formed Fiber Technologies in October 2013 for 11 violations, many involving the same standards. The company entered into a settlement agreement that included terms involving the abatement of hazards and paying a penalty of $69,000. Prior to October 2013, the company had been inspected by OSHA 16 times at their facilities nationwide, resulting in 80 violations being cited. 


The company, based in Auburn, Maine, manufactures nonwoven fabrics and polyester staple fibers for the automotive industry. It employs 750 workers corporate wide, with 340 at the Sidney facility. Formed Fiber Technologies also operates Color-Fi Inc. in Sumter, South Carolina.

Formed Fiber Technologies has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA"s area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission.

To ask questions; obtain compliance assistance; file a complaint or report workplace hospitalizations, fatalities or situations posing imminent danger to workers, the public should call OSHA"s toll-free hotline at 800-321-OSHA (6742) or the agency"s Toledo Area Office at 419-259-7542. 

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA"s role is to ensure these conditions for America"s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.

Source: https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=26364

OSHA CITED CASE. Part 1


Trade News Release Banner Image

Region 6 News Release: 14-1143-DAL
June 30, 2014
Contact: Diana Petterson      Juan Rodriguez
Phone: 972-850-4710      972-850-4709
Email: petterson.diana@dol.gov      rodriguez.juan@dol.gov


San Antonio fruit processor and staffing agency cited by US Department of Labor's OSHA for exposing temporary workers to serious hazards Fresh From Texas Inc. and iWorks Personnel Inc. fined a total of $135,200.

SAN ANTONIO – Fresh From Texas Inc., a fresh fruit and vegetable processer for H-E-B Grocery stores and fast-food markets, and staffing agency iWorks Personnel Inc. have been cited for 18 violations by the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration for exposing workers to damaging noise levels, chemical hazards and possible amputation hazards for failing to train machine operators on controlling hazardous energy. The total proposed fine for the complaint inspection that began in December 2013 is $135,200.

"Workers, whether employed directly by the company or as a temporary worker, require proper training on workplace hazards. In this case, both Fresh From Texas and iWorks failed to do so and put workers in danger," said Kelly C. Knighton, OSHA's area director in San Antonio. "Both host employers and staffing agencies have roles in complying with workplace health and safety requirements, and they share responsibility for ensuring worker safety and health."

Fresh From Texas was cited for 12 serious safety and health violations, with a penalty of $76,100, for 1) failing to prevent workers from exposure to hazardous chemicals; 2) to identify and evaluate respiratory hazards in the workplace; and 3) to ensure a hearing conservation program was implemented for workers exposed to noise levels that would cause permanent hearing damage. Regarding slicing and dicing machines, violations were cited for failing to establish a written lockout/tagout program for energy sources to ensure machines were turned off when workers were inside them; provide machine operators with training; guard rotating gears; and provide safety instructions on the machines. 

Two repeat violations were cited, with a penalty of $49,500, for failing to ensure sufficient working space around electrical equipment and unobstructed access to fire extinguishers. Similar violations were cited in 2012. Three other violations, with a penalty of $3,300, were cited for failing to record injuries of temporary workers, review the log for accuracy and ensure safety instructions were clearly posted on dangerous machines.

OSHA inspectors found that temporary workers employed by iWorks Personnel were also exposed to chemical hazards and were not trained on chemical safety. As a result, OSHA cited iWorks for one serious safety and health violation, with a penalty of $6,300. 

A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known. A repeat violation exists when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years.

In April 2013, OSHA announced an initiative to improve workplace safety and health for temporary workers. During the inspection, OSHA inspectors paid special attention to the hazards facing temporary workers to determine the role the host employer and the staffing agency played in the dangers.

Fresh From Texas employs about 515 workers at its San Antonio facility. iWorks Personnel employs about 130 workers in both the San Antonio and Houston areas. The companies have 15 business days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to comply, request a conference with OSHA's area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission.

Source: https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=26292


Wednesday, July 9, 2014

SICK and TOXIC OFFICE.

You are working very hard to earn a living and your office is TOXIC? Lets take a fresh re-look into SICK BUILDING SYNDROME (SBS).












Regards.


Wednesday, July 2, 2014

FATIGUE AT WORK

More about FATIGUE.
 
Fatigue is an experience of physical or mental weariness that results in reduced alertness. For most people, the major cause of fatigue is not having obtained adequate rest or recovery from previous activities.  

