Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi Guys,
Very disillusioned safety manager here... i'm feeling this is the final straw for me in my current position. We had a confined space task that was required due to production problem that resulted in a large blockage in a tank/silo. The content hardened and retained significant heat and safe access was only achievable from top man hatch during my review on Monday evening. There is also a bottom access hatch but the blockage was from bottom of tank to about 2/3rds its height. I advised that we needed to bring in /hire a specific rescue attachment to allow safe entry from top of the tank and allow the operator to be secured and retrival possible. I advised we should wait until this equipment arrived copying in senior manager, dept manager and main production operation manager. I was off site today and have been advised they went ahead anyway and got it completed. One positive is at least they followed their training and used competent trained staff, safe isolation and LOTO of energy sources and documented permit and with all monitoring in place. However they did this work from bottom hatch, digging from low level and underneath the compacted product and removing this way. This has annoyed me greatly as my concern was possible collaspe of the product as they 'dig' it out and trapping those working underneath and inside the tank. No rescue arrangements where provided. My instructions were ignored as the production operation manager wanted this equipment back in production and didnt want to wait until tomorrow. All are NEBOSH Trained, all aware of confined space programme and all advised by me that I didnt want this task completed until proper equipment provided.
I suppose in my long winded rant i'm asking for advice on how to approach this? I'm really feed up at being constantly ignored and only following rules when it suits (e.g. no production pressure) The decision today was made by company 2nd in charge so this is culture that goes right to the top.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
So what you gonna do??
Quit??
You think it'll be better anywhere else??
Think again.
You're there to advise but can't force top management to do what you advise. Record everything and you'll be ok legally. When it comes to your conscience, well, like I said, you think it'll be different somewhere else??
I go to different clients all the time. Most of what I said gets ignored. But I make difference where I can and that's all I can hope for. The rest is documented to cover my backside. My conscience is clear. I've done what I can and made a difference where I can. So have you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Good advice from Claire, it is true that many employers and their complicit supervisor/managers ignore safety advice when it suits their purpose. However, rather than just document the poor practice and future poor practices, I would personally like to make my professional opinions known, unless of course you believe it may compromise your own job.
So, some sort of letter to the top man in the organisation stating the facts, the potential if things had gone wrong and how the whole process is undermining your position as health and safety manager. Corporate manslaughter is a serious business and if the current practices continue without rebuke...I think you get the picture.
Crack on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I agree with ClaireL and RayRapp. Being your sole employer you'll just have to crack on with them, document all the advice you've given, archive it all electronically, you never know when you might need it. When you've done all you can on an issue, and communicated all the advice properly, and documented it all, as ClaireL says, your conscience is clear.
Ray mentions letters to 'the top man'. That's part of your essential records.
I have two levels of 'letter' or note, issued in times of difficulty. One is a Guidance Note, where I explain how particular safety issues are properly dealt with - best practice used in industry, quote published code of practice on the subject, other HSE guides INDG etc., and give examples of where incidents or accidents have happened elsewhere under similar circumstances.
The higher level 'letter' is the Advisory Note where I explain where they are not complying with the HaSaWA or relevant regulations, indicate what enforcement they could expect if an inspector walked onto the site now, and give examples of accidents and prosecutions at local companies. At one of our local large industrial estates I can list over a dozen recent enforcements, and, sadly, 2 fatalities, and often remind clients of the circumstances.
I'm fortunate, I suppose. Being self-employed I can walk away from clients, particulalry builders who only let me on site 1/2 day a week. If it becomes obvious they ignore H&S the other 4 and 1/2 days then I walk away e.g. when it's obvious scaffolding has been altered without inspection, or a wall or structure has disappeared without a risk assessment, or untrained drivers are persistently usng FLTs or telehandlers etc etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
It's a basic issue throughout the trade I suppose - we advise - they decide whether or not to listen. I think that we have a responsibility to ensure our advice is always as reasonable as possible (not for a second suggesting original advice in this posting was not) so that there is no excuse that sometimes we make unrealistic demands. I also create a very simple newsletter which goes out every month, it includes some details of some prosecutions (Gleaned from SHP mostly) that reflect the sort of incidents that may be paralleled within our organisation, together with the usual defence "We ad a clean sheet up till now govner" Just to remind those that might choose not to follow advice what the implications might be. Always trying to sound helpful rather than defensive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I agree with all the above. However, I notice from your "rant" that you say you copied in the senor managers, implying you did your advice by email, and also that you were off site.
