Final
Report
Review
and
Comparison
of
Government
Programs
and
Services
that
Support
Workplace
Health
and
Safety
in
the
Residential
Construction
Industry
Alberta Employment and Immigration (E&I)
March 2009
Table
of
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... 5 1. BACKGROUND ... 9 1.1 OBJECTIVE ...9 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND ...9 1.3 JURISDICTIONS AND PROGRAMS OF INTEREST ...10 1.4 REPORT REQUIREMENTS...10 2. PROJECT APPROACH ...11 2.1 INTRODUCTION ...11 2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW ...11 2.3 PROGRAM REVIEW...11 2.4 QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION ...12 2.5 QUANTITATIVE DATA COLLECTION ...12 2.6 REVIEW OF STATISTICAL TRENDS ...13 3. ACADEMIC LITERATURE REVIEW ...14 3.1 INTRODUCTION ...14 3.2 LIMITATIONS TO THE STUDY...14
3.2.1 Data Source Limitations...14
3.2.2 Definition Limitations...14
3.2.3 Evidence‐based Practices Limitations ...15
3.3 INSPECTION/ENFORCEMENT‐KEY FINDINGS...18
3.3.1 Ontario Inspection / Enforcement Findings ...18
3.3.2 Alberta Inspection / Enforcement Findings...18
3.3.3 Australia Inspection / Enforcement Findings ...18
3.3.5 United States ‐ Inspection / Enforcement Findings ...19
3.3.6 United Kingdom Inspection / Enforcement Findings...20
3.4 SOCIAL MARKETING – KEY FINDINGS...20
4. REVIEW OF PROGRAMS IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS...23
4.1 REQUIREMENT ...23
4.2 SPECIFIC FINDINGS BY PROGRAM ...23
4.2.1 The Safety On Site (SOS) Program, Saskatchewan...23
4.2.2 WorkSafe Saskatchewan ...24
4.2.3 New Zealand Site Safe Passport Program...25
4.2.4 Home Safe® Colorado Program ...27
4.2.5 The US National Program ...29
4.2.6 New Zealand Site Safe Program...29
4.2.7 The UK and the EU/HSE Programs ...29
4.2.8 Ontario Cooperative Program...30
4.3 EFFECTIVE PRACTICES...31
5. STATISTICAL TRENDS...33
5.1 NON‐FATAL INJURIES ...33
5.1.1 Alberta Non‐Fatal Injuries...33
5.1.3 Saskatchewan Non‐Fatal Injuries...34
5.1.4 Manitoba Non‐Fatal Injuries...35
5.1.5 Ontario Non‐Fatal Injuries ...35
5.1.6 Nova Scotia Non‐Fatal Injuries...36
5.1.7 United Kingdom Non‐Fatal Injuries...36
5.1.8 Australia Non‐Fatal Injuries ...37
5.1.9 New Zealand Non‐Fatal Injuries...38
5.1.10 HomeSafe, Colorado Non‐Fatal Injuries ...39
5.2 FATALITIES...39
5.2.1 Alberta Fatalities...39
5.2.2 British Columbia Fatalities ...39
5.2.3 Saskatchewan Fatalities ...40
5.2.4 Manitoba Fatalities...40
5.2.5 Ontario Fatalities ...40
5.2.6 Nova Scotia Fatalities ...41
5.2.7 United Kingdom Fatalities...41
5.2.8 Australia Fatalities ...41
5.2.9 New Zealand Fatalities ...43
5.2.10 HomeSafe, Colorado Fatalities ...43
6. FOCUS GROUPS ...44
6.1 SCOPE OF DISCUSSION AND FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS...44
6.2 OHS OFFICERS’ FOCUS GROUP COMMENTS...44
6.3 INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS AND EMPLOYERS’ FOCUS GROUP COMMENTS...46
7. TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS...49 7.1 METHODOLOGY ...49 7.2 FINDINGS BY JURISDICTION...49 7.2.1 Canada...49 7.2.2 United States...50 7.2.3 European Union ...51 7.2.4 Australia...52 7.2.5 New Zealand ...54 7.3 COMMON INTERNATIONAL THEMES ...55 8. FACE TO FACE MEETINGS ...56 8.1 INTRODUCTION ...56 8.2 WORKFORCE STRATEGY FOR ALBERTA’S CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ...56 8.3 CHALLENGES AND ISSUES IN ALBERTA ...57 8.4 STRATEGIC DIRECTION FOR ONTARIO ...58
8.4.1 Data Driven Program ...59
8.4.2 The Position of the Construction Association of Ontario ...59
9. OHS TICKETING REVIEW ...62
9.1 REVIEW METHODOLOGY...62
9.2 TICKETING ACROSS CANADA ...62
9.2.1 The Ontario Experience...62
9.2 .2 The Alberta Perspective...63
9.3 ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES AND FINES IN SELECTED JURISDICTIONS...63
9.3.1 British Columbia Administrative Penalties and Fines...63
9.3.2 Manitoba Administrative Penalties and Fines ...65
9.3.3 Ontario Administrative Penalties and Fines...67
9.4 EFFECTIVENESS OF TICKETING PROGRAMS ...68
10. OHS OFFICER RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION SAFETY SURVEY ...70
10.1 SUMMARY ...70
10.1.1 Safety Compliance ...71
10.1.2 Issuing Tickets...71
10.1.3 Fear of Verbal/Physical Abuse...72
10.2 SAFETY FACTORS...73 10.3 QUALITATIVE DATA‐OHS OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS ...74 10.4 SUGGESTED STRATEGIES ...75 10.4.1 Education...75 10.4.2 Social Marketing/Partnerships ...75 10.4.3 Equipment ...76 10.4.4 Other...76 10.5 REGIONAL DIFFERENCES ...76 11. FINDINGS AROUND SUPPORT FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES...81 11.1 TICKETING ...81 11.2 COMPLIANCE WITH OHS LEGISLATION...81 11.3 INCENTIVES ...81 11.4 COOPERATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY ...81 11.5 COMMUNICATIONS...81 11.6 EDUCATION AND TRAINING ...81 12. KEY FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...83 12.1 KEY FINDINGS ...83 12.1.1 Relevant Information...83
12.1.2 Comparisons between jurisdictions difficult or impossible to make...83
12.1.3 Ticketing ...83
12.1.4 Trends in accident and fatal incident rates ...84
12.1.5 The fundamental impact of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises ...84
12.2 CONCLUSIONS ...85
12.2.1 Alberta performance comparable with that of other jurisdictions...85
T12.2.2 TAlberta shares a common experience with other jurisdictions...85
T12.2.3 The fundamental impact of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises ...85
12.2.4 Highly effective practices...86
12.2.5 Proven and emerging programs in other jurisdictions ...86
12.3 RECOMMENDATIONS...87
12.3.1 Relationship with stakeholders...87
12.3.2 Compliance Enhancement Strategy...87
12.3.3 Ticketing ...87
12.3.4 External Programs ...87
REFERENCES...89
APPENDICES...94
