Document 5L70ve1zXNeXJ0RymVMx5Nv8e

FILE NAME: National Safety Council (NSC) DATE: 1957 Oct DOC#: NSC207 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Transactions of the NSC - General Sessions - 45th National Safety Congress JENT SAFETY TOPICS Volume 1 GENERAL SESSIONS 1957 National Safely Congress This is sheer pun, but these laws still focus on doing something for the man who has met with an accident, rather than on driving full steam into eliminating' causes for accidents. When a ship is sinking, then the whole weight of responsibility rests on manning the life boats and getting the pas sengers and crew off the vessel. When an auto has gone hurtling off a thruway then the weight of moral responsibility is to rush medical care. But neither life boats nor ambulances are the full measure of moral responsibility that rests upon us today when ships still sail the high seas and cars ride the highways. Our moral sense has grown up beyond that level of moral satisfaction. In its modern con cept moral responsibility stresses preventing the worst from happening on the oceans and on our roads rather than being content with picking up the pieces after the worst has happened. Total security is a goal that is beyond our reach, but great progress can be made when men of competence and good will and devo tion join together to help each other in every way possible to promote safety mea sures against accident hazards. The symbol of this step is, I suppose, the National Safety Congress itself. It stands for moral responsibility toward these hazards at its best, for our deepest responsibility toward the victim of accidents is to see to it that all is done to keep him from becoming a victim. And that is a worthy cause for all o f- us, wherever we are--in labor and in management, in education and in govern ment. LABOR'S STAKE IN SAFETY by A. J. HAYES international president, International Association of Machinists; vice president, A FL-CIO , Washington, D. C. I don't intend to stay within the limits of this title because I am certain little new, in formation could he said about "Labor's S take in Safety. It is obvious that no one could have a greater stake in industrial safety than tin men and women who are the direct victims of industrial twidents. To an employer -- matters of industrial safety, occupational disease, accident pre vention and workmen's compensation--are all tied u]i with, economic considerations. They are important insofar as they affect-- ami can he made u> reduce--insurance costs, training costs, and material costs. Hut these are all money c.nis--cash costs--costs that are measured in dollars and cents. To a worker, on the other hand, an in dustrial accident is a matter of something that is even more tangible than money. It is a matter of a man's blood, hones and sinew--of tragedy, suffering and sorrow. And sometimes, in fact, more than SO times a day--on every working day--it is a mat ter of life itself to someone, somewhere, in tton country. That is why I say that labor's ' stake in safety is pretty obvious. Therefore 1 win touch upon aspects of the subject that are not often discussed--aspects that arc some what controversial. Perhaps they are not discussed because they-arc controversial. ETHICS IN SAhETy Since my views and public statements cn the "corruption in u n io n s" issue have beer, as frank and honest as 1 can make them. 1 see no reason to he any less candid in stating my views about matters of indus trial safety. T assure you, however, that 1 am not injecting controversy for its own sake, hut because these arc matters that con cent the men and women who rim the daily risk of being injured, diseased or killed or their jobs. Safety--and accident prevention--have an ethical as well as an economic side. I think none of us--whether we represent labor cr management -- would disagree with certais basic ethical principles in the field of indus trial safety. W e would all agree, for ex- t ^ ample, * should ` and Ik j would I a moral against * infecti< f ment. We ethical 1 day to ' J* In pra' 1 diet W 1 t thus in * action. j* politic;: As a as the for ex. I tion In J years L ! and e.i dustrin. W indust rr $ tectior tl dustrin r Hen might fill wo l on the ment t early 5 one. I do f indica'.i Vii human facto: matter -? were ' i day. ? the gn *i.*f poverr their .. i i Th t that c if result 8 ethic V It can was t: ! the enoug: t vailed than being content with niter tlie worst has > goal that is beyond our gress can be made when ukI good will and devo- help each other in it promote safety meant hazards. The symbol ' suppose, the National elf. It stands for moral rd these hazards at its vst responsibility toward lonts is to see to it that p him from becoming a a worthy' cause for all - are--in labor and in ducation and in govern- :TY '.lists; vice president, ..iv that labor's stake in 'ious. Therefore I will if the subject that are --aspects that are some- Perha)is they are not ey are controversial :s IN SAFETY Jl public statements on rifltons'' is>uc have been i st as I can make them, be any less candid in about matters of indtts-urc you, however, that I controversy for its own hese are matters that conwomen who run the daily :al, diseased or killed on lent prevention--have an it economic side. I think her we represent labor or ;:'d disagree with certain ;des in the field of indusuould all agree, for ex- * ample, that the objective of industrial safety should - be the preservation of human life and the protection of human health. . W e i would further agree that an employer has a moral responsibility to protect his workers \ against disease, accidents, mental stress and infections from the conditions of emplov- ' * ment. We all profess to agree that human life J is not cheap; that man is not something to . be sacrificed to a machine. And yet, these ^ ethical principles are not always applied in day to day life nor are they self-enforcing. ' In practical application they come into con, ^ flict with individual economic interests, and thus must he enforced either through group action, or by society as a whole through' political action. i As a rule, society does not move as fast as the need would indicate. W e all know, ^ for example, that the first industrial revolu- t tioti had run its course for more than 100 { years before society got around to adopting t and enforcing rules and regulations of in dustrial safety. For more than 100 years 1 industrial workers wore given no legal pro- tection against the risks and hazards of in- f dustrial employment. i Here and there, a lone individual employer might attempt to provide decent and health s' ftil working conditions tor his workers. But on the whole, the story of factory emplov- *f ment in the 19th century--and through the early 20th century--was a pretty ghastly v one. I don't need to go into the details that arc ; indicative of the cold indifference with which human life was held in American mines and 1 factories. Suffice to say, it did not seem to , matter how nianv men,women and children ^ were killed or crippled in the course of a day. There were always