Incident Investigation disciplinary actions

Disciplinary action may be appropriate if malicious or criminal intent is positively identified as a root cause. An example would be when an investigation reveals horseplay, practical jokes, fights, or even sabotage was among the root causes. These activities have no place in any workplace and are especially undesirable in the chemical processing industry. It is most likely that a company s employee handbook, human resources documents, or union contract addresses these situations and communicates the policy in advance of an incident. In short, the investi-... 

Incident investigations should very rarely result in disciplinary actions. The team should assume that disciplinary actions are not part of the investigative outcome. Even the perceived threat of disciplinary action has detrimental effect on an investigation and may discourage cooperation during interviews. 

The investigation of incidents identifies specific individuals as those accountable for the incident. Disciplinary actions are taken to teach people that this is unacceptable behavior. 

The investigation of incidents identifies the specific root causes and contributing causes for incidents. There is less emphasis on identifying the specific individuals responsible. Disciplinary actions are rare but likely if there is a history of repeated occurrences. There is usually a greater amount of explanatory detail in the incident report. There is greater tendency in a fact finding organization to report near-miss as well as minor incident events. 

If we search for culprits to blame using the finger-pointing method Ian Nimmo just described, the investigation process is very simple. As Nimmo just indicated, we identify specific individuals (in this case the chemical process operator) as accountable for the incident. It would be easy to say the operator failed to follow established procedures. Disciplinary actions could result to teach people that this is unacceptable behavior. [3] Using just the first layer approach would be a waste of effort. Such injustice could create an atmosphere encouraging sincere individuals to be less likely to report all the facts. It is probable that we would not find out all the underlying contributors and hence be unable to effectively prevent a repeat of an incident with a 5.5 million (1979) price tag. 

The investigation of incidents identifies specific individuals as those accountable for the incident. Disciplinary actions are taken to teach people that this is unacceptable behavior. In extreme cases, individuals are fired for incompetence or negligence in their duties. These organizations tend to report a small number of incidents, and the incidents reported include significant observable events such as loss of life, major equipment damage, environmental release of contaminants, or significant loss of production. 

Upon completion of an investigation, incidents will be reviewed before proceeding with nondisciplinary or disciplinary action, according to the provisions of the performance and corrective action policy. 

---