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The rate that serious workplace injuries and fatalities occur in the residential construction industry is found to be significantly higher than in most other industrial sectors. This is a
common finding in leading jurisdictions worldwide despite comprehensive occupational health
and safety legislation and supporting safety literature, educational programs, and deterrent fines. This situation is universally seen by governments and industry as totally unacceptable both from the standpoint of human cost and financial burden.
To address this issue, the Department of Employment and Immigration (E&I) issued a request for proposals for consulting services to review and compare government programs in Alberta and other jurisdictions that support workplace health and safety in the residential construction industry.
SURVEY OF LEADING JURISDICTIONS
The project involved a survey of selected jurisdictions in Canada, the US, Europe, New Zealand and Australia, to identify programs and services that were found to be effective in reducing or
eliminating workplace injuries, and to make recommendations regarding possible application
of best‐practice programs in Alberta. A special focus was made on the effectiveness of “ticketing” or on‐the‐spot fines as a deterrent to unsafe work practices.
METHODS
The collection of relevant data and information was carried out by direct interviews, telephone calls, internet searches, literature searches, occupational health and safety (OHS) officer survey, and focus groups. This search resulted in the collection of a large amount of relevant materials. STATISTICS
Statistics and other related data and information were collected from each jurisdiction and an attempt was made to identify and compare international leaders in residential construction worksite health and safety. This was an extremely complex task given the wide range of policies, programs and operational structures identified within the study.
DATA AND INFORMATION QUALIY REQUIREMENTS
At the outset it was considered very important that the study report and recommendations should be based upon an evidence based analysis of how Alberta programs compare with those in other jurisdictions. Recommendations for E&I program enhancements must be backed by evidence of the potential effectiveness of each approach. The findings contained throughout the present report and references are described in additional detail in Appendixes 1 to 5.
KEY FINDINGS
• Relevant Information
The study generated a mass of relevant data, information and opinion. However, it was found difficult to make true comparisons or to use the information gathered to make evaluations jurisdiction to jurisdiction and with Alberta programs. There is little or no evidence based analysis undertaken in this sector in any jurisdiction.
• Ticketing
It was found that ticketing can be used as an optional strategic enforcement tool for application in the residential construction sector. Input from industry revealed general feelings of support for introduction of such a program in Alberta. However, OHS officers in the northern part of Alberta stated strong opposition but OHS officers in southern Alberta stated some support. It was agreed that any system introduced should be universally applied and reserved for flagrant
non‐compliance.
• Trends in injury and fatal incident rates
Notwithstanding the difficulties in making comparisons promising downward trends in injury
and fatal incident rates were observed. Ten effective practices were identified which are believed to be responsible for this positive change. Experience in Ontario suggests that it is possible to gain even greater levels of compliance with Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) legislation than is presently experienced in Alberta.
• Impact of Small and Medium Sized Employers
Staff from small and medium sized employers involved in the residential construction industry was identified as the principal source of OHS compliance issues in the jurisdictions studied.
Appreciation of this unique dynamic should be considered central to the development of
programs that act to significantly increase compliance with OHS legislation.
CONCLUSIONS
• Evaluation and Comparison of Programs
It is not possible at this time to make true comparisons between programs jurisdiction to jurisdiction or to carry out evidence based analysis of such programs due to the limited amount of evidence available. Resolution of this issue in construction is a long term as little work is underway in Canadian or off‐shore jurisdictions.
• Alberta performance is comparable with other jurisdictions
Notwithstanding the difficulties in making comparisons and undertaking evaluations in
residential construction sector, Alberta has a comprehensive range of programs and
partnerships that are comparable with other leading jurisdictions both in terms of level of effort and overall program effectiveness.
The active participation of small and medium sized employers in improving levels of OHS
compliance is fundamental in nature. The development of programs and enhancements in
Alberta must address the unique operational characteristics and service needs of small and medium sized employers if further improvements in compliance rates are to be realized.
• Potential for further reduction in workplace injury and fatal incidents
The experience in Ontario, gained over decades, has shown that further significant
improvements in accident and fatal incident rates can be achieved. Key components of the Ontario program include a focus on compliance with OHS legislation, strategic initiatives such as goal setting, progress tracking, data driven programs, targeting, blitzing and use of tickets.
