|
|
TITLE: |
||
|
|
|||
|
DOCUMENT ID: |
3700
Safety Observation Program |
||
|
|
|||
1.0
Purpose
Jefferson
Lab’s Safety
Observation (SO) Program provides a process where managers, at all levels,
regularly visit work areas; observe work practices and conditions; and discuss job
safety with employees. The framework of
a SO helps to resolve safety issues and concerns, recognize and acknowledge
safe work practices, and gain employee commitment to correct unsafe work
practices. This is all done in a
non-threatening, collaborative manner.
The SO also provides for consideration of other safety issues beyond
those specifically observed.
This SO Program is a key tool
within Jefferson Lab’s Integrated Safety
Management System (ISMS). It is
designed to enable effective sampling and measurement of safety data which leads
to improvement in workplace safety. SOs are a powerful tool for reducing injuries by recognizing and
eliminating unsafe work practices.
|
NOTE: SOs may be used as input for the Jefferson Lab Safety Incentive Program. |
2.0
Responsibilities
NOTE: Management authority may be delegated at the discretion of the responsible manager.
2.1
Director’s Safety Council :
·
Develops,
implements, and continuously improves the SO process.
·
Reviews
summary SO data for lessons learned.
2.2
All Levels of Management:
· Receive
and maintain SO Training (SAF100KD Safety Observation
Procedure)
·
Conduct
SOs in accordance with training.
·
Review
and analyze SO data regularly, in order to:
o Monitor the safe behavior and
performance of individuals under your authority.
o Define appropriate action to
correct deficiencies.
o Monitor and ensure execution of
follow-up actions.
o Monitor the effectiveness of
changes designed to reduce unsafe acts.
o Monitor and ensure the integrity
and quality of the SO Process.
2.3
ESH&Q – QA/CI Manager:
·
Provide
summary SO data to the Director’s Safety Council.
2.4
Deputy Director – ESH&Q:
·
Provide
SO Training when requested.
3.0
Philosophy
The basic philosophy behind the SO
program is: Jefferson Lab management looks after its people. The program provides for training, and
support tools to ensure constructive dialog is achieve between managers and
workers. The goal is for everyone at
Jefferson Lab to engage and commit to the improvement of personal and
organizational safety.
SOs
are a collaborative improvement process absent of blame
or punishment. To maintain employee
support of the SO program as one of Jefferson Lab’s safety management tools, it
is crucial that the SO be conducted and recognized as completely separate and
apart from any disciplinary activities.
Although the observer’s name is included in the observation report,
nothing is recorded that identifies the worker(s) observed.
4.0
Definitions
The SO program emphasizes unsafe
acts (behaviors, practices) rather than unsafe conditions.
·
Unsafe Act – is an action or inaction that creates,
or fails to avoid, a hazard and therefore it has a greater than negligible
probability to resulting in injury. An unsafe
act may or may not violate established safety rules, procedures, or common
practice.
·
Unsafe Condition – a hazard associated with
facilities, tools, equipment or the general environment, which has a greater
than negligible probability in resulting in an injury.
|
This
SO program assumes that a vast majority of unsafe
conditions are the result of unsafe acts.
Bringing the condition to the attention of the person(s) who created,
and accepted, the condition; and discussing ways to modify the behavior,
helps prevent the unsafe act from occurring again. Examples: Unsafe Condition: a tripping hazard along a walking
path. It is easy to correct this
unsafe condition. Move the item. But this does not prevent the condition
from happening again. Only by changing
the behavior of the person who created, or accept it, can the conditions be
eliminated and the potential for injury be avoided in the future. Unsafe Condition:
Unsafe hazard
during equipment operation. It is easy to ensure the hazard
is appropriately labeled, but we need to take responsibility for correcting
the deficiency and render the equipment safe. Only by engaging the operator in
constructive dialog in order to recognize the full extent of the hazard; and
then bringing it to the attention of the designer can we obtain an adequate
solution and avoid the unsafe condition in the future. Sometimes
the full extent of an unsafe act is
difficult to recognize and address, we tend to use the ‘unsafe condition’
label for the problem and correct it, without eliminating the causes, and
thus fail to ensure prevention. |
5.0
Benefits
The benefits Jefferson Lab
achieves through the use of this SO Program include:
·
Recognition
and correction of unsafe acts
and conditions before injury occurs.
·
Determination
of the effectiveness of various safety management processes and improvement of
them.
·
Reinforcement
of safety standards across the organization.
·
Increasing
employee awareness and motivation for safety
·
Creation
of a commitment to resolve issues that arise because of unsafe
acts and condition.
6.0
Program
Elements
The process for conducting a SO
is described in the ES&H
Manual Chapter 3700 Appendix T1 Safety Observation Procedure. This procedure addresses training
requirements; planning; performing; follow-up; documentation; and review of
data.
7.0
References
ES&H
Manual Chapter 3700 Appendix T1 Safety Observation Procedure
ES&H
Manual Chapter 3700 Appendix T2 Safety Observation Report Procedure
8.0
Revision
Summary
Reviewed
– 09/29/11 – Reviewed
by Technical Point-of-Contact, no substantive changes required.
Revision 0 –
11/19/08 – This
is new content.
|
|
ISSUING AUTHORITY |
TECHNICAL POINT-OF-CONTACT |
APPROVAL
DATE |
EXPIRATION
DATE |
REV. |
Page 1 of 4 |
|
|
|
ESH&Q Division |
11/19/08 |
09/29/16 |
0 |
|