more waiting at the gates the next morning--driven by raw poverty to plead for a chance to jeopardize i their lives and limbs. SOCIETY BROUGHT CHANGES The point I am getting at. of course, is that change--when it came--was not the result of any regeneration of moral and ethical conviction on the part of etfifiloyers. It came rather because society ns a whole was thoroughly revolted. It came because the American people were finally shocked enough to correct a condition that had pre vailed--and grown worse--for 100 years. Labor Safety So we finally got factory laws--Mid work men's compensation--and an organized effort to make mines, factories and mills safer places to work. But of all the legislation aimed at this objective, workmen's compen sation was the key. For until employers were made directly and financially respon sible for the results of workers' accidents, they had no economic reason to prevent accidents. The whole pattern and fabric of our industrial safety program throughout the nation rests entirely on how good- and how effective our workmen's compensation and our occupational disease laws are. ECONOMIC REASONS -Oh;--of course, you can point to many other good economic rationalizations for in dustrial safety. You can say industrial ac cidents add all kinds of direct and indirect costs to' production. You can point to the cost of hiring and training a new employee, o f equipment damaged in a work accident, of the time lost by other employees when an accident occurs. But I will throw them all right back to you and say that these considerations were present long before we had industrial acci dent programs--and that it wasn't until ac cident prevention was reinforced with work men's compensation and occupational disease legislation that employers really became safety conscious. So it seems that the thing that counts here is how good our workmen's compensa tion and occupational disease legislation really are. And that's a good question! I've spent my whole adult life in the labor movement. As a matter of fact, I was projected into it bv the very thing we arc talking about here today--an industrial accident. I went to work at 17 years of age because my father was totally disabled by a work in jury--an injury that eventually killed him. In the course of many years of studying and dealing with the problems of my union --which are, of course, the problems of the members of my union, I realized that our present system of workmen's compensation and occupational disease legislation is com pletely and wholly inadequate to meet the needs of our complex industrial society. I am not alone in that conclusion. There are, in fact, many men in the labor move ment today who feel even more strongly 1hail I do--men who arc firmly convinced dial workmen's compensation has been a gigantic swindle on the American worker. This nation lias tried to deal with a national problem by having' 48 seperatc, conllid in g -- ami in a sense -- competing state statutes. And there is no doubt but that workmen's compensation is one kind of labor legislation that states use to compete with one another to attract industry. Tit fact, whenever we go into the state legislatures to get improvement or expan sion of existing laws, we invariably meet employer counter-arguments to the effect that any further improvement in coverage or benefit structure will khove industry into the waiting and sympathetic arms of slates which are more concerned with payrolls-- than with the people on those payrolls. SAFETY INTEREST LACKING Certainly the health and safety of the nation's work force should not be a pawn in any state's bid for new industry. Rut that is just what it is under a system that allows Mississippi or Arkansas or Georgia to compete for industry by offering low workmen's compensation benefits and a mini mum of safety regulation at the plant level. Why should an employer pay $40 a week for a temporary total disability in Illinois-- when he can go to Arkansas and pay $25 a week for the same injury? The situation in workmen's compensation legislation is so bad, in fact, that the Secre tary of Labor, Mr. Mitchell, although speak ing for an administration that normally fol lows a hands-ni'f policy in state legislation, has been constrained to speak out and to plead with the states to bring their laws into line with modern conditions. Rut because employers can play off one state against another in this matter, the re sults have been somewhat negligible. There is no indication that the remedy will ever ealclt up with the need, until there is broader recognition that industrial accidents are a national problem--one that is truly solvable only on the national level. The lack of tPMrong and equitable work men's compensation system leads to a cor responding lack of interest in enforcement of safety codes and regulations. In many states the Bureau of Factory Inspection-- by whatever name it goes under--is little more than a sop to the conscience of the stale legislature. In fact, the inspection serv ice in such states is not only understaffed but the staff is underpaid, untrained and technically unqualified to do a competent job in a field that needs a high degree of competency. Rut as bad as the situation in workmen's compensation and factory inspection may be, the situation in occupational disease cov erage verges on the criminal. And this is a matter of more than jnst poor legislation. It is incredible to think that in the second half of the 20tb century 20 states still either have no coverage or limited coverage of occupational disease. But the greater problem is that there is too little understanding of the nature and complexity of occupational disease. The range and source of occupational disease in modern industry is practically limitless. Xotic of the ways by which man makes a living is completely free of some hazard to physical or mental health. The risk of oc cupational disease grows greater every day as industrial processes become more and more dependent upon and saturated with toxic dusts, fumes, vapors, gases, acids and alkalies. Every day thousands of workers are ex posed to everything from arsenic to mercury poisoning, from benzine compounds to mag nesium poisoning, from sulphuric acid to chromium poisoning. Thousands have no physical or legal protection whatsoever against the chemicals and poisons that are slowly killing them. UNAWARE o f r isks In fact, many are not even aware of the risk. They will find out when it is too late. In many states they will also find out that they have no right to compensation under the occupational disease law. I wonder how you tell a man who has contracted carbon tetrachloride poisoning, for example, that he isn't entitled to benefits under the occupa tional disease law because the legislature of his slate hasn't seen fit to recognize that carbon tetrachloride poisoning is an occupa tional disease? 