Work environment, system safety process

The job safety analysis (JSA) [also referred to as the job hazard analysis (JHA)], which is a more simplified form of task analysis, has been a longstanding tool for task and function analysis. JSA has been available and utilized in general industry for many years by the industrial safety community. However, many practitioners do not understand or are simply unfamiliar with the connection between the JSA and the system safety tasks of hazard identification and analysis. It has even been suggested by some in the profession that the JSA itself is a type of oversimplified system safety analysis and, if performed earlier in the job development phase, could be used as the basis of a preliminary hazard analysis for a specific task or set of tasks. However, because JSA is often (if improperly) used to analyze a function only after it has been implemented, much of the data is not factored into the system safety process. The primary purpose of the JSA is to uncover inherent or potential hazards that may be encountered in the work environment. This basic definition is not unlike that previously discussed regarding the various system safety analyses. The primary difference between the two is subtle but important and is found in the end-use purpose of the JSA. Once the job or task is completed, the JSA is usually used as an effective tool for training and orienting the new employee into the work environment. The JSA presents a verbal picture of a specific job. 

The JSA, then, is a specialized approach of task analysis that takes an existing job and analyzes its tasks to specifically identify hazards encountered in the work environment. At the very least, the JSA does have a place within the system safety process as a tool to evaluate the hazards or risks of an existing task or function during the operation phase of the project life cycle. Here we see another connection between the principal elements of the industrial safety process and one of the basic objectives of the system safety effort, namely, that the JSA tries to eliminate or control the risk of hazard exposure in a given task during the life of the project. 

An organizational framework or a safety management system is required to avoid accidents or incidents. It comprises procedures for monitoring the production process and the work environment such that hazards are understood and controlled. To this end hazard analyses for work places are carried out (cf. [5,7, 8]) and events are evaluated in order to identify and implement measures apt to avoid their recurrence or to make them at least less probable. This has to be a continuous process. 

Attitudes, both personal and organizational, affect the development of a safety culture in a workplace. The environment in which people work and the systems and processes in an organization also influence the safety culture. Therefore, each organization needs to consider all of these aspects in developing and nurturing a safety culture that suits the organization and the individuals within it. (Ardern,... 

System-oriented studies of the normal cognition and behavior of individuals and the work environment are replacing studies that count error as the target for patient safety research. Researcher Jens Rasmussen, noting problems with the concept of human error (for example, the notion is hard to define and is a function of the biases of the observer), believes that error is only an indication of experts exploring the boundaries of acceptable performance in an unkind environment (Rasmussen, 1998, p. 4), and believes (p. 3) that safety depends on the control of work processes to avoid accidental side effects causing harm to people, environment, or investment. ... 

Engineering controls must be implemented so that skin contact is minimized or even eliminated. Closed processing systems in factories and dust control measures can help to reduce airborne concentrations of particulate pitch compounds, including PAHs. The current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard for CTP Vs is 0.2 mg/m of workplace air during an 8-h day, 40-h workweek. Industries that manufacture or use pitch as an end product are monitored periodicaUy by the OSHA to insure that the working environment is maintained within this parameter (Gorman and Liss 1984). 

Abstract Local and short haul (L/SH) drivers work in various other work environments in addition to that of the truck cab, and the safety of these environments vary widely. In this study, we combined methods from three time perspectives accident statistics analyses (past) video observations (present) and scenario workshops (future) in order to provide new knowledge that can be applied to design and management process development in the transportation industry. Even though new technologies have and will emerge to ease drivers work, the work that is performed in environments other than truck cabs still involves tasks that require physical activities and pose risks of occupational diseases and accidents. Thus, drivers safety at work and work ability issues remain an area that needs continuous, systemic development. The results inevitably show that in order to successfully improve L/SH drivers work, the relevant stakeholders participation and a systemic approach is crucial. 

The central problem with any bonus or sanction system, or even all safety campaigns aimed at work processes in the man-machine-environment-system is that, irrespective of whether positive or negative intensifiers... 

---