Article Critique – The Safety Man Cometh
From the article, Safety Man Cometh by Mundy, the author described discussed various health and safety concerns existing in the company, which posed great danger to stakeholders including employees, owners, companies and the industry. The safety and health concerns are apparent as the author indicates the company did not have a formal safety and health plan to ensure safety in the construction process.
Over time, the company had avoided inspection and potential hefty penalties. New employees received no or little training on safety matters and most jobs had no provisions for fall protections in spite of constructors working above the required heights. There was no PPE required unless contractor needed it, which posed major health concerns (Mundy, 2003).
Worse still, Mundy revealed that the company did not adopt employee training on first aid to help victims in case of accidents (Mundy, 2003). It is important for organizations across the world to effect measures of helping workers at times of work-related accidents, which could negatively impact employees and the performance outcomes of firms.
With the poor safety and health conditions, the company and employees stood in great danger because of detrimental implication of accidents and the resulting fines. Indeed, various injuries to employees often bore heavily on the company as they had to deal with insurance woes. Employees suffered from injuries such as sprains, cuts, broken bones and burns.
Employees suffering from safety and health irresponsibility caused a lot in form of compensation, treatment and lost working time. Overall, the author portrays a company working under the major risks in construction including falling, strikes from falling objects, rough material, heavy loads moving, loud noise, slips and trips among other dangers (Mundy, 2003).
The article is precise in highlighting the deplorable safety and health conditions existing in the company, which could be very costly for both the company and its employees (Lingard & Rowlinson, 2005).
Following the change of ownership in the company, the new management introduced several healthy and safety initiatives through systematic management of health and safety issues in the company. Through the new initiatives the company implemented mechanisms to facilitate identification of hazards, operational guidelines, performance, and standards procedures.
The initiatives aimed at reducing risks for injury and the associated insurance costs, which affected the company’s competitiveness in the industry (Mundy, 2003). For effective implementation of the safety initiatives, the new owner hired a full time manager, with sufficient roofing experience to oversee the process. OSHA regulations and policies provided the framework for the new initiatives (Reese & Eidson, 2006).
Major areas of focus for success were changing employee attitudes through cultural change, implementation of fall protection, safety training for employees, and improvement of record keeping.
In the new initiatives, the company complied with OSHA standards, which provides ways for systematic management of safety and health in the workplace. The design of constructions was affected by the new initiatives, as constructors, designers and other actors in the company had to consider safety and health issues in the actual construction, repair, or demolition of structures.
Through the hazard, profiles in the new initiatives facilitated the identification of common hazards related to the roofing activities including the possible measures to ensure safe performing of tasks. The profiles also covered training of the involved stakeholders. Safety measurement was an important way of ensuring standard performance of tasks and improvement of awareness on health and safety issues in the workplace.
Supervisors were major stakeholders in the new initiatives as they had to ensure compliance with standard operations in daily activities. Overall, OSHA regulations and policies formed the basis of the new initiatives, which resulted in major improvements in the construction company (Reese & Eidson, 2006). In fact, many firms to improve their performances through the adoption of the OSHA regulations and policies..
From the information discussed about the “safety man” and Mundy, the safety engineer, there is similarity in terms of the position description, which entails ensuring safety in the company. However, the roles are dissimilar because while the safety man focussed more on the aftermath of an accident, Mundy, as a safety engineer focused more on the prevention aspect through compliance with health and safety standards.
The safety man focused providing effective reporting of accidents to guide insurance companies in compensation while the safety engineer focused on ensuring the company reduces insurance costs through elimination of workplace safety risks.
The position of the safety man was mostly meant for people who had suffered injuries as a way of avoiding compensation while the safety engineer was appointed to supervise implementation of safety and healthy requirements in the company.
The safety engineer had adequate educational qualification and undertook continuous training to increase knowledge on workplace safety while the safety man had limited information other than the actual accident.
Another unique aspect that could be noted is that the safety man was gender specific while the safety engineer’s position did not consider one’s gender (Mundy, 2003). This could have negatively impacted the performance of the organization.
References
Lingard, H., & Rowlinson, S. M. (2005). Occupational health and safety in construction project management. London, United Kingdom: Spon Press.
Mundy, R. D. (2003). The Safety Man Cometh; Improving the perception of Safety in the Roofing Industry. Professional Safety Journal, 48(12), 1-151.
Reese, C. D., & Eidson, J. V. (2006). Handbook of OSHA construction safety and health (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC/Taylor & Francis.