Hinze, J and Bren, K (1996) Identifying OSHA paragraphs of particular interest. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 122(1), pp. 98-100. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Employers of construction workers have become increasingly concerned about worker safety in the past decade. Although the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations provide safety guidelines, they do not indicate the relative importance of the different paragraphs. While a common-sense approach might help these employers to focus on the appropriate work conditions, additional help might be gained from an examination of data that identifies specific paragraphs of particular interest. These paragraphs are associated with the greater number of violations. Paragraphs of even greater interest might be those in which a high proportion of violations are of a serious nature. Research shows that the paragraphs involved in the most violations are not necessarily those involved with the same relative number of serious violations. Although no claim can be made that these paragraphs identify the areas where most workers are injured, they do identify areas that warrant particular attention by employers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction worker, occupational safety and health, violation, regulation, relative importance |
| Subjects: | practitioner, risk assessment, political science, regulatory law, occupational health and safety management |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Health and Safety, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here