Document gE0QDXOdXyXa3ozx7epe4Ejj3

SC-ETM- A * N> I OS Other Volumes in this (1959) Series Users of this volume will find much value in its companion volumes, which offer the complete record of the 47th National Safety Congress! Here h the list: VoL No. Title 1 to 9 10 or Copies more 1 General Sessions end Index to ell Volumes ..................... . $ AS 2 Aeronautical Industries; Air Trensport.. . . .40 3 Automotive end Machine Shop; Power Press and Forging 65 4 Cement, Qvsrry and Mineral Aggregates. . . . S Chemical and Fertilizer.................................. .40 AS 6 Civic Leadership; with Church, Home, Women, Youth. . AS 7 Coal Mining......................................................................... A5 8 Commercial Vehicle............................................................... . AS 9 Construction; Public Employee..................... .. AS 10 Electrical Equipment ............................... ............................ II Farm.......................................................... .40 .40 12 Food and Beverage: Meat Packing, Tanning and Leather Products; Trades and Services................................. . AS 13 Glass and Ceramics; Rubber.......... 14 Industrial Subjects Sessions (ASSE). ............... . AS .90 IS Labor ... . AS 16 Marine . . ... A5 17 Metals....................... . .65 18 Mining................................................ .65 19 Occupational Health Nursing....................... . .40 20 Petroleum ... ............... A5 21 Public Utilities...................-................. AS 22 Pulp and Paper; Printing and Publishing. . . AS 23 Railroad............... ............................. .40 24 School and Collega........ ............... . ... .90 25 Traffic ................ ........................................... .90 26 Transit ............................................* .. . . AS 27 Wood Products; and Textile................... ... .. .65 28 arly Morning Sessions........................................................ .... AS $ i5 AS AS AS .55 AS A5 A5 AS AS AS AS A5 A0 AS AS AS AS A5 AS AS A5 AS .80 AO AS AS AS COMPLETE SETS (28 Volumes! . . . $10.50 SIOAO Stock No. 022.29--1 022.29--2 022.29--3 022-29--4 022A9--S 022.29--6 022-29--7 022-29--8 022.29--9 022-29--10 022-29--11 02U9--12 022A9--13 022A9--14 022.29-- IS 022.29--16 022.29--17 022.29--18 072.29--19 022.79--20 022.29--21 022.29--22 022.29--23 022.29--24 022A9--25 022-29--26 022.29--27 022A9--28 022.19 All prices shown ere subject to 10 per cent discount to Netionel Safety Council members. NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL % 42$ NORTH MICHIGAN AVI. CHICAGO II. ILL 300026003 44 022.20---1 National Safety Congress Transactions VOL. 14 1959 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL 425 NO. MICH1CAN AVENUE CHICAGO 11. I1JJNOIS CONTENTS ACCIDENT prevention fundamentals Part I--Knowing Your Problem Gathering Accident Facta........................................... Richard M. Bryant Picking Your Safety Target......................................................... J. E. Brown Putting Accident Data in Statistical Form. . .................. Henry R. Poubcr Part II--Marketing Your Safety Program With Higher Management............................. .................. Howard P. Mold With Supervision................................... . With Employees............................................. .. Earle S. Hannafard, PhJJ. 5 9 12 20 2S 26 RADIATION HAZARDS--A BROAD CONCEPT What Constitutes a Safety Program in a Nuclear Power Station..............................................................John F. Jones Safety Problems in the Construction of a Containment Vessel. D. H. Dierks Recent Developments in Standards, Regulations and Practices in Nuclear Safety (A Panel Discussion)..................................... 32 36 39 SAFE MATERIAL HANDLING Conveyors--Hazards and Controls Yard Material Handling Equipment .............. . Walter B. Pipp 41 G/en ft. Johnson 44 SMALL BOAT SAFETY--A NEW CHALLENGE Dry Land Outboard Motor Boat Demonstration ............ Charles W. Russell 49 WHAT WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT AIR POLLUTION Legislative Trends of Air Pollution in the United States............ A. B. Pettit Effects of Air Pollution Upon a Community.........................John H. Ludwig SI 55 EXTENDING SAFETY THROUGH THE PLANT GATE Getting It Home!....................................................................John V. Grimaldi Getting It on the Road!................................................. Alex C. Davidson, Jt. Getting On With Itl................................................... W. BaUentine Henley 61 63 69 \ ''-W ---,(? t ) CONTENTS---Continued IMPROVING YOUR SAFETY PICTURE What It Photography?........ .................................................. Earl R. Wallace Why Use Photographs in Safety Engineering?................Robert H. Alblaer How Arc Photographs Used in Safety Engineering? (A Symposium) (a) Simple Record Pictures.....................................................lack R. Ban (b) General Public Education................................................ Ralph Kahli (c) Special Uses of Photography in Safety Engineering. Allie C. Peed. It. 73 74 77 78 8( L P GAS SAFETY FROM BUUC PLANT TO YOU Round Table Discussion..................................................................................... 84 SAFETY IN MULTI-PLANT OPERATIONS Solutions for Multi-Plant Safety Administration Problems (Panel)............ 84 CHEMICAL SAFETY IN LABORATORIES AND SMALL PLANTS Personnel Training Methods.............................. .........................Ellh L Stoat 98 HOW PLANT SAFETY ENGINEERS MEET FLEET PROBLEMS Background of the Plant Motor Vehicle Accident Problem......................................................... Clyde F. Schfueter What Can the Safety Director Do to Control Motor Vehicle Losses.................... ................................................ Richard Wilkin Techniques We Can Use to Reduce Our Company's Motor Vehicle Losses (a) Selection of Drivers . John A. DePew (b) Training ................ . . D. A. Wearer (c) Emphasis on Supervision Amos E. Neyhart 101 104 108 109 III INDUSTRIAL MEDICAL PROGRAMS-THEIR DEFICIENCIES AND EXCESSES Medical Aspects.................... ..................................Dr. Kenneth f. Mathrson 112 Nursing Aspects...................... .................................... Helen A. Rehchl. R.N. 114 WHAT 'WE HAVE LEARNED Recent Research on Fire Spread and Fire Control in Public Buildings.............. ................................................... Dale K. Aack What to Look for in Determining tire Origin of Fire and Telltale Sign Concerning Progress...................................Sgt. Drew Brown Theories of Combustion of Wood and Its Control.................... F. L Browne 119 125 127 OFFICERS, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SAFETY ENGINEERS. 1959-40 . 134 Other Volumes in 1959 National Safety Congress Transactions Back Cover ACCIDENT PREVENTION FUNDAMENTALS PART I -- KNOWING YOUR PROBLEM GATHERING ACCIDENT FACTS By RICHARD M- BRYANT Superintendent, Engtneeri&g-Audit DepL, Glen Falls Insurance Co., Glen Falls, N- Y. Xo accident in itself is of primary im portance. even though the resultant cost and inconvenience may be of great consequence. Studying the results of accidents merely in forms us of their number and severity, but be complete. Such data as the workers* name, sex, age, and occupation; the date, hour and place of accident. These, however, have little direct bearing on our efforts to prevent further accidents of the same nature. leaves us wide open for more of the same. Getting back to the five major factors in What is important is the reason why the volved in an accident, let's consider them accident happened, and whether or not the one at a time. First, the agency and agency conditions still exist which might result in part. There will normally be little difficulty another. Gathering the facts of the acci in determining the machine, elevator, hand dent must include a careful investigation of tool, or what-have-you, and the particular the cause or causes that were responsible. part of the agency involved in the accident. AH of us here have one thing in com mon : an interest in safety. Not all of us work at it irota the same point of view, and not all with the same budget. My particular interest as supervisor oi the en gineering department of the Glens Falls Insurance Gx. is to help our insureds to eliminate accidents. 