Lifting Matters Q1 2020

Q1 2020

PROMOTING SAFETY IN THE CRANE INDUSTRY Tilt-up and Precast Concrete Construction Safely erecting concrete panels

Thanks to this edition’s contributors

CALL FOR CONTENT

Are you an aspiring author? Are you passionate about the safety of your workmates? Do you have an idea for improving safety or efficiency in your workplace? We want to hear from you.

Contribute to Lifting Matters’ vision of a safer industry by submitting your ideas and articles to liftingmatters@writestrategy.com.au We are seeking stories about recurring incidents, significant incidents, ideas about safer and more efficient ways of working, any prevalent issues, good reminders, anything of a safety related nature.

You can submit a full article, anywhere from 200 to 1000 words, or you can send us ideas about what you would like to hear us discuss in future issues of Lifting Matters. If you’re from a business, we will mention you as a supporter and publish your logo at no cost to you.

We can’t wait to hear from you!

2

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

MISSED AN ISSUE? Current and previous issues are all available for download on our website.

Visit the archives at: liftingmatters.com.au

From the Editor Q1, January - March, 2020 Welcome to the Q1 2020 edition of Lifting Matters.

I hope all our readers enjoyed a safe and happy holiday season.

This issue we are exploring tilt-up panel and precast concrete erection. The sheer dimensions and proportions of concrete panels present unique challenges for the crane industry. The heavy but flat load is awkward and difficult to rig and maneuver, and sadly when not handled correctly can result in tragic accidents.

We have several experts weighing in on how best to manage tilt-panel jobs, including Adam Courtney from Universal Cranes, John Humphries from CICA, Daniel Blank from Smithbridge, and Worksafe Qld. I encourage you to invest time reading our People Profile this issue. Derek Thomas, owner of crane training school Crane Elite, shares a very personal and tragic experience as a crane driver which fueled his passion for ensuring everyone in the crane industry receives the right education and training. We explore the themes of Derek’s experience further in an article from Peter G Furst of IRMI, delving into practical ways we can ensure we create a culture that says everyone is responsible for safety.

4

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

Please get in touch with us! You can visit us on Facebook, LinkedIn or drop us an email any time. If you have an incident report, ideas about safer and more efficient ways of working, widespread issues, valuable reminders or anything else safety-related, we want to hear from you. We look forward to working together to protect our people and save lives in the crane industry.

Any contributions for our next edition are due by 13 March 2020. If you prefer printed glossy copies for your crane cabs, cribs, mess hall, or reception, please send your postal address and the number of copies you require to liftingmatters@ writestrategy.com.au.

Lifting Matters is available to view at www.liftingmatters.com.au, or you can subscribe to receive an email copy each quarter.

Stay safe and see you next edition!

Thank you DASHELLE BAILEY, EDITOR liftingmatters@writestrategy.com.au

Contents

EDITORIAL

4

FEATURE ARTICLE Safe work with precast concrete

6

INCIDENT REPORT Brisbane, Queensland Gold Coast, Queensland Perth, Western Australia Noosaville, Queensland Austin, Texas Greensboro, North Carolina

12 14 16 18 19 22

TOPIC COMMENTARY Cranes and precast panel erecting

24

WORKING SAFELY Guide to managing risk in construction: prefabricated concrete 28 OPERATOR’S OPINION Dan Blank

30

PEOPLE PROFILE Derek Thomas

32

TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT Everyone is responsible for safety: the myth and solution

34

Feature Article

Safe work with precast concrete ADAM COURTNEY Sales Manager Universal Cranes Working with concrete panels is one of the most dangerous activities in the crane industry. There are many hazards to be aware of including rigging and clutch failure, ground conditions, weather conditions… the list goes on! Most notably, there have been fatal accidents with concrete panels because of their sheer size and weight, most often involving a dropped load due to failure of the concrete or lifting insert. To safely lift and place concrete panels we must understand how to minimise the risk associated with lifting insert failure and/or concrete failure.

6

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

But first, precast concrete basics Many of our readers will have had some involvement in precast concrete erection at some stage in their careers, but for those of us who haven’t yet come across these kinds of lifts, let’s cover some basics.

Precast concrete is widely used in the construction industry due to its versatility in shape, texture, and colour. Typically, there are two types of concrete panels: precast that is constructed off-site and

Feature Article transported to site, and tilt-up that is constructed on site. Both require cranes to lift the concrete panels into place.

1. Precast Concrete Panels: Precast panels are manufactured by casting concrete in a reusable form system which is then cured in a controlled environment such as a factory, transported to the construction site by semi-trailer, and lifted into position with a mobile or tower crane.

The typical weight of a precast panel is 1 to 10 tonnes.

2. Tilt-Up Panels: Tilt-up panels are manufactured onsite using temporary casting beds. When the concrete has cured, the panels are lifted off the casting bed and rotated into a vertical position using equalising rigging arrangements, prior to final installation with either a mobile or crawler crane.

Tilt-up panels typically weigh between 1 to 50 tonnes.

The panels can be erected by a variety of crane types. There are three types of cranes mainly used in the erection of precast and tilt-up panels.

1) Tower Crane: A tower crane is generally erected and used in metro areas where space is limited, often on high rise buildings. The precast panels are transported to site using semi-trailers where the tower crane lifts them off and places them into position.

2) Mobile Crane: A mobile crane is also typically used in metro areas due to space limitations. The average size for a mobile crane for this application is between 60 and 350 tonnes.

3) Crawler Crane: A crawler crane is used outside metro areas due to its physical size and transport restrictions. A crawler crane is typically used in industrial estates erecting panels for new commercial buildings and factories. One of the benefits of the crawler is that it can track around the site with a load, meaning panels can be cast either on- or off-site. Like the mobile crane, the crawler tends to be onsite for one day to one week at a time. The average size for a crawler for this application is between 80 and 150 tonnes.

