John A Gambatese, Matthew Hallowell, Frank M Renshaw, Margaret M Quinn, Pamela Heckel
{"title":"Research: The Power of Collaboration.","authors":"John A Gambatese, Matthew Hallowell, Frank M Renshaw, Margaret M Quinn, Pamela Heckel","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4608861/pdf/nihms717801.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"34266993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Policy Development: A Key Factor in Promoting PTD.","authors":"T Michael Toole, Pamela Heckel, Matthew Hallowell","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4618786/pdf/nihms717829.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"34120482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A residential elemental mercury contamination incident in Rhode Island resulted in the evacuation of an entire apartment complex.To develop recommendations for improved response, all response-related documents were examined; personnel involved in the response were interviewed; policies and procedures were reviewed; and environmental monitoring data were compiled from specific phases of the response for analysis of effect.A significant challenge of responding to residential elemental mercury contamination lies in communicating risk to residents affected py a HazMat spill. An ongoing, open and honest dialogue is emphasized where concerns of the public are heard and addressed, particularly when establishing and/or modifying policies and procedures for responding to residential elemental mercury contamination.
{"title":"Mercury Contamination: Review of a Residential Response.","authors":"Marcella R Thompson","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A residential elemental mercury contamination incident in Rhode Island resulted in the evacuation of an entire apartment complex.To develop recommendations for improved response, all response-related documents were examined; personnel involved in the response were interviewed; policies and procedures were reviewed; and environmental monitoring data were compiled from specific phases of the response for analysis of effect.A significant challenge of responding to residential elemental mercury contamination lies in communicating risk to residents affected py a HazMat spill. An ongoing, open and honest dialogue is emphasized where concerns of the public are heard and addressed, particularly when establishing and/or modifying policies and procedures for responding to residential elemental mercury contamination.</p>","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3576874/pdf/nihms-440646.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"31262126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-10-01DOI: 10.1002/9781118574683.ch10
F. A. Manuele
In The Standardization of Error, Stefansson (1928) makes the case that people are willing to accept as fact what is written or spoken without adequate supporting evidence. When studies show that a supposed fact is not true, dislodging it is difficult because that belief as become deeply embedded in the minds of people and, thereby, standardized. Stefansson pleads for a mind-set that accepts as knowledge only that which can be proven and which cannot be logically contradicted. He states that his theme applies to all fields of endeavor except for mathematics. Safety is a professional specialty in which myths have become standardized and deeply embedded. This article examines two myths that should be dislodged from the practice of safety: 1) Unsafe acts of workers are the principle causes of occupational accidents. 2) Reducing accident frequency will equivalently reduce severe injuries. These myths arise from the work of H.W. Heinrich (1931; 1941; 1950; 1959). They can be found in the four editions of Industrial Accident Prevention: A Scientific Approach. Although some safety practitioners may not recognize Heinrich’s name, his misleading premises are perpetuated as they are frequently cited in speeches and papers. Analytical evidence indicates that these premises are not soundly based, supportable or valid, and, therefore, must be dislodged. Although this article questions the validity of the work of an author whose writings have been the foundation of safety-related teaching and practice for many decades, it is appropriate to recognize the positive effects of his work as well. This article was written as a result of encouragement from several colleagues who encountered situations in which these premises were cited as fact, with the resulting recommended preventive actions being inappropriate and ineffective. Safety professionals must do more to inform about and refute these myths so that they may be dislodged.