1*11 admit that we have the ulterior motive of trying to make a profit on the various types of business which . we service, but our department is interested in preventing accidents rather than in com In Amarillo a scaffold turned over, causing an employee to brtak an arm and be badly bruised, resulting is an insured loss of 3,9/5. There was no question bin what the agency involved wi the scaffold. Any time there is persona) injury or property damage, the injured person, foreman, or supervisor will be very* willing to place the blame on the inanimate object The agency might even be an animal, bird, or insect but here again, there will be no reticence about plac ing the blame. piling statistics. Factor #2: The unsafe mechanical or physical condition. Here again, with no In our efforts* we try to work with the great effort it c*n be determined if the people responsible for safety in the plant, accident resulted from improperly guarded institution, hotel, or whatever the risk may or defective equipmait, hazardous arrange be, in analyzing the accident for the con ment or procedures, improper illumination tributing factors. A knowledge of these fac or ventilation, or unsafe dress or apparcL tors is a primary requirement. I'm sure In the previously mentioned scaffold case, that all of you are familiar with the Ameri the unsafe physical condition of the scaffold can Standards Association's Code Z-162 ing was the cause. In LaFayette, Ga., a "Compiling Industrial Injury Causes'* but I mechanic and helper were taking a track would like to re-state and discuss these five off a caterpillar dozer. A chip from the factors. They are: 1) The agency and mushroomed head of the chisel took the agency part, 2) The unsafe mechanical or right of one eye of the helper who was physical condition, 3) The accident type, holding it The chisel was defective and 4) The unsafe act, and, 5) The unsafe per the man should have been wearing safety sona) factor. goggles. Due to the fact that the manage There U other information that must be ment had refused to cooperate in eliminat included in an accident report in order to ing such unsafe practices, our coverage n. 1959 Kaiionat Safety Congress Q. What special qualifications are re quired of LP-Gas tank truck operators? What is the industry doing about 18 year old drivers? many years without ever seeing it in liquid form. Q. Should. LP-Gas tanks be installed above or below ground? A. It is doubtful if there are any drivers A. Either type of installation is safe so below the age of 21 and industry trains their people thoroughly. One plant calling for three months on the job training was ex* plained. Most operators in the industry se long as it is made according to the rules of NFPA Standard No. 58. One panelist pre ferred above ground when possible as the fittings could be checked more easily. cure men of stable, reliable temperament Q. What is the industry doing about gas and when they are hired they are placed on impurities? a 90 day probation period. They must have an interest in understanding the fuel busi ness. The biggest safety problems are usu ally human problems. In spite of all the work concentrated oa this phase of the in dustry's safety program, a considerable amount of engineering goes into the design A. The specifications of the Natural Gas oline Association of America are accepted by the industry* and followed closely. Mar keters are constantly on the alert to keep ofl-spcdficatlon product off the market. This probIon is an operational one rather than safety. of foolproof equipment. As an example, outlet connections on tanks are protected by excess flow valves which automatically cut off the flow of gas in the event of a leak from the piping downstream. Q. What is recommended where a radio and an LP-Gas tank are in the same auto trunk? A. The trunk should be vented. Trained mechanics avoid fuel and ignition sources Q. Are firewalls used around LP-Gas in the same area. This can be done by coro- storage tanks ? - partmoitation. It was explained that gaso A. Because of the rapid vaporization of LP-Gas, firewalls arc not considered neces sary, except in the case of large volumes of refrigerated gas. LP-Gas docs not flow a great distance without vaporizing. In fact, many persons have handled LP-Gas for line vapors are heavier than LP-Gas, which is about 1*4 times as heavy as air. In clos ing the discussion, Mr. Wherry summarized the efforts of the industry* *** maintaining a safe record and recommended that those using this fuel provide a continuous pro gram of safety education. SAFETY IN MULTI-PLANT OPERATIONS SOLUTIONS FOR MULTI-PLANT SAFETY ADMINISTRATION PROBLEMS (A Panel Discussion) Moderator: W. -Eugme Stuffing, Directof of Safety, Carrier Carp., Syracuse, N. Y. Participants: Gordon L. Bowen, Safety and Workmen's Compensation Administrator, American Radiator and Standard Sanitary Corp,, New York, N. Y. Russell DcRcarocr, Safety Manager, In ternational Business Machines Corp, New York, N. Y. 86 Raymond D. Harvey, Safety Director, In dustrial Safety Section, Ford Motor Co.. Peathorn, Midi. H. M. Huntington, Supervisor of Safety, Internationa! Harvester Co,, Chicago, 111 Stanley W. Parsons, General Safety Di rector, The Carnation Co, Los Angeles, Calif. Fred R. Temple, Chief Safety Engineer, Convair, A Division of General Dynam ics Corp, Fort Worth, Texas. fndurfrtal Softly Qvnncy W. Ttzraa. Chiei Safety Engineer, Texaco, Inc, Houston, Texas. Stuffing: I have selected 15 questions which in turn have been assigned to various panel members for discussion before your croup. Jn the interest of covering as much ground as possible, I have asked each panel ist to restrict his discussion periods to a maximum of five minutes. After formal du ration, the other panel members will have an opportunity to speak to the same ques tion, should they desire. Question 1: What factors constitute the essentials of a minimum basic accident pre vention program applicable to multi-plants ? tors. Supervisors must be trained, and they must be oriented to the proper place of safety in their everyday operations. This training starts with the very* basics of safety. What is safety; lost time accident frequen cies; severity; Workmen's Compensation in surance; costs; the basic elements oi the program; supervisory responsibility and all the other phases of it. This must explore the supervisor's participation at the depart ment level, working with his people and training them on the spot. The supervisor will .work on the safety committee and thus have a continuing orientation and training by his rotating participation in these safety committee activities, which also include plant Bozien: The philosophy and policy of my safety and housekeeping inspections. company docs not constitute anything pos The third and fourth points of the pro sibly that you gentlemen have not heard in gram are accident analysis and accident the past. First, may J say that uc are a large comjany of small plants, largely self insured for -Workmen's Compensation. We are adopting a basic program of ten points, effective throughout all of our plants. We have seme wav to go in this; it is not en tirely in effect at the present time. investigation. To this end ure put the super visor and his department to the test by de termining and showing his accident record from the standpoint of the number of acci dents and the types occurring in his depart ment. This involves a monthly, cumulative accident analysis. This accident analysis is This program is premised upon the re made, broad and general, not particularly sponsibility oi supervision, from the plant specific for individual detailed problems of a manager to the line foreman--for the safety department. program. In our 40 plants in this country and Canada wc presently have only three full time safety engineers a* such. The average plant runs 400 to 500 people, so therefore you can appreciate that our per sonnel managers, employee relations man agers must wear several hats. It lists the basic types such as material handling, eye accidents, machine accidents-- to orient us and reveal where the problem is in his department Then the supervisor can find the further detail and what the Indi vidual problems are tinder the broad type headings. He can use the staff services of Our first program point is management di his personnel and safety departments. rection and support. This is an old point and vnu arc all familiar with it. However, we must insist that this be a regular and routine part cf all of their responsibilities and just not window dressing. To this end a series of cost and accident statistics meas urements are being validated on the basis of quantity as well as quality and are bring carefully studied on a periodic basis by our top managements. This starts with our ex ecutive offices in New York as well as at the divisions and the plants operating under these divisions. The plant manager is held responsible for The fifth point involves accident experi ence and progress measurement. Lost time accident frequency* and severity is all well and good, but for really close analysis of ac cident prevention progress, we have found that total accident frequency and costs are of greatest importance to the supervisor in relating to his part of the program. It shows him what the true accident frequency cost is in his plant and in his department. This goes alt the way back up the line to the plant manager and relates to his gross sales and net income, and can be shown as a percent age of his profit. Ail of our managements his cost of operation, safety and workmen's are quite interested and actively concerned compensation being a part of that cost