Lifting Inserts & Clutches Perhaps the most critical element of safely lifting concrete panels is the lifting inserts and clutches. Lifting inserts are used for safe and efficient installation of concrete panels and are designed and manufactured by specialists. They are cast into the concrete panel to aid lifting and installation by a crane.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

7

Feature Article A lifting clutch that is compatible with the lifting insert is also used as part of the rigging arrangement.

There are two most used lifting inserts:

1.

For general use, round bodied anchors

2.

In Australia, the most popular lifting inserts are ‘hairpin’ plate inserts for edge lifting, with or without a hole for attaching extra reinforcements.

Three different examples of lifting inserts

8

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

As mentioned, lifting inserts require specialised design and manufacturing. Accidents involving concrete panels most often occur due to the failure of the lifting insert or surrounding concrete when the engineer’s specifications are not met.

To ensure a safe concrete panel lift, you should ensure:

•

The correct lifting insert is used as per the engineer’s design specifications, as well as the correct lifting clutch for the selected lifting insert

•

The slinging arrangement is suitable for the lifting insert and clutch configuration

•

The lifting clutch has been appropriately maintained and is not damaged

•

During the lift, inappropriate shock loading does not occur when lifting or moving the concrete element. This can happen due to poor rigging practices, panel handling or panel preparation

Other factors that should be considered by the party responsible for the precasting include the concrete strength, curing time, the depth of the anchor embedment, and correct void formers.

Feature Article

Mitigating these risks

Be sure to check your local requirements.

1. Lifting insert and clutch specifications

2. Lift engineering and design complies with AS 3850 Tilt-up concrete construction

It is imperative lifting insert and clutch specifications are as per the relevant standards. According to Worksafe Queensland:

Lifting insert systems should have a minimum guaranteed factor of safety of 2.5 to 1 against failure of the anchor, the concrete, or any reinforcing to which the insert relies upon for its anchorage. For instance, an insert for a 10 tonne working load must not fail at less than 25 tonnes when installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s and engineer’s specifications. Lifting clutches should have a minimum factor of safety of 5 to 1 against failure.

All panel designs must be verified by a suitably qualified engineer. AS 3850 Tilt-up concrete construction outlines the requirements for both precast concrete panels and tilt-up panels cast on site. In some jurisdictions, local safety bodies have adapted this standard into a Code of Practice. For example, in Queensland, Australia, Workplace Health and Safety Queensland issued the Tilt-up and precast construction Code of Practice, which is approved under section 274 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011.

3. Quality assurance Appropriate QA must be conducted on the concrete panel construction and verified against the engineer’s design. The concrete strength must also be tested.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

9

Feature Article

Lateral brace

End brace

Main brace Knee brace

Panel Bracing The other critical hazard in concrete panel erection is bracing. Bracing is a temporary support system for concrete panels to ensure they do not overturn or collapse during construction. They are usually placed diagonally and designed to resist lateral forces such as wind loads. The bracing is used to hold up concrete panels until all structural connections between the load-bearing panels, roof and floor diaphragms are complete.

Each panel is supported by at least two braces throughout the duration of construction.

Bracing details for concrete panels must be specified in the engineer’s design, 10

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

including the type, angle, configuration and size of erection braces. Bracing should be designed, manufactured, inspected and maintained to a recognised standard such as AS 3850 Tilt-up concrete construction.

There are extensive requirements for bracing design, which varies depending on the bracing type. Ensure you understand the requirements for fixed versus adjustable braces, brace connections and anchors, and base restraint. According to Worksafe New Zealand, brace connections should be designed with a factor of safety of 2.5 against failure. When post-installed drilled-in inserts are used to attach a brace, they should be designed with a factor of safety of 3.0. Be sure to check your local requirements.

Feature Article provided in the incidents section of this issue.

Winds & loading Due to the shape of precast panels and their large surface area wind is a particularly important hazard to consider in tilt-up panel erection. Wind can easily affect the load if caught on the right angle, causing the load to move laterally and affecting the crane’s stability and integrity of the boom.

The crane’s working wind speed will need to be reduced in windy conditions when lifting large precast concrete panels, and in extreme conditions the lift should be delayed until wind eases.

When it goes wrong A recent example of a panel erection lift gone wrong was an incident on the Gold Coast, where a 100 tonne crawler crane was lifting a 16 tonne concrete panel and the lifting clutch link broke. This caused two of the lifting points to become ineffective and the panel was dropped. Fortunately, no one was injured in the process. The lift failure was caused by a cracked lifting clutch link which went unnoticed. A reminder, those lifting inserts and clutches are absolutely critical in concrete panel erection. Check the design and the condition of all the required equipment before executing the lift. More details on this incident is

This incident serves as a good reminder to ensure a rigorous inspection and testing program is carried out on lifting clutches, possibly beyond the current minimum industry benchmarks. AS3850 does outline the requirement for non-destructive testing (NDT) of lifting clutches at manufacture but does not require any NDT during 12-monthly inspections. To prevent these kinds of unexpected failures, Workplace Health and Safety Queensland encourages relevant parties to consider carrying out NDT to inspect for cracks at the 12-monthly inspection.

Changes in the Industry There have been significant safety improvements in the pre-cast panel industry over the last ten years, including the introduction of backup axillary lift points to account for rigging or structural failure on pre-cast panels, and the introduction of face fit testing and protective equipment to protect workers from silicosis. These are just two examples that have helped create a safer environment when working with pre-cast and tilt-up panels.

Want to know more?

For further information on the erection of tilt-up and precast concrete elements please refer to the following: Tilt-up and pre-cast construction Code of Practice 2003 AS 3850 Tilt-up concrete construction

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

11

Incident Report

October 2016

Brisbane, Queensland Project

Construction of foul-water drainage tank at Eagle Farm Racecourse

Cranes

Unknown

The Outcome

Two fatalities

Key Learnings

• Wall panels should be adequately braced and anchored to the ground with engineer designed footings

• When working in pits, it is best to develop a special work

system that minimises the need for workers to be in the pit

On 6 October 2016, two workers tragically lost their lives when an 11-tonne concrete panel collapsed during the construction of a foul-water drainage tank in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. The below ground construction, part of the $25 million development of 400 infield stables at Eagle Farm Racecourse, included the assembly of four concrete wall panels below ground level.