I know I am not fully aware of the situation, but it sounds like this was a serious safety issue and a serious production issue.
Maybe, getting the senior managers, or at least the production operation manager, onto the site to see the problem with you. That way the consequences of doing it wrong would be more obvious, and the benefits of doing it right would be clear. This is a far more helpful aprroach.
You may find that this would have had a different result as you would be seen more as part of the management team, working as a team.
But, it has happened now, and they have not had the accident. So maybe they will be happy not to follow your advice again in the future and see if they can get away with it next time.
How about you organise a session with the key managers and get them to role play, or discuss this job, but the with the scenario of it going wrong and the employees doing the job becoming trapped whilst unblocking the silo incorrectly. This may help them to understand what the consequences to them will be. Follow it through to a prosecution, and maybe they have to meet the children of the trapped employees and explain why they did not follow the safety managers advice.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Hi Safetyman,
I sympathise with you, I actually thought you were talking about my workplace for a minute.
I agree with the other comments made, it is a thankless job sometimes, but keep chipping away at it, making even a small difference is progress, a previous manager of mine likened it to pushing a pea up hill with your nose!
and so what if you were having a rant, at least you are passionate about doing the job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Had a similar issue yesterday.
New sign fitted to our building, 4m high, no risk assessment or safe system of work produced, although at least they used a MEWP and not a ladder.
I pointed out the 'error of his ways' to the workshop manager but just got 'THAT' look.
Documented my concerns in an email, making sure I copied the MD in but as always, it fell on deaf ears.
So, onwards and upwards, I'll keep plugging away, revelling in the small victories you achieve and ensuring that IF things go wrong, at least I've done my bit in TRYING to keep folks safe.
Don't think that by 'seeking alternative employment' its any different anywhere else, it isn't.
We are seen as a neccasary evil and just a drain on resources and a hindrance to production.
Make no bones about it, if they could legally do without our services, none of us would be in a job!.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Interesting. What about courage of our convictions and belief in what we do? What if it had collapsed and there had been a fatality.
If your leadership are not listening to you to this extent then i suggest you get out before you get caught up in a serious safety failure and by the attitude you describe around you i suggest you might be seen as the ideal scape goat to 'carry the can'.
Unless you are giving the worng advice, requiring unecessary controls???
I can speak from experience having recently resigned my position - without another job to go to - because i did not have the suport of the leadership. I am pleased to say i am now in a new role with an organisation that has a completely different view.
Stand up for what you believe in and what you know will protect people at work - or find a different career path.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
A few years ago I was working out in Africa for a contractor. The project manager, who was the highest level of authority on site, wanted to do something that I didn't agree with. It didn't affect anyones safety directly, but any accident would have caused hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage and would have been a major set back to the project. I objected to his decision and put forward a well thought out, well planned argument. I told him where he was in breach of company policy (there was no legislation where we were,) the implications on the project, the implications on him etc, but in the end he decided to ignore my advice, overrule me and do it anyway. Obviously I was a bit unhappy with this and I started getting upset and running around causing a fuss trying to get him to change his mind. I was probably on course to loose my job over it when the client HSE Rep gave me a piece of advice. He said "You are here to advise, thats all you can do. You have advised him, he has chosen to ignore it and there's nothing you can do about it. Just make sure you document it." So I did. That has always stuck with me, we can't win every battle. It's better to still be around to fight the next one. Don't be too fed up about it, it happens to us all
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The management took a management decision: they weighed the risks to the business from the certain lost production and the perceived risks from the confined space fatality(ies) and all that goes with that and reached their conclusion.
From a safety management perspective they made a very poor decision. Happily for all concerned (except you) the outcome was good.