with these accident records and safety per Our second point is supervisory responsi bility. This also includes our personnel man agers. who are also our safety administra formances. Progress is thus measured on a departmental, as well as a total, basis. We In New York get summary information so 87 1959 National Safety Congress that we can determine the individual and total picture; and where we can possibly work with and help individual plants. We have co direct line of control over any of our plant operations; we provide strictly staff, safety advisory and consultant services. The sixth point is the safe operating prac tices requirement. Each department, each supervisor will develop his own safe operat ing practices in conjunction with his safety committee at the location. These then be come most practical; they are operating practices which the supervisor himself has had a part tn making and something with which he can live, train his employees and enforce. The seventh point is safe plant and equip ment and the eighth is industrial health and medical services--both adequate and satis factory for the individual location as needed. Our ninth point provides for proper orien tation of supervision, as well as the person nel department, in workmen's compensation claims control. And. finally, getting to our tenth point, staff services, we consider here the corporate, division and plant levels. These services should provide a practical minimum, for otherwise we are then doing the supervisor's job for him and defeating our purpose. However, these services involve technical advice and consultation to aid in the set-op and administration of all of the involvements of an effective safety activity. We have prepared, and are at the present moment cir culating among our divisions and plants, three basic polities. They are safety services, medical and workmen's compensation poli tics. These three polities state our philos ophy and provide basic activities which we require of our divisions and plants. 1 can best describe these polities as umbrellas un der which the individual plant can live and operate, because of their varying needs and situations, but which provide for and require the basics which I have outlined here, plac ing these responsibilities on local plant man agement and their supervision. This we consider to be a basic and mini mum accident prevention program. Huntington: Companies with scattered op erations over the country are faced with special problems in organizing tor safety and need a guide to follow in setting up an over all safety program so that such operations adhere to the program insofar as local con ditions will permit My idea of the essatials for a multi-plant accident-prevention program are: 1. First of all, top management must be sold on the idea and the reasons for a sound accident-prevention program to include all of its operations, regardless of size. 2. The selling job is best done by those closest to the over-all problem and by who ever b in charge of the company's or cor poration's safety activities. This may be a safety engineer, safety director, safety su pervisor, or the like 3. From my personal experience and ob servations, and knowing what other large companies are doing along this line, there appears to be a common pattern set up by all. (a) A staff safety department at the main office or plant is set up and acts in an advisory capacity. (b) A central safety committee, or govern ing body, made up of operating and staff people is needed to lay the ground rules for aU to follow'. Thb group should meet quarterly or as often as there i< adequate business to be conducted. (c) A statement of policy is adopted by top management to provide a general plan for all plants and operations to follow. (d) Local management at the various opera tions have the prerogative to determine how they can best adhere to the policy. After all, it b their plant and they should run their own show*. (e) Depending on the size of the operation, someone must be delegated by the plant manager to the safely responsibility, whether it be on a full or part-time basis --safety supervisor, safety engineer, or the industrial relations manager. In my own company a safety supervisor han dles thb program at most of our opera tions; however, the industrial relations manager in some of our smaller plants also serves as safety supervisor. (f) A local safety committee, consisting of equal representation from management and the union, I feel is an essential part of the program, for by having them as a part of the act you arc more apt to get greater cooperation in your safety program and in carrying out the com pany's policy. Minutes of the various meetings held by thb committee at each Industrial Safety operation should be sent to your top safety man so he can analyze them and feel the pulse of the safety program at the particular operation. (g) Tart, but not least, follow-up must be made at the local plant level by the head of safety for the company, or hb ' assistant, on a periodic basis to see that the safety polio* anti the general safety rules of the company are bong com plied with and to give whatever help he can on aU matters pertaining to safety. Then, too. where you have multi-plant op erations it b advisable to get all of your safety men together on an annual basb to talk over their various problems, and thb affords the top safety man the opportunity to review the various policies, introduce new programs, dbeuss the results of his plant inspections, etc Stuffing: Now you have heard two dif ferent answers to this question from two highly successful safety engineers who work for vastly different types of industry. Un doubtedly there are other opinions an thb question, but in the interest of saving time, let's proceed to the second question. Question 2: What minimum field data is needed to conduct a multi-plant accident prevention program from an Accident Pre vention Director's point of view, as dis tinguished from an Accident Prevention Supervisor of a division who may have multi-plant operations? Harvey: I'd like to tell you at the begin ning that our policy on safety in the com pany is written into a manual that goes to all locations, called our Safety Program Guide. We ask our people at all locations --they are full-time safety engineers at all a&sonbly and manufacturing plants, hut even in a parts depot somebody b responsible for safety--to follow the instructions given in Section 200 of the Guide. In general, we insist on enough data coming m through standard forms which we supply so that we can follow all of the requirements in the two American Standards Association codes in compiling work injury experience. This doesn't constitute an endorsement of those codes--I think they should be rewrit ten. There are lots of things wrong with them. But as long as they exbt, that's what we have to follow in order to get industry wide comparison. There b one addition-- that is, that in a fatal, critical or serious injury we insist on immediate notification so that we can take whatever action we deem necessary from a staff standpoint. Beyond that, we ask all of our locations to compile all sorts of statistics. We want them to compile them, but all that we need in this area is that they let us know what they are compiling. We may have a branch that compiles statistics on cable life and breakage; non-injury accidents. That's fine; we may want to pass it on to other plants if we agree with it; but our basic statistics are simply the necessary reports to compile our frequency, severity and causes under the ASA Code. ' De Reamer: Concerning how much data b needed by a corporate safety manager or director to conduct a multi-plant safety pro gram varies from one end of the pole to the other. I don't think we particularly need any. I*vc advocated for a long time that a safety program has to be run following the same baric management principles that we apply to any other function of the business. And one of the principles of management that certamlv applies to safety b the prin ciple which states that a staff function b in place to perform a service to operating man agement It has the authority of facts well mar shalled rather than the power to command or direct. A staff function teaches; H ad vises and appraises. Frankly, about the only information that we insist upon from oper ating plants is that if any one of our operat ing plants discovers an unsafe condition, an unsafe act, unsafe material or unsafe pro cedure that they feel might exist In another plant or in another division, then they com municate such information to the corporate staff. We in turn can decide whether or not other divisions in the company need to be told about it. Xow, how about accident sta tistics? Again, we are performing a staff func tion. The only accident statistics that we want are accident statistics that operating managers ask us for. But it is a staff job to educate them as to what they need. And I mean that very frankly ... at IBM we are in the process of trying to decide what land of accident statistics our genera) man- 89 1999 National Safety Congress agers would like to have. And I think this makes sense. We could decide in New York City that they ought to have a report of alt the injuries that are occurring throughout every plant of IBM; we could decide in New York that maybe they would like to have accident frequency and severity rates re* ported to them. ment of the company a bill of goods about what is needed and what is accomplished, then we have to convert that to a point where we would have had in the certain plant or a certain division or a certain group --one man injured, if there were so many people, in a certain period of time. Or, if we are talking about automotive aeddent re But maybe they wouldn't be a bit inter ports--if I can tell my sales department peo ested in them. I think one of the problems ple that a truck operator may expect to drive facing safely engineers is that most man at the rate we are having automotive acci agers have never really been told what ac dents. he may expect to drive 12 years and cident frequency means, how it should be . 