Management of Workplace Health and Safety - Case Study Example

Management of Workplace Health and Safety Name Institution Lecturer Course Date Management of Workplace Health and Safety Introduction “A firm’s ability to weather storms depends on how seriously executives take risk management when the sun is shining and no clouds are on the horizon” (Kaplan and Mikes, 2012). Affective risk management requires a faithful adherence to the five-step model for risk management, which is comprised of five distinct steps: identification of the risks, risk assessment, monitoring the risk, responsibility assignment and implementation of risk eradication/mitigation strategy and monitoring the strategy (Wilson and McCutcheon, 2003). Depending on the nature of the risk, the strategy for eradicate or mitigate the risk may involve the establishment of an appropriate policy, such as policy that prevents machine operation at given conditions, or building an appropriate facility, such as a cross bridge for crossing a busy road. Hazard identification A hazard is defined as a source of potential harm. Hazard identification is the first step in the risk management process, which culminates with the identification of the negative and adverse effects that are attributed to a substance, activity or a scenario (Leeuwen and Vermiere, 2007, p. 3). Accordingly, hazard identification and assessment is solely dependent on whether a given scenario, situation or substance is capable of causing undesirable or harmful effects (Myers, Cramer and Hessian, 1991 & UTAS, 2011). In the case provided, the hazard is the roads passing between the buildings in the institution. Since the institution is located within a busy environment, within the city center, involving moving vehicles, the roads serving these vehicles are safety hazard for the organisation because there are high chances that people may be run over by the vehicles while crossing the roads from one building to another. This safety hazard is further intensified by the fact that the roads serve vehicles throughout the day, which increases the potential for the roads causing injury and deaths to workers and students in the organisation. Hazard identification is a process comprised of two key steps. Firstly, the risk manager risk assessment personnel collect relevant data regarding the hazard, which includes the data on the types and extent of health effects that are likely to emanate from the exposure conditions from which injury, disease or death will result (Wells, 1996). Based on the type of investigation used, qualitative or quantitative, the process may lead to quantitative (numerical data) or qualitative (non-numerical data).This is immediately followed by a critical analysis of the collected data to gain a close insight of the hazard (Leeuwen and Vermiere, 2007 & University of Melbourne, 2012). From the case at hand, the hazard has not resulted to any injury or death. However, there have been near-misses on one pedestrian crossing, which means that this particular pedestrian crossing has a high potential of causing injury and death. Data available on this case is that the organisation employs about 300 staff, which means that the number of people affected by the particular hazard is more than this number (including the students). Since the institution offers tertiary education, movement of people within building as well as in and out of the institution is constant throughout the day. This, when combined with continuous flow of vehicles along the road, increases the chances of people being run over by vehicles or people colliding when using the pedestrian crossing. Information given shows that there is a speed limit of 20 kilometers per hour (kph) imposed. However, there are no measures to ensure that motorist obey this limit rule, which further intensifies the hazard potential of the road because a motorist can pass by the pedestrian crossing at a higher speed thereby knocking down and injuring or killing people. Nevertheless, the speed limit of 20kph still has the potential of injuring pedestrians of knocked. The positioning of the pedestrian crossing is another crucial factor of consideration while identifying the hazard. Given that a speed limit of 20kph is imposed, location of the pedestrian crossing just near a corner means that neither the pedestrians nor the motorists will be able to see each other when approaching the facility, which further intensifies the hazard. Risk Assessment Risk assessment is the second step in the risk management process, which involves assessing the extent of the risk associated with the identified hazard. This involves use of established frameworks to assess the risk by considering crucial factors, such as population involved and magnitude of the risk. Risk assessment leads to the prioritisation of the identified risks using the risk calculator (Anon, n.d). It is a process comprised of three steps; analyzing the consequences, exposure and the probability of the risk (The University of Queensland, 2009). In the case at hand, there are three risks associated with the identified hazard, which include (1) people being hit by fast moving vehicles; (2) people being hit by slow moving vehicles; and (3) people colliding when they are using the pedestrian crossing (particularly when people are moving in opposite directions). People being hit by fast moving vehicles (vehicles failing to observe the 20kph speed limit deliberately or not deliberately) Probability: unusual but possible (possible especially when drivers are unaware of pedestrian crossing ahead or due to mechanical breakdowns preventing vehicles from stopping). Exposure: frequent because the institution and roads are being used throughout the day Possible consequences: multiple fatalities especially if several people are involved (it is expected that students can cross as a group). Consequently, the risk score, as shown in figure 1, is very high risk. People being hit by slow moving vehicles Probability: very likely Exposure: frequent because the institution and roads are being used throughout the day Possible consequences: serious injury (serious). The speed limit of 20kph, if observed, may not lead to fatality but will definitely lead to serious injury to a person or people hit by the car. Consequently, as shown in figure 2, the risk score is very high risk. People colliding when crossing the road Probability: unusual but possible Exposure: frequent because the pedestrian crossing is used throughout the day Possible consequences: first aid treatment (noticeable). Consequently, as shown in figure 3, the risk score is moderate risk. Summary of risk prioritisation Table 1: Risk matrix Risk Priority Action People being hit by fast moving vehicles Very high Immediate action is required People being hit by slow moving vehicles Very high Immediate action is required People colliding crossing the road Moderate risk An action is required as soon as possible Risk Control Risk control should be based on the established risk matrix, which means that the high priority risk should be addresses before addressing the moderate risk. There are six distinct ways of controlling the risks: Hazard elimination This involves doing away with the identified hazard (The University of Queensland, 2009). In this case, it would imply closing the road to eliminate the interaction between people and vehicles at the pedestrian crossing. It would also involve doing away with the pedestrian crossing to control the third risk, collision amongst people. In essence, doing away with the road eliminates all the risks. However, this measure is not practical considering that the two items, people and vehicles must be allowed to move considering that the institution is located in the city center. Substitution This involves providing an alternative process that is less hazardous (The University of Queensland, 2009). The substitutable item in this case would be the pedestrian crossing to provide alternative ways of crossing the road. A flyover would be appropriate, which prevents interaction between the people and the vehicles. This will eliminate risks 1 and 2 but will not eliminate risk 3. Risk 3 can be eliminated without the creation of a flyover by providing two different pedestrian crossing, each for people from either side of the road such that people will not meet when crossing the road. However, since this risk ranks lower that the other two, risks 1 and 2 must be solved before solving risk 3. Therefore, such a provision can be allowed for the fly-over to prevent people collision. However, a flyover might not be an economically sound solution considering the population and that several of them will have to be established for all roads in the institution. Further, there might not be enough space for this. Redesigning This involves changing the process in such a way that it eliminates or reduces the risk without affecting the delivery of the process (The University of Queensland, 2009). In this case, it would involve redesigning the road and/or the pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian crossing can be redesigned to eliminate risk 1 completely by providing two crossing areas, each for people from either side of the road. Reducing risks 2 and 3 requires a redesign of the road by establishing bumps along the road on either side of the pedestrian crossing. The bumps should be in such a way that they allow all types and sizes of vehicles to move but at an extremely low speed. The pedestrian crossing should also be moved in a place where motorists have a clear view of them including the people about to cross the road. Therefore, the pedestrian should be placed on a straight stretch of the road where there are no structures adjacent to the road. Otherwise, structures adjacent to the road, which can prevent clear view, by the motorists and pedestrians, should be removed. The road can also be redesigned to prevent heavy vehicles, whose risk of developing mechanical problems particularly with the brakes is high. Such vehicles can be directed to alternative roads that are not used by pedestrians. Redesigning is a practically and economically sound strategy. Isolating Isolating involves separating the hazard and the population under the risk of the hazard (The University of Queensland, 2009). This strategy is impractical for the case at hand because people and vehicles must be allowed to move within the institution. Administrative Administrative approach involves use of policies, directions and instructions to eliminate or reduce the risk (The University of Queensland, 2009). In this case, an administrative approach would involve imposing and enforcing a speed limit on the road and installing warning signs warn motorists of pedestrian crossing ahead. The speed limit can be reinforced by having a police person on either side of the pedestrian crossing to ensure motorists obey the policy. Cameras can also be installed to replace police persons. Protective and Preventive Equipment (PPE) PPE is usually the last resort when all other strategies have failed, which involves providing people with protective equipments against the risk (The University of Queensland, 2009). However, this is impractical for the case at hand. Implementation Combination of two or more of the