Yes you could use post cards.

Is this a Friday type fun post or do you want real suggestions ?

My advice is to get your front line managers/supervisors to undertake face to face talks - and I have never noted a situation where this is not possible in some way irrespective of the arguments against such things and e-learning etc. have their place but only as a back up to face to face

Its interesting that people have problems re face to face when its a H&S area but no problem re face to face when its another area

Hilary's answer is spot on. It seems that increasing numbers of people are becoming over-dependent nowadays on communicating via computers, smartphones and other devices with screens. As a result their ability to communicate face to face is becoming impaired. For example, though e-mails are fine for many purposes, it can be a lot easier, quicker and more effective to discuss things with people either face to face or by phone as and when feasible.

Also, with so many people seemingly dependent on devices with screens nowadays, OS&H people and other professionals, etc., who actually talk to people may have a distinct advantage over those who rely on impersonal screen-based communication methods. The people you talk to are probably more likely to remember you as an individual plus what you say and how you say it. However, don't ruin your advantage by only talking about OS&H - show others that you are human, possess some sense of humour and are not going to bore them.

Yes hilary, Toolbox Talk, the keyowrd is Talk.

As a consultant to local medium/small businesses I often deliver Toolbox Talks. The main reason that I am asked to do them is because the supervisors have difficulty delivering such talks 'seriously' i.e. the lads tend to have a laugh and nothing is really achieved.



So, I try and have a proper talk with the teams, and I always hand out something printed with colour images, not scruffy photocopied HSE indgs. OK sometimes it can be a bit of a laugh, I mean it's the 'grannie teaching them to suck eggs' thing, like talking about ladders driving. But after I inspected a building site recently a group of brickies AND the site foreman had me talking to them about Edge Protection. The fact that I called it Edge Protection was a good start as it's not a term they were using daily, so now the scaffolding and floors with holes etc all get the same attention, the joiner builds balustrades, the scaffolder put in more mid-rails and toeboards, everyone knows why we need these things - not just to avoid accidents, the site is on a busy street and I said inspectors will drive down here every week and will SEE if there's any problems ......

Before the talk the site was a disaster waiting to happen.....

..... see how things are next week


And getting back to Ray's post,



I think having a PC and the skill to knock up a site-specific leaflet with images makes preparing a fresh new Toolbox Talk quite easy. For the brickies above I showed them photos taken on their own site, places where they could easily fall, and from other building sites showing stacks of bricks on scaffold without brick-guards, unfinished scaffold, missing mid-rails etc etc.

They were interested then, see how things are the next lift of scaffold....

Funny but I have been popping pills all week - got a muther of a cold. Anyway, thanks for your comments. I guess my question was born out of frustration, all I ever seems to hear is "we'll give 'em a toolbox talk". I agree fact to face talking with them and not at them is probably the way forward. However, this is time consuming and dependant on other things like logistics.

I just wondered if anyone had re-invented the wheel and not let on. :)

I talk to the guys on the factory floor every day and have done since i started with the company. As a result they feel that they can talk to me about problems they are having and are happy to query things. Only yesterday I was stopped by one of the CNC operators who was unhappy that he had to stoop to get parts out of a bin. He asked his line manager for something to raise the box but nothing happened. I grabbed one of the FLT operators, moved a Bin Stand to the workstation and all was good. THe line manager will be asked by me and the works manager to explain why he did nothing.

Talking to the people is the best way to bring H&S to the forefront of their minds

Some valuable observations in this thread

At the same time, it's worth considering how Ray appears to be describing seriously faulty design of work and of mismanagement

1. If conversation, at perhaps times supported by on-site photographs, is the most cost-effective method of reducing safety incidents, then the ratio of safety competent practitioners to operatives should be improved rather than allow a ratio of 'hundreds or even thousands' to one to effectively prevent reduction of safety incidents. There's no sane reason why the safety function or any other support function should be expected to compensate for leaders who simply fail to do their job by designing a workable organisation and by controlling the stresses, fatigues and errors (as well as safety failures). Weekly reliable reports are emerging of how grossly the failures of leaders of banking institutions contributed to a global financial crisis in ways that no financial controller employed by these organisations could prevent or should have been expected to.

2. Where 'someone has done something seriously wrong - indeed they are the staple diet', safety incidents are the consequence of disciplinary failures - NOTcause. There's no sane reason why the safety function or any other support function should be expected to compensate for leaders who simply fail to do their job by negatively reinforcing anyone responsible for doing 'something seriously wrong', whether its' a one-off or 'the staple diet'.

By using coaching techniques to promote safe behaviour and question unsafe behaviour. It's likely that the person doing the job understands the risks so coaching draws out this knowledge rather than, as with toolbox talks, impose knowledge on them.

Semantics. They understand the risks alright, they just choose to ignore them. Somebody grinding without eye protection understands the risk, they choose to ignore it because of other reasons that a toolbox talk won't discover.

What's going to have the biggest effect;

- Somebody external coming in, sitting them down, and lecturing them on rules and regs

- Sombody talking to them like adults and gathering an understanding of what the drivers are before acting

In truth all the techniques on this list are part of the jigsaw but you'd still be able to see the big picture if you took a few away.

Hillary has said it all at #5

Talk and try to do that face to face not over the phone/vid link or otherwise.

Again:

With a nod to John J here, Electricians and most people in the construction industry would prefer to be in face to face contact and not subjected to 'death by power-point' which to a lot of people is quite boring. They would be happy with a member of their peer group talking about site conditions and not someone using 'office speak'. And I'm not being patronizing here, just honest.

The physiological aspects of H&S may be ok for us but try that on building site and all you get is the smile normally reserved for the happy home.

Talk and talk some more. Listen to the replies and act. If that is time consuming so what? The point will be better made (IMHO)

“Toolbox talks” says it all, they were introduced to pass on the relevant information on the shop floor, AT THE TOOLBOX, face to face, not only are you passing on the information, you also get valuble feedback from the guys who are actually doing the work “at the coalface” as the Meercats say “Simple”

Yes, but Ray we here are not all the forgetful 'we' that you imply in your message.

As I said above the key word now is 'talk' i.e. talk as a group. Yes I'm handing out guidance, reading through it with them, discussing some obvious accident scenarios, suggesting to them what an inspector might think if he came on site, handing out site photos, and these photos are to aid the discussions, so we can fix the issues that they now understand/recognise and hopefully won't ignore in the future.

Yes, there's always occasions when they do have a laugh at me, like: I've never welded in my life and I'm talking to them about arc-eye, the handling of cylinders or using an LEV, but I try and talk to THEM as like they are the experts, which they are.

My experience with these talks is always that they have been received as a learning exercise, no arguments, with some light-hearted moments when someone acknowledges what he was doing was daft.

Dear All

Thank you Kieran.

The vast majority of workers - and others - surveyed over many years reveal the preferred method of communication is face-to-face. Ironically we have the most sophisticated communication technology in the history of manpersonwomankind and communication remains a key organisational weakness for many.

I would think most experienced construction workers are heartily fed up of yet another induction/tool box talk delivered with all the passion and enthusiasm of a dead whale. During the 1980s I was on a visit to Austria where a converted bus went to construction sites. In the morning a professional cameramanpersonwoman videoed workers on site - with manager and worker permission - and edited the footage during lunch.

The bus had seating for around 8 workers and in the afternoon the workers and supervisors watched the edited highlights. This service was provided for small construction companies as part of their mandatory insurance. Apparently it was popular and improved site safety - which was why the insurance company provided several of these buses.

Why don't we give workers cam corders and ask them to do video risk assessments, to be viewed by professionals with the workforce to get a joint view as to risks and controls. As others have commented there is no one communication method that acts as a 'magic wand'. However one of the points from the Olympic Park construction is that part of their success was put down to the variety of communication methods used across the site.

On a final observation: at the 2009 IOSH conference the Director for Health and Safety at Laing O'Rourke described a collaboration with Liverpool University on developing a course for site supervisors. It was all about communicating with the workforce and how to motivate people. Not surprising, perhaps, that in the analysis of the Olympic safety success, the training of all supervisors in workforce motivation - amongst other safety aspects - was seen as an important factor in motivating the workforce to develop and maintain a safe culture.

Perhaps if the points Kieran makes about 'action' based approaches in presenting effective training and communication methods were taken on board we might get a better response from workers, who are really just people with workers clothes on.

People Support What They Help Create.

Cheers.

Nigel

When we at zimmy's HQ deliver 'Tool box talks' we do NOT talk 'at' the workforce. We discuss what we/they do, how they/we do it and why. Then we look at what can be done to turn any bad practice into good. With out the cooperation and good will of our teams my, and the managers jobs would be a right pain. Our chaps tend to join right on in. They make a list of problems as they see them and we talk it out. Seems to work so far.

We have started to make lists of what may or may not be a near miss and talk through the list. Early days so far but seems like a plan

Kieran,

Trigger incidents, highlighting the need for a 'chat with the lads', include unconventional methods of gaining access for working at height e.g. painting window frames without a ladder, without a scaffold, without a mobile tower - it has been demonstarted to me that it can be done !!! and I the photos to prove it :o))

Another favorite concerns street works - I audit utility workers who work on footpaths with excavators, Stihl saws etc. - they must not endanger pedestrians, yet often fail to erect a suitably barriered work area.

But the chat with the street lads doesn't always come up with complete solutions. Like, if they completely block a footpath, with an excavator and barriers, there may not be a wide enough roadway for a sufficiently good 'safety zone and temporary footpath', yet they are not allowed to TELL pedestrians to cross the road. A tricky one.

Kieran, thanks for that. I'll let you invent the jargon to replace the term 'toolbox talk', maybe come up with a name that I can use, though I can imagine what some of the lads would say :o))

Why am I here right now, in case you wonder, I HAVE done my Xmas shopping, and now listening to football :o)

Hopefully Mrs W is out getting me something nice!