7 months before he has an automotive acci interpreted, how good a measurement is it. dent, while the passenger car operator may We must only ask for information from the operating departments that will help us help them do a better safety job. And at the moment the only information we are asking for is this information that pertains to an unsafe condition or a procedure that might expect to drive 10 >*cars and 9 months with out an automotive accident. The*c figure* are arbitrary*, of course. Then 1 think they realize it much more when we say that our rale was so much per hundred thousand or per million miles ox travel. exist someplace cle. And this is mandatory, Stuffing: The next question is "How can and this responsibility is not to be minimized a safety director of a multi-plant operation --information must get out fast to all the utilize the services of an insurance com plants so that it corrective action is neces sary' it can be taken. Nou* J hope that later on somebody will disagree with me on this and we'll have an opportunity to talk some more on it because I feel strongly that as pany engineer to the greatest advantage? Additionally, how* far can he go in request ing and expecting services which are con sidered to be more than normal services that the insurance company provides?" safety people we must operate as staff peo ple, and as staff people we must give our op erating departments what they want, not what we think they want. Temple: Our company represents some thing a little bit different from the four pre ceding members of the panel in that we have a much more varied products involved-- Harvey: We like to keep our frequency everything from electric motors in the East and severity company-wide. Our frequency* Coast division of General Dynamics and the at the moment is 1.04 and our severity is Electric Dynamics plant to large aircraft cn 20S, if you are interested in how we are do* the West Coast; in the San Diego Division ing by this system, but I might point out Convair; aircraft again up in Canada: down this*--we are not all on decision-making to the atomic submarines of Electric Boat levels. In my company, for example, the Company, and our public relations people Industrial Relations Staff has functional su are not keeping us too well informed, be pervision of all industrial relations programs. cause 1 had to find out the other day that 7*wma: I think that was "what minimum we now own a plantation down in South data was needed." I think the minimum data America where they take extract from a needed at a centralized point is the sufficient flower and make it into vanilla--Standard data to^nablc the safety directovto convert Vanilla. So, we've got everything in the that information into something that can be business--I mean in variety. presented to management in a form that they can understand. I'm not saying that manage ment needs to have things simplified for them but maybe we can sell our point much better if we can simplify it Now, how can you or I, involved in multi plant problems relating to safety* utilize the services of the insurance company*, particu larly their safety engineers? In the firs; place we're going to have to know some Accident frequency rates, injury frequency rates, severity rates are good and we who are in the safety profession understand them; we can relate them, one with another, but if we are going to sell the top manage thing about what the broker consummated in the contract with the insurance carrier so that we can keep our requests within line of the contract, although definitely we should get all that the contract is for and most of Industrial Safety us try* to get a litle more. But by the same tokert we've got to stay within the bounds of reason. Now, what can we get? Well, in the first place, if the insurance carrier has safety engineers we get consultation services on problems. We can get information on what is going on in other plants, for which they are the carrier. We can get some technical services which may not be available in our own plants or in some plants. We can also get benefits of their suggestions from in spections in the plant. Those inspections jhould be made very closely with the safety engineer in the plant. The inspections should company furnish back to ns--now, this may not come from your engineering group; it may come through the claims department of your insurance carrier-- and that is to give os full information cm the compensation monies spent This is most especially im portant to die companies, to the individual division, particularly if you are on retro spective audit basis, hi your insurance con tacts, where there is a premium return of monies that are not expended. There are many other services which if the insurance carrier exgineers and various other functions of that carrier, if they have, on be very valuable to you. be made for the purpose of improving the . I would suggest one thing--don't ever plant safety, as should all inspections. They* expect your compensation carrier to team should not be made for the purpose of put up with you to put pressure on top man ting somebody on the spot, whitewashing agement. because this can be a fatal mistake. some fellow who is not doing a good job-- I remember one instance that occurred in one but they should be made for the purpose of of our divisions where the top safety man helping. And sometimes the safety engineer in the division teamed up with the insurance for the insurance company is roaming around carrier to try to get a little bit more support through the piant unescorted, contacting peo out of management They tried it in this ple and making suggestions direct to super maimer--of making a rather critical report vision--this can lead to trouble. Another back to the insurance carrier's general offices, thing that we can expect of then is efforts which in turn goes through the broker down toward researching some problem on which through the general offices of the corpora we are haring trouble or a problem which tion, back to the division. Well, obviously arises out of a new produet. this didn't turn out right because when the Another thing which we can expect of our safety engineers from the insurance carrier is that they know something about what the compensation experience is in our divisions. Now, here we run into peculiar problems, be cause sometimes the claims department and the engineering department of the insurance carrier don't seem to know* that the other exists. I don't know why that should be; I think that is a mistake, but it is a fact. So, with one or two insurance carriers that we have had. we've had to get the claims department and the engineering department acquainted with each other and cross-feed a little in answer came back to the division and to the safety man and to the insurance carrier, the answer was, "Any time we want the insur ance carrier to make a critical report and suggest that management isn't doing its job, we will ask for an appraisal, and untff then please hold that information. We don't want it" So this whole thing had a very adverse reaction on the engineer who was involved in the plan as well as the insurance carrier itself. This should never be done, but we can get a lot of help from good engineering service of bur insurance carriers and more especially, if they have good engineers. Parsons: Before 1 answer this question, formation, because there is a definite rela tion between oigmeering and claims. We asked the engineers to give us back some information on accident analysis. Sometimes the statistical department of the insurance carrier doesn't have that service, but where they do have that service, they can give you good information back in accident and sta I'd like to give you a little information about Carnation Company and the scope of its operation so you will know why we have our present program. We operate 358 plants in the United States and Canada, and 28 for eign plants. The safety organization is or ganized and directed from our Los Angeles world headquarters. You can see that we tistical analysis. Of course some plants are have a problem. big enough--they can do that for themselves. Now, to get to answering the question, Another thing we insist that our Insurance "How can we utilize the services of our 91 i < 19S9 National Safely Congress insurance carrier?