Safety
Occupational Health & Safety | 23 April 2015

Column: The Other Side of the Organizational Safety Coin

You have probably heard some variation of the saying “there are two sides to every coin” more times than you can count. But have you ever applied it to organizational safety?

One side of the coin is injury prevention. Keeping workers safe is what gets most safety professionals out of bed in the morning and motivates them throughout the day. Reducing injuries and keeping people out of harm’s way is as satisfying as it is tangible, and injury statistics and lost-time incidents are tracked with regularity in corporate safety programs.

When it comes to what keeps safety professionals up at night, many times it is not just thoughts of what could go wrong, but instead how they will justify the cost of implementing safety measures and processes that are often quite expensive. The other side of the coin literally deals with the coin itself—the financial aspect of safety. And this side can feel cold and calculating.

Nobody wants to think the reason we protect people on the job is because it saves the company money—safety professionals do it because it is the right thing to do. But that does not mean safety efforts do not have very real financial implications. As we will see, money and safety performance are very closely linked, and many safety professionals do themselves a disservice when they talk about one without fully including the other in the conversation.

The link between finances and safety is not hard to see. According to the National Council on Compensation Insurance, the average medical cost of lost-time claims is USD 36,592. Because that number has risen every year since 1995, the cost of the medical treatment of workplace injuries is likely to continue increasing. The result is a rough equation that is as simple as it is self-evident: If you reduce the number of workplace injuries, then you potentially reduce the workers compensation premiums your company has to pay. Conversely, more claims will likely mean a higher total payout.

However, most employers are not simply handed a medical bill. Instead, medical costs, wage benefits, and other injury-related expenses are typically paid by workers compensation insurance. But a higher injury rate can lead to elevated workers compensation premiums, and that can really add up quickly for many businesses.

Hydrocarbon Processing | 20 April 2015

The True Cost of Poor Quality

Knoxville, Tennessee-based System Improvements has been in the forefront of teaching structured root-cause analysis throughout the world. System Improvements has used its proprietary software (TapRooT) for its courses and teaching endeavors over several decades. The organization has recently examined the thinking conveyed in old—if not antiquated—quality improvement (QI) language. The company observed language and performance indicators used by industry to monitor quality of output. TapRooT and similar performance software identified important flaws regarding QI programs.

QI trends
One of the biggest QI trends was the term “cost of poor quality” (COPQ) as tied with “zero defects.” Indeed, a number of COPQ financial models popped up in many Fortune 500 companies. In the safety world, there was a similar drive with the term “cost of compensation” tied with “zero injuries” and tracking OSHA-driven recordable incidents.

Yet, the focus of both safety and quality was, in each case, a lagging visible indicator. In other words: good or bad, the findings are too late.

Proactive stance
But dealing with lagging indicators is just not where reliability professionals should focus their drive and effort. While identifying and being able to comprehend the ultimate damage are vital ingredients of the process, a more productive goal would be to spot (and even avoid) problems before they develop. Designing in quality is more productive (and less expensive) than inspecting components and machines that failed because of lack of quality.

Guidelines
If you do not assess the quality of work, then how do you know if it is up to standards? Another important issue raised is, “Should I have to trust everybody’s work?” In the safety world, the phrase “Safety must be part of every action we do,” is often said but not necessarily followed. Industry professionals do sympathize with the present situation. However, slogans and exhortations are part of the bucket-labeled, “consultant-conceived” generalities. Too often, little or no value-adding guidance is given by clever slogans. More managers would do well to ask, “What are the goals for the safety or quality programs, and why is it necessary for the company and the employees to follow?”

Read the full story here.

ProAct Safety | 16 April 2015

Column: Safety Drivers, the First Level of Leading Indicators

The way we measure safety has contributed to our tendency to manage safety reactively. All our early safety metrics were reactive (i.e., chronologically after accidents or incidents occur). Because our metrics were essentially failure metrics, we fell into a pattern of managing safety to produce fewer failures. The only serious problem with this approach is that it reaches the limits of its effectiveness before it tells us how to prevent all accidents. As we fail less, our failure data diminishes, losing its statistical significance before our performance reaches zero accidents.

This limitation of traditional safety metrics and management has spawned a search for what are commonly called “leading indicators” of safety that will allow us to predict and prevent accidents better. Although this thinking is going in the right direction, it has not gone far enough. Ultimately, safety will have multiple metrics connected by algorithms that provide truly prescriptive metrics with which to manage safety. This set of multiple metrics will form something similar to the balanced scorecard used by strategic managers. It will have at least four major sets of metrics, the first of which might be called “safety drivers.” These are key performance indicators of our major safety efforts designed to improve organizational safety conditions and behaviors. They fall into five major categories: leadership, supervision, conditional control, onboarding practices, and knowledge/skill building.

