The spotlight throughout 2018 will once again be on the Trump administration’s efforts to deregulate government and roll back regulations brought in under the Obama government. When it comes to the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), however, one expert believes the current president will not have an easy time making any big changes.
During his first year in office, Trump moved forward with some notable initiatives aimed at deregulation. He relied on the rarely-used Congressional Review Act to eliminate 14 regulations, including two OSHA-related rules, the “Volks” rule around record-keeping and the “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” rule.
Another example of rollback action took place in January 2017, when Trump brought in the so-called “2-for-1” regulations. This executive order stipulates that if any government agency wants to get a new rule out they must cancel two older ones.
In addition, some OSHA rules that have not been updated in … Read more...
ISO 45001 will heap a whole lot more responsibility on to the already full plates of top managers. The standard puts business management on the hook to create, orchestrate, maintain, monitor, develop and actively promote a system that takes occupational health and safety (OH&S) policies and embeds these into the culture and operation of a business’s everyday activities. The corollary to this is that leaders will need to find a way to ensure sufficient financial, personnel and time resources are devoted to the successful implementation of a management system for OH&S.
At the heart of the ISO 45001 standard is a need for worker involvement through participation in decision making, evaluation procedures, implementation and feedback mechanisms.
The new standard will amplify a need for an effective safety solution, including tools that will allow manufacturers to connect with different stakeholders throughout their organizations, to foster trust and collaboration at each level.… Read more...
A software-based system for managing safety in manufacturing organizations may hold the key to unlocking efficiency, improving processes and creating safer workplaces that, at the end of the day, puts money back in the pockets of these businesses.
Experts say that Safety Management System (SMS) support the ability of manufacturing companies to help change leadership thinking and cultures in reducing the number of workplace injuries through increased awareness of, and involvement in, safety programs, and ultimately elevating the important of and commitment to safety across entire organizations.
In the U.S. a total of US$170 billion is spent by business each year on occupational injury- and illness-related costs that eat away at net earnings. The National Safety Council reports that a dollar invested in an SMS – and the subsequent potential improvements that can be achieved in overall safety management – returns anywhere from between $2 and $6. These savings come … Read more...
The effectiveness and ultimate success of any health and safety regulation or standard really does begin and end with leadership.
Full commitment and support by top business management in driving corporate-wide adherence to and support of regulations, policies and guidelines for safety, quality and pretty much any other regulatory directive is essential. It’s the power behind the punch.
That leaders need to lead is hardly an Earth-shattering revelation. But it’s a refreshing and necessary guiding principle behind the upcoming ISO 45001 standard, set for publication in April. The International Labour Organization estimates more than 7,600 people die each day from work-related accidents or diseases – over 2.78 million people every year.
This new standard spells out requirements for an occupational health and safety management system (OHSMS) through a framework intended to improve employee safety, reduce workplace risks and create better, safer working conditions.
In late November, a group of Intelex employees made the 100-kilometer trek from Toronto to Cambridge, Ont. to the Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada (TMMC) Inc. plant. The highly cross-functional team included members from Sales, Marketing, Consulting and Implementation, Sales Engineering, Customer Engagement, Customer Success, and Product Management. We wanted to gain insight, first-hand, into the activities within a world-class automotive manufacturing company that exemplify an integrated EHSQ management system – before the impending holiday season and 2018 bomb cyclone made headlines!
The team prepared extensively for the tour. We wanted to maximize our learning while on site and help retain this information long-term. We looked at the history of Toyota to discover why it had become so successful and capable of producing award- winning quality products, while exceeding customer expectations. We learned that each vehicle manufactured at Toyota’s TMMC plant goes through over 4,800 quality checks before leaving the facility! … Read more...
A single workplace musculoskeletal injury can cost a company between $18,000 and $60,000, according to Mike Kim, CTO and co-founder of StrongArm Technologies, a safety data solution provider.
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) affect muscles, tendons, blood vessels, nerves, ligaments, discs, etc. Aside from the compensation costs paid to injured workers, a company can also incur indirect costs, including lost productivity, the cost of replacing affected employees, and the price tag that comes with training their replacements.
“Because of these indirect factors, OSHA believes the cost might be doubled,” said Kim, speaking during a recent Intelex EHSQ community webinar. “Then we’re looking at $36,000 to $120,000 for one injury. And that’s not to mention the personal toll it takes on the workers and their families, and their livelihood.”
The innovative power of information technology (IT) will turn the EHS industry on its ear!
It’s still somewhat early days for the integration of IT and EHS workflow process, and the road being travelled by many organizations is to simply take the first step of moving beyond traditional methods of paper-based recording and tracking, and replacing these with electronic processes. But the way forward for businesses is a path to huge transformation.
As the saying goes – “you ain’t seen nothing yet!” So much more is looming.
Technology and innovation in EHS will be the topic of what should be a lively discussion during a forward-looking session at this week’s NAEM EHS Sustainability and Management Forum in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. on the topic of – Drones, Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things: Leveraging Technology to Advance EHS. I’ll facilitate a discussion on the exciting potential and possibilities with … Read more...
An already vast ocean of incident and illness electronic recordkeeping for American business has become a whole lot deeper and wider, as a result of OSHA’s “new rule” that came into effect this year.
In 2017, more organizations must gather more data and provide more reporting of accident and illness incidents to the U.S. Department of Labor agency. The so-called “new rule” from OSHA will turn a molehill into a mountain as the number of those employers who will be expected to report this data is set to quadruple. Currently about 35,000 large employers submit data annually to OSHA and that number is expected to jump to 130,000. Approximately 150,000 smaller employers who currently submit summary data now includes 500,000 organizations.
Other significant requirements of the new rule include:
Directing employers to conduct refresher training on recordkeeping requirements.
The auditing of injury and illness recordkeeping forms.
In Measuring Safety Part, 1 we reviewed the drawbacks of focusing solely on the measurement of safety outcomes absent understanding and tracking operational processes and events that are predictive of a safe workplace. In Part 2 of the series, we dove deeper into the implications of this thinking by reviewing “Serious Injury Fatality” (SIF). In this Part 3, we look at the subjective nature of serious injury and fatality prevention recording and whether SIF is indeed the better approach to take.
Building a SIF Safety Triangle addresses previous serious safety prevention framework shortcomings, but it also introduces new issues. Our next question: Who decides upon the categorization of processes and events that have the potential for serious injury and fatality? Also, how is this categorization done?
It seems to be relatively easy to define some categories that separate SIF from the non-SIF … Read more...
This month our member Kamran Akhavan Attari shares a post about Safety within Critical Discourse Perspectives, a while members Chris J Ward and Jane Standerwick discusses why organizations fail to manage H&S. We invite you to join our Environmental, Health and Safety, and Quality professional community, and share your knowledge with other members.