Safety Performance Monitoring in Pump Manufacturing Industries

Safety Performance Monitoring in Pump Manufacturing Industries

Vikas Parmar .1, R.M.Choukse .2, Praveen Patel .3,

M.Tech. Industrial Safety Engineering, Department of Fire Technology and Safety Engineering, Institute of Engineering & Science IPS Academy Indore, (M.P)

ABSTRACT:-

In total safety management system it is cumulative effort of the occupier, manager, safety-manager, head of the departments, supervisors, and workers etc. This gives the end result in accident prevention program. Some time it is essential to find out the comparative result of performance of the team for

past few years. Therefore we need some techniques for measuring the safety performance. Such type of monitoring or measurement helps us to identify the weakness in implementation of safety program in industries, with view to improve the safety system in future. The measurement of safety performance is useful to all management to know the progress of safety culture. It promotes safety in all walks of life like road safety, home safety, industrial safety and safety at the sea and the sky. The industries are paying crores of rupees every year in terms of workmen compensation and other benefits. Many insurance companies pay the huge amount for accident injuries, deaths, and property damage. If they know the real measurement of safety performance they may try to suggest necessary safety measures to reduce the premium amount.

This type of quantitative monitoring gives clear trend of the industry towards safety. One should find out the main departments which are the unsafe, what are the unsafe actions? How much is money lost and time lost in accidents, etc? So we can easily concentrate upon those areas and provide remedial measures to stop those losses.

Keywords: – Safety performance, Frequency rates, Severity rates, Incidence rates, Accident statistics, Safety culture, Safety leadership.

1. INTRODUCTION

   The industrialization has a great contribution in national development. The globalization of trade and business has given us opportunity to improve our national economy by exporting the industrial product. When we explode the foreign markets we find the foreign customer insist our industries to follow the norm of ISO- 18001. To improve the industrial production in quality in quantity is the main goal of our industries, but unfortunate the industrial

   accident, industrial disaster, occupational diseases, put forth hard deal in production and economy. It also affects adversely the social system of our country, therefore it is urgently necessary to implement safety program and inshore the compliance of safety loss and ISO- CODES related to health safety and environment. The safety performance is a key issue for the industries to become a world class competitor. Occupational accidents may lead to permanent disabilities or deaths and economic losses or both. Death of employees or their permanent disability causes economic loss and social problems for employers, employees and their families. Occupational accidents can be reduced through effective preventative measures by investing on safety equipments, training, and educating the employees, process design, and machinery. In order to develop a good safety culture, attitude of the workers needs to be reoriented by adopting best practices, good housekeeping, change in work culture, and work practices. Occupational accidents are common in India like in many other developing countries. The responsibility of the safety in an organizational context must be shared by employers, employees, trade unions, and related state authorities to determine the outcomes of present safety practices. To start with, employers should emphasize on the concept of occupational safety and invest in accident preventative measures. Further, employers and employees should receive awareness raising training so that employees are careful about occupational accidents and act responsibly. In the drastically change of climate, safety has always been a major concern in the Indian industrial setting.

   A safety culture is usually regarded as a subset of an organizational climate; similarly, safety performance is considered to be a subsystem of organizational performance. Hence, the safety climate can influence safety performance. The analysis of a perceived safety climate could identify the areas that need to be improved. Employees perceptions of work safety are associated with variables related to industrial accident rates. Workers who perceived their jobs as safe tended to be involved in fewer accidents than workers who perceived their jobs as dangerous. There are many published reports on safety issues focused on the manufacturing industry and on other industries. Threats to the occupational safety and health in general industries include physical, chemical, biological (including infectious), ergonomic, and social hazards. The safety performance monitoring is the periodic observation of effectiveness and efficiency indicators in order to track the progress of a program toward specified objectives. As an evaluative function, it is likely to focus on aggregate impacts without tying effects to individual elements. The emphasis tends to be on tracking outcome but not on measuring linkages and drawing conclusions about cause and effect. The purpose of safety performance monitoring is to provide decision makers with relevant information enabling them to take appropriate action to improve program performance. A safety performance monitoring system consists of three major components: Data, Analysis and Action. At an intermediate stage, the effectiveness of a performance monitoring system would be indicated by the extent to

   which the results are reflected in managers decisions and actions. Ultimately, its impact would be measured by the observable improvements in program performance.