Two workers, a 34-year-old man and 55-yearold man, were located in the construction pit with the only means of entrance/egress via a steel-extension ladder to the top of one of the walls. The first three concrete panels were lowered by crane onto the floor and ‘secured’ with adjustable temporary bracing.

When the fourth wall panel was being lifted into place, the structure became unstable and one of the wall panels began to fall forward.

12

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

The two workers managed to scale the ladder and jump onto the back of the slab as it fell. However, the failure of this wall caused a second wall which was no longer supported to fall forward, sadly crushing the workers between the two panels. The fatalities came just days after workers had walked off site amid concerns for safety.

A full investigation of the incident was conducted by Workplace Health and Safety Queensland. It was found that a sewage pipe had been used as makeshift bracing for the concrete panels that formed the drainage tank walls. Timber and plastic packers had also been utilised in an attempt to overcome inaccuracies on the concrete levelling pad.

Further, two workers were not aware that they had been nominated for roles as health and safety co-ordinators.

Incident Report

The Brisbane construction company involved in this incident was fined $405,000 for two counts of failing to comply with health and safety regulations. The company’s site manager faces two charges relating to duty of care under the Work Health and Safety Act. In addition, the subcontractor in control of the site is facing separate manslaughter charges brought by the Queensland Police Service under the Criminal Code, as well as one reckless conduct charge with respect to an earlier construction of another foul-water drainage tank.

Key learnings from this incident The erection of concrete wall panels requires thorough planning and engineering. In this incident, it is clear there were multiple failures contributing to the outcome including:

•

Inadequate panel restraint due to the lack of suitable bracing on the face of the panel and restraint at the bottom of the panel. A panel restraint system must be designed and certified by a qualified professional engineer.

•

Failure to put adequate measures in place to overcome inaccuracies on the concrete levelling pad which affected the fit of the wall panels. A comprehensive safe work procedure must be developed by the panel erector and verified by the principal contractor. Responsibilities of every worker should be specified in the procedure.

•

A limited escape route for the workers. A special work system should be put in place that minimises the time needed by workers to install or adjust the panels inside a pit.

This may include special designs relating to bottom restraints and footings.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

13

Incident Report

October 2019

Gold Coast, Queensland Project

Installation of tilt-up panels

Cranes

100t crawler crane

The Outcome Key Learning

• No injuries but high potential incident • Extensive damage to concrete panel • Lifting clutch links must be regularly and thoroughly inspected

• Consider going beyond current regulatory

requirements by carrying out Non-Destructive Testing at inspections in addition to when manufactured • A back-up lifting system is critical for lifting precast concrete panels

A 100t crawler crane was lifting a 16-tonne concrete wall panel on a tilt-up construction site on the Gold Coast in Queensland, Australia when the lifting clutch link on a 5-tonne lifting clutch failed, sending the panel crashing onto the casting stack below. Thankfully no one was injured in the incident, but the concrete panel was severely damaged.

The concrete panel had four face lifting inserts with equalising sheaves each fitted between two inserts. When the lifting clutch failed, two of the lifting points became ineffective resulting in the dropped panel.

It was identified that the lifting clutch link had a crack through the cross-section.

14

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

Incident Report

Despite inspection and proof testing from a third-party lifting gear organisation six months prior, the crack went undetected as it was on the inside of the lifting clutch link and not clearly visible on a visual inspection.

•

As outlined in Section 13.2 of the Tilt-up and pre-cast concrete construction Code of Practice 2003, back up lifting systems are critical for lifting precast concrete.

Be sure to check your relevant local regulations and guidelines.

•

Rigorous and frequent inspection and testing programs are necessary for lifting clutches. Consider going beyond the current requirements outlined in AS3850 and carry out Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) at annual inspection and testing. AS3850 currently specifies Non-Destructive Testing is required at manufacture but not during subsequent inspection and testing.

•

Maintain comprehensive inspection and testing records on all rigging equipment including lifting clutches.

•

Ensure visual inspections of lifting gear are carried out prior to any lift execution.

Key learnings from this incident While this incident fortunately did not result in any injuries, it did have the potential to cause major injury or death to nearby workers. It highlights several key areas to consider in concrete panel erection:

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

15

Incident Report

May 2018

Perth, Western Australia Project

Installation of tilt-up panels at a residential complex

Cranes

Tower crane

The Outcome

• Two cars crushed by a 3.9t fallen concrete panel • No injuries

Key Learning

Comply with legal regulations for tilt-up construction including appropriate training for all workers

In May 2018, a 3.88 tonne tilt-up panel fell from a residential construction site in Perth, Western Australia, crushing two cars below in the neighbouring car park.

Fortunately, there were no injuries. The incident involved a labour hire worker who was acting as an unlicensed surveyor alongside an apprentice boilermaker.

16

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

On the first floor of the 34-storey apartment complex, tilt-up concrete panels were being supported by temporary braces – namely, two props bolted to the internal face of each panel and to the suspended concrete slab floors.

The unlicensed surveyor decided to align an out-of-place panel using the site’s tower

Incident Report

crane. The two men unbolted the timber connecting the panel to the one below.

As the unlicensed surveyor left the area, he instructed the apprentice to locate the socket needed to unbolt the temporary props.

Key learnings from this incident

The apprentice then unbolted the temporary props causing the 3 x 4m panel to fall from the building onto two cars parked in the adjacent property.

Whilst the offending company’s Managing Director said the incident was caused by “human error”, the root cause was not a simple mistake but rather a failure to comply with legal regulations for tilt-up construction and the provision of appropriate training.

The building company involved was found guilty of failing to ensure work was directly supervised by a person who had completed an approved course for managers and supervisors on a site where tilt-up work was being done. They were fined $47,500 and ordered to pay $1519 in costs.