** We in Carnation Com* pony have a very good insurance program. I won't go into It in detail, but actually it boils down to this--it's cost pita. It's our spector did in his plant--whether he liked his service, whether he is doing anything for his program. This is a personal and confi* dential report that comes to me only. Over money, and that's one Hem we speak of time and time again--to managers, district martagers, executives. It's our money that the insurance company is spending and they don't forget it With this in mind, we peri odically call in a representative of our in surance carrier. We sit down and go over the period of years we have established a relationship with our insurance carrier engi neers to the extent that during hunting sea son the boys get together over a few cock tails: they're buddies, and that is the only way it can come about, through some direct program where each one knows what part the various locations in the company and he has to play in it So at look at it this determine at that time, to the best of our way--if we're paying for this service, by ability, a service frequency for each loca gosh, we're going to get H. tion. This is based on all the statistics that the gentlemen before me didn't want. But this is the only way we can handle it in our world headquarters. A card is made up for each location, whether U be a plant of 1.500 employees or a vacant lob On this card we give a description of the property, the operating name, the contact man in the company that the insurance carrier should And if we don't get it, then wc can go to our insurance carrier and say, non*, here is proof of poor service. We would like in have better service, even to the extent of replacing the engineer who services our plant, because as I said before, it is our money that it is paying these men to visit our plants. contact upon arrival, number of employees, Now,- as far as material is concerned--I vehicles, elevators, fired and unfired pressure said before, we give them all the material vessels, etc We keep a running record of that is sent to the plants such as bulletins: the individual inspections made by our car our monthly safety news and other items of rier's engineers. These engineers submit a interest, which they can read in advance of report not only to their own office but a attending the plant safety meetings or talking copy to our office in Los Angeles. We re to the plant manager. Also, we give them view this copy very carefully. our standards. We have standards issued by When we determined the frequency of service, we also laid certain ground rules for the engineer to follow in contacting our plants in order to make an inspection. We consider the insurance company representa tive or engineer a part of our general safety department They are one of us. They know everything that goes on in Carnation Com pany. Every time we send a bulletin, fre quency rate report, or any other material to our plants, we send a copy to them. When they appear before our manager or super visor in the plant, they know as much about the General Safety Department on safety which have been approved by all of the op erating departments of the various divisions. They have these standards in their posses sion, so if they see an unsafe condition, they can go to the manager and say. Took here, Mr. Manager, on page so and so, article 2, here are the standards pertaining to this hazard." Now it is so easy for people to go through a plant and say a hazard exists and then drop it. We don't want to drop it there. If they submit a recommendation, either verbally to the local plant manager or our safety program as the manager or su to us, they not only have to give the hazard perintendent himself. They are prmed with involved but how it can be rectified, in de material. Well, this being the case, we ex tail; how* it can be eliminated, following our pect some good inspections and we don't standards. If it is not in our standards, then mean inspections where they come in at 12 o'clock and say, "John, have you had lunch yet? Let's go out to lunch,** and then after lunch, that is the last you see of them. any other standard which they may be able to refer to and sometimes it may be a viola tion of a. state code, and if so, we want to know the number of that state code. Also, He has to turn in a report following our we come up from time to time with new outline. On the other hand, our superintend products. You never know when we are ent or manager also turns in a report to uS, going to come up with something new. So following an outline, as to what that in if we don't know in Los Angeles, sorely the 92 industrial Safety ir.-urance engineers in the field don't know u-lat we are coming tip with. They may arrive at a plant for the monthly inspection and in the meantime we have slipped in a few pieces of equipment which they don't know exists- Well, we know it exists through our engineering de partment Every piece of equipment which is -*e<igned and installed in any one of our plants, is submitted to the safety department The design is approved and immediately aiter the approval we sead out a notice to lie insurance carrier engineer that service* that location. So he knows what to look for. he knows what to follow up on ii there are some particular items which we want him *.o follow up on. he does and reports back m us. That is special service. Special serv ice is something which we try to get as much of as possible. We are paying for this -crvicc end t think we are entitled to it. so ue should be able to control their actions in the plant as much as the actions of our own safety engineers in Los Angeles. There is one item which wc still have dif ficulty with--we would get reports in from insurance carrier engineers saying that "1 called Mr. So and So, the manager, and he aid, I have no problems." Sure, he didn't have any problem.*, he was probably going out to lunch or had another meeting, so he said, "Well, let it go by--well wait for an other month." We requite that the engineer tell us the conversation that took place on the telephone and why he thinks he should not have made that visit, because we want to know why he didn't make it, as there must be a good reason for it. Also, in this list of instructions we state that he must make an appointment with the superintendent or the manager--he does not waft; in the back door, or even the front door, un announced. He makes an appointment, our manager knows he's coming, and there is a man assigned to him, if the manager himself cannot make the rounds. They inspect the entire plant from stem to stem and verba/ recommendations are given at that time. He cannot make out what we call hotel room rccommeidations. If he thinks of these items after he leaves the plant, he identifies them as such and they are discussed in such a manner. Now. we get back to how we dispose of these recommendations. The recommendstions come to us from the insurance carrier's inspector. We review them and then pick out the recommendations for that particular plant and write a letter to the manager ad vising him that on a certain date this man entered his plant, discussed these recom mendations, and please advise us when they have been complied with. If there is a rec ommendation where we can help him to comply, through past experience in other plants, we give him an explanation of horw he can correct this situation in detail. Now, if there is a recommendation we do not un derstand, we eliminate it from the letter. We don't confuse him with recommendations which we know* he can't understand And some of them we eliminate altogether. Our program may seem rather strict, but as 7 say. we're in business to make money and that is our money being spent. Tumo; Wc have just been through a pro gram of coordinating the services of our htsurance carrier with what we think is the best wav of getting the most effective values from them. The insurance carrier has had in existence for some time--and we're up dating it--a set of instructions not nearly in as much detail as has been mentioned here, but only some baric procedures and the in surance compony management--the manager of the Loss Control Division---is left the prerogative of controlling his own people. Wc have had one problem that I think needs to be mentioned and that is the mat ter of establishing and maintaining a line of communication. We operate of course in all 50 states and our plant sizes go from 6.000 down to a single-man remote pipe line operation, so we do have a matter of control involved. The safety engineers for the in surance company may make a recommenda tion and it will be handled to conclusion, but the engineer himself will never be advised of what has happened, and he may come back and resubmit