2. PROPOSED MONITORING METHOD

   The focus in this study is on safety performance monitoring in pump manufacturing industry previous five year (1st April 2008 to 31st march 2013). The data presented in this paper were compiled as a part of a research project. Accident statistics may serve as an important feedback instrument to monitor safety performance. Accident statistics are commonly expressed as rates, per unit population or per unit time worked. Computation of rates requires number of injuries and exposure. Frequency rates express injuries in terms of hours of exposure taking into account actual exposure to the risk, e.g. including overtime hours. Severity rates express the number of days lost in terms of hours of exposure, taking into account the gravity of the injury. Incidence rates express injuries in terms of number of persons exposed to the risk per year. Rates can either be

   computed for (insured) employees or for workers (insured and uninsured combined). In comparison do statistics of fatalities and serious injuries provide more reliable indices of safety performance. This paper deals with safety performance monitoring. It also examines some of the general limitations of statistics on occupational accidents for the pump manufacturing industry. The purpose is to provide a basis for an informed discussion on the safety performance of pump manufacturing industry, with a perspective on limitations of the data available.

3. ANALYSIS/CALCULATION

   Now this data have taken from the pump manufacturing industry.

   Example (Calculation) As chosen sr.no.5 from table no.1, year 2012-13. Details:-

   • No. of Accident = 4

     (Taken from accident register,)

   • No. of reportable Accident = 4 Taken from Accident register)

   • Man days lost due to reportable Accident = 49 (Taken from Accident register)

   • Man hours worked = 2169344 (Taken from Attendance register)

   • Avg. no. of employees present in one day = 892 (Taken from Attendance register)

   • Total no. of working days in a year = 304 (Taken from Attendance register)

     We know that

     Total man hours worked = Avg. no. of employees present in one day

     • No. of working day in a year 8

   Total man hours worked = 892 304 8

   Total man hours worked = 2169344 Now..

   • Frequency Rate: – It is define as number of disabling accidents per million man-hours worked by factory, in a year.

     • Purpose To know how often disabling accidents occur. No. of Accident x 106

       Frequency Rate = in a calendar year Total Man-hours worked

       4 x 106

       Frequency Rate = in a calendar year 2169344

       4000000

       Frequency Rate = in a calendar year 2169344

       Frequency Rate = 1.843 in a calendar year

   • Severity Rate: – It is define as number of man days lost per million man-hours worked.

   • Purpose To know how serious the injuries are. .

     Man days lost due to lost due to reportable Accident x 106

     S.R. =

     Total Man-hours worked 49 x 106

     in a calendar year

     Severity Rate = in a calendar year

     216934

     49000000

     Severity Rate = in a calendar year 2169344

     Severity Rate = 22.587 in a calendar year

     • Incident Rates: – It is the ratio of number of accidents to number of employees during the period under review.

   • Purpose To know the simple ratio of number of accidents to number of employees

   No. of reportable Accident x 1000

   Incident Rate =

   Average No. of persons employed

   in a calendar year

   Table no.1

   4 x 1000

   Incident Rate = in a calendar year 892

   4000

   Incident Rate = in a calendar year 892

   Incident Rate = 4.484 in a calendar year

   140

   120

   100

   80

   60

   40

   20

   0

   2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

   Fig.2 Severity Rate

   140

   120

   100

   80

   60

   40

   20

   0

   2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

   Fig.2 Severity Rate

   Similarly.

   The frequency rate, severity rate, incident rates, previous four year.

   CALCULATED DATA
   Sr.No.	Year	Frequency	Severity	Incident	Total
   		Rate	Rate	Rate	Man- Hours Worked
   1.	2008-09	17.877	137.061	43.478	167808
   2.	2009-10	11.918	11.918	28.985	167808
   3.	2010-11	7.869	131.815	19.138	508288
   4.	2011-12	1.441	11.048	3.504	2081792
   5.	2012-13	1.843	22.587	4.484	2169344

   45

   40

   35

   30

   25

   20

   15

   10

   5

   0

   2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

   Fig.3 Incident Rate

   45

   40

   35

   30

   25

   20

   15

   10

   5

   0

   2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

   Fig.3 Incident Rate

   Table no.2

   Graphically represented all year frequency rates, severity rates, incident rates-

   18

   16

   14

   12

   10

   8

   6

   4

   2

   0

   2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

   Fig.1 Frequency Rate

   18

   16

   14

   12

   10

   8

   6

   4

   2

   0

   2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

   Fig.1 Frequency Rate

   Now

   Safe-T-Score

   SAFE-T-SCORE

   Frequency rate new Frequency rate past

   Frequency rate past 106 Man-hours worked new

   Positive (+) STS indicates a worsening record while negative (-) STS indicates an improving record over the past.