aforementioned strategies The most effective approach would involve combining any two or more of the aforementioned approaches, which will lead to an effective, efficient and low cost risk control strategy. For instance, redesign strategy will be combined with the administrative strategy. This will involve redesigning the road and pedestrian crossing as aforementioned. Each side of the pedestrian crossing would then be provided with a sign directing pedestrians to cross at that section of the pedestrian crossing to avoid people collision. The road will be provided with bumps and road signs indicating that there are bumps and a pedestrian crossing ahead. Road signs will also indicate the maximum speed allowed for motorists. Road signs will also be installed on either side of the pedestrian crossing to direct heavy vehicles to other roads. Finally, street cameras will be installed and motorists warned of their existence to ensure that they obey the speed limit (some high vehicles may move at high speeds despite the presence of bumps). Assigning responsibility The redesign of the road and the pedestrian crossing, as well as the installation of the road signs and street cameras will be the responsibility of the national highway department. The institution will be responsible for educating its population on how to use the new pedestrian crossing. Risk Monitoring Risk monitoring is a crucial step because it helps to evaluate whether the strategies will control the risks as planned. The monitoring process will seek to provide answers to the following three questions: Have the control measures been implemented as planned? Are the control measures operating as desired? Are there new hazards created by the control measures? Ultimately, the monitoring process will help in enhancing the control measures or changing them in the effort of improving the safety standard of the facility. This will involve collecting data regarding the risk level after the control measures have been implemented. The control measures will be monitored and evaluated on the ability to: 1. Completely eradicate risk 1 2. The ability to achieve zero near miss cases Conclusion The hazard identified involves the roads passing between the buildings in the institution, which leads to three risks (1) people being hit by fast moving vehicles; (2) people being hit by slow moving vehicles; and (3) people colliding when they are using the pedestrian crossing (particularly when people are moving in opposite directions). The most effective approach would involve combining two strategies: redesign of the road and pedestrian crossing and administrative strategy. Bibliography Anon. n.d. Risk Management. Accessed April 14, 2013 from http://www.google.co.ke/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.intad.asn.au%2Fdocuments%2Fstore%2Frisk-management-calc.pdf&ei=DzZqUaKgH5Cu8QTv3ICIDw&usg=AFQjCNEV6gQNd3tm9moKIJ-EW2fFedetjw&bvm=bv.45175338,d.Yms Kaplan, R. S. & Mikes, A. 2012. ‘Managing Risks: A New Framework.’ Harvard Business Review, vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 48-60. Leeuwen, C. J. & Vermiere, T. 2007. Risk Assessment of Chemicals: An Introduction. The Netherlands: Springer. Myers, R. W., Cramer, J. J. & Hessian, R. T. Risk Management Programs. In, H. R. Greenberg & J. J. Cramer. 1991. Risk Assessment and Risk Management for the Chemical Process Industry. John Wiley & Sons. The University of Queensland. 2009. Risk Assessment and Management. The University of Queensland, Australia. Accessed April 14, 2013 from http://ppl.app.uq.edu.au/content/2.10.08-risk-assessment-and-management University of Melbourne. 2012. General Risk Assessment Form: 3 Variable. Accessed April 14, 2013 from http://www.google.co.ke/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&ved=0CHIQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsafety.unimelb.edu.au%2Fdocs%2FRiskAssess3Variable.pdf&ei=DzZqUaKgH5Cu8QTv3ICIDw&usg=AFQjCNEx5SEWvqpjfze6vpDxJNxCmf7bJw&bvm=bv.45175338,d.Yms UTAS. 2011. Minimum Standard-Work Health and Safety Project and Task Risk Management. Accessed April 14, 2013 from http://www.google.co.ke/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&ved=0CIMBEBYwCQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.utas.edu.au%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0003%2F152535%2FWHS-Risk-Management-MS-Project-and-Task-V1.0.pdf&ei=DzZqUaKgH5Cu8QTv3ICIDw&usg=AFQjCNH7c3UG1BJrVVEjFCDB9CC39MaihQ&bvm=bv.45175338,d.Yms Wells, G. 1996. Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment. UK: Institution of Chemical Engineers. Wilson, L. & McCutcheon, D. J. 2003. Industrial Safety and Risk Management. Alberta, Canada: The University of Alberta Press. Appendix Appendix 1: Brief description of the organisation context The organisation, which provides tertiary education, employs about 300 staff. The entire population of the organisation, including the students and staff, is about 2000. The institution is located within the city center, which creates high level interaction between people and vehicles. Such an interaction is a major concern to the safety and health department because of the risk associated with the hazard, the roads. There have been concerns regarding the risks, which has resulted to the speed limit policy for the roads in the vicinity, which is limited to 20kph. Nevertheless, there have been informal reports about near misses on one of the pedestrian crossings. This means, therefore, that additional controls are required to ensure utmost safety for the entire organisation. Appendix 2: Risk Assessment Calculator Figure 1: Risk 1 Figure 2: Risk 2 Figure 3: Risk 3 Read More