the same recommendation that has been turned for cause. Now, we have just recently established a line of com munication where the insurance company en gineer will be furnished advice as to why his recommendation was turned down. We have, tor instance, in effect--and this opens up an entirely new area--that we won't pur sue--but nan-sparking tools--Wc don't use those at all in our pipe tine operations and we are not emphasizing them in some of the other operations. If the safety engineer comes m and recommends non-sparking tools 93 f. i 1959 .Vationaf Safety Congress for a particular operation, he can resubmit lines as to how that personnel or safety man those recommendations until he is blue in ager should handle such situations. the face and they will never be favorably considered. So, to remove the irritant of a resubmission of a recommendation that Is doomed to be turned down helps out the relationship between the insurance carrier and his representative as they make the contacts in the field. He may feel that he must controvert dis ability, for the amount of disability claimed is not perhaps what his medical advice feel* it is. This is a medical question that must be referred to the physician at the plant location and liandled with the claims repre sentative But it is one that the local admin De Reams': First of all, I think the re sponsibility of a Director of Safety in a multi-plant operation is to inform his or ganization, if they don't already know it, that there arc some competent services avail istrator will be concerned with and will find staring him in the face quite often. He must be conversant with the problem and its rea sonable solutions, though he should not han dle it directly or by himself. able from the insurance company and it Temple: Let me just make one cormricni. ought to be used. Rather than advocate all Gene. Part of our function is the assistance these controls and establish all these controls, in the provision of good plant medical serv I would say that we ought to say to each ices and that goes for outside the plant in of our plant goicral managers and division relation to services for which the insurance general managers, this sen-ice is available carrier is paying. If there is a good relation to you and you may use it if you want to between the plant mcd-cal doctors and the and if you don't want to, you don't have to. outside medical field, vour local medical as It's your responsibility--and then let them sociation, you can influence the people who decide. are injured to use the suggested list of doc If I were to make the plant appraisal, my comments to any general manager would be, "These arc the things that require correction. You decide for yourself whether or not you want to correct them, and if you want to, you can throw* my recommendations in the wastebasket. If you prefer, you can do some thing about them: I don't necessarily need to know wlmt you have done." N*ow, it's an amazing thing that when you operate like this, how frequently you do get letters back saying that "we have done all the things you recommended." Xow, why does this w-ork any differently than a control proce dure? Well, again, it is a sendee that they want; they know* that you are not in there tors. Let me preface that--or make this re mark. In Texas the imurancc carrier can furnish you medical services and can deny jayment for any bills tiiat are incurred out side the authorized services. This is pan of the Texas law*. But assuming there is no Mich law*, if there arc good relations between your plant medical people and the outside medical people, you can influence very greatly those people to use- those recom mended doctors. But this again must be predicated on those good relations, and good relations between your employees and yc-ur plant medical people arc also necessary. Question from the floor: I'm searching to police them: they know* that you are in for ideas and recommendations as to meth there to help them; they know that they are ods for determining the amount of money not going to be hung because of the recom w*hich should be budgeted for safety in our mendations that are made or the unsafe various sized plants. conditions that are discovered. It^. is a serv Harvey: This is going to take about half- ice function, and they* like it. a-minuic. We do liavc functional control of Bozrm: There is one comment I would like to make. Quite a few of the companies represented here arc self-insured. Because of tliis self-insurance factor, the local safety administrator, be he personnel man or other wise, will be confronted with this particular our safety programs in all of our plants. J Itavc called several locations concerning this question and they tell me flint from 70 to SO per cent ot their budget is automatically con trolled by the requirements set up in the Safety Program Guide. The other 20 per cent arc the optional things that they have problem. I agree with the gentleman here; to work with, so that is the way their budget it may not be our responsibility to answer it is handled to comply w*iih the functional now, but w*e do have to have some guide staff supervision. 94 Industrial Safety Stuffing: I should point out that in Ford Motor Company they are not as decen tralized as some companies. So that would partially answer the question. Huntington: The question of budgets for safety has always stumped me. Setting up a budget for any given plant varies, of course, with the needs of that plant and its tize. and what the plant's goals are. I don't :hink 1 can give you the answer you are Poking for; however, 1 toss this out for what it is worth. 1. We know that mechanical guarding of machine* and equipment will always be a continuing process because of variance* in plant physiol changes and new lines of ma chines to produce parts. Therefore it is most iiffirult to set up a budget for such guarding. 5-jeh things are essential, and it wc had r-.or.cy. set up for such a budget and it was overdrawn, would you eliminate making a zuard because of the cost clement? I'd say y ii would not. licit thing to do here is tliat when ma chine* and equipment are purchased you have *rr.e estimate made oi such guarding costs in the yrjrdue price. Likewise, when it is <xjcctcd that machines will moved to new i-rations or a guard will liave to be revar.tjed. or the like, some estimate should !< made of that co*t also. 2. Perhaps we can be a little more spe cific in one area oi budgeting, and that is in safety promotion activities. Speaking from my own jrsonal experience, many of our plants submit a budget each year to the division manager for approval. These vary from a few hundred to several thousand dollars, dcj*cTiding on the size of the plant and the scope of their safety promotion program. Such things budgeted arc for plaques, good housckccjring awards in the form of mcrclutndise, dinners, free coffee, posters, etc One w*ay could be to decide on a set sum |r employe for promotion activi ties. say $2. S3, $1 or S3. ; B,men: We do not recommend a budget tor safety. Safety is an integral part of the over-all industrial management function and resjcmsibility. There is no separate safety function, so to determine what our budget is would tic almost impossible, in my opinion. These men--the manufacturing superintend ent, the foremen in the particular depart ment--have to nm a plant and get the prod uct out at the least cost and with the highest quality possible. To do this, he has got to liave a method of, let's say, waste control. He's got to have proper inspection and qual ity control techniques. If he finds through any of these various procedures that some thing has gone wrong on the line, what is he going to do? He's got to get it fixed. And how* can you prepare a specific budget to cover something like this? And safety is the same way. If there is something wrong--if there is a need for machine guarding, or a better material handling procedure, or some indus trial health control, this has to be taken care of and be worked into the over-all budget of that particular plant for a given year. So therefore we have attempted no state ment or idea as to how* to develop or pro vide a safety budget for any cf our plants. Now. granted, many of our plants don't have a specific safety budget, but through training and education of our supervision and our plant management staff, the importance of safety in relation to their net profits is be coming more and more evklcnt, and there fore when items come along that impair their particular profit, they take steps to correct it. Eventually provision? are made in the tadgets, but wc feel no need for specific safety Imdget*. Questi-m from the poor: Hew do you perform the staff functions of appraisal without field data? De Reamer: If a plant felt they needed an ajrpraisal and would like to have me. come out to make the appraisal. I would go there and I'd go. through the plant and I'd sit down and obviously I would review their accident statistic* and see how they stood as compared with our other plant*. But you Live to get this in the proper climate or at mosphere. 