Document x12o1RxJ4BGVv0kyM1ZBgGqoQ

198 Twenty-fifth Xatiouaf Safety Congress C M. IfcrrTTJcr.n. Revere Copper and Dmi Ine_ Detroit. Mich. Hoyt I. FtM`iir.iL iMruit Steel Product* Co_ Detroit. Midi. Mesue C. Half, General Motors Corp.. Detroit. Midi. M. J. McCaittiiv. Kbher Hodv Corp. Detroit. MtcK. K. A. Shaw. Murray Corp. n! America. Detroit. Mich. Cabs. I- Snxei'K. Delco Product* Cnrp. Dt)lon. Ohio. R. F. Tiialx**. fluidr Motor Co^ Flint. Midi. C. T. Wixm.Mi. Chrysler Corp. Detroit. Midi. MONDAY AFTERNOON SESSION October 5. 1936 The Seuuw was called to order bjr ler Corporation. l>etroit, Mich.. who pre (cneral Chairman C. T. Wincgar. Chrys aided. introducing the speakers: What Makes a Safety Program Effective By J. F. KOLB Director. Department of ladostrial Rrlarimra, National Metal Trades Association. Chicago An adequate inogram of industrial safe ty cannot be established and succession)* maintained without a comprehensive study of company policies, practices, equipment, and \er#ontiel. and a subse quent adjustment of such factors to con form to desirable standards. In many cases safety programs have' failed to function effectively because com pany policies (1) were so limited in scope as to be quite inadequate and too often have been treated as matters of cxie* diency. (3) trere confusing to line or staff officers because delegated authority and responsibility were not definitely defined and allocated, and (3) were seldom prop erly transmitted to all employees m well written, easily understood language. Too often a subordinate officer who was interested in enlarging his sphere of activities, hoping to attract the attention of his superiors, has been iwrmitlcd to work unassisted in the development of safety programs. In many such cases lack of special preparation for the job prevented this officer from comprehend' tng the ramifications of industrial safety. Further, the uncertainty of official co operation. foreman reprisal, and insecur ity of his position because of manage ment's incomplete cooperation, have se riously retarded such safety programs. The effectiveness of a plant safety pro gram is directly proportional to the in terest. support, and leadership of the plant management. Therefore, the man ager in cooperation with his staff should develop policies and operating plans that conform to standard practice. He should delegate the administration to competent personnel. The policies and plans should indicate the extent of the program and allocate responsibility and define author ity for execution of the plan. The per sonnel should be impressed with the importance of safety service to the com pany and each employee. In actual prac tice some adjustments may be needed to assure accomplishment of objectives. In developing safety a plant can build AutotnotnT and Maehiue Shop Section 199 one of the most satisfactory organisa tions and programs or. through lack of intelligent cooperation or actual oppo sition, reduce the effectiveness of safety work to a point where employees will disregard an rules and ridicule the spas modic efforts of the management to pro tect their persons against koown hazard*. Employees tend to disregard certain safety rules or orders merely because such orders were given in a disparaging man ner which caused them to believe they might disregard them with impunity so far as their immediate superior was con cerned. Occasional clashes hare occurred between production foremen, maintenance foremen and the director of safety, when either the machine or the mechanical guarding was partially out of order or was being improperly used. In seme cases the foremen's interest in obtaining maximum production caused them deliberately to remove guards or permit employees to do so: in other cases, they have ordered an employee to con tinue using a machine when they knew that either the machine or the guarding was defective and injury might result to the employee at any time. Sometimes, because of the forceful demands of certain plant officials, those in charge of safety permitted the operation of hazardous equipment until a serious accident forced upon the attention of higher officials the knowledge of neglect or insubordination. When employees are permitted or en couraged to avoid the use of protective devices, even on jobs when the hazard is slight, they probably will take the next step and encroach in this field until a major accident occurs. Regardless of the amount of responsi bility reserved to the manager, the com pany's line and staff organizations should be folly instructed regarding their duties, and some major official should periodic ally check up on their performance to be certain that their efforts are property co ordinated and producing anticipated re sults. Since the Hoe organisation is largely responsible for action and the staff organisation for gathering and as sisting the line in the dissemination of information, we can easily determine any officer's function aod responsibility in re lation to the safety program. The value of the contacts established and maintained by the line and staff officers in this field will be measurable in terms of red or black accounting and In terms of em ployee satisfaction or dissatisfaction. When the staff gathers and prepare* information for dissemination to employ ees. every line officer should transmit it unimpaired so that employees will accept it in the right manner and make the best possible use of such help.. When improper mechanical guarding or defec tive equipment is reported, the line offi cers should cooperate folly m guarding or rehabilitating the equipment before using H again and induce employees to use such equipment in the apptroed way. Further, good management-employee re lations help locate and eliminate hazards before men or equipment are damaged. Proper coordination of effort win cause all employees to be so conscious of the need for safely that they will refuse to operate machines or processes when im properly guarded. The rapid mechanization ol industry and the employment of a much larger number of men of limited training and experience has increased industrial haz ards to a remarkable extent. Although seme of our newer machine tools are ef fectively guarded, there is so much old equipment still in use by inexperienced men and so much more mechanical equip ment in use in general, that we will have to increase our activities in the field of safety if we expect to keep our accident ratios about their present level or to re duce them. Regular and rigorous re-examination of equipment and guarding will provide re ports of hazards that in most cases can be eliminated by mechanical treatment. In many cases these reports can be re inforced by periodic analyses of reports on plant experience, including workmen's compensation cases and other shop cases classified as to the type, cause, point of occurrence, severity, loss of time, and recurrence. In certain eases a combina tion of these studies will indicate that guarded equipment is improperly guarded, and even though such reports do not in dicate the solution, they will at least di rect attention to a problem that must be solved. Management should take the initiative m promoting these studies and not de pend entirely upon the reports of inspec-