全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Evaluation of Safety Performance in a Construction Organization in India: A Study

DOI: 10.5402/2011/276545

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

In India the construction industry is the second largest employer next to agriculture and about 31 million people are employed in construction sector. Indian construction industry is labour intensive comprising of semi- skilled and unskilled workers. The measurement and evaluation of an organization's performance on health and safety conditions at work mainly aims at the provision of information about the current situation and the progress of the strategies, processes and activities that are adopted by an organization with the view to keep H&S hazards under control. The construction industry needs a new paradigm for measuring safety performance on construction sites that is a proactive approach rather than just depending on the reactive data. The proactive approach is able to provide essential feedback on performance before incidents occur. This paper presents proactive safety measures to eliminate unsafe actions/conditions which contribute towards accidents and injuries by conducting safety sampling survey and overall safety performance was evaluated by inter observer reliability of internal and external safety auditors. The study was conducted in a large construction organization, certified under OHSAS 18001 and involved in construction of high rise buildings in India. 1. Introduction The construction industry has often been criticised for its poor performance in health and safety. Brown commented that the manner in which safety is managed in the construction industry has not radically changed over the years [1]. In the manufacturing sector, the working environment and the work methods remain essentially unchanged from day to day. On the other hand, on a construction site, the working environment, the work to be done, and the composition of workers changes continuously. The continuous change generates a greater risk for construction processes, which potentially exposes the workers to unforeseen and unaccustomed hazards. Anderson argued that there are several factors in the construction industry that seem to conspire to create “barriers” to significant widespread safety improvement [2–4]. These include shortcomings in the present general level of health and safety education, general apathy and complacency towards health and safety issues, lack of quality and commitment of site management to give site safety issues the priority they need and/or deserve, lack of sufficient resources allocated to health and safety, overemphasis at site level on production objectives to the obvious detriment of good safe working practices, failure of government to put

References

[1]  Brown, “Total integration of safety professional into project management,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference of CIB Working Commission W99, pp. 137–144, Lisbon, Portugal, 1996.
[2]  J. M. Anderson, “Managing safety in construction,” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 127–132, 1992.
[3]  J. M. Anderson, “Can construction learn from the safety culture of others,” Construction Manager, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 15–16, 1997.
[4]  J. M. Anderson, “Addressing barriers to improve safety performance,” Construction Manager, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 13–15, 1998.
[5]  W . E. Tarrants, The Measurement of Safety Performance, Garland STPM, New York, NY, USA, 1980.
[6]  J. C. R. Cariel, “Safety management in operations,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Health, Safety & Environmental, pp. 421–428, 1991.
[7]  A. Laufer and W. B. Ledbetter, “Assessment of safety performance measurement at construction sites,” Journal Construction Management & Economics, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 530–542, 1986.
[8]  J. R. Turner and R. Müller, “On the nature of the project as a temporary organization,” International Journal of Project Management, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2003.
[9]  D. Cooper, “Safety management system auditing,” in Improving Safety Culture—A Practical Guide, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK, 1998.
[10]  I. Glendon, “Safety auditing,” Journal of Occupational Health and safety, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 569–575, 1995.
[11]  Clerinx, Langerbergh, and G. Vanden, “Audit in safety management systems in the process industry,” in Proceedings of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation Seminar (CEC '03), Ravello, Italy, October ,1993.
[12]  J. Cohen, “A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 37–46, 1960.
[13]  J. R. Landis and G. G. Koch, “The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data,” Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 159–174, 1977.
[14]  J. L. Fleiss, “The measurement and control of misclassification error,” in Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, chapter 12, pp. 140–154, Wiley, New York, NY, USA, 1973.
[15]  C. H. Lawshe, “A quantitative approach to content validity,” Personnel Psychology, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 563–575, 1975.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133