1 recently read a statement to the effect that "the scope of occupational disease is vast almost beyond calculation" and "it comes, in fact, unpleasantly close to being the major public health problem of our time." In fad , the inspect ion scrvis Hot only understaffed, underpaid, untrained arid .llified to Jo a competent iat needs a high degree of situation in workmen's a! factory inspection may ia occupational disease covihe criminal. And this is a :han just poor legislation. think that in the second century 20 states still either ' or limited coverage of :\<e. or problem is that there is landing of the nature and `Occupational disease. The ' of occupational disease in is practically limitless, ic- by which man makes a :ely free of some hazard to cal health. The risk of oc grows greater every day rocesses become more and upon and saturated with vapors, gases, acids and u.-ands of workers are e.x.ag from arsenic to mercury henzipe compounds to mag- from sulphuric acid to iug. Thousands have no. al protection whatsoever '.cals and poisons that are m X/ARE OF RISKS not even aware of the out when it is too late. -w will also find out tltat f5* tn uridcr iisease law. I wonder how " ' o has contracted carhon tiing. for example, that benefits under the occupa-, because the legislature of cen fit to recognize that de poisoning is an occupa- c. statement to the effect d occupational disease is ltd calculation" and "it pleasantly close to being health problem of our Labor Safely If that is so--and I for one ani inclined to broken down under the stress of life in a believe it--it is tragic commentary on our complicated, impersonal and highly indus lime--on the ethics of a business community trialized society. Hut we don't know how that has done so little about it. It is even much more stress people can take, or what more tragic in view of the fact that we are effect automation will have on a worker's now entering a new phase in our industrial nervous system. At what point does the development--a phase of such sweeping human mind crack up from sheer loneliness, change that some commentators have re- lack of contact with fellow workers, from terred to it as a new industrial revolution. uninterrupted repetition and brainwashing Think of that--we are entering a new in boredom ? dustrial revolution without ever having fullysolved the problems that attended the old one. 1 am not just tossing questions out at random here. All of the things I am talking about--from workmen's compensation and I wonder if it will again take us 100 years occupational disease to radiation and mental to make even a decent start on the health distress--have a valid relation to industrial and safety problems that will arise out- of__ health _and safety--and are proper subjects automation and atomic energy. These prob- of labor interest. lems are not a part of a distant tomorrow hut are already a part of the world today. LOOK FOR DANGERS Now more than 1,500 industrial plants arc using atomic materials in one form or another--in 1,500 establishments American workers are already exposed to the hazards of atomic radiation. Can we say the state laws in existence today--indeed can we say that any system of state inspection and compensation -- are adequate to care for tiie workers who will get leukemia or bone cancer because of exposure to atomic radiation? For safetv is a broad term. It is defined as: (1) the state or condition of being safe: (2) freedom from danger or risk; and (3) freedom from injury. Safety means freedom from any kind of danger, risk or injury. When we apply that definition to industrial conditions we must think in terms of bidden dangers as well. We must change our attitude toward oc cupational diseases--go out looking for them instead of trying to pretend they don't exist, DON'T KNOW PROTECTIONS Personally, T feel somewhat discouraged about the prospects. How can the states protect and care for victims of industrial * radiation when they haven't yet learned to protect and care for victims of occupational diseases that have been prevalent for genera- or implying if they do exist, that they have no relation to industrial causes. I am not exaggerating when I say that industry has taken a "hcad-in-the-sand" at titude up to now. it lias tried to cover up occupational diseases rather than to isolate, prevent anil care for them. tiotis ? We need only look at silicosis and There has been little research--either pneumoconiosis to sec the failure. And governmental or private--in the field. The failure to provide adequate treatment and Public Healtli Service spends less than one rnrnpeocntinn for these dreadful dust diseases cent for each worker each year on the pre is paralleled by the failure of industry to vention of occupational diseases. The Na finance programs of research that would tional Institute of Health, which has made - lead to their prevention at the source of hundreds of research grants during the exposure. past three or four years, lias made less than Related io the problems of occupational disease and radiation is another matter that half a dozen in the field of occupational health. There is an iron curtain of secrecy has received almost no attention in industry, around this whole subject. or in government. That is the matter of mental disease. W e already know enough about automation to know that it will throw workers into a lonely and eerie world in habited by monster mechanical devices. Not only does industry fail to support and subsidize research in occupational dis eases, itself, but men who have tried to do independent research find that it is virtually impossible to get facts, information, or co We also know that our mental hospitals operation from the people in industry who arc already crowded with people who have are in a position to help. Worse still, if a 19 & w f r m m f i t t i -* l-V. -vAU-/VWV O I^- 1957 National Safely Congress research project does lend to show a cor relation lictwccn employment and disease, the authors find it is almost impossible to get their work published or distributed. The result is a deplorable lack of informa tion about occupational disease. W e are years behind other countries in this respect. One expert in this field said that research in pneumoconiosis in this country is 25 years behind that of Great Britain. SECRETS PREVAIL IN INDUSTRY Industry actively opposes objective re search and free interchange of information on occupational diseases because it is more afraid of (he possibility of paying compensa tion benefits than it is that workers will (lie from lack of proper information and ade quate precaution. Here are specific examples that will illusstrate this point. There is some medical evidence that the chemicals used in the dye industry and in the manufacture of synthetic rubber cause or contribute to cancer of the bladder. In fact, one o f these--amine--is so dangerous that it has been outlawed for all industrial uses in Britain since 1951. But efforts to prove, publicize and restrict the dangers of this deadly acid have hit stubborn resistance in this' country. The large chemical companies have refused to find out if amine does contribute to cancer of the bladder and have strongly' resisted in dependent research into this problem. Much the same situation holds true in five asbestos industry'. There