WorkSafe WA Commissioner Darren Kavanagh stated “Since 2008, there has been a National Code of Practice for Precast, Tilt-up and Concrete Elements in Building Construction that needs to be followed in every workplace where tilt-up construction is taking place.

Further, the company was also prosecuted for failing to comply with an improvement notice issued in July 2018 requiring it to have at least one member of staff certified as competent by completing an approved Supervise Tilt-up Work course. The notice was not complied with until early September.

“Tilt-up construction can be a hazardous activity, and it’s vital that both workers and members of the public are protected from any potential incidents involving falling concrete panels.” Building companies have a legal and moral responsibility to adequately train their workers and provide a safe place of work. LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

17

Incident Report

July 2019

Noosaville, Queensland Project

Placement of panels at an industrial complex

Cranes

110t Manitowoc M12000

The Outcome

Minor damage to plant with a broken glass window

Key Learning

• Have an appropriate number of workers required for the lift • Use heightened awareness when working in restricted spaces • Consider environmental factors during the risk assessment

On 9 July 2019, a 110t Manitowoc M12000 was placing concrete tilt panels at an industrial complex on the Sunshine Coast in Queensland, Australia.

The first panel had been lifted into place fairly close to the crane, and the next panel weighing 20 tonnes needed to be placed in between the first panel and the crane. This required the crane operator to position himself as close to the first panel as possible.

Working in a very tight and confined space, the “flip up” windscreen was open at the time to reduce sun glare.

With the sun in his eyes, the operator was concentrating on ensuring the concrete panel did not strike the boom. When slewing to pass the jib over the top corner of the first panel, the panel struck the crane’s windscreen shattering the glass. Fortunately, the operator was not injured.

18

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

Key learnings from this incident There were multiple factors contributing to this incident which should have been addressed.

When working with concrete panels in restricted spaces, it is imperative to: • Ensure an appropriate number of workers are available for the lift. Due to the confined nature of the lift, the operator and rigger should have stopped the job and communicated to the client that further workers/riggers would be required to control the load. Keeping open and clear lines of communication between the team on the site is crucial for safety.

• Use heightened awareness of your surrounds when working in tight spaces, whilst maintaining focus on the lift.

• Take into consideration environmental conditions that may contribute to a difficult lift such as sun glare or wind. Ensure these are factored into the risk assessment prior to the job.

Incident Report

January 2018

Austin, Texas Project

Tilt-up construction of commercial building

Cranes

Crawler crane

The Outcome Key Learning

• Overturned crane • Minor injuries • Quality assurance must be undertaken on site • Lifting clutches must be thoroughly and regularly inspected.

• Riggers must be properly trained and where required qualified in tilt-up construction

• Unnecessary personnel should not be permitted in the lifting vicinity

Images: https://imgur.com/a/7EtKz LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

19

Incident Report

Nearly a dozen workers were lucky to escape major injuries in January 2018 when a crawler crane lifting a concrete panel overturned in Austin, Texas. The crane was erecting a large panel as part of the tilt-up construction of a commercial building when a cable at the top of the panel broke free.

A dogman standing on one end of the panel as it was being lifted at the opposite end, was thrown to the ground from the force of the tilt panel as it lost footing on the ground. He quickly regained his balance and escaped clear of the slipping panel. As he did so, the remaining workers in the vicinity also fled as the concrete slab pivoted and then came crashing to the ground, pulling the crane over with it.

The panel had eight attachment points embedded in the concrete, with a series of cables and pulleys allowing the angle of the panel to be adjusted as it was lifted. Dave Ritchie, a crane operator for 17 years and a safety consultant for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, said that either the attachment insert came out of the concrete (which is dependent on the quality of the concrete), or there was a problem with the rigging (either with the assembly of the rigging or failing to identify a defect during inspection).

Once the cable broke free, excess stress was placed on the remaining attachment points shifting the load distribution, and ultimately pulling the crane over.

It was reported that one worker was trapped beneath the fallen crane, before later being freed.

Two workers suffered non-life-threatening injuries, including the crane operator who broke his ankle when exiting the crane cab.

20

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

Incident Report

Key learnings from this incident Whilst we were unable to locate official findings of this investigation, there are a number of measures that should be considered to prevent an incident of this nature:

•

Quality assurance must be undertaken on site to verify the quality of the surrounding concrete including the strength and curing times. Additionally, the lifting inserts and clutches must be in line with the engineer’s design.

•

Lifting clutches must be thoroughly and regularly inspected.

•

Riggers must be properly trained and where required qualified in tilt-up construction

•

Unnecessary personnel should not be permitted in the lifting vicinity. An exclusion zone should be established, and only suitable trained and qualified personnel allowed within the exclusion zone.

Images: https://imgur.com/a/7EtKz LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

21

Incident Report

August 2002

Greensboro, North Carolina Project

Major retail store construction

Cranes

Unknown

The Outcome Key Learning

• Three worker fatalities • Additional minor injuries • Temporary bracing should not be removed until

permanent connections to the structure have been made

• Construction should follow qualified plans/documents • All contractors and inspectors must be properly trained in tilt-up construction

In August 2002, three workers tragically died when a 20 tonne precast wall collapsed on them during a lunch break, outside a large retail construction project in Greensboro, North Carolina. Six others escaped with minor injuries.

The fire sprinkler subcontractor’s employees had taken cover in the shade provided by a reinforced concrete tilt-up wall panel. Just a couple of hours earlier that day, construction workers had removed temporary bracing supports from approximately 14 tilt-up wall panels, one of which the employees were seated under.

At the direction of the tilt-up wall contractor, the tilt-up sub contractors had removed the bracing based on a report from the testing agency that the welds between the roof joists and the embedded 22

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

steel plates of the wall had been completed.

The report was flawed as the welds had not been properly made and were thus ineffective in providing support at the top of the wall.

