Waters, J and Raidén, A B (2008) Consideration of personal safety in project deployment. In: Dainty, A (ed.) Proceedings of 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008, Cardiff, UK.
Abstract
The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 legislates that all employers have a legal obligation to maintain the welfare of their workers. More recent amendments also require employers to carry out risk assessments in order to identify work-place hazards and develop appropriate measures to prevent or minimise risks to staff. Whilst the construction industry as a whole has faced the issue of workplace safety head-on, and the number of accidents in workplaces has sharply declined, the issue of personal safety (in terms of crime or intentional harm against the person) has not received the same level of attention. This could be owing to 1) a lack of standardised procedures for dealing with personal safety at work, 2) issues surrounding resources and time management, 3) an organisational ethos whereby crime against the person is not viewed as a priority issue, 4) a reluctance to deal with less foreseeable and preventable risks, and/or 5) the belief that once a problem is identified then responsibility must be taken for it. This situation can be compounded by employees being reluctant to report incidents, fearing it is a weakness on their part, that they will not be offered appropriate support, or that it is regarded as 'part of the job'. Ultimately, however, the impact of acts of 'intentional harm' against employees can have detrimental effects on their morale, health and welfare. Employers can suffer in terms of employee efficiency, image and recruitment. Thus, it is of benefit to both employers and employees that risk management strategies to promote personal safety and appropriate resourcing practices together with safety training are introduced into the workplace. This discussion paper seeks to raise the issue of personal safety at work and raises important questions about the extent to which employers value personal safety procedures and staff training, consider allocation of staff to project teams and possible barriers which may inhibit information and guidance on personal safety.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | health and safety; personal safety; project deployment; risk assessment |
| Index terms: | time management, efficiency, workplace safety, health and safety, strategy, morale, risk assessment, risk management, safety training, construction industry, project team, recruitment |
| Subjects: | health safety and environment, financial risk, management, performance management, industry analysis, leadership, occupational health, project controls, occupational health and safety management, risk assessment, project delivery |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Time Control, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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