appears to be de cided after-effects on workers who produce asbestos in that there is a marked correla tion between asbestos employment and lung cancer. Here again, the industry has been traditionally reluctant to cooperate in a full scale scientific study of this curious correla tion. This reluctance to do researcli in health hazards recurs in industry after in dustry. DOCTORS OFTEN BIASED But even worse when workers do succumb to cancer of the bladder or the lung, or to some other, equally horrible diseases, we are treated to the spectacle of company doctors who testify that the disease couldn't possibly have been caused by their employment. Doc tors arc supposed to be above reproach in our society. But as a labor official I have known of too many cases in which company doctors have testified against workers a; for management in occupational disc' cases even though they knew their testime; was biased. It should not surprise us that doctors c. be unobjective in these cases where the testimony is bought and paid for. We ha\ only to look at the wide-spread differea: of opinion among doctors as to the effect c cigarette smoking to see that their testimon can sometimes be something less than trut! ful. Most doctors who are not in the pa of cigarette companies are convinced by a! the scientific evidence on record that cigar ettes undoubtedly contribute to lung canceBut the doctors on the payrolls of the to bacco companies either deny that cigarette contribute to lung cancer, or at best mair. tain that there is not yet enough proof. As we contemplate these conflicting viewamong professional men--and as we though' fully study the reluctance of industry to h* honest about this matter of occupation;, disease--we cannot help but wonder whether the lust for profits has made many men for get the real purpose of life. What is threal purpose o f life? Is it production an.. profit--or the well-being of the individual? If there is conflict between the two, do v.v sacrifice production and profit or the well being of the individual? The ethical answer is obvious. But th practical methods of reaching the logical ethical conclusion are more difficult. FEDERAL ACTS NEEDED W e could make a start by enacting co.a prehensive federal workmen's compensate and occupational disease legislation to tabthe place of the chaos that results iron having 4S different state systems. But have no hopes for such a constructive a; proach in the foreseeable future. I arr afraid the insurance lobby, and the employe groups that profit from weak administration are too strong for us at this time. So we'll just have to make that one of our Ion,range objectives. Rut there are some things we can do right now. W e can try to have program set up in the National Institute of Hcalt' and in the Public Health Service which would recognize the importance of occupa tional disease--and which would put the re search effort in this nation on a par with that of other civilized industrial nations. iified against workers and .1 in occupational disease ;li the)' knew their testimony surprise us that-doctors can "vthese cases where their and paid for. W e have the wide-spread difference g doctors as to the effect of 'g to see that their testimony - something less titan truthrs who a .e not in the pay '.ipanies are convinced by a!! 'cnee on record that cigarcontribute to lung cancer. ; on the payrolls of the to: either deny that cigarette? <:g cancer, or at best main not yet enough proof, plate these conflicting views mil men--and as we thoughtreluctance of industry to be us matter of occupational not help but wonder whether has made many men for,`ose of life. What is the life? Is it production and H-being of the individual ? -; between the two, do we ' 'it and profit or the well: dual? iwvcr is obvious. But the 0 of reaching the logical 1 are more difficult. A l ACTS NEEDED a start by enacting comi workmen's compensation (fecase legislation to take j a o s that results from J state systems. But I <>r such a constructive aji reseeable future. I am e lobby, and the employer 1 from weak administration r us at this time. So we'll ke that one of our long some things we can do an try to have programs tional Institute o f Health h- Health Service which lie importance of occupa1 which would put the re ds nation on a par with azed industrial nations. Labor Safety i it we cannot get decent factory inspectrn from the state goverment, then we in * labor movement must resort to self-help. ? -hay unions are thinking in terms of col, active bargaining clauses which would rc"i rare the employer to adopt the safety standards set by the American Standards ? Association as the minimum acceptable in *e shop. C' LABOR FIGHTS FOR SELF ", we are also prepared to bargain for more stpplementa! injury benefits when the com- ;nsatiou provided by state laws is not adcctate to sustain a worker and his family. 5 Although our efforts will directly benefit, ' ciy the 17 million organized workers, per1 "ar-s they will release new pressures that ? rid eventually result in improved Iegislav tt-ti benefiting all workers. L The American labor movement has but tie purpose--one reason for existence in American life--to serve and protect Ameri- i tan workers. There are times when we make ourselves pretty unpopular because we keep looking for the things that are wrong .with American industry and American society. I may have offended industry men with this indictment of the ethics and morals of our business community. But I would be derelict in my duty and false to my trust as an elected officer of one of America's greatest unions if 1 did not say frankly and candidly that we in the labor movement are not satisfied with present legislation relating to industrial health and safety, workmen's compensation and occupational diseases. In a sense this is a great challenge to -the--National Safety Council--a challenge that can be met only if all facts arc squarely faced. If we in the labor movement could count on your assistance in the fight for better legislation and more research on both the state and federal levels we might, to gether, make this a far happier, healthier and safer nation in which to live and work. GOOD COMMUNICATIONS HELP SAFETY by GEORGE SCRIVEN public relations director, United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers of America, AFL-CIO , Akron, Ohio Our organization has been safety minded :,r many years. The record on that score ' geaks for itself in a loud and clear manner. - The results of our efforts, in cooperation T nidi enlightened managements, tell the story it iic.v -,vc have seen the number ot accttsits reduced in the plants in which our * m. embers wo. rk, I shall . not. go . into specific, tzrures on ire picncy rates ana suen. I don't suppose any of you would dispute * the fiat statement that good communications _ '-.tip safety. But I'd like to try and give * Tin some of the techniques, the how and the * !:y of that statement. First, let's do a little word analyzing. I . certainly don't want to sound like the pon. titical professor lecturing his class on semat^ ics. But when we say good in our topic, "Good Communications Help Safety," we immediately infer that there is another kind besides good. And there certainly is. I think there is a lot of had and fuzzy com munications going cm in ail fields. Within the subject matter at hand, I would say the word good means that type which gets some concrete reaction and re sults. In the United Rubber Workers, we think our communications have been good because we have the results to siiow for it. MUST HAVE RECEIVER Now for the word communications in the phrase. You can't have communications-- the good type that is--unless someone is sending the message and someone is re ceiving it. I was in the Air Force in World War II, and I served as a radio operator in the Pacific aboard a B-29 Superfortress. When I sent a message and no one received it, I didn't have communications. I was 21 INCENTIVE AWARDS FOR GOOD SAFETY | RECORDS IN THE MINING INDUSTRY tjf. by JOHN McKENNA SMITH jj safety engineer, Asbestos Corporation Limited, Thetford Mines, Quebec, Canada jg This paper deals wilh the application of safety incentives at Asbestos Corporation Limited in Thetford Mines, Quebec. Awards for safety achicvments have been used by this company for the past six years. This period compared to an equivalent period before the award program-shows. the_ acci dent experience has improved appreciably. To attribute (he. improved experience solely to safety incentives would be incor rect because supervisory training and re vised and improved methods have Helped our accident prevention program. Never theless, no single feature has been more instrumental in making our workers safety conscious than safety incentives. Asbestos Corporation Limited is engaged in tbc mining and milling o f asbestos ores in the Thetford Mines--Black Lake district of Quebec. Some 2,000 men are employed, operating three plants with a large expan sion program in progress at one of them. Lack plant consists of a mine, a mill, main tenance shops and facilities for the storage and shipping of bagged asbestos. INCENTIVE PLAN Six years ago the safety department of Asbestos Corporation Limited examined sev eral plans to improve the safety record of the company. If accident prevention could be constantly before the worker, the accident f recpicncy and severity would decrease. 1 his would lower the compensation rate, since this company operates on a merit rating basis within the rate structure set by the Quebec Workmen's Compensation Commis sion _for the Quebec Asbestos Mining A s sociation. A safety incentive plan was proposed to management based on the following prin ciples : 1. The goals for safety awards should be realistic and possible to attain by any group which would pay particular attention to accident prevention. 2. The employees should know their standing during the time the plan is c i operation. <4 3. The awards or incentives should be distributed to as many employees * possible. I 4. One group of employees should rex he penalized for the poor performance * of another group. 5. Tangible prizes arc better than moot- ,k $ tavy awards. (). The safety incentive plan must be ca- devstood by all employees. t Management accepted a safety incentive plan based on these principles, and it began on November 1st, 1951. It is still in opention. 1 will elaborate on each principle ani show how these principles were applied i? our company. The success of the plan is due to strict adherence to the basic prirciplcs. GOALS EASY TO ATTAIN Before proposing any safety incent:- than, it is advisable to review the past experience of the company and of other organizations in the same industry. Tr:s review or survey will guide in setting objec \ tives for safety awards. Ti would indeed be unrealistic to t e i olobsjtecttiimvees aocncidaentyseaprelyr mfriellqiounencmyanofbeSerirs t of exposure when your best previous fre quency has been 20 and that of the induscr; 1 12.. In other words examine your record and set your objectives so they may w reached by extra effort ill the field of acci dent prevention. Do not expect mirads and do not set the objectives so high i*< employees will feel they cannot attain these objectives. At Asbestos Corporation Limited, ccr survey of past experience and local erec tions indicated that consecutive man-shira worked without a lost time accident weex 1 Mining Industry R GOOD SAFETY !ING INDUSTRY SMITH hetford Mines, Quebec, Canada The employees should know their .standing during the time the pian is in operation. The awards or incentives should be distributed to as many employees as possible. One group of employees should nut he penalized for the poor performance <if another group. Tangible prizes are better than mone tary awards. The safety incentive plan must lie un derstood by ail employees, nnngemcnt accepted a safety incentive based on these principles, and it began . November 1st, 1951. It is still in opera- vill elaborate on each principle and . how these principles were applied by company. The success of the plan is strict adherence to. the basic prin- GOALS EASY TO ATTAIN ire proposing any safety incentive it is advisable to review the past Tncc of the company and of other iizations in the same industry. This ,v or survey will guide in setting objec"'V safety awards. Jn hl indeed be unrealistic to base uves on a yearly frequency of five .me accidents per million man hours :|i05iirc when your best previous tre v has been 20 and that o f the industry q other words examine your records -ei your objectives so they may be <(1 by extra effort in the field of acciprevention. Do not expect miracles lo not set the objectives so high the vees will feci they cannot attain these tives. Asbestos Corporation Limited, our y of past experience and local cotvii- indicated that consecutive man-shifts ed without a lost time accident would be the best basis on which to make awards. This basis bad several advantages, among which were". a. Within our reporting or labor ac counting set-up, this figure could be easily reported by the timekeeping departments daily. h. If a lost time accident occurs on any day during the month, it is not neces sary to wait until a new period before another no-accident record can start. The objectives were set so that once the first was reached, the group continued to amass consecutive shifts since the last lost time accident. When the second or third objectives are reached, awards of greater value are distributed. To be more specific, groups or plant divisions are awarded safety incentives after !, 10,000, 25,000 and 50,000 shifts without a lost time accident. The value of the award at 25,000 shifts is approximately two and one-half times the value at 10,000 although * only 15,000 consecutive shifts have been e added to the total. EMPLOYEES KNOW WHERE THEY STAND The employees should know their relation to the objective when the plan is in opera tion. This principle is extremely important in any work where an objective is being at tained. Everyone is familiar with the ther mometer chart used in charitable campaigns and war bond drives. For the safety incen i