Further, the bottom of the wall was not structurally supported due to a failure to follow construction documents and meet tilt-up wall industry standards. The space beneath the panels for the grout varied between 2-4” (instead of 1” as per local standards), the space had not been grouted after the panels were erected, and the location of the shims under the wall did not follow a consistent pattern.

It is unknown what caused the wall to fall, however once the temporary girders had been removed, there was little to keep the panels upright and secured.

Incident Report

North Carolina Department of Labor Division of Occupational Safety and Health (OSH-NC) conducted an inspection of the construction site identifying hazardous conditions in the tilt-up erection. Fines ranging from $5,600 to $12,600 USD were issued to five companies involved in the incident.

Key learnings from this incident This incident stresses the importance of three factors in tilt-up construction:

1.

Temporary bracing must not be removed until permanent connections are completed at the top and bottom of all panels.

2.

Construction must follo w qualified structural drawings and align with industry standards.

3.

All contractors and inspectors must be properly trained in tilt-up construction and able to adequately carry out their duties.

U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Directorate of Construction, Investigation of the August 5, 2002, Collapse of Tilt-Up Precast Concrete Wall Panel i n Greensboro, NC Report.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

23

Topic Commentary

Cranes and precast panel erecting Article contributed by JOHN HUMPHRIES – CICA Working with or around precast concrete panels is a high-risk operation. The collapse of any concrete panel, even a small one, can have catastrophic consequences for workers, the public and property.

Recently published accident statistics reflect a high representation of incidents involving precast elements. In light of this, here is a list of the top 6 causal factors of incidents involving this kind of lift and it’s not all in the craneage.

Clutch and Insert Compatibility. Turning up on site with the wrong clutches is an easy mistake to make. Take the time to

24

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

ensure the crew heading to the job has compatible clutches for the lifting inserts cast into the elements to be lifted. It is recommended that the same manufacturer for the insert and clutch are used or a letter obtained from the manufacturer about compatibility.

Incorrect Rigging for Panel Rotating. Load equalising snatch blocks are crucial and, along with the chains and shackles, need to be of sufficient capacity and correctly tagged with up to date inspections.

Panel Birth Certificates and Shop Drawings need to be provided and

Topic Commentary reviewed prior, to confirm lifting points, masses/dimensions, curing time and the need for strong-backs. Often, the crane company will be assigned blame if a panel breaks mid lift. Crane operators need to be aware of this as, sometimes panels are designed incorrectly and are inherently unstable! If in doubt don’t lift.

Tail-swing Clearance and Crane Setup Sufficient clearance to slew is obvious, yet often overlooked and the panel installation sequence and position of temporary panel bracing (props), often causes issues here.

Also, the Crane needs to be of adequate capacity with a current CraneSafe Green Sticker and set up on suitable ground with adequate timbers or mats.

Panel Trucks need to be positioned in line with the crane boom to allow for rotation in line the boom, with the skids/ legs lowered to provide stability. Stacking or sequencing needs to be in the right order, alternating from side to side so the trailer is not unbalanced at any stage of unloading. If the trucks are not positioned correctly a second crane should be used, rather than attempting to horizontally rotate the panels, which will side-load the sheaves on the boom.

Temporary Leaning. If the panel sequencing is wrong, never lean a panel on the crane or another structure. The panel should be properly positioned elsewhere on dowels and braced, as per a normal installation.

While seemingly obvious, these points are often overlooked. The best way to ensure this doesn’t happen is adequate planning,

a good lift plan and site-specific SWMS will capture the multiple high-risk work triggers:

•

Involves tilt-up or precast concrete

•

Has a risk of a person falling two metres or more

•

Requires temporary support to prevent collapse

• •

Movement of powered mobile plant Adjacent to roadways.

The lift plan will determine if load share calculations are required. If the mass of the load is within the minimum rated capacity of both the main and the auxiliary hook, load share calculations are not required for the lift plan, however, a lift procedure is still required, and should specify the risk management process of the entire operation. If the load mass is greater than the minimum rated capacity of either hook, you can either use a bigger crane or calculate the maximum load share for each hook as part of your lift procedure.

According to AS2550.5, the minimum rated capacity of each hoist must be at least 1.2 times the maximum calculated share of the load for that hoist. This is carried over from the Dual Crane Lift Standard and acts as a safeguard against complexities and uncertainties of coordinating two cranes at once. CICA’s position is that this is not mandatory for a single crane dual hook lift if it’s a ‘Designed Lift’ planned by a

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

25

Topic Commentary If this information is available from the beginning of the project, then many of the issues mentioned previously are avoided or mitigated early.

“While many problems originate outside a crane crew’s sphere of influence, we fail in our duty of care when we try and ‘make do’ with a less than ideal situation that we detected far too late.”

professional engineer as the ‘competent person’ mentioned in the standard.

The site should be inspected with the builder or supervisor well in advance to determine:

•

Trenching and backfilling hazards and the need for geotechnical ground studies

•

Other works occurring on the day of lifting

• • •

Electrical hazards and site constraints

26

Propping and access issues Material delivery points and orientation

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

This article cannot possibly cover every detail of precast erection, but rather, highlights the more common oversights and draws attention to the many simple elements that can prevent a large incident.

Be wary of making economic or efficiency decisions rather than safety decisions when presented with an unforeseen hazard.

CICA Membership provides members access to the Australian Standards, guidance notes, safety bulletins, resources and tools to facilitate compliance and safety. Go to www.cica.com.au for more information on how to join.

Incident Report

CALL FOR CONTENT Contribute to Lifting Matters’ vision of a safer industry by submitting your ideas and articles to: liftingmatters@writestrategy.com.au

Contributor (content and images): Vertikal.net LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

27

Working Safely

Guide to managing risk in construction: prefabricated concrete

Safe Work Australia has developed a guide on the safe use of prefabricated concrete elements in the construction industry.

Prefabricated concrete (also known as precast concrete) is a concrete element manufactured somewhere other than its final place of installation. This method of construction is becoming more common and involves discrete elements like walls or 28

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

Working Safely columns being prefabricated offsite and then erected and incorporated by crane into final position in a building structure.

Due to their size and mass, prefabricated concrete elements are vulnerable to collapsing, posing a significant work safety risk. Safe design and adequate planning are the best ways to manage the health and safety risks that may arise when working with prefabricated concrete.

The Guide to managing risk in construction: prefabricated concrete provides national guidance material for duty holders in the building industry. It includes information on managing risks and work health and safety duties associated with working with prefabricated concrete, as well as training, instruction, supervision and consultation processes.

The guide contains information on design, manufacture, transport and storage of prefabricated concrete, as well as tips and advice on the erection process, including crane setup and operation. There is a pre-erection checklist and information on technical standards and certificates of compliance.

The use of prefabricated, tilt-up and concrete elements in both building and civil construction has become increasingly popular in recent years and it is important to be aware of the risks associated with this type of work. Download the Guide to managing risk in construction: prefabricated concrete at safeworkaustralia.qld.gov.au

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

29

Operator’s Opinion

Operator’s Opinion Dan Blank has over 20 years’ experience in construction. Dan started his career as a carpenter building residential houses and high-rise buildings in New Zealand. After moving to Australia, Dan joined a specialist tilt-panel construction company where he spent several years working exclusively in precast concrete panel preparation and erection. Having also spent several years in marine and civil construction and ultimately transitioning to crane driving, Dan has a unique perspective on tilt-panel and precast concrete erection.

Have you personally been involved in any tilt-up panel lifts? What happened and what did you learn?

My biggest tilt-up panel job was the Gold Coast Convention Centre in Queensland, Australia, where I was a foreman for Forest Constructions. We were lifting tilt panels onto a suspended slab with one crane. The panels were being temporarily propped for a second crane to then place into final position. We were using two Manitowoc M12000 crawlers.

One of the most important things I learned from this job was “ALWAYS DOUBLE CHECK”.

30

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

One day I asked the builder if an engineer had signed off on the back propping of the slab. He had advised me it was all done on the weekend and was ready to go.

My supervisor and I decided to do a walkthrough anyway just to double check.

Lucky we did - after taking a look at the back propping we noticed that a lot of the

Operator’s Opinion

props were loose and not levelled. After finding loose back propping, we tightened all props again and had engineers sign off again before using crawler cranes on top of the slab.

What is the most common action or behaviour you witness in the field when operators don’t plan for tiltpanel lifts appropriately? How do you think we can fix it?

Tilt-panels are such dynamic loads because of their shape. Wind has a big effect on the load. The awkward shape also means steady placement on the ground takes a highly skilled and experienced operator.

Unfortunately, the most common mistake I have seen is overriding of cranes. It is never acceptable to override the crane’s built-in warning functions – these are almost always telling you something very important. You must be hyper-aware of these when lifting tilt-panels because the environmental factors that might have just

a minor impact on a normal lift will have a significant impact on a tilt panel lift.

The other mistake I have seen is attempting to execute unachievable lifts. Adequate lift planning is essential.

Factors that have a minor impact on a normal lift will have a significant impact on a tilt panel lift What do you feel is the most important safety issue affecting your particular role in the industry today?

At the front of my mind recently has been regular inspections and servicing of cranes and rigging. To relate this back to tilt-panel and precast erection, regular and thorough inspecting of any lifting clutches is critical.

I know of incidents where lift clutch failure has had fatal outcomes.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

31

People Profile

Derek Thomas

Derek Thomas is the owner of Florida based crane school Crane Elite.

WARNING

as Derek Thom

this article contains graphic content that may be disturbing for some people.

e Elite Owner, Cran

Tell us about your experiences in the crane industry?

In March 2018 I had a traumatic experience that changed my soul to the core. It was the middle of a normal day operating a 999 Manitowoc crane. We were off-loading cage components for a form to be placed inside a bridge for an overpass.

I had a foreman named Mike, who was working alongside a young helper. We were in the process of lifting a 35ft cage weighing about 15,000lbs. As we picked up the cage, I noticed there was only one 32

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

tag line to help control the load. The foreman stepped away in the middle of the lift to look for other rebar components.

Suddenly, the load was swinging towards my crane boom. I shouted outside to the young helper to pull the rope. He ran under the load and snatched the rope with such a force that it swung the opposite way towards the opposite side. He snatched again, when finally the foreman took over to control the load. We sat the load down.

I can tell you - I was not a happy camper!

I summoned the young man over to ask if he was new to construction. He stated it

People Profile

was his first day. I took the opportunity to coach him as a mentor, discussing not walking under loads or doing things he has no experienced doing. He was appreciative of the advice.

I summoned the foreman Mike over, who I had worked with for two years and questioned him about teaching his people safety around cranes. He laughed and told me, “Yeah, yeah, I know, I will talk to them!”. And that was that, the day finished.

The very next day I had to operate another crane next door while another operator took over my usual crane for the max cage lift of 40,000lb, which they had assembled the day prior. I was not present, but I was later told the team attempted the cage lift and during the lift one end caught onto the rebar rack. The foreman Mike was in charge. He climbed under the load to dislodge the rebar that was catching. Once freed, the force caused the 40,000lb load to fall on Mike.

The education at both a site level and management level was simply inadequate and a man paid the price of his life for it.

Now I can preach until I’m blue in the face about safety. A big part of this is ensuring everyone in the crane industry, at all levels, fully understands how cranes work, how to operate a crane, plan a lift, key risks and mitigation strategies. I strongly believe that until management takes a class on crane theories, we will repeat some mistakes again and again.

When I saw the commotion, I ran over and found myself in a surreal scene. The cage was on top of Mike, his insides were coming out his mouth, and his chest was as flat as a pancake. It was surreal to the point it traumatized me forever.

We are so sorry you had this experience. What did it teach you and how did it change you?