• Proven and emerging programs in other jurisdictions
Although few evaluations exist, some programs in other jurisdictions have gained attention
within the residential construction sector and are seen as progressive and worthy of
consideration for application elsewhere. In addition, there are several new programs that
appear to have significant potential and should be monitored and assessed where possible.
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Regular Stakeholder Consultations
The northern industry stakeholder group has suggested to Government that a regular series of joint meetings should be held with stakeholders to identify and discuss items of joint interest
and concern and where opportunities for improved service delivery can be identified and
explored. It is recommended that E&I take a lead role in ensuring that these meetings occur.
• Standardize Enforcement Province‐wide
Stakeholders report variability in enforcement across the Province and suggest that there is a lack of a “level playing field” in the residential construction sector. It is recommended that this issue be addressed through the development of a revised compliance enhancement strategy.
• Further Assessment of Ontario Ticketing Program
Ontario has proceeded to introduce a ticketing program targeting industry that is unique in Canada. It is recommended that the issue of ticketing in Ontario be revisited in order to identify
those factors that have justified the program. The initiative should be government to
government, at least at the outset, due to possible sensitivity to public release of information. In the event that ticketing shows proven merit, it is recommended that E&I consider the design and pilot of a ticketing program applied to the residential construction sector. At a minimum, implementation will require stakeholder consultations, identification of offences and fines, a development plan, a communications plan, and a training program for OHS officers.
• Formal Assessment of Established Programs in other Jurisdictions
The study has identified established programs in other jurisdictions that appear to have the potential to enhance or augment existing Alberta OHS programs in the residential construction
sector. The programs identified should be formally assessed for application in Alberta. The study also identified programs in other jurisdictions that are new but may have the potential for application in Alberta. These programs show be subject to watching briefs and periodic review to establish their potential worth in the context of application in Alberta.
1.
BACKGROUND
1.1
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this project is to review Alberta Employment and Immigration’s (E&I) programs and services that contribute to safe and healthy worksites within Alberta’s residential construction industry, and to explore program and service delivery options that would likely increase workplace health and safety by decreasing the worker injury rate in the residential
construction industry.
1.2
PROJECT
BACKGROUND
The residential construction industry in Alberta is very dynamic and has been responsible for the recent construction of a very large number of homes in response to a period of
unprecedented growth.
Statistics provided by E&I indicate that the residential construction industry in Alberta is made up almost exclusively of small and medium sized enterprises (SME’s). Indeed, the statistics show that companies employing 10 people or less make up 93.7% of the 18,000‐plus companies estimated to be in this sector. While large numbers of the companies within this sector are
highly OHS‐compliant, concerns have been expressed by safety advisors working for large
sized enterprises (LSE’s) homebuilders, residential construction company owners, industry
safety association representatives, and OHS officers that a significant number of companies are
not compliant and that some of these companies are intransigent as regards their OHS
obligations and responsibilities. There is evidence to suggest that non‐compliant, and especially intransigent companies, contribute in a fundamental way to the abnormally high levels of workplace injury and fatalities in this critically important sector of Alberta industry.
It is also apparent that all of these injuries have occurred despite the fact that E&I has a number of programs in place to promote workplace safety, including occupational health and safety
legislation that requires safe workplaces, voluntary partnership program with employers, a
wide variety of publications, a website, a contact centre, and a public awareness campaign. E&I have targeted employer and target industry health and safety programs with the residential construction industry being one of the industries being targeted. In addition, the Alberta construction industry has a dedicated and competent safety association, along with a variety of equally competent construction industry associations that provide safety services in addition to other business interests.
E&I have a requirement to identify a range of program enhancements that are likely to reduce the rate of injury and fatalities in the residential construction sector. This work includes the
identification of challenges that could affect program and service delivery for any
1.3
JURISDICTIONS
AND
PROGRAMS
OF
INTEREST
The jurisdictions selected by E&I for study included Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan,
Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, Colorado, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and three
Australian States (New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria).
The programs to be studied included The Saskatchewan “ Safety on Site” program, the
Colorado “Home Safe” program, New Zealand’s “Site Safe” program and the UK’s
Construction Occupational Health Management Essentials” program.
An essential focus of the study is “ticketing” and in particular the experience of British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Nova Scotia with this form of workplace enforcement.
1.4
REPORT
REQUIREMENTS
This report includes the results of the literature review, an evidence‐based analysis of how programs in Alberta compare with programs in other jurisdictions, a description of approaches that have proven effective or ineffective in other jurisdictions and an analysis of the viability of ticketing by E&I Occupational Health and Safety Officers.
Recommendations for E&I program enhancements, backed by evidence of the potential
effectiveness of each approach, must be provided. A recommendation regarding the
implementation of a ticketing program for Alberta’s residential construction sector is
mandatory. This recommendation must include an approach for program design and
2.
Project
Approach
2.1
INTRODUCTION
The following data collection methods were used as part of this study:
I. Literature Review;
II. Program Review;
III. Qualitative Data Collection;
IV. Quantitative Data Collection; and
V. Review of Statistical Trends.
Each of these is described briefly in terms of the overall approach.
2.2
LITERATURE
REVIEW
A comprehensive search of the academic literature was conducted to evaluate approaches taken by leading Canadian and international jurisdictions with respect to ensuring workplace health and safety within their residential construction industries.
Databases related to construction and buildings, as well as others related to health and safety, were searched using key terms related to the topic of interest. Internet search engines (i.e. Google scholar) were also used to obtain any literature of interest. Lastly, some evaluation information was obtained directly on the WCB or equivalent websites.