   STS It indicates

   Between +2 & 2 Change is not significant. There may be

   random fluctuation only.

   More than +2 Record is worsening than it was in the past. Something wrong has happened.

   Less than 2 Record is improving than it was in the past. Something better has happened.

   Example (Calculation)

   As chosen sr.no.1, from table no.2, (2008-09) & (2009-10).

   Frequency rate new Frequency rate past

   Safe-T-Score (2009-10)

   Frequency rate past 106 Man-hours worked new

   11.918 17.877

4. SAFETY ACTIVITIES

   • Purpose: – To compare safety performance of factory with respect to different time periods. Unit time period may be a month, year etc.

   • Definition: – Safety activity number is the sum of safety activities in a year, with respect to man hours worked and average number of employees.

     Safety Activity Numbers = N = N1+N2+N3+ N4+.

     Safe-T-Score (2009-10)

     17.877 106

     167808

     5.959

   • Formula: –

     Safety Activity Rate

     Safety Activity Number5106

     Man-Hours WorkedAvg. No. of Employees

     Safe-T-Score (2009-10)

     Safe-T-Score (2009-10)

     106

     5.959

     10.321

     The parameters for safety activity as follows.

     • No. of safety recommendations mentioned in safety audit report, are complied with (N1).

     • No. of unsafe practice detected (N2).

     • No. of unsafe condition detected (N3).

       Safe-T-Score (2009-10) 0.577

       Similarly

       The year (2009 and 2010), (2010 and 2011), (2011 and 2012), of Safe-T-Score is

       Sr.No.	Years	Safe-T-Score
       1.	2009-10	0.542
       2.	2010-11	0.836
       3.	2011-12	3.267
       4.	2012-13	0.493

       Table no.3 Now graphically represented..

     • No. of statutory compliances carried out (N4).

     • No. of safety committee meeting held (N5).

     • No. of training session of health & safety arranged internally (N6).

     • No. of traiing session of health & safety done trainer being

       external agency (N7).

     • No. of mock drill of on-site emergency planning conducted (N8).

     • No. of safety motivation programmers like safety arranged (N9).

     • No. of suggestions for safety received from employees (N10).

5. NEAR-MISS INCIDENTS

   The near-miss incidents mean any unplanned, sudden event that could have caused injury or damage to man, materials (plant), but not resulted in any accident. We must learn from near-miss incidents and accidents to prevent recurrence. The first step in the learning process is investigation to determine the causes and underlying reasons why near-miss incidents and accidents occur. A thorough investigation of root causes will identify the management system weaknesses. Learning which management system weaknesses are leading to near- miss incidents and accidents is one of the highest value activities in which a company can invest, and learning from near misses is much cheaper than learning from accidents. Many manufacturing industry should improve safety management systems, and they should begin to focus on getting near-miss incidents report and on root cause analysis. This is a very exciting trend. So one

   0.493

   -3.267

   -0.542

   -0.836

   2009-10

   2010-11

   2011-12

   2012-13

   should make groups of five employees from each department and taking the all information about the near-miss incidents in every week improve the safety system in future.

6. MOTIVATION

   (Accident free period zero)

   The factory management should reward to those workers having zero man-days lost in accidents in span of 12 months. Employee motivation is a process or program employers can initiate to motivate employees. Employers motivate employees to work harder or to reduce near-miss incidents. Although the term 'benefits' is becoming a term of the past, a benefits package is a great way to motivate employees. Incentives are also a great way to produce hard working employees and motivate all to become the best employees. Motivating an employee is a personal mix of seven key strategies. These include, setting expectations, effective punishment, fair treatment, rewards, employee needs, work related goals and restructuring jobs.

7. PUNISHMENT

(Repeated faults endangering himself & fellow workers)

The factory management should punish to incorrigible workers who are not reliable & may repeat the unsafe acts leading even to disaster.