By this time in my career, I had 30 years’ experience. It became numb to me, with all the preaching to management about putting inexperienced individuals in positions to do dangerous jobs.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

33

Training & Development

Everyone Is Responsible for Safety: The Myth and Solution Article contributed by PETER G FURST, IRMI Reproduced with permission of the publisher, International Risk Management Institute, Inc., Dallas, Texas, from the Expert Commentary section of IRMI.com, copyright International Risk Management Institute, Inc. Further reproduction prohibited. Visit www.IRMI.com for more information.

In many organizations, the thinking behind the “everyone is responsible for safety” idea is to create an employee mindset to proactively engage in the creation of a safe work environment for everyone. The basis for this thinking is that if everyone is actively engaged, then the risk of injury should be minimized due to the concerted grass-roots effort.

Not only will all the employees benefit from this approach through fewer accidents, but they should experience satisfaction in witnessing the positive result of their engagement, which created a safer work environment. This should also lead to improved morale.

34

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

I was speaking to a group of about 250 people in a seminar at a safety conference.

To make a point, someone mentioned that “in reality,” everyone was responsible for safety. When I asked the group exactly how this could be managed effectively, no one had a good answer. Though this may sound good in theory, in practice, it is not effective because holding a group accountable is not practical and, therefore, unmanageable in practice. There are also other reasons that make this particular approach to affecting safety performance ineffective.

Training & Development

Trouble Assessing the Situation The first step in an individual’s decision to intervene is the recognition that another individual requires assistance. To take action, the bystander has to realize that the other person is not aware of the hazard and may possibly get injured unless given a warning. Some of the practical reasons why individuals hesitate in taking action in regard to safety may be involved with the assessment of the situation.

•

What one individual may consider as being unsafe, another may feel is perfectly safe. So the observer may assume that the situation is safe enough when, in fact, it is not.

But because of this assessment, this person may not do anything about it.

•

The observer may think that the situation and associated exposure pose minimal risk and that it does not warrant intervention, as the other person is experienced and should be able to handle it.

•

Even if the observer deems that the other person is in a situation that may be potentially hazardous, the observer may assume that the person is aware of the hazard and will take it into account in his or her performance of the task.

•

If there are others in the area, then the observer may assume that one of the other persons present has already alerted or will alert the exposed employee and, as a result, do nothing. (See my article, Stop Work Authority and the Bystander Effect, from July 2015.)

•

In the case of a supervisor who is faced with a critical goal and the need to "get the job done," the supervisor may not say anything about a hazard, as the task may take minimal time (meaning the exposure is limited), and the worker engaged in the activity is experienced. Given those factors, the supervisor decides that no intervention will be forthcoming.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

35

Training & Development

•

If the observer works for a different subcontractor, that person may feel that he or she does not have the authority or the expertise to say something about the situation he or she assumes is unsafe.

•

The observer may feel less experienced than the person performing the task and, therefore, not voice concern over the potential hazard.

•

The observer may feel reluctant to voice concern for fear that others may ridicule that concern. This is especially applicable to people who do not have an affinity for affiliation.

•

The observer may be busy and feel that others who have time will intervene and, as a result, feel justified in not doing anything about the situation.

The Presence of Others There may be many underlying reasons why one worker may not take any action on a construction site once aware of a situation that may potentially injure those working in or around possible hazards. This may also be explained by a number of sociopsychological concepts. More importantly, it actually may create a situation where many people will do little or even nothing to further the cause of safety. A number of social psychological experiments have demonstrated that individuals may fail to assist others in situations where they become aware of 36

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

potential hazards not due to indifference but, rather, due to the presence of other people in the area. This is explained by the “diffusion of responsibility” theory and the principle of social proof.

Per Wikipedia, “[d]iffusion of responsibility is a sociopsychological phenomenon whereby a person is less likely to take responsibility for action or inaction when others are present” (https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility). Each individual may assume that since everyone is responsible, there has to be a number of other people who can take action.

Therefore, there is little pressure to take action. The end result may actually be that everyone is going to make that very same assumption, and no one will actually do anything to further the cause of safety.

Another reason for inaction involves the principle of social proof. This principle states that we determine what is correct by finding out what other people think is correct.1 In situations where we are not sure what the correct action or behavior ought to be, we look to see what others are doing.

As a rule, people make fewer mistakes if they act in accordance with social evidence than not. Usually, when a larger number of people are doing the same thing, it is the right thing to do. In a way, when there is doubt about what a person should do, it becomes a shortcut to deciding what to do.

When the other people in the area fail to react, individuals often take this as a signal that any form of action or response is not required.

This sort of thinking may even lead to the conclusion that taking any action is not appropriate. Other researchers have found

Training & Development that onlookers will tend to be less likely to intervene if the situation is perceived to be unclear, open to interpretation, or enigmatic. Per Wikipedia, “[t]his phenomenon tends to occur in groups above a certain critical size and when responsibility is not explicitly assigned.

It rarely occurs when the person is alone.

Diffusion increases with groups of three or more” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Diffusion_of_responsibility).

Tragedy of the Commons Another possible mechanism that may drive the derailment of thinking that everyone is responsible for safety may be the “tragedy of the commons” idea. According to Wikipedia, the term, popularized by Garrett Hardin, represents situations where individuals driven by self-interest “behave contrary to the best interests of the whole” group. This concept was based on the effect of unregulated grazing on “common land”—a practice in medieval England. The land (pasture) was owned by the manor, and commoners grazed their herds on it and paid the manor for the privilege. A commoner’s primary focus was feeding his or her herd with no concern for other commoners or the sustainability of the grazing. This practice was also used in relationship to common lands and village greens in the American colonies, where the village owned the land, and individual villagers had the right to graze their animals there (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_ of_the_commons).

We can see the “tragedy of the commons” concept at play concerning sustainability

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

37

Training & Development issues today in situations such as global warming, pollution of the atmosphere, ocean fisheries, sustainable development meshing with economic growth, environmental protection versus industry practices, etc.

The “tragedy of the commons” idea may play a role in occupational situations where individuals have to achieve some form of production to meet operational goals and do not see any benefit to investing time and effort to ensure that others are working safely.

