Rank: Super forum user 
|
Notice board at site staff entrance displaying number of days since last significant accident on site e.g day away case, RIDDOR etc.
Good idea or bad idea?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Bad.
Drives accident reporting underground
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Can become a bind to keep up to date, especially when you're on hols, at meetings etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
What would you do if every day the number was one?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Neither a good idea nor a bad idea.
It doesn't drive accident reporting underground, it's the company's attitude to accidents that does that. If the company makes a big thing about lost time accidents and castigates everybody in site when one occurs then that will drive reporting underground. Merely having a board that states when the last accident occurred in my opinion won't
It won't be a bind to update if you buy an electronic board
If every day wass number one you have a bigger problem than whether to buy a board or not.
Go for it I say, there's nothing wrong with them if thay are used properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I agree with Walker, it can serve to "hide" accidents & I have had personal experience of this.
It also begs the question of what is the point & will it actually make any difference in the scheme of things?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I think they are fine while the stats show the 'good news' not so much fun when you have 'nothing to brag about'. Two of the four sites in the organisation where I work have them one fancy electronic one and one manual one - the later is a pain in the **** to keep updated.
S
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The idea stems from the thought of sharing good news with the employees. The site in question has a very good accident record. Over a year without a day away case..
All good and well, but my concern is how it would effect moral, opinions etc should we eventually have a significant accident. Dispaying a board saying one day since the last accident wouldnt seem to acheive much...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
They seemed like a good idea when I first came across them in 1996.................enough said!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
We had a "days since last lost time incident" board but removed after having went 1000 days without an LTI as we believed it was putting undue pressure on the workforce not to report incidents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I agree with Pikeman, it seems a bit out of date now.
I tend not to believe them either. Who exactly are you trying to convince and what are you trying to convince them of.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
bluewater wrote:We had a "days since last lost time incident" board but removed after having went 1000 days without an LTI as we believed it was putting undue pressure on the workforce not to report incidents. Bluewater makes a very valid point. Site I worked at was on around 1500 days when someone had an accident. The IP was inconsolable, not because of the injury but because he thought that everyone was now pointing at him behind his back and saying "That's the one". Management were really good by the way, but the pressure to not be the one who resets the board becomes the elephant in the room regarding reporting incidents. We did think about going to days since in the current month, i.e. no more than 31 days but in the end turned the board around so it faced you as you left site not entered it - a bit of psychology to say "well done" rather than "look out" I would not introduce one as a new idea... Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
On similar note we are a couple of weeks short of going a full 12 months without having an over 7 day injury and wondering whether to make a big thing of it or just a line in my next quarterly report and minute it at the next monthly meeting, 280 employees, a mixture of office, manufacturing and warehousing.
Probably jinxed it now anyway !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
It's a bit old fashioned now.
At some of our sites we have electronic boards that we use to promote our safety culture programme, safety observations closed, pictures from emergency drills etc, recipients of safety awards. The focus is on positive initiatives to improve safety rather than accident statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Well it is effectively a Friday!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A double edged initiative. Nice to share good news with employees, and it might just focus their minds on working safely to maintain the record. On the downside, it can put on a subtle pressure not to report things, and the first person to have an accident can feel quite bad about it (although perhaps he/she should, depending on the circumstances?). I did some work for a company who had such a good, well publicised record that they included it in the next year's company diaries, then someone had an accident and they had to scrap the entire print run.
Nice thing to do, as long as you are aware of the possible consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
One of my pet hates. Plenty of history of these boards being associated with underreporting.
Really, really depressing when you go to site following fatal accident and the board has just been reset. Can't usually get away with attempting to hide a fatality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
peter gotch wrote:One of my pet hates. Plenty of history of these boards being associated with underreporting.
Really, really depressing when you go to site following fatal accident and the board has just been reset. Can't usually get away with attempting to hide a fatality. Agree. Ten years ago I recall regularly visiting a large chemical processing site with one of these boards. Every time that I went, the numbers grew and they even congratulated themselves when the number reached 1m, but this board had long lost any credibility amongst the its workers as they could all quote different accidents and incidents which had not been included.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Again nothing to do with a board, all down to the nature of the company.
How many people report in one way or another how long since an accident, or how many accidents in a given time period. If companies make a big thing about publicising accident rates, mean time between accidents , accident frequency rates or what ever, then all of the arguments expressed above can be applied. If the emphasis given is to improve a KPI only then you run the risk of under-reporting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user 
|
There is a really interesting account of the impact of safety targets on organisational culture and reporting within the rail industry that can be found here: http://www.rssb.co.uk/Li...view-of-network-rail.pdfThe accident free day boards and league tables were all established with good intention by managers committed to reducing the harm experienced by the workforce and promoted and maintained by good safety professionals. The competition to have the best record, the longest days without a RIDDOR, to be highest in the league tables led over time to a pressure and a culture of under reporting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Why not instead on posting accident numbers post
Management Audits done, Findings noted, Findings Resolved average time take to resolve (Management responsiveness)
Number of employee safety findings noted and issues resolved (Engagement)
Number of completed risk reduction projects (commitment)
Number of safety committee reps, Days since last meeting. (engagement)
Internal Awards and Recognition, External Awards (Recognition)
Number of EHS Training day/Hrs completed (commitment)
Why not measure the site safety on the presence of safety rather than the lack of accidents. Put the leading indicators at the front door, keep a positive first impression
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
There's nothing wrong with reporting performance as long as it is done in the appropriate way. It's when it becomes a kind of competition that problems arise. If improved safety as illustrated by the use of KPIs. notice boards, LTI boards etc is shown to result in a benefit to all employees then it will be a positive thing, if on the other hand it is used as a measure of performance in comparison to other sites, departments, individuals etc it will ultimately lead to under-reporting, fudging figures and misrepresentation.
Tools are only dangerous if you don't use them properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.