IOSH EDINBURGH BRANCH
Minutes of 184 Edinburgh Branch Meeting
Craighouse Campus, Napier University, Edinburgh – Thursday 13 September 2007 - 130pm
Sederunt: P Davison T Graveson H Graveson S McMorland H Pearson C Pender
R Innes I Sinclair A James R Walker P Graham P Keogh J Fenton
L Crichton A Bell S Scott C McGregor M Dunne M Munro A Dick
A Diment D Richardson D Morrice A Reavey M Batho N Olliver W Ferris
S Daly P Veitch J Wilson J Brannigan C Eaton K Breem K Tesh
J McMahon B Barnbrook B Sommers M Hanson S Heesom R Brownlie K Lloyd
A McLeod T Ambler I Alexander J Burt C Mellor J Willoughby S Beaton
M Bancroft R Lovering M Sayer L Young A Curran G Lyall D Ward
I Murray D Guss
Apologies: Andrew Sharman, Marion Johnstone, Julian Davis, Bob Bertram
1. Chair:
2. Minutes of previous meeting: June 2007
· Receipt – anyone who hadn’t received their minutes should email the Secretary.
· Accuracy: Proposer – Simon Heesom; Seconder – Ross Innes.
Matters arising not on the Agenda: None
3. Correspondence
The Grange – membership
Affiliate 96; Chartered Fellow 24 Chartered Member 290; Grad 46; Life Member 4;
Member 92 Technician Member 299
Total 851 (But 59 still to pay subs)
SGs
Aviation 2; Comms/Media 6 Construction 241; Consultancy 62; Education 48; Environment 118
Fire RM 44; Food/Drink 4; Hazardous Ind 10; Healthcare 51; International 22; Offshore 48
Public Ser 120; Railway 16; Retail/Dist 9; Rural 13; Safety Science 20
4. Group Reports
· Branch Education Development Officer – Liz Young. Liz reported that the deadline for signing up for and completing the records of CPD had been extended to the end of Dec.
· Specialist Groups
Public Services: Marion Johnstone reported that the National Safety Symposium had been very successful with Scottish Power winning the Zurich Municple prize for Supreme Safety.
Construction: Allan Dick reported that it was planned to hold the Interbuild Conference in Edinburgh in 2009. He reported that re-organisation of the SG’s central Executive Committee to create a smaller, more focused body might result in no representation from Scotland on it. He felt the Branc Exec should keep an eye on this.
5. Members Items
· PHASS has completed a mapping exercise to show locations of all OHS professionals in Scotland (ergonomists, SH practitioners, OH nurses etc) – on HSE website at www.hse.gov.uk/scotland/mapping.htm
Specialist Groups monthly news bulletin .Please note that this now has a space on the IOSH website at www.iosh.co.uk/specialistgroups
· The Roger Midson Challenge Trophy is planned to be an archery competition at Beescraig Country Park: Fri 26 Oct: 2-4pm. Cost £15.60.
· A reminder that there is a special site visit: The Risk Factory: 19 Oct: afternoon – email ali_mcleod@btinternet.com
· Russell Brownlie announced a RoSPA seminar: 26/27 Sept: “Director’s Duties”
· He also mentioned the detailed H&S plan published by the Scottish Executive (now Govt) which members should be aware of.
· 10 minute talk: Safety Diversity: Ian Sinclair, , Health and Safety Advisor, Buccleuch Estates Ltd
6. Guest Speaker
Behavioural Safety : David Guss: DuPont Safety Resources
Project Manager, DuPont
Paul Graham introduced the speaker as David Guss, MIEE, MIET, C. Eng, DuPont Safety Resources Project Manager to the assembled members, who then indicated that he had been invited to come and speak to the Branch by the Chair – Andrew Sharman and having accepted he now finds that Andrew had done a disappearing act by going on holiday to the Cook Islands.
Behavioral Change
The speaker indicated that it was probably better to define the topic as Culture Change rather than Behavior Change – this is based on the old doubt that you cannot change behavior, but what you may be able to do is modify actions and then maintain that change
Du Pont
Du Pont founder started the Company in 1802 having studied at St Peters Institute in making gun-powder.
The Company moved to Delaware and continued making gunpowder which was used in blasting through the Rockies. There was at that stage little talk about safety and the activity was accepted as being hazardous.
They now have a museum set up in one of the original mills, where there are three solid walls and a soft roof just in case it goes wrong, as it is likely to when dry grinding fine powder.
