Real case for you to discuss EHS professionals' communication skill
74 views
Skip to first unread message
Chen Tom
Nov 5, 2009, 2:18:38 AM11/5/09
to ehs-...@googlegroups.com
Scenario: A real case with little edit.
An EHS guy was angry by frequent violations of contractors.
The day when he had a safety walk to a building construction site, he found that workers stopped their job on scaffold with hook of safety belt in hands.
He asked them down to the ground and told them as below:
I know you do not use your safety belt, that is the reason why you have the hook in hands. I have asked you lot of time to correct. I hope all of you can cooperate with me to complete the job safely.
The workers nodded with silence and promised to correct.
Then the professional left.
Welcome your discussion on this EHS professionals' method.
--
Best regards
Tom
An EHS guy was angry by frequent violations of contractors.
The day when he had a safety walk to a building construction site, he found that workers stopped their job on scaffold with hook of safety belt in hands.
He asked them down to the ground and told them as below:
I know you do not use your safety belt, that is the reason why you have the hook in hands. I have asked you lot of time to correct. I hope all of you can cooperate with me to complete the job safely.
The workers nodded with silence and promised to correct.
Then the professional left.
Welcome your discussion on this EHS professionals' method.
--
Best regards
Tom
Charles Xu
Nov 5, 2009, 5:01:46 AM11/5/09
to Chen Tom, ehs-elite
Dear all,
Maybe it need be further investigated to find the root cause with 5
why methods, why do the contractor violate this basic rule frequently?
Best regards!
Charles Xu
2009/11/5 Chen Tom <tomc...@gmail.com>:
Maybe it need be further investigated to find the root cause with 5
why methods, why do the contractor violate this basic rule frequently?
Best regards!
Charles Xu
2009/11/5 Chen Tom <tomc...@gmail.com>:
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 6:01:17 AM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
tabs
Not my style.
I would have asked the site management why he/she was not working
safely. It is his/her job to make sure (through delegation if need be)
that all people working for him/her do so safely.
The approach described has cut the site management out of the issue.
On 11月5日, 下午6时01分, Charles Xu <charlesxurim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Maybe it need be further investigated to find the root cause with 5
> why methods, why do the contractor violate this basic rule frequently?
>
> Best regards!
> Charles Xu
>
> 2009/11/5 Chen Tom <tomcsc...@gmail.com>:
>
> - 显示引用的文字 -
Not my style.
I would have asked the site management why he/she was not working
safely. It is his/her job to make sure (through delegation if need be)
that all people working for him/her do so safely.
The approach described has cut the site management out of the issue.
On 11月5日, 下午6时01分, Charles Xu <charlesxurim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Maybe it need be further investigated to find the root cause with 5
> why methods, why do the contractor violate this basic rule frequently?
>
> Best regards!
> Charles Xu
>
>
>
>
> > Scenario: A real case with little edit.
>
> > An EHS guy was angry by frequent violations of contractors.
>
> > The day when he had a safety walk to a building construction site, he found that workers stopped their job on scaffold with hook of safety belt in hands.
>
> > He asked them down to the ground and told them as below:
>
> > I know you do not use your safety belt, that is the reason why you have the hook in hands. I have asked you lot of time to correct. I hope all of you can cooperate with me to complete the job safely.
>
> > The workers nodded with silence and promised to correct.
>
> > Then the professional left.
>
> > Welcome your discussion on this EHS professionals' method.
>
> > --
> > Best regards
>
> > Tom- 隐藏被引用文字 -
>
>
> > Scenario: A real case with little edit.
>
> > An EHS guy was angry by frequent violations of contractors.
>
> > The day when he had a safety walk to a building construction site, he found that workers stopped their job on scaffold with hook of safety belt in hands.
>
> > He asked them down to the ground and told them as below:
>
> > I know you do not use your safety belt, that is the reason why you have the hook in hands. I have asked you lot of time to correct. I hope all of you can cooperate with me to complete the job safely.
>
> > The workers nodded with silence and promised to correct.
>
> > Then the professional left.
>
> > Welcome your discussion on this EHS professionals' method.
>
> > --
> > Best regards
>
>
> - 显示引用的文字 -
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 6:01:44 AM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
This wont method won't work as efficient as he might thought. As a
safety professional , we trying to help the people onsite to secure
their personal safety.The way to achieve a voluntary compliance is the
thourough information on why exactly the safety belt is needed. If
they get the same idea as we do, the safety goal will not be the sole
game played only by EHS.