1 wont to first emphasize that we have frequency rates that in most cases are less than 1, and when you look at a fre quency rate of les* than 1 for 8 or 9 year*, it becomes very uninteresting because it is not telling you anything. Question from the floor: How do you know that? De Reamer: How do I know what ? Question: That the frequency rate is less than 1. De Reamer: Our plants prepare them. Question: So you do get field data? 95 1959 A'atuma! Safety Congress De Reamer: No, I don't. You set, the point 7 was tninj to make--I toid you that probably we would all have a corporate safety report that would indicate the relative safety performance of each plant At the moment we are not using one because I don't think that this corporate report would tell us what the relative standing of our plants was, or how wdl or how poorly they were doing. Let me just show you what I mean. TT:e characteristic way of reporting acci dent statistics is to collect all the facts--a, b. c, d, e and so forth*--and then after the plant you indicate the frequency rate--and you list them in order with the plant with the worst frequency rate at the bottom and the plant with the best frequency rate at the top. Right ? Isn't that the way? Well, how do you do it? De Reamer; Well, this is the way we used to do it, too. and when you look at the re port from year to year, you realize that a manager wasn't told anything: all he was being told was that his plant had a frequency rate of 2.03 and plant B had a frequency rate of 3, and plant C had a frequency rate of 4. and so on. Nothing was said as to whether they were doing any better safety job. AH they were told was that for every million manhours worked they had X num ber accidents that they counted. What I'm doing---and all ot our plant safety people are doing it because I think we're together on this--we're first trying to educate management as to what the specific statistics mean, and w*e are experimenting with other kinds of statistics, like total in jury experience and doctor's cases. I'm not necessarily saying that these statistics are meaningful, either, but we're looking at them to see whether or not there is a possibility of finding some kind of criteria that w*ould at least tell in numbers what kind of a job is being done. I've sajd to our management th^J accident statistic? as far as I'm personally concei ned are like liturns paper. Litmus paper tells you whether you are acid or base. Accident sta tistics if they are properly used cut tell you whether or not your plant is getting better, is getting worse or is remaining the same. Some of you are disagreeing a little bit and your disagreement is good. Instead of selecting plants in order of their frequency* rates, we're listing plants in order of the improvement. Now here is what we've ex perimented with. We've taken the total in jury experience; doctor's cases, and disabling injuries in 1938 and comparing with 1959. indicated the per cent of improvement. You find that the plant that has done the best job, you can list up at the top; the plant that has done the worst job, you can list at the bottom. You can definitely say that Plant A is doing a good job because they have improved in all areas. 7 think we first must educate our manage ment to want these statistics. This is the way it works with everything else cost, production -- the general manager of the plant isn't getting the cost report because some cost manager told him that he should have it; he's getting it because he asked some cost manager to prepare reports for him, because He wanted them. And 1 think that accident statistics have to come through the same kind of metamorphosis--or genera tion. Question from the floor: In other words, while you don't require field data, you obvi ously are getting iL De Reamer: Well. ves. I'm getting h be cause I'm experimenting. But I'm not using it yet. Question from the floor: You use field data in your work--it isn't completely dis regarded as a centra] staff function. De Reamer: Let me just give you a little bit more insight on what I'm trying to get at--the point l*m trying to make is that 1 did, two months ago. request from all of our plants accident statistics. And I prepared reports something like the report I prepared here--and I sent it out to the goieral man agers and I said, "Does this took like any thing you'd like to have?" And one man ager said. Yes. it was something he'd like to have. And another manager said he thought so, too. Now, if all the managers will come through and say yes. we'd like to have this--we'd like to lave it on a quar terly basis, on a semi-annual--we'll prepare it for him. And it then becomes their re sponsibility to determine how far down the line they want to send those statistics. This ts a very small fraction of a corporate safety man's job--this occurs once a month, and with modem IBM equipment it takes just a moment to get it out Harvey: The real trouble wiih our A-S.A. codes on accident frequency and severity Is Industrial Safety that the}* were made by a group of safety meit from our plants through their divirions engineers without any mathematicians or to the New York corporate office. This has statisticians to help them. Statistics can be worked fairly well--we've had to modify it very misleading. For example, you have some. I agree wholeheartedly with this busi two departments. This department is run ness of the lost time accident frequency and ning at 90 per cent efficiency; this depart severity not being worth much. However it ment at 60 per cent Which department su is traditional--we are still continuing to use pervisor is doing the best job? Why. the them, for I suppose it is nice to know how one at 90 per cent sure--but let's go back you are stacking up with somebody else in behind that The one at 90 per cent was your particular industry. But this is about runing 100 per cent up to 6 months ago; as it is. as far as I am concerned. Perhaps while the one at 60 per cent was only run I can describe our particular report--I have ning 30 per cent We took that supervisor it here and anybody that would like to take out of that 100 per cent one and put him a look at it afterwards is most welcome to down in the 30 per cent one. He's brought do so. ihat up to 60 per cent while the other one. We list our plant, by divisions. We show has gone down to 90 per cent You see. the injuries by type--whether or not per these things can't be arbitrarily listed. manent total or partial or temporary* total-- Now. in our statistical set-up in Ford lost time accident frequency and severity. Motor Company, we take frequency and We also show* the manhours and total acci severity and give them equal weights by a dent costs. Cost is reported regardless of mathematical formula--frequency divided by whether the location is self-insured, com the frequency of the company and severity mercially or state fund insured. Then we divided by the severity of the company, the develop a cost per $100 of payroll. Next to two quotients added to make an index. Then this we show* a manual classification, picked we position all of our plants and we judge arbitrarily* as the major classification for our plant performance by whether they* are that particular plant location; we don't moving upward or downward in their list bother with their clerical office workers or ing. Now it's true that a plant can move any of the rest, just the major classification upward or downward with situations beyond --if it is a sheetmetal classification mainly, the control of the safety-program. and Vs of their manufacturing payroll if 1 reviewed the safety program oi a plant recently which has shown a marked improve in this, then this ' actual rate with is it. We compare their the manual rate, for a ment. I say a plant--it's an activity--and guide to how well they* are doing. Now. this the main reason for their better record is iltat they built a new plant and moved into is really a progress report We arc inter ested mainly in what they are doing from iL The new plant is much easier to operate y*ear to year or irom quarter to quarter, as safely. These things are extremely compli cated--you have to figure them out: As far the case may be. This report is quarterly now*, but w*ili become semi-annual. \Ve show a< management not knowing about injury ratc<. I can tell you that Ford Motor Com pany up until 1946. when the new* manage the per coit of increase or decrease over the previous year's record. This gives us a cumulative, running figure year after year ment came in, was operating on the basis as to actual progress. This year starting that the plant managers just want to know* January 1 we are adding to this, total aca who gets hurt--you can send a report out bin they don't care about any ratios. dent frequency- Our greatest weight is to be placed on that total accident frequency* When the new* management team took over control, one of the first things asked and improvement. Now, as to the use that these statistics are put to--they* are sent to our personnel or safety administrators--I was. "What is your Safety Program? Where are your frequency and severity reports?" Today management receives these reports keep saying personnel for the simple fact is ihat almost all of our safety* administra tors are also our personnel administrators regularly. too. It is their job to educate their local Stuffing: That's the whole point, inci management on the importance of these sta dentally. tistics--what is an accident frequency, what Bozren: Two and a half years ago we does it mean and how is he using it to help established a statistical recording require- the plant manager improve his safety record. 