In 1811 there was a big explosion in which 20 people were killed including members of the founder’s family and a number of immigrant workers. The following Board minutes included the consideration of “should they continue in this sort of work”.
From this point onwards the Company philosophy has been one of –
- if we can’t do it safely – we don’t do it at all.
Safety
Du Pont operates through the belief that Safety is a Line Management responsibility and to make sure this was effective they were made to live on the factory. No new employee would go into a new mill until it had been operated by management first.
Safety Statistics have been kept from 1912.
Injuries have been considered as preventable since 1940s
Off-the-job safety has been considered as an integral element since 1950s
Behavioral safety auditing (the STOP program) started in 1960s
Safety
Du Pont moved away from gunpowder and into the chemical arena, and the manufacture of Lycra, Teflon Nylon etc which has further developed in the safety aspects with Nomex, Kevlar, Soutara (cleansing wipes), and Tyrek.
As a world wide benchmark Du Pont is a $27 million business & 50,000 employees.
Their value of safety has resulted in a constant down-turn in lost time injuries with the exception of a blip during the First World War although they have still never achieved a zero year, but a much better performance than a very wide range of industries and industry sectors.
Culture & Behavior
Du Pont has a series of core values/ beliefs/ principles (Safety, Health, Environment, Ethical, etc) which are required to be demonstrated by ALL individuals – where everyone is required to DO what they say they are going to do.
One of the beliefs is that ALL injuries / illness can be prevented and the target is zero
Company Policy
Du Pont has the basic concept and policy that they will not make, handle, use, sell, transport or dispose of a product unless they can do so safely and in an environmentally sound manner
Cultural Development
The speaker then showed a graph which demonstrated the phases as they see it in Du Pont which are necessary to reduce the injury rate:-
The stages go though - commitment to rules, reaction to instruction, and use of fear
Complexity understood, personal commitment
Co-operation, peer keeper, organizational pride
This relates to personal approaches of –
Do it safely so I don’t get caught
Do it safely so I don’t get injured
Do it safely so no one gets injured
Factors of safety
Du Pont follow the understanding that leadership and management is one of the key factors in ensuring safe working from the studies which have shown 96% of accident are as the result of unsafe acts as apposed to the remaining 4% which are the result of unsafe conditions.
It is accepted that the workplace is never really safe but the major controlling factor of whether the conditions will ever result in injury is behavior of the individual, where behavior is considered as something which is - observable, measurable, describable in some way without resorting to emotion/ feeling/ attitude. It’s about getting the individuals to choose the safe way of doing a job rather than the unsafe way.
How to change behavior
There is a very strong link with management commitment in demonstrating by their actions. They quote it as FELT Leadership (leadership which you can feel) where the standards expected are clearly communicated = do it yourself – do it the right way – be seen to do it the right way as it applies to you – in this way you are demonstrating what you want.
Behavioral Auditing
Consider the difference between Inspections and Behavioral Auditing =
Look at things Talk to people
Passive event – you see it & record it Interactive event
Involves the expert to recognize failings Involves everyone
You are looking for the negative factors Looking for negative & positive
BOTH – Document – Follow up
Auditing Process
1. Observe and make contact – question to understand the task being done
2. Comment on the safe behavior first
3. Discuss consequences of any unsafe acts observed or which you uncover during the conversation – define the safer way of doing the job
4. Get agreement on actions required to work safely in the future and to upgrade the standards if necessary
5. Discuss other safety issues
6. Thank the employee. [ Record off line the data and details of what was discussed ]
NB; Never go out with a clipboard
In conclusion - Why do Behavioral Audits
Auditing visibly demonstrates the Company and your personal commitment to safety. [Du Pont has a basic requirement for ALL of its management to undertake behavioral auditing – this even includes the Finance Director going out onto the shop floor to do it]
It helps manage the base of the triangle [controlling the unsafe acts]
It is a two-way constructive interaction – not punitive in any way
It is a process – NOT just a chat
Standards are checked
It is a powerful source of “leading indicator” metrics
It highlights strengths and weaknesses
7. Closing details
Dates of next meetings
Edinburgh Branch
11-Oct-07: Influencing Attitudes - Changing Risk Perception. Gareth Jones, , Head of HSEQ, Petrofac Operations Services
|
Max Bancroft, MRSC, CMIOSH Branch Secretary |
Richard Lovering, CFISOH Branch Executive Committee |