Read the full column here.

Center for Offshore Safety | 10 April 2015

Center for Offshore Safety Report Highlights Industry’s Safety Performance

New data from industry operations and independent third-party audits reveals the US offshore oil and natural gas industry’s highest commitment to safety, according to the Center for Offshore Safety’s (COS) first performance report published on 8 April.

“America’s offshore oil and natural gas industry is even safer than before, but our goal will always be zero accidents and zero spills,” said COS Executive Director Charlie Williams. “Sharing data and lessons learned throughout the industry is an essential part of the work COS does to continually enhance safety.”

The report, based on data collected from COS members about their 2013 operations, highlights key indicators of safety performance, lessons learned from incidents, and information from the first cycle of safety audits now required by federal regulations. These audits are based on an industry standard developed by the American Petroleum Institute covering Safety and Environmental Management Systems.

Key findings of the report include:

  • On average, 96% of planned critical maintenance, inspections, and testing were performed on schedule
  • All eligible COS members successfully completed audits of their Safety and Environmental Management Systems
  • COS participating members did not suffer a single fatality or loss of well control during more than 42 million work hours in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico

Fuel Fix | 6 April 2015

Feds Say Shell’s Spill Containment System Works as Company Seeks Arctic Drilling Approval

Shell has successfully deployed its Arctic containment system in waters near Washington state as it prepares for potential drilling in the Chukchi Sea later this year.

The company didn’t officially need the test, which was conducted over several days in Puget Sound. Its emergency containment system, carried and deployed from the Arctic Challenger barge, already won certification from the American Bureau of Shipping and the US Coast Guard years ago.

But the exercises gave Shell a chance to demonstrate the equipment for Coast Guard officials and federal regulators at the Interior Department who will decide whether the company gets critical permits enabling a new round of Chukchi Sea oil exploration this summer.

Expro | 2 April 2015

Expro Wins Eni Safety Award

International oilfield services company Expro has been presented with the Eni safety award for well-testing services at a ceremony held on 30 March 2015 in San Donato, Milan.

Expo workers test a well. Expo has won the Eni safety award for well-testing services for the second year in a row.

Expro workers test a well. Expro has won the Eni safety award for well-testing services for the second year in a row.

This marks the second consecutive year Expro has won the award, which recognises a contractor that has achieved the best safety results whilst working with the Italian operator.

The judges based their decision on Expro’s exemplary safety record, with the company accomplishing no lost time incidents during 535,000 hours worked for Eni.

Expro has provided well-testing services to Eni for more than 10 years, predominantly in west Africa, and has maintained an exemplary safety record throughout.

Stefano Dallera, Expro’s global account manager for Eni, said, “We are extremely proud to receive this award for a second time, which recognizes our commitment to championing safety. Our employees strive to embed safety in all aspects of our operations, and this recognizes their continued efforts.”

David Ford, Expro’s group health, safety, environment, and quality (HSEQ) manager, said, “We have fully integrated positive health and safety practices throughout Expro, ensuring mandatory HSEQ core training is completed by all staff, as well as promoting our house rules, which all employees, visitors, and contractors must adhere to.

“We are delighted to receive this award from Eni as it acknowledges our continued commitment to safety management across our global operations.”

Expro was also presented with the Royal Society of Prevention of Accidents President’s Award in 2014, which recognizes 10 consecutive years of Gold Awards.

Drilling Contractor | 31 March 2015

Joint Safety Improvement Plan Aligns HSE Objectives for Shell, Halliburton

Speaking at a joint presentation with Halliburton at the 2015 International Association of Drilling Contractors Health, Safety, Environment, and Training Asia Pacific Conference in Kuala Lumpur on 12 March, Alain Moonen, manager for wells safety at Shell, noted that the industry’s safety performance is tailing off even though we are still going in the right general direction.

“It’s unacceptable that we create an environment where people still get hurt,” he said. Together with Duane Sherritt, vice president of business development Asia Pacific at Halliburton, Moonen shared the results of a joint safety improvement plan (JSIP) put in place between Haliburton and Shell in the Asia Pacific region.

