Safety first. That’s a motto we hear all the time, and many manufacturers not only preach and believe it, but actually enforce it. Unfortunately, too many others talk about it with empty words.
In fact, a staggering statistic I heard recently says that every 15 seconds, somewhere in the world, an employee dies, and 160 others sustain a disabling injury. In most cases, these deaths and injuries were preventable if the appropriate safety measures were taken.
When accidents like this occur, thoughts and prayers obviously go out to the families and loved ones of the victims. However, as big business will tell you, there’s a lot more at stake when these unfortunate events occur. The companies have a brand to protect, and they will tell you that protecting the brand is simultaneously protecting the employees behind that brand.
For examples of where a brand took a big hit, look at BP, Toyota, and Firestone. Those companies recovered, but not before undergoing a massive public-relations effort.
“Our customers are asking for more protection of both their people and their brand,” Chris Brogli, business development manager for safety at Rockwell Automation, told us. “Safety doesn’t have to curtail productivity. In fact, we see that safe companies are actually the most productive.”
It’s clear that “safety first” has to be a top-down mandate, not the other way around. One of the best approaches is to follow the ABCs of safety: accountability, buy-in, and commitment.
Rockwell is very aware of the technologies that should be adopted to maintain safety. The company is also helping to develop standards to maintain a safe work environment.
Part of that process is helping customers do on-site risk assessments. “Some companies think they’re being safe, but because the techniques that they are employing are out of date, they really aren’t safe,” said Brogli.
A simple example of where new technologies help promote safety is in their programmability, something that wasn’t previously available. By having programmable machinery, certain sections of a manufacturing floor can be slowed or shut down for maintenance or cleaning. The impact on revenue is minimal, while the impact on safety is huge.
I learned a lot of these safety issues while visiting the Rockwell Automation Fair, where the company previewed its Safety Automation Builder (SAB) software tool. Due out in February, it will be available for free to customers. SAB is aimed at OEMs building the equipment for their end customers.
Excellent post Richard. I feel every company large and small should have a safety "officer"--someone responsible for training and making sure employees have the necessary PPE. I think one huge problem comes with making employees adhere to existing and published safety standards. In the places I consult with, safety is an ongoing issue. I am frequently amazed at the number of times maintenance workers completely ignore "lockout-tagout" requirements when working on equipment. They feel leaving for a 10 or 15 minute break gives them cause to ignore this one safety rule. I have been made aware of several near tragedies as a result. Again, good post highlighting a very important issue.
What has been demonstrated repeatedly over the years is that when a product has finally been made fool-proof, somebody arrives with a new and improved fool. This has been demonstrated repeatedly by individuals with credentials far better than mine.
The issue of personal responsibility recently came up in the case of the Toyota floormat recall. Its seems many vehicle owners used improper floormats in their vehicles, and Toyota had to recall 154,000 vehicles to "prevent problems that might occur when improper floormats are used by owner." Toyota said one owner stacked eight carpet remnants on the floor in front of the accelerator.
Why is it that so often the courts, and the juries, find in favor of the very dumbest of people? Why does anybody believe that stupidity should be rewarded? That concept is so very foreign to my thinking that it amazes me.
What ever became of the concept of personal responsibility for one's actions?
very often the safety standard you mention is in place to protect those who will be sued when some idiot is being edged out of the gene pool by his own stupidity.
"Safety first. That's a motto we hear all the time, and many manufacturers not only preach and believe it,"
Richard, you are right. Eventhough saftey come first, most of the employers are neglecting it for their own financial benefits. If something is happens to employees also, from management side their involvement is minimal. So I think employees has to be take care about their saftey and some software run tools or automation may help for rescue purpose in industrial floors.
I agree, Naperlou. My anecdotal view of the situation is that factories in the West seem to be safer than they were many years ago. One of the differences is in visibility. Today's factories are far brighter than the ones we may remember from the 1960s and '70s, and employees seem to be more aware of safety issues than they used to be.
My first question is about the veracity of that claim about the number of accidents and injuries. I do not accept assertions that are not attributable. They are only as good as gossip, and probably not as reliable. they may even be total fabrications.
Of course it is our duty to design safe equipment, there can't be any question about that. BUT do we need to take extrordinary efforts to protect the drunks bent on self destruction? Electrcal panels are a good example. Not only do the doors need to be interlocked with the disconnect switch, so that power must be switched off to open the door, but also, all of the terminals inside must be guarded so that they can't possibly be touched. This means that to replace a failed motor starter a lot of time must be wasted removing the shields before it is possible to start removing the starter. And changing a fuse, which should only take a minute, instead takes 10 minutes to remove all of the guarding. That might make a small amount of sense, except that those doing the work are experienced service people, not somebody who wandered in off the street.
My point is that so often the safety standard is in place to protect those who should never be in the area at all, and who have no reason and no business being near the hazardous hardware. Why do we need to be so very over protective of the people who would never be in the area? Why would somebody who does not know where the high voltage terminals are, or even what the high voltage terminals are, be poking around in the electrical enclosure in the first place? Worse yet, why should we expect that they would be poking around? Does anybody have a rational answer that does not include the vulkture lawyers?
Another angle to this problem is that of employee cooperation. As a test engineer for a major semiconductor company, I often designed and build test sets for our plants that were located out of the U.S. Not only did we keep safe operation in mind when designing our test sets, we had to take it even further and try to predict how employees might try to defeat our built in safety measures. For example, one test set I built had a cylinder that came over the test bed with some force. In an effort to prevent someone from getting their hand caught, I used dual sensors that required the operator to place their hands on either side of the tester to in order to actuate the cylinder. One of our engineers called me during his visit to the plant and informed me that the employees simply put a glove to block the sensor on one side - intentionally defeating the built in safety measure...
I have also seen shortcuts taken in pressure situations - the employee felt that their job was at stake and so they bypassed normal safety protocol to get a job done more quickly. Safety must also become cultural - it must come from the top down and also be enforced as the priority in any situation regardless of the perceived need for speed...
I'd be careful with that staggering statistic of yours.
1. "Somewhere in the world" is probably concentrated in those countries which do not have a well developed safety and accountability ethic.
2. Some jobs are inherently more dangerous than others. Spilt that statistic into agricultural, manufacturing, technology, infrastructure jobs etc and it will look might uneven. For example, where I live the highest statistic is in construction work, in other fields it is close to zero.
3. What is a work accident? According to the local law in my country, if I trip over the cat outside my front door on my way to work (or returning from work) thats a work accident. If I'm involved in a traffic accident while driving to a sub-contractor, is that a work accident or a traffic accident? Technically, a work accident, but the lawyers will check first which category has the higher compensation.
By experimenting with the photovoltaic reaction in solar cells, researchers at MIT have made a breakthrough in energy efficiency that significantly pushes the boundaries of current commercial cells on the market.
We looked at a number of sources to determine this year's greenest cars, from KBB to automotive trade magazines to environmental organizations. These 14 cars emerged as being great at either stretching fuel or reducing carbon footprint.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
A quick look into the merger of two powerhouse 3D printing OEMs and the new leader in rapid prototyping solutions, Stratasys. The industrial revolution is now led by 3D printing and engineers are given the opportunity to fully maximize their design capabilities, reduce their time-to-market and functionally test prototypes cheaper, faster and easier. Bruce Bradshaw, Director of Marketing in North America, will explore the large product offering and variety of materials that will help CAD designers articulate their product design with actual, physical prototypes. This broadcast will dive deep into technical information including application specific stories from real world customers and their experiences with 3D printing. 3D Printing is
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
5 