Stefansson(1928)在《错误的标准化》(The Standardization of Error)一书中指出,如果没有足够的证据支持,人们愿意把书面或口头的东西当作事实来接受。当研究表明一个假定的事实不真实时,推翻它是困难的,因为这种信念已经深深植根于人们的思想中,从而被标准化了。Stefansson呼吁一种心态,即只接受那些可以被证明的和逻辑上不能被反驳的知识。他说他的主题适用于除数学以外的所有领域。安全是一个专业领域,在这个领域里,神话已经变得标准化并深入人心。这篇文章检查了两个应该从安全实践中消除的神话:1)工人的不安全行为是职业事故的主要原因。2)减少事故发生频率,就等于减少严重伤害。这些神话来源于H.W. Heinrich (1931;1941;1950;1959)。它们可以在《工业事故预防:科学方法》的四个版本中找到。尽管一些安全从业人员可能不认识海因里希的名字,但他的误导性前提却一直存在,因为它们经常在演讲和论文中被引用。分析性证据表明,这些前提没有可靠的基础、可支持或有效,因此必须予以推翻。尽管这篇文章质疑了几十年来一直是安全相关教学和实践基础的作者的工作的有效性,但也应该承认他的工作的积极影响。这篇文章是在几位同事的鼓励下写成的,他们遇到的情况是,这些前提被引用为事实,因此建议的预防行动是不适当和无效的。安全专业人员必须做更多的工作来告知和驳斥这些神话,以便它们可能被驱逐。
{"title":"Reviewing Heinrich: Dislodging Two Myths From the Practice of Safety","authors":"F. A. Manuele","doi":"10.1002/9781118574683.ch10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118574683.ch10","url":null,"abstract":"In The Standardization of Error, Stefansson (1928) makes the case that people are willing to accept as fact what is written or spoken without adequate supporting evidence. When studies show that a supposed fact is not true, dislodging it is difficult because that belief as become deeply embedded in the minds of people and, thereby, standardized. Stefansson pleads for a mind-set that accepts as knowledge only that which can be proven and which cannot be logically contradicted. He states that his theme applies to all fields of endeavor except for mathematics. Safety is a professional specialty in which myths have become standardized and deeply embedded. This article examines two myths that should be dislodged from the practice of safety: 1) Unsafe acts of workers are the principle causes of occupational accidents. 2) Reducing accident frequency will equivalently reduce severe injuries. These myths arise from the work of H.W. Heinrich (1931; 1941; 1950; 1959). They can be found in the four editions of Industrial Accident Prevention: A Scientific Approach. Although some safety practitioners may not recognize Heinrich’s name, his misleading premises are perpetuated as they are frequently cited in speeches and papers. Analytical evidence indicates that these premises are not soundly based, supportable or valid, and, therefore, must be dislodged. Although this article questions the validity of the work of an author whose writings have been the foundation of safety-related teaching and practice for many decades, it is appropriate to recognize the positive effects of his work as well. This article was written as a result of encouragement from several colleagues who encountered situations in which these premises were cited as fact, with the resulting recommended preventive actions being inappropriate and ineffective. Safety professionals must do more to inform about and refute these myths so that they may be dislodged.","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/9781118574683.ch10","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50719262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Person-centered safety theories that place the burden of causality on human traits and actions have been largely dismissed in favor of systems-centered theories. Students and practitioners are now taught that accidents are caused by multiple factors and occur due to the complex interactions of numerous work system elements, human and non-human. Nevertheless, person-centered approaches to safety management still prevail. This paper explores the notion that attributing causality and blame to people persists because it is both a fundamental psychological tendency as well as an industry norm that remains strong in aviation, health care, and other industries. Consequences of that possibility are discussed and a case is made for continuing to invest in whole-system design and engineering solutions.
{"title":"People or systems? To blame is human. The fix is to engineer.","authors":"Richard J Holden","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Person-centered safety theories that place the burden of causality on human traits and actions have been largely dismissed in favor of systems-centered theories. Students and practitioners are now taught that accidents are caused by multiple factors and occur due to the complex interactions of numerous work system elements, human and non-human. Nevertheless, person-centered approaches to safety management still prevail. This paper explores the notion that attributing causality and blame to people persists because it is both a fundamental psychological tendency as well as an industry norm that remains strong in aviation, health care, and other industries. Consequences of that possibility are discussed and a case is made for continuing to invest in whole-system design and engineering solutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115647/pdf/nihms194159.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"29955459","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
David M Rempel, Demetra Star, Billy Gibbons, Alan Barr, Ira Janowitz
Drilling overhead into concrete is a strenuous task that is associated with shoulder, arm, neck and back musculoskeletal disorders due to the forceful and awkward aspects of the work. This common task is done to hang pipes, ducts and trays and is performed by construction workers in the electrical, pipe fitting, sheet metal, ironwork and carpentry trades. In this project, alternative devices for overhead drilling were developed in order to reduce the high shoulder loads. The design premise for the alternative devices was adopted from interventions developed on construction sites. These devices were evaluated for usability, productivity, and fatigue in two rounds of testing by 30 construction workers performing their usual overhead drilling. After each round of testing the device designs were modified based on feedback. The final design was associated with much less arm fatigue but similar productivity compared to the usual method for overhead drilling. The feedback, design suggestions and field testing by experienced construction workers was vital to the successful development of these devices. Field testing were done with real tasks, in diverse field settings, with subjects familiar with the task. Multiple rounds of field testing and redesign can significantly improve the safety and usability of new tools. Having experienced workers accessing the new tools can help with determining if and how a new tool is compatible and beneficial to current work practices.
