Canadian Safety Reporter - sample

4 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2016 CSR | November 2016 | News reduce work-related injuries. An IWH review team exam- ined 43 peer-reviewed studies, all published in English language journals, between January 1990 and June 2013. Their goal was to see what elements of policy could produce the best occu- pational health and safety out- comes for workers. Among other results, the team identified strong evidence that inspections with penalties result in a decrease in injuries, and consultative activity has no effect on injury outcomes. The team also found that in- spections without penalties do not reduce injuries. "This fur- ther confirms that specific de- terrence — inspections resulting in penalties — is much more effective than general deter- rence — the possibility of being inspected," said IWH President Dr. Cam Mustard. The 'why' behind the findings That the threat of being in- spected isn't especially effective in altering behaviour is entirely understandable," says Emile Tompa, senior scientist with IWH and principal researcher for the study. "It goes more into the area of behavioural econom- ics," says Tompa. "An employer's utopian vision sees employees thinking about things over the long run, planning well into the future. But in reality, people are quite busy and organizations are too, trying to meet deadlines and manage things on an operational level day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month." He adds, "They often will deal with things only when they have to — when they're putting out fires —so it only really hits home when you experience it first hand." The behaviour is reflective of how people deal with risk, says Tompa. "We have a tendency to overestimate big risks; infre- quent things, like a plane crash," he says. "But they are likely to underestimate the things that are much more likely to happen." In terms of occupational heath and safety, says Tompa, people tend to underestimate the risk of being evaluated and punished, so the deterrent isn't particularly effective. "We're not very good at judging what the probability is that we're going to be cited and fined if we don't comply 100 per cent," he says. "The idea that we're dealing with things on a short- term basis makes us deal with the more immediate things, the most pressing issues," rather than the bigger-picture occupational health and safety policy tasks. In their study, the researchers note, "For (general deterrence) to be effective, firms would need to be rational, long-run optimiz- ers, and knowledgeable about the probability and the financial implications of being inspected." In reality, the authors write, "firms may have bounded ratio- nality and have limited capacity to process information." If this is the case, they suggest, regulators may need to heighten awareness in the field by actively commu- nicating the consequences of non-compliance, and consider making information about non- compliers easily available to the general public. They add, "Fo- cused awareness campaigns and inspection blitzes might also be a way to provide acute awareness on a particular hazard." Inspections and penalties spark positive change The results, say Tompa, under- score the necessity for regula- tory inspections and conse- quences for organizations not following the rules, in the in- terest of employee health and safety. "These findings reinforce the importance of regulators be- ing out in the field and identify- ing, citing and penalizing non- compliant organizations," says Tompa. Those citations and penal- ties could mean occupational health and safety regulations are followed, in the long run. "Implementing fines and cita- tions will spark change, and (the new behavior) will become sec- ond nature for organizations," says Tompa. He points to the re- search team's findings in the area of smoke-free workplace legisla- tion. Inspections and citations for non-compliance helped en- force municipal regulations on the issue, says Tompa, "But there was a lot of fear in that industry (restaurants, bars, nightclubs) about it affecting business. At the end of the day, society has embraced that change and it's accepted, and now it's business as usual, really, as people realize the importance of it and work around it. "What that says is when we bring in new legislation for oc- cupational health and safety, if the conditions are right, if there's awareness by a broad sector of society that this is important and these exposures are adverse and have important implications for workers, it can really work quite well." He adds, "Don't fear that more regulation will necessarily will impinge on productivity in business. "Those regulations just get brought into an organization and become part of how you do business," says Tompa. Knowing the details = a safer workplace No regulator has the resources to inspect all workplaces and to levy penalties for all violations, says Tompa, making other mea- sures also necessary. He adds, "Regulators may need to height- en awareness by actively com- municating the consequences of non-compliance, and possibly make information about non- compliers easily available to the general public." "One of the things we've sug- gested as something of a policy prescription is that if the impli- cations of non-compliance were more broadly known (the exact penalties and fines, for example), organizations would be more apt to invest in compliance," says Tompa. Some jurisdictions heighten the awareness of non-compli- ance consequences by publicly naming organizations that com- mit serious violations, "to make everyone else feel concerned that this could be me," says Tom- pa. While awareness of non- compliance implications might have some impact, says Tompa, "that missing component with the general deterrent is that or- ganizations just don't know the probability of being inspected." It's a one-two punch that loses some impact if one half is missing. "If organizations don't know the probability (of an in- spection) or don't know the im- plications for non-compliance, they're less likely to act on what they know they should do," says Tompa. Keeping up awareness campaigns The researchers found that en- suring general awareness of safety regulations is still an ele- ment of success when it comes to keeping employees safe. They looked at two groupings of stud- ies for a connection between awareness campaigns and injury reduction and found one group showed limited evidence and the other showed moderate evi- dence to support the link. What this means, says Tom- pa, is that reaching the right audiences with awareness mes- sages can have a positive impact on safety. "The people on the front line, the people oversee- ing health and safety issues, they play a critical role when it comes to hazards in the work- place and how to effectively prevent adverse exposure. They can make sure people know about hazards and how to take care and use the proper precau- tions." He adds, "We all play a role in awareness." Penalties < pg. 1 Some jurisdictions publically name violators People and organizations are busy trying to meet deadlines and manage things day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to- month. ey often will deal with things only when they have to -- when they're putting out fires -- so it only really hits home when experienced first hand.

• Cover