97 t959 Xational Safety Congress The cost picture is important, for respon sibilities are basic and lave been well cov ered elsewhere. When it comes to good business operation, a manager is greatly in terested in what accidents are costing him. and how much can he save ? He's got to do this--he has no choice. Therefore we have to educate, at the local level, in the use of these statistics and present wliat is the mo>t usable to that man. This is the job of our safety man at the plant level, with his plant manager. Anything short of that is useless-- we do not ask for any statistics in Kew York that are not going to be useful to our plant people; we do not collect statistics just to have a record system going. We have three forms that come from the field--two of them are solely because of self-insurance require ments for consolidation of reporting to the individual states; one is a listing of disability claims and the amounts of money reserved, laid and outstanding on them; the second is classification information which the state requires. The third is the safety statistics report, on one sheet of paper. George Steet, Ralston Purina, SL Louis, Mo.: I asked die question about the doctors. I fed quite strongly about this problem be cause 1 feel that unless the matter is prop erly handled, the particular plant which has a problem would be spending unnecessarily large sums of money for compensation claims. 1 would like Mr. De Reamer to dis cuss this matter a little more fully. De Reamer: 1 don't think there is a pat answer to this question. And having had experience years ago in handling compen sation, I know what a serious problem it is. The only time that I think you might have a solution to the problem is when the prob lem is being created by a lack of under standing on the part of the doctor who i* treating your people. This docs sometimes exist. Many companies report quite a hit of success with having meetings arranged be tween community doctors and the plant man agement to explain what the philosophy of the company is. what the benefit plans are. something about the compensation law and how these diagnoses will have effect on the kind of award that a person gets. Haney: 1 certainly agree with what Rutsaid--the only thing I want to point out is that this is a very real problem--it come' up all the time. Now what do we do? We go lack -to our ASA Code and read the in troduction to it. "The methods outlined in this standard for classifying work injuries are independent cf workmen's compensation laws and rulings of workmen's compensa tion agencies." Therefore, if your doctor wishes to send in a rejort to your compensa tion department to the effect that this broken Itone should le reported to the state a* a 10 per cent disability. Nut is not chargeable under the ASA code, he ehn do so. CHEMICAL SAFETY IN LABORATORIES AND SMALL INDUSTRIES PERSONNEL TRAINING METHODS By ELLIS STOUT Chemistry-Metallurgy Division, ios Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Los Alamos, N. M. Most injuries tliat occur in laboratories and pilot plants can be considered to have been caused by one or more of the following rea sons: failure to realize the hazards of the work; the presence of unsusjiected impuri ties or weaknesses in materials; failure of mechanical and safeguarding equipment; failure, to follow the correct procedure, that is, taking a short-cut--often referred to as human error; inattention on the part of the employee to the job; or failure to use safety equipment. Proper safety training can correct four out of six of these reasons for injuries. A safety engineer in an industrial plant usually thinks of safety training as a com bination of general safety meetings, safety posters and booklets, films, newsletters, and Industrial Safety an occasional contact with workers. In most scientific laboratories, litis sort of safety training will not be adequate. Such very general and rudimentary types of safety training can only be expected to develop some sort of safety awareness. The hope of safety people who use this sort of training program is that employee exposure to it will develop an awareness to unsafe practices and unsafe conditions and will avoid them volun tarily. Experience has shown that this is not the case, however. Such mass training meth ods have many weaknesses. The training material must of necessity be general in nature, and the hoped for carry-over from the general to specific conditions does not usually follow, since the specific interpreta tion is left to the worker. In place of mass safety education methods, a more personalized safety training is rec ommended. Such personalized training re quires a great deal more work on the part of the safety specialist and the supervisor. A safety engineer who feels that is is doing his job if he investigates accidents and fills out the necessary* forms; holds an occasional safety meeting for various groups, where he shows stereotyped safety films, many times haring little or nothing to do with the work bring performed, and also perhaps, designed for an audience of grade school level; {nits up colorful safety posters on bulletin boards, keeps up a conspicuous chart showing the number of days since the last disabling injury; etc. will probably find that his work has been drastically changed if he undertakes personalized sfety training. In many cases, he will have to leant consider ably more about what goes on in his plant than he has felt necessary before. A training program in a laboratory per forming scientific research work by skilled workers, mostly with high academic degrees, must of necessity be basically different in character from a program for routine indus trial workers. Such a program must be more inclusive in scope, more detailed, and more explanatory than the usual training work. Training for scientific people usually goes better if it is carried out in a subtle, person to person way, than if it is attempted through formalized lectures and meetings. A major part of a training program can consist of inclusion, on a rotating basis, of scientists on safety* committees in the labora tories and allied areas. In many cases a well grounded training program can be carried out without any formal lecturing at all, and personnel become trained in spite of, per haps, an initial belligerent feeling toward safe practices and safety personnel. If there is a lack of respect for safe practices by scientists, it may be that such feeling has been brought about by the safely personnel themselves, due to a tendency* to treat sci entists as ordinary* workers. In designing a safety* training program for laboratory employees, the following funda mentals should be kept in mind: 1. When safety rules are formulated, con siderable thought should be given to whether the rule is sound, and to providing logical and correct explanations for the rule. 2. Safety rules should not be arbitrary, but should be capable of logical substantia tion. To illustrate this point, the following example is given: A laboratory* needed to use some liquid hydrogen in its work, and this material had to be transported some distance to the laboratory'* passing through a residential area on the way. After consult ing the literature on the subject of liquid hydrogen, the safety people went to elab orate precautions including larg>? warning signs, red Hags, no smoking signs, and a police escort for the truck carrying the de war of hydrogen. When it was pointed out, however, that the energy* available from an explosion of the hydrogen was less than was possible from the gasoline of the truck, it became obvious that such precautions were not necessary. 3. A great aid in safety work with sci entific people is gained if the safety engi neers are also scientifically trained, and un derstand the scientists* point of view*. Safety people should discard ideas that all scientists are crackpots, and make an effort to learn from the logical mind. 4. Many times actual scientific research must be carried out in order to solve a safety* problem in the research field. 5. Cooperation with laboratory* personnel on a safety program can be started most successfully by seeking aid and advice from scientists, particularly on questions clearly within their field of specialization. Work in a research laboratory is so different from any routine operation that many times a research worker is the best person to assist the safety stair on aspects of safety in Ins work, and also can sometimes spot hazards 90