JSIPs are an initiative Shell began 4 years ago in collaboration with several of the company’s business partners. They are jointly created between operator and contractor and work to align and formalize the key HSE focus areas in both personal and process safety. While most companies have the same objectives when it comes to HSE, as well as similar procedures, Moonen explained, the JSIPs are intended to help put those things in the same “language.” Resulting procedures and collaterals will look the same, feel the same and follow the same direction. “It’s very simple, but it’s focused and aligned,” he said.

ProAct Safety | 26 March 2015

Column: Is Winning or Losing a Safety Culture Habit?

When you achieve a year without a recordable injury, do you know why it was a winning year? What is your confidence and strategy to win even more next year?

Goals in safety should be focused on winning, not failing less. Are we winning more today than yesterday? Are we winning the hearts and minds or nudging more hands and feet? You don’t win more by holding ground; you win by continuously advancing. You don’t win more by creating more rules of the playing field or by increasing incentives; you win more by creating a culture where winning is a shared desire. You win more when winning is a habit.

Vince Lombardi, known as one of the most successful coaches in NFL history believed, “Winning is not a sometime thing; it’s an all the time thing. You don’t win once in a while; you don’t do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is habit. Unfortunately, so is losing.” Is winning a habit in your organizational culture?

The Washington Times | 19 March 2015

New York, Feds Find Safety Defects in Latest Oil Train Inspections

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo says the latest round of targeted crude oil tank car and rail inspections have uncovered 93 defects, including seven critical safety defects that required immediate corrective action.

The inspections are the latest in a series of actions state agencies are taking to protect New Yorkers from potential dangers associated with the transport of crude oil by rail.

Cuomo’s office said on 17 March that state and federal teams examined 453 crude oil tank cars and approximately 148 miles of track in these inspections.

ABC | 19 March 2015

WorkSafe To investigate Chevron Safety Claims After Cyclone Olwyn

Western Australia’s industrial safety watchdog will investigate the cyclone safety procedures of US gas giant Chevron after concerns were raised about its Pilbara operations during Tropical Cyclone Olwyn.

Three unions called for WorkSafe to investigate after slamming the company for failing to evacuate workers from their Barrow Island and Wheatstone operations before the Category 3 system hit.

Photos obtained by the ABC showed workers sleeping on the floor, under desks, and in hallways.

Western Australia WorkSafe Commissioner Lex McCulloch said there were several issues raised by the unions, including that evacuations were left until too late and the cyclone-proof worker accommodations on the ship Europa and on-site were inappropriate.

McCulloch said WorkSafe was working with Chevron, the Shire of Ashburton, the Department of Mines and Petroleum Resources Safety Branch, and unions to establish the veracity of the claims.

“We need to be circumspect [and] are not making any judgment around the claims at this point,” he said.

McCulloch said Chevron had been responsive and provided information as requested.

Thorne & Derrick | 13 March 2015

Safety Training Video: Why Lock-Out/Tag-Out Is Vitally Important

Many industrial accidents are caused by the unexpected energization of electrical equipment or by the uncontrolled release of energy through a failure to implement correct lock-out/tag-out. These accidents can be prevented by proper lock-out/tag-out procedures. Safe working practices should be implemented in-house that are designed to prevent needless deaths and serious injuries to service and maintenance personnel by controlling unauthorised or accidental use of energy.

To perform service and maintenance work on industrial equipment safely, you must understand the importance of energy control and the current regulations—you must also know how to apply energy isolation and lock-out/tag-out.

Occupational Health & Safety | 12 March 2015

Column: Lagging to Leading to Transformational Indicators—Measuring the Contribution of Value

Measuring activities to determine the health of improvement efforts or culture tells you very little if excellence is your goal. Excellence is not just zero injuries or incidents; it is the ability to win through the achievement of great results, with strong and confident insight into how the results were achieved, and a culture that focuses on a continuous improvement mindset.

Many well-intended organizations suffer from a programmatic focus and demonstrate an activities-based culture, whether these activities add value or not. For years, the safety profession, in particular, has tried to compete with the business goals of production by integrating activities and thinking into everything to overcome this competition. If there is no real or perceived value that is yielded by the activities, the competition continues, as it was not correctly addressed. Our strategy shouldn’t be to compete; it should show how we will win by adding value. Zero injuries or incidents is the byproduct of the value of excellence, not the final goal.

Effective safety strategy, however, is still surprisingly lacking in many organizations. I have named the “strategy” in place for most the “Perpetual Cycle of Avoiding Failures,” with zero injuries being the primary, misguided goal. The cycle repeats like this:

  1. Review current injury rate
  2. Set new injury rate or objective
  3. Develop a list of initiatives (or programs)
  4. Execute on the efforts
  5. Return to Step 1