2.3
PROGRAM
REVIEW
The methodology used to identify and evaluate programs in leading jurisdictions was to:
I. Take the basic information and data gathered as the results of the analysis of published serious injury and fatal accident data for each jurisdiction, the relevant results from telephone surveys and the information gathered from the literature search and to use
this information to look for factors that demonstrated program leadership in each
jurisdiction.
II. To then carry out a much more detailed Internet search to find and review relevant
supporting documentation. This documentation included such material as government
audits, formal program evaluations, critical informed opinion, strategy and policy
documents and annual reports.
III. Lastly, undertake a limited second round of telephone interviews to clarify areas of importance or to solicit the release of unpublished material.
2.4
QUALITATIVE
DATA
COLLECTION
Qualitative methods were used to determine the views of key residential construction industry stakeholders in regard to issues related to health and safety within the sector. Focus groups
were conducted in northern and southern Alberta with representation from residential
construction company owners, safety advisors from large employer homebuilders,
representatives from regional residential construction health and safety organizations, and OHS officers.
The purpose of the focus groups was to identify issues and potentially effective solutions that could contribute to healthier and safer worksites in the residential construction sector, as well as to bring forward the range of opinions held by industry representatives. Both northern and southern regions of the province were targeted so that any industrial or cultural differences between regions could be detected. Specific areas pertaining to the industry that were explored during the discussions included: barriers to achieving health and safety on site, views on ticketing, the role of government, and ideas for potentially successful programs.
Additionally, face to face meetings and/or telephone interviews were conducted with the
Alberta Construction Safety Association, the Canadian Home Builders Association – Alberta,
the Alberta Workers Compensation Board, and the United States National Association of Home
Builders to determine which delivery enhancement opportunities would be most welcomed by
Alberta’s construction industry and safety associations.
2.5
QUANTITATIVE
DATA
COLLECTION
To further support the data gathered via focus group discussions and interviews, a survey was administered to ascertain OHS officer feelings and perception in regard to safety on Alberta’s residential construction sites.
There was a key interest in determining officer attitudes towards the implementation of a
potential ticketing system targeting residential construction employees. Determining any
regional differences that may exist between officer groups was also of interest.
The survey began with a short explanation of its purpose, followed by four demographic questions, three questions on safety compliance, seven questions on issuing tickets, and four questions on safety factors. All survey items, except for the demographic and open‐ended questions, used a Likert‐type scale, with five response options ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. There were two open‐ended questions which asked for top recommendations of “What government can do to improve safety in the residential construction industry” and identification of “Any other methods that would be effective in ensuring residential construction worker
2.6
REVIEW
OF
STATISTICAL
TRENDS
A review of available data was reviewed to determine injury and fatal incident rates for all jurisdictions of interest. General trends in the injury and fatal incident rates were determined over a five year retroactive period (2002‐2007).
The data reported upon was gathered from one of more of the following sources, Workers
Compensation Boards (WCB), Departments of Labour, Departments of Statistics, and Safety
Organizations in Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and the states of Victoria, Queensland and New South Wales in Australia.
The reporting of data and all associated calculations on all variables reflect claims accepted by respective WCB’s for the construction industry. There are a number of claims that go unreported by parties who do not to submit to a WCB and cannot be reported on.
Due diligence was performed to ensure that the definitions, upon which all statistics are based, were as consistent as possible across jurisdictions. One issue in making direct comparisons between jurisdictions on all data is a lack of consensus on definitions and categorization used in the reporting and associated analysis of data.
In Alberta, the divisions may be based on ACSA industries such as ‘Construction Trade Services (CTS) and ‘Construction’. Each classification contains various occupations represented within the entire construction industry. However, E&I data on 18 occupations specific to the residential construction sector was obtained and are reported in the current document.
In B.C., the classification is ‘General Construction’. In Saskatchewan, the classifications are
‘Residential Construction’ and ‘Building Construction’. In Manitoba, they are ‘Building
Construction’ and ‘Construction’. In Ontario and in Nova Scotia, the data are reported for ‘Construction’. The occupations contained under each of these definitions by jurisdiction often vary, making it difficult to make true group to group comparisons.
Recently in the UK, an attempt was made to compare jurisdictions on a number of measures related to injury and fatal incidents and it was found that comparison was not possible due to the variation of definition and calculation of statistics between jurisdictions.
3.
ACADEMIC
LITERATURE
REVIEW
3.1
INTRODUCTION
In April 2008, a comprehensive search of the academic literature was conducted on approaches leading Canadian and international jurisdictions take with respect to ensuring workplace health and safety within their residential construction industries. The full Academic Literature Review is available in Appendix 1 of this report.
3.2
LIMITATIONS
TO
THE
STUDY
3.2.1 Data Source Limitations
The data reported upon was gathered from one of more of the following sources, Workers
Compensation Boards (WCB), Departments of Labour, Departments of Statistics, and Safety
Organizations in Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia,
the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and the states of Victoria, Queensland and New South Wales in Australia.
The reporting of data and all associated calculations on all variables reflect claims accepted by respective WCB’s for the construction industry. There are a number of claims that go unreported by parties who do not to submit to a WCB and are not included in this report. In some jurisdictions his omission can provide serious estimating difficulties. In New Zealand the provision of universal accident insurance and compensation is a fundamental problem in that the comparison of NZ injury and fatal accident rates is not possible with other jurisdictions.
3.2.2 Definition Limitations
Due diligence was performed to ensure that the definitions, upon which all statistics are based, were as consistent as possible across jurisdictions. One issue in making direct comparisons between jurisdictions on all data is a lack of consensus on definitions used in the reporting and associated analysis of data.