CONCLUSION

This article discusses safety performance monitoring in the pump manufacturing industry during previous five year, from 1st April 2008 to 31st March 2013. With the help of this monitoring method I calculated all year of frequency rate, severity rate, and incident rate and also calculate the Safe-T-Score of 2009-10, 2010- 11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and the Safe-T-Score of 2009-10 (0.542),

2010-11 (0.836), 2011-12 (3.267) and 2012-13 (0.493). After

monitoring the safety performance status is cleared, because when we got the negative value of Safe-T-Score (Less than 2) that time the record is improve than it was in the past. Something better has happened or the positive value of Safe-T-Score (More than +2) that time the record is worsening than it was in the past. Something wrong has happened or the Safe-T-Score between +2 & 2 that time change

REFERENCES

References Made From:

1. Abbas Al-Refaie, 2013. Factors affect companies safety performance in Jordan using structural equation modeling. Safety Science 57, 169178.

2. Frank Huess Hedlund *, 2013. Recorded fatal and permanently disabling injuries in South African manufacturing industry Overview, analysis and reflection. Safety Science 55, 149159.

3. Jimmie Hinze a,*, Samuel Thurman b, Andrew Wehle a, 2013. Leading indicators of construction safety performance. Safety science 51, 23-28.

4. Danny Faturachmana, Shariman Mustafab*, 2012. Performance of Safety Sea Transportation. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 57, 368 372.

5. G.S. Beriha a, B. Patnaik a, S.S. Mahapatra a,*, S. Padhee b, 2012.

   Assessment of safety performance in Indian industries using fuzzy approach. Expert Systems with Applications 39, 33113323.

6. Sanna Nenonen *, 2011. Fatal workplace accidents in outsourced operations in the manufacturing industry. Safety Science 49, 1394

   is not significant. There may be random fluctuation only. So the year of 2009-10 and 2010-11 the safety performance record is improved

   1403.

7. Tsung-Chih Wu

a,b,*, Chi-Hsiang Chenb, Chin-Chung Lib, 2008. A

than it was in the past. Something better has happened. In year 2011- 12 and 2012-13 the safety performance change is not significant. There may be random fluctuation only.

So with help of this monitoring we can say the safety performance was good but management should try to make safety performance status better or improve. In the safety management various elements are there like safety policy, safety committee, safety organization, planning and implementation, safety audit, safety sampling, safety survey etc. they are helpful in reducing the work place hazards, control the accident, and occupational diseases. Including the safety management in industry many accidents, hazards and occupational diseases are reduces, it can be provide information to each and every worker about the various hazards in the workplace and provide the good solutions for controlling those hazards. Provide proper training to the every employer to identify and control hazards. So with the help of the safety performance monitoring or measurement to implementation of safety program in pump manufacturing industries and improve the safety system in future.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This paper has benefited from conversations with many different people for more than can be acknowledged completely here. I would like to extend our sincere thanks to all of them. It is our great pleasure to express our profound gratitude to our esteemed guides Mr. Bachchan Kanungo Associate manager (Safety) Kirloskar Brothers Limited, Prof.R.M.Choukse, Fire Technology & Safety Engg. Dept., IES, IPS Academy Indore & Ex. Director of Industrial Health & Safety, Government of M.P. for his valuable inspiration, able guidance and untiring help, which enabled me to carry out and complete this work. I am sincerely and heartily grateful to Er.Praveen Patel Head of the Department, Dept. of Fire Technology & Safety Engineering to support me throughout my project. I express our sincere gratitude to Dr.Archana K. Chowdhary, Principal, Institute of Engineering & Science, IPS Academy for extending all the facilities during the course of study. At this juncture I also take this opportunity to express our deep gratitude to all the Faculty members and Staff of Fire Technology & Safety Engineering Department, for their appreciation and moral support. I am also thankful to all the persons who helped us directly or indirectly to bring the research paper work to the present shape.

correlation among safety leadership, safety climate and safety

performance. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 21, 307318.

8 Blair, E. (2003). Culture & leadership: Seven key points for improved safety performance. Professional Safety, 48(6), 1822.

9 E. Lehtinen and B. Wahlström, 2002. Safety performance measurement in process industries.

10 Van Steen, J. (Ed.), (1996). Safety Performance Measurement. European Process Safety Centre (EPSC), Warwickshire, 135 p.