In simple terms, fatigue largely results from inadequate quantity or quality of sleep. This is because both the quantity (how much) and the quality (how good) of sleep are important for recovery from fatigue and maintaining normal alertness and performance. Furthermore, the effects of fatigue can be made worse by exposure to harsh environments and prolonged mental or physical work.

Inadequate sleep (quality or quantity) over a series of nights causes a sleep debt, which results in increased fatigue that can sometimes be worse than a single night of inadequate sleep. A sleep debt can only be repaid with adequate recovery sleep.
 Source:

Working outside the Monday-to-Friday, 9-to-5 routine can limit the opportunity for sleep and recovery in each 24-hour period. It can reduce the amount of sleep you get by between one and three hours per day. This is because these hours of work:
  • limit the amount of time available for sleep
  • disrupt the body clock, which is programmed for activity during the day and sleep at night
In addition to sleeping less, people who work non- traditional hours often obtain sleep of a lower quality.

In the current 24 hour, 7 day a week (24/7) society, there are many reasons that workers don’t obtain the quality or quantity of sleep that they require to be adequately rested. Some of these reasons are work related and some are non-work related. Examples of work-related fatigue factors are:
  • hours of work (especially night work, early morning starts, and high total number of hours)
  • task demands or time pressures that do not allow for adequate breaks during shifts
  • working conditions that may compound fatigue (for example, heat stress and time pressures)
Examples of non-work-related fatigue factors include:
  • undiagnosed or untreated sleep disorders
  • individual family or social factors that take priority over sleep

Symptoms of fatigue

In general, we are poor judges of our own fatigue levels. It’s difficult to tell when our fatigue has reached a point where it’s no longer safe to work or drive. However, there are signs or symptoms that can be used as a gauge.

Fatigue-related symptoms can be divided into three categories: physical, mental, and emotional. The diagram on the following page outlines some of the major symptoms in each category. Depending on the type of work being conducted, there may be some task-specific indicators of fatigue that can be added to this list. If you experience two or more of the symptoms listed, you may be experiencing some level of fatigue or reduced alertness. Fatigue is not the only cause of all the symptoms, but when they occur together it likely indicates fatigue-related impairment.


If you exhibit fatigue-related symptoms on a regular basis, you should consider seeing an appropriate medical specialist. This is particularly important for individuals with a body mass index greater than 30 and a neck size greater than 40 cm, since they have a significantly higher risk of sleep apnea.

Consequences of fatigue

A fatigued individual is often impaired and can’t continue to perform tasks safely or efficiently. For example, fatigue can affect your ability to:
  • react quickly in emergency situations
  • communicate clearly with fellow employees
  • work productively
Fatigue and falling asleep have been identified as significant contributors to incidents and accidents in a wide crosssection of industry. This relationship has been well supported by evidence from organizational and government investigations as well as industrial risk data. The incidents and accidents that result from fatigue can be severe and include fatalities, but are most often associated with employee injury or equipment damage.

How big a risk is fatigue?

In recent years, researchers have compared effects on performance of alcohol and fatigue. While most people understand that alcohol intoxication can be a significant risk on the roads, the effects of fatigue are not generally understood or acknowledged.

Studies have found:
  • The performance of a person who wakes at 7 a.m. and stays awake for 17 hours until midnight will be as impaired as that of someone with a blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.05% – the legal driving limit in many countries.
  • A person who wakes at 7 a.m. and then stays awake for 23 hours until 6 a.m. the following day will have a performance as impaired as someone with a BAC of 0.10% – more than the legal limit of 0.08% in Canada.
Although there are differences between being fatigued and being drunk, this research provides valuable information. One night of sleep deprivation can leave you more impaired than would be acceptable for driving a vehicle.

 

High risk times for fatigue

There are particular times of the day when the risks associated with fatigue are increased, regardless of the relationship between fatigue and recovery sleep. It is important to understand these risks when making decisions about hours of work, hours of overtime, contingency planning, and emergency responses.

Times when fatigue levels increase are:
  • midnight to 6 a.m. (and especially 3 a.m. to 5 a.m.). This is the low point in the body’s circadian rhythm that governs alertness and performance.
  • the beginning and end of shift when handover occurs. Fatigue levels can affect communication.
  • when breaks have not been taken for a number of hours. Employees who have been on duty longer may have accumulated fatigue.
  • early shift starts (before 6 a.m.). Early start times shorten sleep obtained the night before if you either neglect to go to bed earlier in compensation, or “clock watch” because you are anxious about getting up on time.
  • when employees are new to the job or workplace. Learning the new job and getting to know the environment and personnel is stressful. People may find they do not sleep as well during the first week or so of a new job while they become accustomed to the new workplace, role, commute, and hours.
 Source: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/page-6077.htm


Tuesday, July 1, 2014

FATIGUE AT WORKPLACE.

Study: Workplace Fatigue Common, Costly.

Nearly 40 percent of U.S. workers experience fatigue – a problem that costs employers billions in lost productivity, according to a study that is detailed in the January Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.


Led by Judith Ricci, Sc.D., MS, of Caremark Rx Inc., the researchers analyzed data from a nationwide study of the relationship between health and productivity at work. The study examined the effects of fatigue on health-related absenteeism and "presenteeism," or days the employee was at work but performing at less than full capacity because of health reasons.

Of the nearly 29,000 employed adults interviewed, 38 percent said they had experienced "low levels of energy, poor sleep or a feeling of fatigue" during the past 2 weeks. Total lost productive time averaged 5.6 hours per week for workers with fatigue, compared to 3.3 hours for their counterparts without fatigue.

According to the researchers, the rate of lost productivity for all health-related reasons also was much higher for workers with fatigue: 66 percent, compared with 26 percent for workers without fatigue.
 

Nine percent of workers with fatigue reported lost productive work time. According to the researchers, fatigue reduced work performance mainly by interfering with concentration and increasing the time needed to accomplish tasks.

Symptoms of Fatigue, Source: https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/images/ca-publications/fatigue-symptoms.gif 

With adjustment for other factors, fatigue was more common in women than men, in workers less than 50 years old and in white workers compared with African-Americans. Workers with "high-control" jobs – relatively well-paid jobs with decision-making responsibility – also reported higher rates of fatigue.

Employers Pay a Steep Price for Worker Fatigue.
For U.S. employers, fatigue carried overall estimated costs of more than $136 billion per year in health-related lost productivity – $101 billion more than for workers without fatigue. Eighty-four percent of the costs were related to reduced performance while at work, rather than absences.

Health conditions for which fatigue is a major symptom – such as depression or anxiety – accounted for only a small part of the productivity losses. Far more of the costs were thought to result from a wide range of other physical and mental health problems that may occur when fatigue also is present.

Work-Life Programs, Improved Treatment/Assessment Could Help.
Previous studies have found that fatigue is a common symptom that is linked to missed work time. The researchers note that the new study is the first to focus specifically on the rate of fatigue in U.S. workers, and its relationship to worker productivity.

Ricci and her team conclude that the results identify fatigue as a major problem in the U.S. work force, and one with a major impact on productivity and costs.

"Interventions targeting workers with fatigue, particularly women, could have a marked positive effect on the quality of life and productivity of affected workers," the researchers conclude. They suggest that companies could offer "work-life programs" to help employees balance their work and personal responsibilities, and take steps to improve assessment and treatment for the large subgroup of workers who have fatigue co-occurring with other health conditions.

Source: http://ehstoday.com/news/ehs_imp_44448

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

ROAD MAP TO EXCELLENT SAFETY COMMITTEE

A 2-DAY SESSION ON
ROAD MAP TO SAFETY & HEALTH COMMITTEE's EXCELLENCE.

Venue:
INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH (IMR). KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA.


Dates: 23rd & 24th JUNE, 2014

ROAD MAP to Excellent & Effective SAFETY and HEALTH COMMITTEE is the main agenda for a 2-day Training Session At the well-known and reputable Insititute of Medical Research (IMR), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia conducted/facilitated by me. 

A golden opportunity to share knowledge and experiences in creating an effective Safety & Health Committee with senior doctors and medical researchers. This Road map is critical in ensuring the roles and responsibilities of the committee are carried out diligently.

There are SEVEN STEPS to complete the journey. STEP 1 - Assess the members' readiness and capacity to perform the intended tasks and responsibilities.
STEP 2 - Function as a TEAM
STEP 3 - Assess where to start for the team
STEP 4 - Decide where to IMPROVE
STEP 5 - Test the changes made and monitor progress
STEP 6 - Implement and sustain the changes
STEP 7 - Spread the changes and counter measures made.

Each of these STEPS must be passed through confidently and successfully in order to achieve the effective Safety & Health Committee at your organization.