1 / 33

Improving Construction Industry Safety

Improving Construction Industry Safety. Marton Marosszeky ACCI - UNSW m.marosszeky@unsw.edu.au. Accidents in Australia. In 1995 / 96 figures in NSW construction 53.9/1000 workers mining 76.2/1000 workers industry average 27.4/1000 workers. Safety Research at ACCI.

octavia
Download Presentation

Improving Construction Industry Safety

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving Construction Industry Safety Marton Marosszeky ACCI - UNSW m.marosszeky@unsw.edu.au

  2. Accidents in Australia • In 1995 / 96 figures in NSW • construction 53.9/1000 workers • mining 76.2/1000 workers • industry average 27.4/1000 workers ACCI Safety Research

  3. Safety Research at ACCI • Trade specific Hazard Profiles. • Standardized documents • Techniques for risk assessment • Site Safety Meter technique. ACCI Safety Research

  4. Hazard Profile Development • Initial focus on highest risks • demolition & roofing • Next stage covered 7 other trade packages • concreting, reo, formwork, plumbing, electrical, masonry & scaffolding ACCI Safety Research

  5. Development Process • Iterative process with industry • Identified discrete activities • Identified hazards for each • Developed strategies to manage each hazard ACCI Safety Research

  6. Hazard Profile HAZARD Risk1 Risk 2 Risk 3 Hazard 1 Hazard 2 Hazard 3

  7. Hazard Profile Development HAZARD Risk1 Risk 2 Risk 3 touching an burns fall death electrical leading by wire from to arm elect’n a ladder broken

  8. RISKS IN DEMOLITION • By a numerical method (Fines) • Risk ratings widely scattered • achieved greater transparency by modifying graphical approach (Kinney and Wirruth) ACCI Safety Research

  9. Fine’s Method • Risk rating R=C*E*P • =Consequence*Exposure*Probability ACCI Safety Research

  10. Fine’s Criteria • Very high >350 • High 180 - 350 • Substantial 70 - 180 • Moderate 20 - 70 • Acceptable <20 ACCI Safety Research

  11. Committee Rating Variation • Rating for an electric shock from a temporary connection • 1 150 substantial • 2 100 substantial • 3 450 very high • 4 6000 very high ** • ** this value was ignored as the descriptions were misunderstood ACCI Safety Research

  12. Exposure(frequency of the occurrence of the hazard event) Continuously (or many times daily) 10 Frequently (approximately once daily) 6 Occasionally (from once a week to once a month) 3 Unusually (from once per month to once per year)2 Rarely (it has been known to occur) 1 Remotely possible (not known to have occurred) 0.5 ACCI Safety Research

  13. .Consequences (most probable result of the potential hazard) Catastrophe; numerous fatalities; damage over $1,000,000; major disruption of activities 100 Multiple fatalities; damage $400,000 to $1,000,000; 50 Fatality, damage $100,000 to $500,000; 25 Extremely serious injury (amputation, perm’t disability); damage $1,000 to $100,000; 15 Disabling injury; damage up to $1,000; 5 Minor cuts, bruises, bumps; minor damage. 1 ACCI Safety Research

  14. Probability (Likelihood that accident sequence will follow hazard event) • The complete accident sequence: Is the most likely and expected result if the hazard-event takes place; 10 Is quite possible, not unusual, has an even 50/50 chance; 6 Would be an unusual sequence or coincidence; 3 Would be a remotely possible coincidence; 1 Has never happened after many years of exposure, but is conceivably possible; 0.5 Practically impossible sequence (has never happened). 0.1 ACCI Safety Research

  15. Variables • Consequence agreement on a fatality 50 • Exposure 2 selected 1rare 1 selected 3occasionally • Probability 2 selected 3unusual but possible 1 selected 1remotely possible ACCI Safety Research

  16. Student Risk RatingRisk rating for truck driver alighting from a parked truck

  17. Subcontractor Risk RatingRisk rating for truck driver alighting from a parked truck

  18. Experience re Fine’s Method • Process lacks transparency • Training in use needed • R is influenced by subjectivity • Unacceptable variability in ratings is unavoidable ACCI Safety Research

  19. Risk ratings - conclusions • Both methods rely on subjective judgements • The graphical method makes these judgements transparent ACCI Safety Research

  20. Current Approach THREE LEVELS • fatality • serious injury • minor injury ACCI Safety Research

  21. Standard Terminology and Documents • Job Safety Analysis (JSA) • Safe work method statement • Work method statements • Hazard analysis • Risk analysis ACCI Safety Research

  22. Site Safety Meter • Based on the Finland TR Index • “Positive” rather than “Negative”. • Relatively objective & fast • % score • Graphical output ACCI Safety Research

  23. Site Safety Meter • Measures specific categories against a prescribed criteria. • Provides both behaviour and systems feedback on site safety performance. ACCI Safety Research

  24. Measures Specific Categories FOR BUILDINGS • Working habits • Order and tidiness • Electricity and lighting • Scaffolding & ladders • Edge protection, falls & falling • Plant and equipment ACCI Safety Research

  25. Selection of Categories Construction fatalities NSW 87/88 (154) Predominant causes: • Falls from height. 41 (30%) • Contact with electricity 32 (21%) • Hit by moving object. 29 (19%) • Hit by falling object. 23 (15%) (Source: WorkCover NSW) ACCI Safety Research

  26. Method of measurement Example-Cat 1 “Working Habits” • One reading / worker / area. • For a “correct” score, a person uses PPE or safety equipment correctly • harness attached near edge • ear & eye protection using saw ACCI Safety Research

  27. Method of measurement • Example-Cat 4 “Scaffold & Ladders” • One obs/scaffold section & ladder/area • For a “correct” score: • Adequately braced and tied • Mobile assembled correctly, ladder, bracing & toeboards. • No large gaps between perimeter edge and scaffold. • Ladder tied off & angled correctly ACCI Safety Research

  28. Safety Score Formula for Score as a % correct readings * 100 total readings ACCI Safety Research

  29. Feedback ACCI Safety Research

  30. Advantages • Provides “(+)”, not “(-) feedback. • Snapshot of safety environment • Stimulates the safety culture ACCI Safety Research

  31. Weaknesses • Difficult to look beyond negatives, • Risk class is not considered. a site may score highly but still have a number of Class 1 (high) risk safety defects. ACCI Safety Research

  32. Preliminary trial results 8 companies & 13 sites 60 site visits  10,000 data • Initial average SS 79%. • After 12 months: • Average score 85%. ACCI Safety Research

  33. Prelim results by categories

More Related