In Alberta, the divisions may be based on ACSA industries such as ‘Construction Trade
Services (CTS) and ‘Construction’. Each classification contains various occupations
represented within the entire construction industry. However, E&I data on 18 occupations specific to the residential construction sector was obtained and are reported in the current
document.
In B.C., the classification is ‘General Construction’. In Saskatchewan, the classifications are ‘Residential Construction’ and ‘Building Construction’. In Manitoba, the classification is
‘Building Construction’ and ‘Construction’. In Ontario and in Nova Scotia, the data are reported for ‘Construction’.
The second issue identified is that jurisdictions often collect their information using varying categories and calculate rates differently. One example is the disabling injury rate (DIR) which represents the probability or risk of a disabling injury or disease to a worker during a period of one‐year of work. In Alberta, the DIR includes both lost‐time and modified work claims.
Other Canadian jurisdictions may specify only a lost time claim division or different categories within lost time claims in their calculation of injury rates. For instance, in B.C, claims are divided into medical, short‐term disability and long‐term disability claims but do not include modified work claims. In Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the division is time loss claims and no time loss claims. Some of the international jurisdictions also report their data based on 3‐year periods. Additionally, injury rates are often expressed per 1,000 FTE or sometimes per 100,000 FTE. Therefore, direct comparisons cannot be made on a number of variables. However, injury rate for most jurisdictions and other trends related to non‐fatal and fatal injury can be reported on. See Appendix 1(attached) pages 40 t0 43.
The consequence of these findings is that true comparisons, jurisdictions to jurisdiction,
cannot be made with any accuracy. Comparison of trends may provide some degree of
resolution but not to a fundamental level. Each jurisdiction must be treated as a stand‐alone entity.
In order to reinforce this finding, it must be reported that the results of a recent similar study made in the UK, confirmed that an attempt to compare jurisdictions on a number of measures related to injury and fatality was not possible due to the variation of definition and calculation on statistics between jurisdictions. All international jurisdictions covered in the present document report their data under the classification of ‘Construction’.
3.2.3 Evidence‐based Practices Limitations
The development of evidence‐based practices or the synthesising of scientific evidence to improve the quality and effectives of various practices is well developed in the fields such as
health care, child welfare and education and training. Progress in the Residential
Construction sector is however, not well advanced generally due to a lack of research data. Nevertheless, progress is being made in other jurisdictions, principally the UK/EU, Australia and New Zealand. In Canada sources say that such work in the Construction sector may be limited to in‐house studies where the results are often not published.
WCB – Alberta has carried some development of evidence‐based practices that relate health care and recovery of injured workers. These practices relate the most common types of injury such as injury to backs and as such can relate to workplace injury in the residential
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in the UK has undertaken studies relevant to the development of research programs fundamental to evident‐based practices and thus plays a fundamental role in supporting the national strategy for the reduction in injuries and fatal accidents. One such study was published in 2005 and is entitled: “An evidence based evaluation of how best to secure compliance with health and safety law.”This and other studies have confirmed the importance of using scientific evidence to improve the quality and effectiveness of HSE programs.
To date the HSE has developed several evidence‐based practices for the control of various preventable industrial diseases such as asthma and exposure to hazardous chemicals. Taking the case of asthma as an example this systematic review produced 52 graded evidence
statements and 22 recommendations on which future practice and management can be
based. Deliverables included:
I. a full evidence review report
II. a summary of the evidence for family doctors and practice‐based nurses III. a summary of the evidence for employers, workers and their representatives,
containing advice on medical confidentiality, worker consultation, and ʹthe hierarchy of controlʹ in addition to summaries of relevant evidence from the review
IV. a summary for OH professionals of the implications of the evidence base for future professional practice and advice to clients and management.
Some of these practices for materials such as solvents will be of use in the construction
industry.
The Prime Minister of Australia has recently made a general announcement that evidence‐
based information will now play a key role in the development of robust government
policies. In keeping with this directive Workplace Health and Safety Queenslandʹs has a vision of ʺworkplaces free from death, injury and diseaseʺ and are using an evidence‐based approach to introduce more effective injury prevention and risk reduction strategies. The construction sector is one of five industry priority areas that have been singled out for increased attention.
To achieve these ends greater use has been made of data and other evidence to target prevention efforts and assist in highlighting major sources of workplace injury and disease. To achieve this, a data‐driven methodology was developed that uses workersʹ compensation data and other data sources to identify occupational “black spots” or occupations that are over‐represented in terms of severe injuries. This “black spot” data is then used to identify the most effective injury prevention or risk reduction strategies.
The Business Plan for “Construction Skills Queensland” for 2007/2008 has now been
endorsed. This Plan brings together the priorities identified in the organisationʹs Strategic Plan and in a Training Plan. The Business Plan identifies leading workforce solutions for the building and construction industry.
The Accident Compensation Corporation of New Zealand, (The ACC) has an internal evidence–based Health Group that investigates issues related to accident care recovery and issues reports which include issues such as medications that assist with industrial matters such as asbestos exposure, and the results of direct injury such as hip arthroscopy and spinal disc replacement; conditions that could relate to injuries sustained at construction worksite activities.
The New Zealand Evidence‐based Healthcare Bulletin is a joint initiative of the New Zealand
Guidelines Group (NZGG), New Zealand Health Technology Assessment (NZHTA), and the
New Zealand Cochrane Group. The purpose of the Bulletin is to summarize news and
information about evidence‐based healthcare activities in New Zealand and overseas. This publication may have relevance world‐wide.