Posted by Yinda Zhou
safety professional , we trying to help the people onsite to secure
their personal safety.The way to achieve a voluntary compliance is the
thourough information on why exactly the safety belt is needed. If
they get the same idea as we do, the safety goal will not be the sole
game played only by EHS.
Posted by Yinda Zhou
> Dear all,
>
> Maybe it need be further investigated to find the root cause with 5
> why methods, why do the contractor violate this basic rule frequently?
>
> Best regards!
> Charles Xu
>
> 2009/11/5 Chen Tom <tomcsc...@gmail.com>:
>
> Maybe it need be further investigated to find the root cause with 5
> why methods, why do the contractor violate this basic rule frequently?
>
> Best regards!
> Charles Xu
>
>
>
>
> > Scenario: A real case with little edit.
>
> > An EHS guy was angry by frequent violations of contractors.
>
> > The day when he had a safety walk to a building construction site, he found that workers stopped their job on scaffold with hook of safety belt in hands.
>
> > He asked them down to the ground and told them as below:
>
> > I know you do not use your safety belt, that is the reason why you have the hook in hands. I have asked you lot of time to correct. I hope all of you can cooperate with me to complete the job safely.
>
> > The workers nodded with silence and promised to correct.
>
> > Then the professional left.
>
> > Welcome your discussion on this EHS professionals' method.
>
> > --
> > Best regards
>
>
>
> > Scenario: A real case with little edit.
>
> > An EHS guy was angry by frequent violations of contractors.
>
> > The day when he had a safety walk to a building construction site, he found that workers stopped their job on scaffold with hook of safety belt in hands.
>
> > He asked them down to the ground and told them as below:
>
> > I know you do not use your safety belt, that is the reason why you have the hook in hands. I have asked you lot of time to correct. I hope all of you can cooperate with me to complete the job safely.
>
> > The workers nodded with silence and promised to correct.
>
> > Then the professional left.
>
> > Welcome your discussion on this EHS professionals' method.
>
> > --
> > Best regards
>
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 6:42:09 AM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
I agree with the "buy in" approach, but frequent violations cannot
continue without action being taken.
Unfortunately this action would involve disciplinary proceedings,
which may include as a last resort; dismisal.
Posted by David Gartside
> > - 显示引用的文字 -- 隐藏被引用文字 -
>
> - 显示引用的文字 -
continue without action being taken.
Unfortunately this action would involve disciplinary proceedings,
which may include as a last resort; dismisal.
Posted by David Gartside
>
> - 显示引用的文字 -
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 9:54:33 PM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
My approach to contractors has always been, treat their employees like
your own employees. You establish clear, attainable expectations
(often rules), and there are consequences for not meeting those
expectations. For employees, there is a progresive discipline system
that allows you establish behavior trends and eliminate unexceptable
behavior (below expectations). For contractors, I have always used the
first time shame on me, second time shame on you approach. The first
time I observe behavior obviously below expectations (violation of
policy), I treat it as, "I must not have communicated this properly"
and we have a discussion to clearly re-establish my expectations.
Second time, I have you leave the job site, return the next day where
we sit down (the contact employee, supervisor and me) and you convice
me that safety is important to you and you should be allowed to
return. Third time, not allowed back. Non-contract employees usually
get a fourth chance before termination and often get an un-documented
verbal warning before one is commited to paper, but the concept is the
same and the "increased" contractor accountability is based on
fatality risk (as in your example, a contractor not being tied off is
a much greater risk then an employee without earplugs or gloves).
This approach does take some time (your time) to establish as you have
to leave your mornings open, but once your contractors understand your
expectations and know you will take action, they will make sure their
employees follow expectations.
Posted by Russ Kapperman
your own employees. You establish clear, attainable expectations
(often rules), and there are consequences for not meeting those
expectations. For employees, there is a progresive discipline system
that allows you establish behavior trends and eliminate unexceptable
behavior (below expectations). For contractors, I have always used the
first time shame on me, second time shame on you approach. The first
time I observe behavior obviously below expectations (violation of
policy), I treat it as, "I must not have communicated this properly"
and we have a discussion to clearly re-establish my expectations.
Second time, I have you leave the job site, return the next day where
we sit down (the contact employee, supervisor and me) and you convice
me that safety is important to you and you should be allowed to
return. Third time, not allowed back. Non-contract employees usually
get a fourth chance before termination and often get an un-documented
verbal warning before one is commited to paper, but the concept is the
same and the "increased" contractor accountability is based on
fatality risk (as in your example, a contractor not being tied off is
a much greater risk then an employee without earplugs or gloves).
