Safety Procedures

Reasons that workers resist compliance to safety procedures



Reasons that workers resist compliance to safety procedures

Any organization in business today is at risk for accidental loss. While types of accidental losses vary, a large loss potential that many organizations face is employee injury and illness. Employee injuries and illnesses have negative consequences for both the affected employee as well as their employer. Besides employee pain and suffering work place injury and illness can pose significant monetary consequences for both the employee and employer. Employees can experience large losses in earning potential due to work place injury and illness that keep them off of work for extended periods of time. Employers also have the potential for large monetary losses as a result of the direct and indirect costs associated with employee injury and illness.

Because of the negative consequences associated with work place injury and illness organizations have aggressively worked toward reducing those losses. One approach that many organizations have successfully used to reduce work place injury and illness is Behavioral Based Safety (BBS). BBS focuses on what people do, analyzes why they do it, and then applies a research-supported intervention strategy to improve what people do.

Thousands of deaths, injuries and illnesses occur because of occupational accidents each year in the United States. In 2006 alone the United States experienced 5,804 work related fatalities and 4.1 million nonfatal occupational injuries and illness (Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S Department of Labor, 2007). This injury and fatality experience has caused many organizations to rigorously work toward preventing workplace accidents. Many organizations throughout the country have significantly reduced their injury experience through the successful implementation of a BBS program (Geller, 2009). The behavior-based approach to safety was founded on behavioral science and researched by B.F. Skinner in the 1950's. In the late 1970's and 1980's this approach was applied to safety programs within industry (Burmahl, 1998).

Companies, including Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and PPG Industries, are achieving success with the BBS concepts (Atkinson, 2000). Atkinson (2000) also indicated one such company (Southern Fineblanking) had observed a 33% reduction in injuries and the average cost of each injury had decreased from $1,400 to under $500 after just one year of practicing BBS.

Proctor & Gamble deployed BBS globally in the early 1980's and has stated that it has been a critical factor in reducing their incident rate from 7.5 to 0.9 during that time (Fulwiler, 2000).

Sulzer-Azaroff and Austin (2000) performed research on BBS effectiveness in several businesses across various industries. They were able to confirm that 32 out of 33 companies reviewed reported a reduction in injuries as a result of BBS.

It clear to see that when BBS works for an organization workers compensation costs begin to decline and incidents become less frequent and less severe (Hidley, 1998). Besides the injury reduction and monetary benefits of BBS there are other positive components that any company can benefit from. BBS empowers employees to contribute to the safety program, which builds a sense of pride and caring in ...