tive plan at Asbestos Corporation Limited, I bulletin boards at the plant entrances or in the punch clock rooms, showed the.number of consecutive man-shifts worked since the 3 hit lost time accident tor each group operat J ing as a unit. These boards are kept up-to- date daily by the timekeeping department at the plant. * MANY AWARD WINNERS The awards or incentives should be dis ,1 tributed to as many employees as possible. Several plans operate with the supervisory 8 employees rewarded for safety records es if tablished by their workers. Other plans ailow so many awards per department or f per 100 employees. W e distribute awards to each employee of the department or plant v division eligible under the plan. The cost H and selection o f awards will be explained later in this paper. By every employee receiving an award we arc eliminating two employee opposi tions to an incentive plan: a. They feel they work to establish the safety record and then the supervisor receives the reward. b. Many feel if their names were placed in a box and one name drawn for a safety award, their name would cer tainly not be drawn. In other words, they are just not lucky in lotteries. All production and maintenance employees, the plant supervisory and clerical staff, and watchmen are eligible for safety awards. Head office staff, laboratory employees and a group at our non-operatir.g properties are not included in the plan. One group of employees should not be penalized for the poor performance of another group. When setting up a safety incentive plan based on group incentives, have groups or units of employees who do the same work. The groups should not be too large. Too many employees might be penalized for the poor safety performance of a small propor tion of the group. Since this is a group effort, it requires good teamwork and it is amazing to see how older employees advise new men on unsafe manner. The breakdown of each plant for the safety incentive plan followed the main working divisions: i.e., mine, mill, shops or maintenance, and general or yard labor. Each group is a unit which operates inde pendently in the plan. If a lost time acci dent occurs in the mill, it does not affect the records of other groups. The groups are not equal in size but by setting the objectives on the basis of con secutive man-shifts worked since the last lost time accident, the exposure to injury is equal tor all groups. The objectives are the same for all groups. There were several objections to this; many employees maintained their work was more hazardous and should therefore receive a handicap. Our experience however, has shown that the equal objectives for all groups were justified. This is a point to study carefully before an incentive plan is put into operation. 21 t. i 1957 National Safety Congress it is preferable to distribute useful items Pyrex ware, table lighters, mixing bowls: us safety awards Ilian to give the equivalent two tools, i.e., hand axe, pliers, tapes. in cash. Many companies distribute individ ual pins, or departmental trophies. This certainly advertises the accident prevention program but a pocket knife, wallet or some small tool is a constant reminder of acci dent prevention. The distribution of useful items has been quite popular among our employees. The safety incentive plan must be under stood by all employees. This basic principle applies to any incentive plan initiated and To illustrate the range of awards distrib uted over the past five and a half years, the following list for each series of awards has been compiled: 1`irst Award (10,000 shifts) Mixing howls, flashlights, table lighters, playing cards, ash trays, pipes, thermos botties, wescot wrenches, combination squares, hammers, tinners' snips, hand axes, wrench sets, ball point pens and razors. operated by a business organization. When Second Award (25,000 shifts) the safety inceiuivc_plan began, notices were Steak knives, Silex coffee makers, bill posted on all company bulletin boards ex folds, vises, can openers, casting rods, pipe plaining its operation. Meetings with super wrenches, pocket watches, a cash allowance visors illustrated in more detail just how on a pair of safety shoes and First Aid lots. the plan would work. When new employees are hired, the plan is explained in the preemployment interview. To recapitulate briefly the safety incentive plan of Asbestos Corporation Limited: Each operating plant is subdivided into four sec tions which operate independently in estab lishing safety records of consecutive man shifts worked without a lost time accident. When one of the following objectives is Third Award (50,000 shifts) This is reached on an average of once a year by one of the sections within the com pany. The awards consist o f: safety foot wear, flash camera, carving set, socket wrench set, aluminum chairs and in sorre cases, combinations of two 25,000 shift awards. Fourth Award (75,000 shifts) reached, 10,000, 23,000, or 50,000 and so on This mark lias been reached once by one in 25.000-shixt increments, each employee section. At the request of the majority of is entitled to a safety award if he has worked at least 75 per cent of the time in the employees in this section and with the approval of management, instead of increas that section during the period the record or objective was being established. If a ing the value of the individual awards is we do for the first three objectives, each lost time, accident occurs in a section, the employee received an award in the 25,000 cumulated man-shifts drop to zero and a fresh start is made. SELECTING AWARDS FOR SAFETY shift range and a drawing was made for two television sets, installed in the em ployees' homes complete with outdoor aatcmia. The selection of suitable awards is im Needless tv say this created considerable portant. When employees are eligible for interest in accident prevention througher, awards, they are entitled to the choice of the company. The president, the genera! one of five or six items. manager and other top company official! The system used by Asbestos Corporation were present for the drawing. The even! Limited entails more work and possibly, was covered by the local press and soot has some, disadvantages but it is more local correspondents for the Metropolitan acceptable to our employees. If we decided dailies. When another group reaches the , everyone was to receive a flashlight or a 75,000 shift mark a drawing for an expen- ; pen knife there would be many complaints sive award will be made only if it is the about how many our men already had; expressed wish of the majority of employees therefore, it is wise to allow a choice of of the section. awards. Anyone in accident prevention knows it i The decision of the five or six items is is difficult to attribute improvement in safety j made along the following principle: two experience to any one item. Asbestos Cor- f personal items, i.e., pocket knife, flash poration Limited has been constantly chang- j light, lighter; two items for the home, i.e., ing and improving working methods, arc j . tabic lighters, mixing bonis; hand axe, pliers, tapes, ite the range of awards distribhc past five and a half years. fist for each series of awards J le d : ^ 10,000 shifts) owls, flashlights, table lighters. Is, ash trays, pipes, thermos bot- wrenchcs, combination squares. ;ners' snips, liand axes, wrench mt pens and razors. rd (25,000 shifts) i res, Silex coffee makers, bill. can openers, casting rods, pipe 'Wet watches, a cash allowance safety shoes and First Aid kits. 