The conclusion to be drawn from these findings is that the development of evidence‐based analysis and methodologies are emerging factors in the residential construction sector due to a dearth of scientific studies in the sector. Consequently, the activities of organizations such as HSE and the Government of Queensland should be carefully monitored. The well developed interests and expertise of WCB‐Alberta and the University of Alberta in evidence‐based practices will form a strong resource for EI as and when these developments occur.
3.3
INSPECTION/ENFORCEMENT
‐
KEY
FINDINGS
The
literature
review
findings
in
this
section
are
sequenced
by
leading
jurisdiction.
3.3.1 Ontario Inspection / Enforcement Findings
I. In 2004, Ontario increased the ratio of health and safety inspectors to workforce and
strategically focused on an aggressive enforcement strategy on workplaces
experiencing the highest injury rates to deal with workplace fatalities.
II. These measures could result in an estimated 45 million dollar savings in avoided
workers compensation costs (Mustard, 2005).
3.3.2 Alberta Inspection / Enforcement Findings
I. At 5.0 per 100,000 workers, Alberta has a higher inspector to workforce ratio than the national average of 3.8 (Mustard, 2005).
In 2004, Ontario had the lowest inspector to workforce ratio at 3.8 per 100,000 workers. With the addition of 200 inspectors, the ratio rose to 5.4 per 100,000 workers. Alberta has a ratio of 5.0 per 100,000 workers, Saskatchewan has 4.9 per 100,000 workers, B.C. has 9.2 per 100,000 workers and Canada’s ratio is 3.8 per 100,000 workers.
II. One study (Lanoie, 2002) found that penalties imposed for safety infractions did not have a significant effect on injury rate. However, industry inspection rate (the number of inspections carried out) was found to have a significant negative effect on injury rate.
3.3.3 Australia Inspection / Enforcement Findings
I. In Australia, legislation introduced in 1997 requiring submission of workplace health and safety plans prior to building resulted in improved levels of knowledge about safety legislation.
II. Additionally, heightened awareness of hazard and risk reduction strategies was
positively correlated with a reduction of injuries (Mayhew & Ferris, 1998).
III. A further study of the development and implementation of workplace health and
safety plans in the Queensland construction industry, suggests a note of caution. The answer is not in industry or other advisers providing “pre‐made” plans or solutions. New Zealand and Australia joined in a coordinated effort to assess and enforce fall hazard compliance on construction sites. Half of the sites inspected were found to be in general compliance with OHS requirements for the prevention of falls (NZ OHS, 2004).
The Falls Prevention in Construction project marked the first time a coordinated
construction safety compliance campaign has ever been mounted across Australia
Additionally, it was the first time a joint Australian and New Zealand construction safety exercise has ever occurred.
Fall hazards are the second largest cause of non‐ fatal injuries to construction workers in Australia. In May 2004, 134 inspectors from Australia’s eight state and territory workplace safety authorities, and from New Zealand’s Occupational Safety & Health Service, conducted a joint compliance campaign on falls prevention in the
construction industry.
Between both jurisdictions, the nine participating workplace safety authorities
committed to a minimum of 920 project visits to housing and small‐scale commercial
construction sites. This target was exceeded, with 1,347 project visits being
conducted.
Inspectors examined how falls hazards were being managed on site and, where
necessary, they took appropriate enforcement action to bring about compliance with OHS legislation.
Approximately 50% of the sites visited were in general compliance with OHS
requirements for the prevention of falls. There were 759 instances of non‐compliance with falls prevention requirements, which were identified and dealt with.
In addition to enforcing compliance, inspectors distributed information on the
campaign and guidance material on falls prevention during their site visits. They
also collected data during their visits, enabling a snapshot of the targeted
construction sectors to be prepared as a benchmark for future reference.
3.3.5 United States ‐ Inspection / Enforcement Findings
I. One study looking at OSHA’s enforcement efforts found a positive correlation
between injury rate and the level of inspections (Viscusi, 1986). No significant relationship was found for level of assessed penalty and injury rate.
The study looking at aspects of OSHA’s enforcement effort revealed no significant relationship between the level of assessed penalties within an industry and the industry injury rate (Viscusi, 1986). However, there was a positive correlation between injury rate and the level of OSHA inspections undertaken in the current year and negatively related to the level of OSHA inspections undertaken in the previous year.
The pattern can be explained by a prioritization of inspections which focused on hazardous injuries and the delay in response of firms to the level of inspections in their industry. OSHA inspections were estimated to have only a minimal effect upon the injury rate. However, inspections were estimated to reduce the total lost workday’s injury rate by an average of 5%.
II. Fall injury rates decrease after targeted inspections in Washington State construction
employers who were previously cited for violating safety standards. Compensable
fall injuries decreased from 1.78 to 1.39 per 200,000 hours worked before and after inspections took place.
Nelson, Kaufman, Kalat & Silverstein (1997) examined workers compensation claim rates for falls directed at Washington state construction employers previously cited for violating standards.
Comparisons were made over a one‐year period on injury rates both before and after inspections were conducted. Additionally, claims for a control group of employers that had not been cited were examined for comparison.
For cited employers the claim rate for compensable fall injuries decreased from 1.78 to 1.39 per 200,000 hours worked for a one‐year period both before and after inspections took place. Additionally, the cited employers were 2.3 times as likely as the control group of employers to experience a claim rate reduction.
III. Results suggest that industry‐wide fall injury rates might be expected to decrease as targeted inspections (those cited) increase.
3.3.6 United Kingdom Inspection / Enforcement Findings
I. A 2005 HSE campaign aimed at reducing slips and trips on construction worksites found relatively low compliance to safe housekeeping practices. Stop‐work orders were issued by HSE inspectors to 14% of sites visited and less than 25% of sites were found to be in good order.
II. Recently (2007/2008) the HSE carried out 2,400 targeted site inspections and found that approximately 33% of sites and 25% of site contractors were considered to be working far below the acceptable standard.
3.4
SOCIAL
MARKETING
–
KEY
FINDINGS
I. Lavack, Magnuson, Deshpande, Basil, Mintz (2006) compared Canadian and U.S.
approaches to improving workplace safety using social marketing techniques and
report that Canadian OHS campaigns are undertaken at the provincial level using
II. Additionally, unlike Canadian Worker Compensation Boards, Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions in the U.S. do not tend to get involved in communication to enhance workplace safety awareness and injury prevention. Their focus is on
providing legally required fact‐based documents, compliance and enforcement with
regulations and legislation, and worker compensation coverage issues.
III. Currently underway in B.C is research that will examine components of
communication materials from social marketing campaigns on occupational health
and safety aimed at young male workers in North America. It will also examine the attitudes of this target group toward these communication materials.
The analysis conducted will be helpful for developing future social marketing
campaigns that can persuade young male workers to consistently engage in safer behaviour at work (Basil, Basil, Deshpande, 2005).
IV. A systematic review of published evaluation and research studies on occupational
health and safety social marketing campaigns revealed that campaigns based
exclusively on mass media communications do not appear to be as effective in reducing the incidence of work‐related injury, disease or disability as campaigns that
integrate public communications strategies with companion programs involving
consultation services, inspection and enforcement, or education and training.
V. The WorkSafe Saskatchewan initiative, spearheaded by the WCB and Saskatchewan
Labour, promotes injury prevention as the single most effective way of reducing the human and financial costs of workplace injuries.
Over the past three years, the WorkSafe Saskatchewan public information campaigns have raised awareness about injury prevention and safety in the workplace. It has been a deliberate decision to stay away from shock tactic campaigning.
VI. Market research conducted by WorkSafe Saskatchewan after the spring and fall
safety promotion campaigns revealed that:
i. Awareness of WorkSafe Saskatchewan continued to be very high 65% at end of November 2005 compared to 66% at end of May 2005.
ii. 65% of respondents attribute a positive influence from the WCB ads on their thinking about safety.
iii. 92% of respondents expressed support for the WCBʹs continuing investment
in safety campaigns.
iv. Nearly two‐thirds of Saskatchewan residents (65%) say the WorkSafe ads
have a positive influence on their thinking about workplace safety.
v. 83% of respondents correctly identified the campaign theme, ʺSafety is
everyoneʹs responsibility.ʺ
vi. More than 4 in 10 respondents say they have changed the way they do things
equipment, safer lifting and ergonomic improvement ‐‐ all themes of
WorkSafe advertising.
vii. Safety campaigns using feedback about injury rates along with safety
inspections reduce non‐fatal injuries for construction workers. An initial intervention effect of a 3.75 reduction in non‐fatal injuries per 100 person years was observed.
VII. Spangerberg (2002) evaluated a safety campaign which used informative, facilitative
(feedback about injury rates) and enforcement (safety inspections) implementation
strategies on the risk of non‐fatal injuries in construction workers.
4.
REVIEW
OF
PROGRAMS
IN
OTHER
JURISDICTIONS
4.1
REQUIREMENT
The requirement was to explore Saskatchewan’s “Safety on Site” program, Colorado’s “Home
Safe” program, New Zealand’s “Site Safe” program, and the UK’s “Construction Occupational
Health Management Essentials” programs to identify potential opportunities for initiating
similar programs in Alberta. Other jurisdictions may be explored for opportunities that are discovered during the course of the work.
4.2
SPECIFIC
FINDINGS
BY
PROGRAM
I. Additional programs worthy of evaluation were identified. These included the
National Association of Home Builders Association (US) and the Construction Safety Association of Ontario.
II. While many programs could not be compared with each other because differing
organisation structures and mandates and because of the absence of evidence based
evaluations, common factors were found which are worthy of consolidation and
consideration in the context of potential application in Alberta.
4.2.1 The Safety On Site (SOS) Program, Saskatchewan
The Safety on Site program provides a working model for the delivery of effective services
to the residential construction sector. The Saskatchewan Construction Safety Association
(SCAA) offers the Safety On Site (SOS) program to assist residential contractors in
understanding and applying the principles of health and safety. The purpose is to actively assist a construction company with improving and developing an effective health and safety
program.
Saskatchewan construction companies with an active Workers’ Compensation Board
account within the “B” rate group (construction) become automatic members of the SCAA. Staff from the SCAA is available to discuss implementation of a health and safety program
with company owner / managers. These discussions include roles and responsibilities,
legislation, personal protective equipment and health and safety education. They can assist
on site supervisors with understanding implementation of a health and safety program;
provide observations when going onsite, providing samples of safety equipment and first
aid requirements and emergency planning.
The SCAA staff work with industry to assess industry needs regarding education and
training, collect industry feedback, gather information on specific industry concerns and develop information on industry specific safety practices and methods.
Company representatives that get involved with the SOS program commit to participating in the program. Initially the owner/manager and supervisors attend an orientation session
and then schedule a time for SCAA staff to accompany a supervisor to a job site to offer assistance and advice regarding health and safety issues.
4.2.2
WorkSafe
Saskatchewan
The WorkSafe Saskatchewan initiative, led by the WCB and Saskatchewan Labour,
promotes injury prevention as the single most effective way of reducing the human and financial costs of workplace injuries. Over the past three year, the WorkSafe Saskatchewan public information campaigns have raised awareness about injury prevention and safety in the workplace.