{"title":"DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A NEW DEVICE FOR OVERHEAD DRILLING.","authors":"David M Rempel, Demetra Star, Billy Gibbons, Alan Barr, Ira Janowitz","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drilling overhead into concrete is a strenuous task that is associated with shoulder, arm, neck and back musculoskeletal disorders due to the forceful and awkward aspects of the work. This common task is done to hang pipes, ducts and trays and is performed by construction workers in the electrical, pipe fitting, sheet metal, ironwork and carpentry trades. In this project, alternative devices for overhead drilling were developed in order to reduce the high shoulder loads. The design premise for the alternative devices was adopted from interventions developed on construction sites. These devices were evaluated for usability, productivity, and fatigue in two rounds of testing by 30 construction workers performing their usual overhead drilling. After each round of testing the device designs were modified based on feedback. The final design was associated with much less arm fatigue but similar productivity compared to the usual method for overhead drilling. The feedback, design suggestions and field testing by experienced construction workers was vital to the successful development of these devices. Field testing were done with real tasks, in diverse field settings, with subjects familiar with the task. Multiple rounds of field testing and redesign can significantly improve the safety and usability of new tools. Having experienced workers accessing the new tools can help with determining if and how a new tool is compatible and beneficial to current work practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2600769/pdf/nihms-37702.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"27897774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2007-08-01DOI: 10.1002/9780470192696.CH14
F. A. Manuele
{"title":"Lean Concepts: Opportunities for Safety Professionals","authors":"F. A. Manuele","doi":"10.1002/9780470192696.CH14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470192696.CH14","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/9780470192696.CH14","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50651750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: Top-levelmanagers makeimportant decisionsabout safety-relatedissues, yet little safetyresearch has beendone involving theseindividuals. SH&E pro-fessionals must workwith these managersto access valuedresources, so under-standing their per-ceptions anddecision-makingprocesses is critical.This study involved asurvey of corporatefinancial decisionmakers to gathertheir opinions regard-ing their companies’safety performance,programs and person-nel, as well as thereasoning behindthese opinions. Theobjective was to iden-tify ways to improveoccupational safetyand offer ideas forways SH&E profes-sionals might moreeasily access resourcesfor safety. Summary of Responses How does your company compare to other companies in your industry?Question Not as good The same BetterSafety performance 22 (5.8%) 108 (28.3%) 251 (65.9%)Safety programs 14 (3.8%) 145 (39.7%) 206 (56.4%)Safety personnel 14 (4.0%) 163 (46.6%) 173 (49.4%) Table 1 Table 1 28_DeArmond_Mar2007.qxp 2/12/2007 9:58 AM Page 29
摘要:高层管理人员对安全相关问题做出重要决策,但涉及这些人的安全研究却很少。SH&E专业人员必须与这些管理人员合作,以获取有价值的资源,因此了解他们的看法和决策过程至关重要。这项研究包括对公司财务决策者进行调查,收集他们对公司安全绩效、计划和人员的意见,以及这些意见背后的原因。目的是确定改善职业安全的方法,并为职业安全与卫生专业人员提供更容易获得安全资源的方法。与同行业的其他公司相比,贵公司如何?问题不太好同样更好安全性能22(5.8%)108(28.3%)251(65.9%)安全方案14(3.8%)145(39.7%)206(56.4%)安全人员14(4.0%)163(46.6%)173(49.4%)表1qxp 2/12/2007 9:58 AM 29页
{"title":"How Does Safety Stack Up? A Survey of Corporate Financial Decision Makers' Perceptions of Safety Performance, Programs And Personnel","authors":"S. DeArmond, Yueng-hsiang Huang, Peter Y. Chen","doi":"10.1037/e518442013-332","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e518442013-332","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Top-levelmanagers makeimportant decisionsabout safety-relatedissues, yet little safetyresearch has beendone involving theseindividuals. SH&E pro-fessionals must workwith these managersto access valuedresources, so under-standing their per-ceptions anddecision-makingprocesses is critical.This study involved asurvey of corporatefinancial decisionmakers to gathertheir opinions regard-ing their companies’safety performance,programs and person-nel, as well as thereasoning behindthese opinions. Theobjective was to iden-tify ways to improveoccupational safetyand offer ideas forways SH&E profes-sionals might moreeasily access resourcesfor safety. Summary of Responses How does your company compare to other companies in your industry?Question Not as good The same BetterSafety performance 22 (5.8%) 108 (28.3%) 251 (65.9%)Safety programs 14 (3.8%) 145 (39.7%) 206 (56.4%)Safety personnel 14 (4.0%) 163 (46.6%) 173 (49.4%) Table 1 Table 1 28_DeArmond_Mar2007.qxp 2/12/2007 9:58 AM Page 29","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57875524","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The greatly increased number of women in the U.S. work force calls for greater attention to and emphasis on their safety and health. The author explores the history, demography, employment experiences and occupational safety and health considerations of working women.
{"title":"Women in the workplace.","authors":"J Erickson","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The greatly increased number of women in the U.S. work force calls for greater attention to and emphasis on their safety and health. The author explores the history, demography, employment experiences and occupational safety and health considerations of working women.</p>","PeriodicalId":74579,"journal":{"name":"Professional safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1987-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"21150165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}