This approach does take some time (your time) to establish as you have
to leave your mornings open, but once your contractors understand your
expectations and know you will take action, they will make sure their
employees follow expectations.
Posted by Russ Kapperman
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 9:54:58 PM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
It does not appear by this story that there is any incentive for the
workers to improve. Many years ago I was in a similar situation. I
could not be in the field all the time but did random visits and some
days several. On each visit I would reward those workers who were
properly tied off. The rewards were tokens that could be used to
purchase tangible rewards. It did not take two days and the compliance
was where we wanted it, near 100%. Typically only a new workers was
out of compliance. A very important note, when the tokens were given
it was given with the reason why and that working safe insures going
home healthy.
Posted by Brian Busch
workers to improve. Many years ago I was in a similar situation. I
could not be in the field all the time but did random visits and some
days several. On each visit I would reward those workers who were
properly tied off. The rewards were tokens that could be used to
purchase tangible rewards. It did not take two days and the compliance
was where we wanted it, near 100%. Typically only a new workers was
out of compliance. A very important note, when the tokens were given
it was given with the reason why and that working safe insures going
home healthy.
Posted by Brian Busch
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 9:55:21 PM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
agree Bobbi, as Safety Professionals we need to just as proactive role
as everyone else on the team. We are hired because we are trained with
a mindset for safety and to keep the team on track when it comes to
safety. I look at how any business model to be successfule needs to
have a triangle where Prodcution is at the top and Quality and Safety
support Production in the two other angles as the bottom. Our role as
a support to production just as much as our cousins in QA/QC.
However, we need to incorporate communciation skills that will better
enhance our initiatives. Micheal Grinder's "How not to get shot"
offers such techniques. He lists eight techniques: Going visiual,
Getting on side, How listeners follow your eyes, Using Third Person,
Separate the problem from the Solution, Use appropriate tonality, use
specific descriptions, body at 90 degrees. This is a powerfull book
that comes with a recommendation that training in communication
skills.
Remember what Confusious said, "What I hear I forget,What I see I
remember, What I do I understand.
Posted by Pamela Cowan,COHS
as everyone else on the team. We are hired because we are trained with
a mindset for safety and to keep the team on track when it comes to
safety. I look at how any business model to be successfule needs to
have a triangle where Prodcution is at the top and Quality and Safety
support Production in the two other angles as the bottom. Our role as
a support to production just as much as our cousins in QA/QC.
However, we need to incorporate communciation skills that will better
enhance our initiatives. Micheal Grinder's "How not to get shot"
offers such techniques. He lists eight techniques: Going visiual,
Getting on side, How listeners follow your eyes, Using Third Person,
Separate the problem from the Solution, Use appropriate tonality, use
specific descriptions, body at 90 degrees. This is a powerfull book
that comes with a recommendation that training in communication
skills.
Remember what Confusious said, "What I hear I forget,What I see I
remember, What I do I understand.
Posted by Pamela Cowan,COHS
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 9:55:42 PM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
@Brian Busch...
Why do we have to reward somebody because they did what they should be
doing? Call me old fashion but send a guy home without pay for
noncompliance and a message will be sent. We shouldn't have to change
a culture with tangable rewards...how about the reward of going home
safe to be with your family after each shift.
What actions do you take with the new employees not compliant with
health and safety?
When OSHA comes in do they hand out tokens? Of course not, but they
see violations they write citations.
Posted by George Rose, CET
Why do we have to reward somebody because they did what they should be
doing? Call me old fashion but send a guy home without pay for
noncompliance and a message will be sent. We shouldn't have to change
a culture with tangable rewards...how about the reward of going home
safe to be with your family after each shift.
What actions do you take with the new employees not compliant with
health and safety?
When OSHA comes in do they hand out tokens? Of course not, but they
see violations they write citations.
Posted by George Rose, CET
EHS Elite
Nov 5, 2009, 9:56:20 PM11/5/09
to EHS Elite
Tom Chen, CSE, IMBA
I quote this case not for a examination on their HSE management sytem
but a discussion on the guy's communication style. Often, I see a guy
with what required EHS expertise but has no influence. There are lot
of factors result in this situation and i am sure communication sill
is one key factor.
so let us back to communication skill. It may give a clue why there is
frequent violation.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages