Posted By Warren Fothergill
This is a 'Directors' response to an issue of not having the correct information on a driving risk assessment, which is self completed, for one of his staff. I raised the issue following review of the assessment and approached the individual to confirm that as the vehicle was due for servicing 28 days ago had it been completed? The individuals initial response was that he had lied...na na na na na!!

"Having read the response from ????? and having spoken to ????, I appreciate that the response was inappropriate. We have discussed the situation and I believe that they replied to you with the information you requested. ????? is a senior manager with many years of experience and has a high level understanding of the issues surrounding health and safety at work.

However I believe that we should have some understanding of the immense pressure on senior management within the division to close the contract, and this may not be visible to those below this level."

My response was directed to our HR Exec, and suggested that we now look at stress, as we are not getting a good work/life balance which is important in business dynamics and reducing incidents of stress/ill health & sickness rates (not that these are high), but needed emphasising.

In essence I am trying to protect people from themselves in these circumstances, but it seems at the expense or at all costs - disregarding major issues that are deemed irrelevant

Do any of you suffer from the same lack of disregard for health & safety and what is your approach?

Posted By W P F
Feel free to comment on this situtation, I am extremely interested on your thoughts.

Posted By W P F
Richard

The said employee works excessive hours, is under pressure to perform and is paid by the company to run his vehicle in a roadworthy manner. His mileage is >25k per year, he will drive in excess of 450miles in anyone day (against the recommendation of the company policy) and health and safety is a burden to him. I am trying to protect him from himself and to start leading by example and not exception. He's not alone in doing the mileage and hours, but the only one to submit erroneous information 'blatantly'.

Servicing the car isn't the biggest risk, but 'at work driving' is at this moment until operational.

To approach the situation and say 'so what' is the appraoch afforded with little thought given to indirect influences, such as fatigue, stress, anxiety, depression (we aren't operational yet - is pretty depressing) and other road users etc. We have a duty to protect and make aware the risks associated with their activities and tried to remind him, but this lack of regard for his own safety and others who may be affected (to paraphrase) is one which leaves me amazaed, and this is accepted by seniors.

Thanks for your thoughts though, I can see where you are coming from, but my concern is this is the biggest risk now, what attitude will we get when we have 'transport', 'mechanical' and 'electrical' hazards to assess, which will increase both the potential and likelihood of an injury or ill-health occurring.

Posted By Safe System
warren - why do you have 2 IOSH logins?

just a thought...

Posted By Pete48
WPF, you have to stay objective in such circumstances. Look behind the written response that you received. Is it the cover up, cop out that you have taken it to be or is it a means to tell you that the matter has been sorted. The Director will be mindful of your concerns, needs of commercial demands and the expected support for a member of his team. If you are junior to both these fellow employees then you will never know what was said in their meeting. From personal experience of being on both sides of such meetings may I suggest that the phrase "I appreciate that the response was inappropriate" is the one on which to focus. The Director has, in effect, confirmed in writing that the response and thus the behaviour was inappropriate. This sets a standard for the future and should make it possible to control any future incidents. The comment about commercial pressure is telling you that you got it wrong, this specific incident did not warrant the time it has taken from both the Director and the individual concerned. For example, it has been seen as a badly executed prank to wind up the safety person? You might not like that but you risk achieving a Pyrrhic victory if you cannot leave it to pass by. It certainly does not, of itself, suggest that there are any issues about commitment to safety. My advice would be to focus on the greater picture and move on.
Working with senior managers as allies is often challenging, working with them as foes is a waste of time for both parties. You have to stay focused. If your concern is for this one employee, deal with that concern. Talk to his line manager or the HR people about your concerns for his welfare then leave them to deal with it.
Raising stuff that demands senior management time unless it is absolutely worthy of that time is the quickest way to alienate senior staff to you and thus to safety. Why? They will give it the time because it is safety, regardless of other demands. If it turns out too many times to be minor when you are saying it is important? Well wouldn't you get a little peeved now and again especially if you are under the sort of pressure that you indicate exists in the company at the moment?
Sorry if this reads as judging you. It is not addressed to you personally, I am just using your example to offer another view of such situations.
Good luck with it.

Posted By Kieran J Duignan
Warren

Complimenting you on your thorough and conscientious commitment, I also suspect you may be operating on the verge of effectiveness by pursuing stress management as your avenue of improvement.

A major limitation of safety practice is the very limited use of psychology; in particular, what is known as 'behavioural safety' is a very limited method of intervention, although useful in high hazard settings where implementation is reinforced not only by senior management but often by HSE inspections.

Two avenues can enable you to break new ground if you are prearerd to raise the bar:
1. Use of psychometric instruments such as the Hogan Development Survey which offer feedback on deviant managment/leadership behaviour and its adverse impact
2. Paricipatory ergonomics, which - when well designed and implemented and is not as limited as usual to 'knobs and dials ergs' - educates people at all levels about using feedback to manage threats of every kind to their safety and wellbeing at work, and postively reinforces their efforts.