My advice is seek a meeting with the CEO and No2 to express your concerns and seek clarification of your role. Use the results of that meeting to plan your future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I don't envy your position Safetyman!
I agree with most of what's been said but I have to agree most with Jayne. Any safety professional can only be as effective as the organisation they are working for allows them to be.
If senior people in your organisation are ignoring your advice then they simply don't see safety as a priority, and that's driven from the top down.
Keeping records to "cover you legally" is absolutely no comfort when you have to tell the family of the deceased how they died in your workplace.
You make it clear that this was not an isolated incident, find an employer that gives a damn and enjoy the challenges we all face but with some possibility of success.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Jayne Thomas wrote:Interesting. What about courage of our convictions and belief in what we do? What if it had collapsed and there had been a fatality.
Interestingly I have walked out of several jobs becuase I was not happy with the quality of service provided. I have strong principles. BUT I am in a fortunate position that I can afford to do that. I have also walked from one job to another job to find it no better. I have now in a job that isn't perfect but I can live with.
Morals are all well and good but so is food on the table and a roof over your head.
Covering your backside doesn't prevent an accident or fatality but it does prevent you ending up in court / without a job / without a career AS WELL as the accident or fatality. It's an imperfect world we live in. Yes do your job as well as you can but it's not a crime to protect yourself as well so that the company doesn't try to take you down with them even though you did everything you could to prevent the accident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
ctd167 wrote:Had a similar issue yesterday.
New sign fitted to our building, 4m high, no risk assessment or safe system of work produced, although at least they used a MEWP and not a ladder.
I pointed out the 'error of his ways' to the workshop manager but just got 'THAT' look.
Sorry, but I need to play Devil's Advocate here - and purely using this as an example, not picking on ctd167 individually!
Sometimes we as safety professionals seem a bit too grudging in giving people credit for having done things at least partially the right way and getting the huff when we aren't consulted by others in our organisations (and I will count myself included). Yes, "at least they used a MEWP", but this could also be read as "at least they did some sort of basic risk assessment which, whilst not documented correctly, at least identified appropriate control measures". Obviously without knowing the full ins-and-outs of the task I don't know if they have identified the appropriate controls, but I have seen colleagues getting out of shape simply because due process wasn't followed despite the fact that the end result was an activity being carried out in a safe fashion.
Are we getting upset because the process hasn't been followed? Because we haven't been consulted? Or because somebody has actually been put at significant risk? Sometimes one of the hardest things for us to maintain is a sense of proportion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Clairel wrote:Morals are all well and good but so is food on the table and a roof over your head.
Covering your backside doesn't prevent an accident or fatality but it does prevent you ending up in court / without a job / without a career AS WELL as the accident or fatality. It's an imperfect world we live in. Yes do your job as well as you can but it's not a crime to protect yourself as well so that the company doesn't try to take you down with them even though you did everything you could to prevent the accident.
This is absolutely spot on. And one of the most important things to remember is to not let yourself get dragged down to the point where you almost stop bothering because it seems that nobody is listening. If you do that, then it becomes nigh-on impossible to avoid the finger being pointed at you when it all goes Pete Tong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
If the sign fitting task mentioned by ctd in his/her response at #8 involved a MEWP (mobile elevated working platform), perhaps it was carried out in a way which reasonably ensured the safety of those doing the work. Perhaps they and/or their supervisor were reasonably experienced and that the work method used was akin to that for similar tasks in the past. We don't know if any other people were likely to be put at risk by the recent task, e.g. people who might walk beneath the sign fitting activity? If there weren't, perhaps the task was fairly straightforward and did not necessarily need a new risk assessment and method statement. If so, this might explain the reaction of the workshop manager to ctd's comments.