The first year of the campaign was conceived to build awareness of the WorkSafe
Saskatchewan brand name, and the fact that it was a joint initiative of the Saskatchewan
Workers’ Compensation Board and Saskatchewan Labour. Saskatchewan WCB’s own
market research has showed that public recognition of workplace injuries as a social issue was increasing and that building prominence for WorkSafe Saskatchewan and its sponsors as the messengers of the solution was also observed.
The campaign used television and billboards ads featuring the animated working stick
character “Bob” who demonstrates the proper technique for safe lifting, fall prevention, ergonomics and safety gear. Additionally, the strategy employs newspaper and radio ads, feature testimonials from workplace representatives, transit advertising, and painted city buses in Regina and Saskatoon.
Market research conducted by WorkSafe Saskatchewan after the spring and fall safety
promotion campaigns revealed that within the general public:
I. Awareness of WorkSafe Saskatchewan remained stable at 65% at end of November
2005 compared to 66% at end of May 2005.
II. 65% of respondents attributed a positive influence from the WCB ads on their attitudes regarding safety.
III. 92% of respondents expressed support for the WCBʹs continuing investment in
safety campaigns.
IV. Almost two‐thirds of Saskatchewan residents (65%) reported that the WorkSafe
ads have a positive influence on their thinking about workplace safety. V. 83% of respondents were able to identify the campaign theme, ʺSafety is
everyoneʹs responsibility.ʺ
VI. 4 in 10 respondents say they have changed the way they do things at work because of WorkSafe. Practices mentioned were using proper equipment, safer lifting and ergonomic improvement – all of which are themes of WorkSafe advertising.
4.2.3
New
Zealand
Site
Safe
Passport
Program
Recently, the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) commissioned Research New
Zealand to evaluate two Site Safe safety programs, the Site Safe passport and the Supervisor Gold Card.
There were three main objectives of the research. The first was to understand how Site Safe is perceived within the construction industry. The second was to determine the effectiveness of the Passport training programs. Lastly, to determine if a difference exists in claim rates
and costs among those employers, and self‐employed construction workers who have
attended Passport training and those who have not.
Two telephone surveys and a set of qualitative interviews were also conducted with the
following participant groups; passport holders, employers and self‐employed groups, and
an industry stakeholder group which included officials from the Department of Labour and three national builders associations.
Each group was asked questions related to their context and experience with the Site Safe’s programs. The groups were asked a number of questions which ranged from the reasons for participating in these courses to the level of awareness these courses have generated. The results reported by Research New Zealand presented an encouraging picture for Site Safe’s
programs.
Overall, the majority of the participants recommend Passport training program as “being a
good, basic induction to health and safety, in particular for the commercial/vertical sector of the
industry”. These comments were further supported by suggesting that “Site Safe as an
organization is perceived positively by the industry, and it has a relatively strong brand”
Percent response when participants were asked if there had been a change in behavior due to Site Safe training (from report) is portrayed in Figure 1.
Figure 1 ‐ Change in Behaviour
Percent response when participants were asked if they felt Site Safe had an impact on reducing risks of accidents (from report) is displayed in Figure 2.
Figure 2 ‐ Impact on Accident Reduction Risk
• Another ACC commissioned study examined the extent to which Site Safe’s services
have had a measurable effect on injury rates in the Construction Industry and the economic value to society, as well as to ACC.
The analysis was based on the claim statistics provided by ACC and were further
supplemented by a literature review on injury trends both in New Zealand and
internationally. They found that Site Safe’s “maximum exposure organizations” have
superior Health and Safety Performance which results in saving ACC $1 million each year in injury claims.
The study examined injury rates for a sample of Site Safe’s member organizations which had considerable exposure to Site Safe’s services, with those for all other companies for
which ACC has records in the same, over two time periods (2002 to 2004 and 2005 to
2007). The Site Safe sample comprised around 380 companies and the non‐sample
around 287,000 companies. Companies from the Commercial sector accounted for the
largest of the Site Safe sample (between 45 and 65 organizations).
The study highlights that the Site Safe sample improved their rates of claims
substantially during 2005/07 in comparison with 2002/04 levels. Additionally,
performance for the Site Safe sample was considerably better than for the non‐sample companies. Between these two periods the rates of new claim costs increased for the non‐ sample companies by about 20%, when for the Site Safe sample the rates reduced by over 40%
The study also analyzed the potential benefits from the Site Safe sample’s rate of claims to the NZ economy in the form of social costs. Social cost is the total of all direct and indirect costs to society. In this case, it is the total of all costs related to injuries and death within the commercial sector. The study presents an overwhelming result by suggesting that there is a national benefit of about $8 million per year in terms of savings in social costs from the Site Safe sample. In general terms this means on an average each company within the Site Safe sample should have saved around $145,000 per year to the New Zealand economy in the form of social cost.
4.2.4
Home
Safe®
Colorado
Program
HomeSafe is a pilot project which is a joint effort between researchers, government agencies, and private businesses (Partners are the Home Builders Association of the metro Denver
area, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and Colorado state
university). Denver, Colorado was the site used to study the effectiveness of the HomeSafe program. The major component of the program is a new set of simplified regulations, which are published in a small booklet making it easier for contractors and workers to understand and practice safety.
The booklet reduces legislated safety code into a format which helps workers and
employers to understand the essentials, covering basic safety issues and information on how to implement simple safety practices. The booklet is pocket sized, easy to understand, and available in English and Spanish.
Some of the topics covered include; major safety concerns, personal protective equipment, power tool use, falls, ladders and scaffold ring, excavation, and trenching. The program aims to move away from a monetary fine system and focuses on the outcome rather than the process.