'd (50,000 shifts) ached on an average of once a of the sections within the corn- wards consist o f ; safety footcamera, carving set, socket . aluminum chairs and in some nations of two 25,000 shit; 'd (75,000 shifts) : iias been reached once by one the request of the majority of 5 in this section and with the anageinent, instead of increas1/ of the individual awards the first three objectives, each rived an award in lire 25,000 ,nd a drawing was made for n sets, installed in the emvs complete with outdoor an- m:iy this created considerable audent prevention throughout The president, the genera'. 1 other top company officials, for the drawing. The event by the local press and some 'indents for tire Metropolitan r; another group reaches the mark a drawing for an expenvill be made only if it is the -h of the majority of employees !1. ; accident prevention knows it attribute improvement in safety any one item. Asbestos Corited has been constantly changwoving working methods, and k Mining Industry -as had an active supervisory training pro tean during tile past five years. I shall * r-::cate the improvement in the safety cx* science since the inception of the safety rrentive plan and point out some features / r.ich might be directly attributable to acciV. feat prevention awards. , Table I is a breakdown o f our accident t experience from 1947 through 1956. This 1 reried was chosen because it illustrates a period of five years, 1947 through 1951, * prior to the introduction of the safety in i' :tr.`ive plan and a five year period, 1952-56, that the plan has been in operation. Tables II and III are a compilation and iverage or these two five-year periods.------ These records indicaie an improvement since the inception of the safety incentive plan. When the compensation cost plus the incentive cost for the 1952-56 period is comI pared to the compensation cost alone for the 1947-51 period, we find a yearly average ' saving of over $30,000, and this- in a period ' xhen the compensation benefits as well as ; e wages were increasing. ' A downward trend lias started in the nc, dent frequency, severity and costs when ; the incentive plan was introduced. However, it is quite definite that the introduction of <- safety awards accelerated the improvement ia accident prevention. One prominent feature after the initiation of safety incentives was the sharp reduction in lost time accidents involving one to three days lost time. When the employees re alized that this was a "team" or group con test, everyone co-operated in not losing time for minor injuries, a practice prevalent in previous years. The company encouraged employees to re turn to work by allowing them to relocate to a less arduous task for a short period of time if the work would have to be done during the course of. operations. The application of safety' incentives at Asbestos Corporation Limited in Thetford - Mines has achieved the results desired since the plan was formulate and introduced, i.e., an improvement in our safety record and a decrease in compensation costs. Safety incentives when properly applied will produce the following results : a. The workers will become more safety conscious. b. The compensation costs will decrease. c. Accident frequency and severity will improve. d. Workers will accept the safety pro gram more readily when they will realize that management is willing to compensate them for safety achievements.-A- 4 ; Trar Ml MS : 1549 i } \ "-S3 ;.-M i K5 i TAREE I ANALYSIS O F ACCIDENT EX PE R IE N C E . COM PENSATION AND S A F E T Y IN C E N T IV E COSTS, 1917-1956 Lost T im o Acc. No Lost T im e A ccid en ts Days Lost H ours ol E x p o su re F re quency Se verity Compen sation Cost ooo 19S 5,824 4,461.293 52.0 1305 $121.017 ins 266 10,127 4.629,157 34.1 2190 32.616 102 155 l.r).231 3,141.106 32.5 4850 60.061 122 209 15.036 4.4S2.137 29.5 3350 102.6SS 01 216 1,602 4.361.799 20. S 367 22.914 54 100 8.492 4,143.237 13.1 2055 22.17S 63 203 7.742 4.062.S35 15.5 1905 3S.319 29 232 7,781 4,177.222 6.9 1860 '25.886 52 267 1.542 4.387,010 11.9 353 31.262 3S 252 1.168 4,299,542 S.S 272 29,173 Incen tive Cost S 9,355 6.613 9.795 7.575 7,394 ~ \ j Period ,947-51 > * ;:-52-5G TAREE II COMTAKISOX OK A CCID ENT E X P E R IE N C E , COM PENSATION AND S A F E T Y IN C E N T IV E COSTS, 1017-1951, 1953-1956 Lost T im o Arc, No Lost T im e A ccidents Days Eost Hours of E x p o su re F re quency Se verity Compen sation Cost 735 1.04 47,820 21.075.472 33.9 2270 $339.296 236 1.153 26,725 21.069,846 11.2 1268 146,818 Incen tivo Cost $10,732 TA1LE III COMPARISON O F AVERAGE YEARLY ACCIDENT E X PE R IE N C E . COM PENSATION AND S A F E T Y IN C E N T IV E COSTS. 1047-1931, 1932-1950 ; .. Period Lost Tim e Acc. No Lost Tim e A ccid en ts Rays Lost H ours of Exposure F re quency Se verity Compen sation Cost Incen tivo Cost : 1547-51 143 *. 1552-56 47 209 9.564 4.215.094 33.9 2270 $ 67.859 231 5,345 4,213,969 11.2 126S 29,364 $ 8,147 23 nnmary report given to the division utendent. Handling in this manner, the ' items is kept to a minimum and inthose requiring further study and in tances require appropriations which approved before corrections can DIVIDED INTO GROUPS . functioning of the' committee is simOrdinarily there are 12 members who the rounds and this number is di* into three groups of four members referred to as Groups A, B, and G embers present themselves at the first . n. Immediately with the start of this mg, or the subsequent meetings, Group . ives forward to the next location to >ble employees and introduce any prenry feature or arrangement in anticipai Group B. talk or message is handled by Group are the discussion periods. Instances more time is required than the sched- minutes. Group C stays on to clear fety items that become involved during scussion period. The success of the . gs depends greatly o n -a functional veil-balanced schedule, and the divid- o f the Committee into the three has been very effective. primary objective of the work of thus tee is to encourage employees to participate in the safety program >rct the causes of accidents, and he'; unsafe practices and conditions re- -s of department which becomes inIn this safety promotional work, ^ancc of equipment and stores operap so involved with the safety c: rf^artment that it is felt greater ber.e obtained through a committee repre* . all operations. Possibly this pro- would be of value at other railroad OFFICERS OF THE RAILROAD' SECTION NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL 1957-58 General Chairman--J. LLOYD, Jersey Central Lines, Jersey City, N . J. I ice Chairman--L. C. H A H N E Y , Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway co., Joliet, 111. Secretary and News Letter Editor--F. C. LEW IS, The Pullman co., Chicago, III. Associate News Letter Editors: Southeast--H. C. D A U L T O N , The Louisville & Nashville Railroad co., Louisville, Ky. ll-'est--P. H. JE N N E R , The Western Pacific R.R.co., San Francisco, Calif. Central--J. E. SL A V E N , Chicago^Burlington & Quincy R. R. co., Chicago, 111. East--J. L, BABCOCK, Bangor & Aroostook R. R. co., Bangor, Maine Southwest--G. R. K N IG H T, St. Louis Southwestern Railway Lines, Tyler, Texas Canada--J. G. BELDHAM , Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Ry. co., Hamilton, Ontario Association Liaison Committee--W. C. L A R A W A Y (Chairman), The Delaware & Hudson R. R. corp,, Albany, N. Y .; A. V . R O H W E D ER (V ice Chairman), The Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Ry. co., Duluth, Minn.; G. W . ELSTE, The Baltimore & Ohio R. R. co., Baltimore, Md. ; G. C. STRO M SOE, Atlantic Coast R. R. co., Wilmington, N. C. ; J. R. T H E X T O N , The Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad co., Hoboken, , N. J. ; D. E. M UM FORD, New York Central System, New York, N . Y. Contest and Statistical Committee--D. P. R U SSE L L (Chairman), The Canadian Pacific Ry., Montreal, Quebec; J. P. KOLOC (V ice Chairman), Illinois Central Railroad, Chicago, II!.; D. W. N A F F , The Norfolk and Western Ry. co., Roanoke, Va.; F. REYNOLDS, Boston & Maine Railroad co., Boston, Mass. ; W . C. LARA W AY, The Delaware and Hudson R. R. corp., Albany, N. Y. ; J. L. BABCOCK, The Bangor and Aroostock R.R. co., Bangor, Me.; O. W . SM ITH , Grand Trunk Western R. R. co., Detroit, Mich.; C. A. BIRGE, Missouri-Kansas-Texas Lines, Dallas, Tex. Film and Sound Committee--R. S. JA M ES (Chairman), Denver & Rio Grande Western R. R. co., Denver, Colo.; E. H. BLEW ER (V ice Chairman), New York Central System, Xew York, N . Y .; H. CONNOR, The Baltimore & Ohio R. R. co., Pittsburgh. Pa.; 3. A. GRUBBS, The Norfolk & Western Ry. co., Roanoke, Va. ; C. M. SC HAEFER, The Chesapeake and Ohio Ry. co., Richmond, Va. ; G. R. KNIG HT, St. Louis South western Ry. Lines, Tyler, T exas; M. A. N U G E N T , The Southern Pacific co., San Francisco, Calif. ; J. W. T H O M PSO N , Seaboard Air Line R. R., Norfolk, Va. Highway Railroad Crossing Committee--R. S. JAM ES (Chairman), The Denver & Rio Grande Western R. R. co., Denver, Colo.; G. M. D E M P SE Y (V ice Chairman), Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific R. R. co., Chicago, 111. ; W. H. R O BERTS, The Chicago & Northwestern Ry. co., Chicago, II!.; G. W. ELSTE, The Baltimore & Ohio R. R. co., Baltimore, Md. ; C. M. SC H A EFE R , The Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. co., Richmond, Va.; . W. IIO BBS, Missouri Pacific Lines, St. Louis, Mo.; J. P. KOLOC, Illinois Central Railroad, Chicago, 111.; G. C. STRO M SOE, Atlantic Coast Line R. R. co., Wilmington, N. C. Home and Off-the-job Safety Committee: R. P. H A M ILTO N (Chairman), St. LouisSan Francisco Ry. co., St. Louis, Mo.; C. M. KIM BALL (V ice Chairman), Southern Ky. Sys., Washington, D. C. ; E. L. DUGGAN, Atchison. Topeka and Santa Fe Ry. Sys., Chicago, 111.; E. H. BLEW ER, N ew York Central System, New York, N. Y .; C. D. BLUE, Chicago & Eastern Illinois R. R. co, Danville, 111.; H. C. D A U LT O N , The Louisville & Nashville R. R. co,, Louisville, Ky. ; JO H N D. W A TT, The Monongahela Connecting R. R. co., Pittsburgh, Pa. it r I I- tVj ir t i V $ f ? m s . 3 f. m -:. gS% P S H I, V; ` ' fffiM . ^Sir'**^ I* i&itKpU&iijlk N ^ y ^ k &- t j M ' a Membership Committee--H. E. SH A U G H N E SSY (Chairman), Eric R. R. co., Cleveland, Ohio; J. J. SI M ONET (V ice Chairman), Soo Line R. R., Minneapolis, Minn.; C. K. KOCH, The Reading co., Reading, Pa. ; R. D. BEDGOOD, Chicago Great Western Ry, Kansas City, Aio. ; P. H. JE N N E R , The Western Pacific Railroad co., San Francisco, Calif.; J. j . N E W B A U E R , JR., Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac R. R., Rich mond, V a.; F. A. GIBBS, The Minneapolis & St. Louis R. R. co., Minneapolis, Minn.; W. O. COTTING HAM , Western Maryland Ry. co., Hagerstown, Md. Nominations and Elections Committee--J. II. W ILLIAM S (Chairman), The Texas k Pacific Ry. co., Dallas, T exas; C. T. D eW IT T (V ice Chairman), Northern Pacific Ry. co., St. Paul, Minn.; R. S. JAM ES, The Denver & Rio Grande Western R. R. co, Denver, Colo. ; R. C. S A B E N S, The New York Chicago & St. Louis R. R. co., Cleve land, Ohio. Program Committee--J. P. KOLOC (Chairman), Illinios Cenerai R. R., Chicago, I1L; G. M. D E M P SE Y (V ice Chairman), Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific R. R. co, Chicago, 111. ; F. L. W INEGAR, Chicago, South Shore & South Bend R. R. co, Michigan City', IndTpR--G S A B E N S , The N ew York, Chicago & St. Louis R. R. co, Cleveland, Ohio; W. F. FRA N C IS, Lehigh & New England R. R. co,, Bethlehem, Pa.; R. A. N EW T O N , Chicago & Western Indiana R. R. Belt Ry. c o , Chicago, 111.; C. K. HOCH, The Reading co,, Reading, Pa. ; G. R. K N IG H T, St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Lines, Tyler, T ex.; E. J. FLA H E R TY , Lehigh Valley R. R,, N ew York, N. Y.; M. E ST ER N BU R G H , N ew York City Transit Authority, Brooklyn, N . Y. Poster Committee--W. G. L A N D R A M (Chairman), Wabash R. R. c o , St. Louis, Ma; F. C. L EW IS (V ice Chairman), The Pullman co , Chicago, 111.; J. R. BANNERMAX, Canadian National Rys. Montreal, Quebec; C. ED W A R D T H O R N EY , Chicago, North Shore & Milwaukee Ry. co , Highwood, IH. ; P. S. MOCK, Long Island R. R. co. N. Y .; G. M. DYER, Kentucky & Indiana Terminal R. R. c o , Louisville, Ky.; J. E SL A V E N , Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. co , Chicago, 111. ; F. L. HILDE BRA ND , Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic R. R. c o . Marquette, Mich. Publications and Rcvie'O Committee--J. T. W ILLIA M S (Chairman), The Pennsylvania R. R , Philadelphia, Pa. ; J. T. A N D R E W (V ice Chairman), Great Northern Ry, St Paul, Mimi. ; H. C. D A U LT O N , The Louisville & Nashville R. R. co, Louisville, Ky. R. A. N EW T O N , Chicago K; Western Indiana R. R. Beh Ry. c o , Chicago, 111.; E. D. W A LD T, Chicago. Aurora & Elgin Ry. co, Wheaton,' II!.; F. B. LEW IS, Union Padc R. R , Omaha, Neb. ; J. F. TOO HEY, New York, New Haven Se Hartford R it e ti, New Haven, Conn. Trespassing Committee--G. R. H U N T O O N (Chairman), Chicago, Rock Island S: Pscifc Ry. oo, Chicago, 111.; R. P. HA M ILTO N (V ice Chairman), St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. co , St. Louis, Mo.; T. R. H U T T IN G , Detroit & Toledo Shore Line R. R , Toletia. Ohio; G. W. OXLEY, Virginian Ry. co , Roanoke, V a.; A. L. LENTZ, Akron, Canteo & Youngstown Ry. c o , Akron, Ohio; A. W. SH E A , Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific R. R. co , Chicago, III.; R. F. DuVALL, New York, Susquehanna & Western R. R. co , Paterson, X. J Stuff Representative--L. W . D U T T O N , National Safety Council, Chicago, 111. i V K xvrtiy . ; .'iH w ' k ;Y-;i nel f4 i m ;? * ' m r- 34 y.-i- : ; 4 1 *. , ix o U r '%