I should emphasise that these thoughts comprise speculation based on the very limited information given about the circumstances, and are not intended as personal criticism or insinuation about ctd. However, ctd's information and comments about the task did remind me of a belief expressed by some people on this forum that everything and anything at work has to be the subject of detailed risk assessments and method statements. Hence, to echo the theme of another thread on this forum, those who regard OS&H people as narrow minded nit-picking regulation-obsessed individuals may have some justification if they’ve encountered such people. If so, the sad part is that they mistakenly assume that all OS&H people are the same.
p.s. I'd drafted my above response and then got diverted by a long phone call, so only noticed that mylesfrancis had already made a similar response when I was about to 'post' mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Some good points, particularly from David at #11. I would only add that, IMHO, the positives that you mentioned (staff following their training etc...) would imply that there is a direct influence that you are bringing to bear on the workforce/ line management. Is this a case of finding a way to turn a negative into a positive...using the failure to follow the advice as a way of increasing the "sphere of influence" you currently have?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Another thought: In his original post, safetyman said he is a ‘safety manager’. If his job title does indeed include the word ‘manager’, perhaps it gives some line managers in his organisation the mistaken impression that he manages health and safety and therefore somehow reduces their own responsibility for it. The same misperception may well exist in varying degrees in other organisations with safety ‘managers’. As this comment is likely to provoke a reaction from some safety managers, I’m not necessarily advocating that their titles should be changed - just pointing out that some people may misperceive their titles. Ultimately, irrespective of titles, it’s how OS&H people interact in various ways (i.e. discussions, actions and writings) with others that can make a difference, even if it takes time and isn’t always successful.
I agree with mylesfrancis at #15 and Clairel as quoted. We do live in an imperfect world and can only do what we reasonably can. As ctd and others have already suggested, keep plugging away and keep copies of correspondence. However, for those who feel like safetyman, if you’ve tried and tried over time and never get any support from the managing director/chief executive or any other senior manager, it might be a wise decision to leave for the sake of your own health and wellbeing. In order to reduce the uncertainty and insecurity which leaving can entail, it’s best to try and find another employer before ‘jumping ship’. As OS&H people have different personalities and working styles, it’s possible that a replacement OS&H adviser might have more success. However, if over time, successive OS&H advisers don’t remain long with such organisations, such turnovers are more likely to indicate an entrenched poor attitude to OS&H by their top people rather than any shortcomings by the advisers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Clairel wrote:So what you gonna do??
Quit??
You think it'll be better anywhere else??
Think again.
You're there to advise but can't force top management to do what you advise. Record everything and you'll be ok legally. When it comes to your conscience, well, like I said, you think it'll be different somewhere else??
I go to different clients all the time. Most of what I said gets ignored. But I make difference where I can and that's all I can hope for. The rest is documented to cover my backside. My conscience is clear. I've done what I can and made a difference where I can. So have you.
Very very true, we can only advise to the best of our ability, and thank god nothing did happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
In this instance, I believe a formal risk assessment SHOULD have been done, taking in to account the sign was erected next to the main entrance of the building.
No exclusion zone or consideration for people using the entrance or the footpath was taken in to account.
Also, the footpath meant they had to lean out of the MEWP to undertake the task.
My opinion, I would have selected a purpose built scaffold for the task, created an exclusion zone, probably locked the main entrance off and signposted an alternative route in to the building.
This would have extended the task, but ultimately would have been a safer way to undertake the work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Safetyman,
I agree with poster who doesn't envy your positon - neither do I...!!!
I like David B's suggestion of a meeting with senior management, some role play etc. Have you seen this recent prosecution - very similar circumstances:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pr...segen&cr=13/8-may-12
As regards the poster who said "... you'd end up having to tell someone that their son/partner had died..". I doubt you would - if anyone from firm has to do that (although I think it would be Police or HSE) then it would be Managing Ddirector. That is something you might throw into the role play....!
Good luck
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
'Are we getting upset because the process hasn't been followed? Because we haven't been consulted? Or because somebody has actually been put at significant risk? Sometimes one of the hardest things for us to maintain is a sense of proportion.'
Myles, it's a good point. I don't think anyone in a position of authority likes their advice being ignored. However, as a safety person you need to be confident that staff at all levels are willing to listen and act upon your advice. Not everything is followed to the letter, that's a given and we must tolerate it to a point. But, it's a big but, when there is the potential for serious and imminent danger we do expect our advice to be followed or at least consulted prior to any significant departure. I cannot tolerate production before safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.