Design process employee involvement

Cultural differences may have a strong influence on the approach you apply to PSM system design and to installation of the systems. In some countries (e.g., Japan) it is expected that the design process will be a participatory one, and attempts to simply install a system that had been designed elsewhere would be doomed to failure. In other countries (e.g., India), the norm is highly directive management within plants, and attempts at employee involvement in system design would be unlikely to work. 

Staff benefits should be designed into the QMS. An outline of expected benefits should be presented to staff to gain their support of the system initiative. Accomplishments should be advertised and rewarded. Establishing well-defined processes empowers employee involvement, participation, and contribution to the organization. It reinforces a culture of quality throughout the organization, and provides a conduit for their contribution. 

Furthermore, whatever the particular safety process — management involvement, safety in the design stages, employee training, hazards communication, incident investigation, use of personal protective equipment, behavior modification, and so on—its fundamental purpose is to avoid, eliminate, or control hazards. 

Site management should designate a responsible person(s) to monitor the weather and initiate the shelter-seeking process when appropriate. A protocol should be in place to notify you and your co-workers who may be at risk from a lightning threat. Depending on the number of employees involved, a team of people may be needed to coordinate the sheltering plan. Safe locations should be identified beforehand, along with a means to route you to those locations. 

Improves employee involvement in the work design process. 

A member of the central safety committee should be designated to guide and administer the JHA process. This person would use cross-functional ad hoc teams to develop and maintain diversity and expertise for development of a portfolio of JHAs. The JHA ad hoc teams would develop specific JHAs based on the risk assessment list developed using the risk guidance card. They would draw on experience and expertise of employees and supervisors in the department or area where the job resides. Refer to Chapter 8, Getting Your Employees Involved in the Safety Management System . 

In daily business, the services promised to your customers are rendered by the employees involved. These include, for example, designers, buyers, value adders and employees allocated to overhead costs. We refer to all operative employees involved in the performance process as... 

In our definition, the "process drivers" are all people involved in the performance process who contribute directly to the completion of performance or service. This includes individuals in value-added functions, including designers and work schedulers as well as overhead-related employees involved in warehousing, stock movement, transport, commissioning, shipping, etc. 

Once the steering committee has the observation process up and mnning, it wUl usually want to expand employee involvement. The design team will often set a... 

This is a process used to check how effective your safe operating procedures are and if there is a need to make changes to control the hazards of the job. Before the start of any task or operation, the designated competent or company authorized person should evaluate the task or operation to identify potential hazards and to determine the necessary controls. This assessment should focus on actual worksite conditions or procedures, which differ from, were not anticipated, or were not related to other hazard analyses. In addition, the competent person shall ensure that each employee involved in the task or operation is aware of the hazards related to the task or operation and of the measures or procedures to use for protection. Note that the job safety assessment is not intended to be a formal, documented analysis, but instead is more of a quick check of actual site conditions and a review of planned procedures and precautions. 

The audit s objective affects both the form and the content of audit. It is our contention that audits are suited to determine point-in-time compliance. It is relatively easy to design an audit to determine point-in-time compliance with a regulation or a standard. It is much more difficult to design an audit process that will reliably help evaluate and improve a process. It is unlikely that a standardized audit could accomplish this. What is required is that the auditor has an understanding of the particular process under study. Based on this understanding, the auditor can then design questions to evaluate the process. We have some limited experience with this approach. It lacks the appeal of standardization and is relatively slow and costly. Moreover, it can succeed only in an atmosphere of trust. If the auditor is to ever find out what is really happening, the employees involved have to be confident that the information they reveal will be used to improve the system rather than to evaluate them. 

The average architect will never or very seldom encounter severe corrosive exposures in his practice. He will more likely encounter the so called milder exposures, such as food manufacturing, food preparation, food serving and dairy product processing. Involved with these are the cleanup areas, i.e., sterilizing processes. The correct design of an area which will not harbor contaminants is important. The architect will also become involved in public toilets as well as employee toilets and change facilities. 

Participatory ergonomics sees end users contributions as indispensable elements of its scientific methodology. It stresses the validity of simple tools and workers experience in problem solution and denies that these characteristics result in nonscientific outcomes. Employees or end users are in most situations in the best position to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the work situations. Their involvement in the analysis and redesign of their workplace can lead to better designs as well as increase their and the company s knowledge on the process. 

Step 5. If the MRC determines that the R D substance may pose any risks, and therefore written notifications of health risks are required, the MRC shall prepare an appropriate written notification of the risks that maybe associated with the R D substance. The notification shall be designed to adequately inform all people who may potentially be exposed to the R D substance. Such notification may be by a container label, conspicuous notices where exposure may occur, written notification to each person potentially exposed, or any other notification system. The MRC shall update the MSDS and label as appropriate. The MRC shall provide the notification to the Pilot Plant Director. The Pilot Plant Director shall use the notifications prepared by the MRC to inform all company employees and all people to whom it directly distributes the R D substance, who are engaged in experimentation, research, or analysis on the R D substance, of the risks that may be associated with the R D substance. The Pilot Plant Director shall provide the notifications to all people involved in the manufacture, processing, use, transport, storage, and disposal of the R D substance. 

Process Safety Management is an ongoing process, involving all managers, employees and contract workers that aims to minimize uncontrolled change from design and/or operating intent and to keep the process within its safe limits. 

---