The Management Dilemma If the organization is truly interested in creating a safe work environment, then making an ineffective statement such as “everyone is responsible for safety” is not useful nor is it effective. Such a statement without a framework enabling everyone to actually engage in the process represents wishful thinking. It is understood that workers work because they need to, and so they are going to do what they have to do to keep their jobs. Whatever the organization’s management states as being important, or whatever workers understand or perceive as being important, is going to affect the workers’ attitudes and drive their behavior at work. If workers are put in a position where they have to choose between conflicting expectations, they will choose the one that ensures their success in remaining employed.

If the organization has a culture that values or emphasizes production, then production is going to be the primary focus of the workforce. Supervisors are going to “push” for production. And, if there is anything (like

38

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

safety) that may be perceived as detrimental to achieving that production goal, it may very well be ignored, with resulting adverse outcomes. What typically happens is organizations add a safety requirement to the performance mix without addressing the underlying drivers associated with the production requirements. Depending on how much pressure management applies to improve safety, outcomes will elicit a set of different reactions from the workforce.

If the pressure for improvement in safety is weak, the workers are going to assume that management is not really committed to the new initiative and will eventually go on to some other one. This will result in cynicism on the workers’ part, so they might ignore the new safety initiative. If the pressure persists, they may pay lip services to it.

This approach of work, as usual, at the worksite will result in little if any improvement in safety outcomes. Therefore, management’s instinctual reaction to this is going to be ratcheting up the pressure on safety. Greater pressure on safety and no change in production expectations is going to create some internal conflict for the workers. They can no longer ignore this, so they will shift from passive indifference to some form of resistance. This could take the shape of subversion, subterfuge, cover up, etc. To avoid conforming, they may try to game the reporting or do the “right” things during site inspections and not at other times.

With some improvement in safety results, though not quite enough, management, in all likelihood, will exert even greater pressure to get the workforce to comply to show greater improvement in safety

metrics. This causes the resistance to go “underground,� and it manifests itself in more counterproductive ways. The safety initiative will be sabotaged. Workers will go out of their way to show how the safety initiative impacts production negatively.

They will maliciously follow every safety rule or step while engaged in performing their task to show how they are hampered from being productive.

To create a culture where everyone (including management as well as the workers) values safety and actively participates in the process requires an

integrated cross-functional approach.

Management must map the workings of the organizational and operational systems and determine where the barriers to creating a safe work environment exist.

This will entail a diligent and exhaustive review of policies, procedures, processes, and practices. After the underlying barriers are identified and removed, the remedy starts with reiterating the organizational values; articulating a compelling vision; devising a comprehensive winning strategy; and setting clear objectives, meaningful measures, and targets.

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

39

Training & Development Before attempting a major change initiative, it might be wise to find the less disruptive avenues that may lead to performance improvement. These initiatives will make some changes to existing processes that are already in use. Successful implementation should be relatively easy, and this will also get the organization used to change initiatives. If the implementation goes well, people will be less likely to be concerned or resist later changes. There are many areas in operations where small changes will result in substantial improvement of safety outcomes. Some “low-hanging fruit� opportunities that should be easy to accomplish can be found in the fundamental

40

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

elements of management, which are planning, organizing, directing, staffing, and controlling.

Integrated planning.

Planning is a fundamental pillar of construction operations. Just about everything in construction has to be planned. Successful construction companies have management and field personnel who generally are effective planners. It is through planning that the appropriate materials are secured,

Training & Development delivered, and installed. It is through effective planning that all trades work harmoniously on the work site. Planning is an ongoing process that starts before construction and is carried out during the execution of work to ensure successful completion of the project.

and objectives. Management defines responsibilities and accountability to ensure the work is performed as planned.

Managers provide the appropriate technology, facilitate communication, and ensure the flow of information and that given directions are clear and specific.

The process has to be modified to make managing the risk of injury a cornerstone of the process. With effective integrated planning, the project staff can ensure that all the necessary elements required to build the project successfully are combined with the identified potential risks of injuries so as to achieve both production and safety goals.

This effort will ensure safe and effective project delivery by minimizing disruption, increasing efficiency, and lowering costs.

Good organizational design helps communications, productivity, and innovation. It creates an environment where people can work effectively together. It means looking at the complex relationship between tasks, workflow, responsibility, and authority while making sure these all support the objectives of the business. How people interact and are incentivized directly affects how well the organization performs.

The fact that an incident involving some element of safety on the construction site causes disruptions, inefficiency, and loss begs the question, why don’t construction companies address potential hazards and exposures to their workers as an integral part of their planning process?

This highlights the need to incorporate safety into the fundamental functions of management. For this process to be effective, safety ought to be addressed before the project is bid and continue all the way through turnover.

Organizing.

Management organizes how the company will function by creating a structuredevising system (policies and procedures) and a hierarchical structure of management functions to successfully achieve its goals

O rganizing the work, worksite, subcontractors, and staff is critical to effectiveness and efficiency. To be efficient, safety must be integrated into the organizational systems and processes.

Prioritizing is required and determined by importance or urgency. It really takes a team of talented people applying their combined skills with a unity of purpose to more effectively manage work, solve problems, make decisions, and organize in ways that truly let them shine.

Directing.

The various members of the supply chain, as well as workers on site, will need direction over the course of the project. Managers tell people what to do, how to do it, and when to have it completed. They assign roles and responsibilities, set standards, and define expectations while holding people

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

41

Training & Development

accountable. Safety must be an integral part of directing the workforce. The need for direction is a function of the knowledge and experience of people involved. Appropriate selection will limit the amount of needed direction, which frees up management to do other important things.

Decision making is an important function of management. Assigning capable staff to the field and hiring competent subcontractors creates a potential for teamwork. For employees to function well, there needs to be effective communication. The project manager should empower each person to make decisions that apply to his or her own groups and roles. This empowerment must be commensurate with each individual’s level of experience and motivation. This speeds up problem solving as well as decision making.

Staffing.

People are a key element of performance.

Selecting the “right” people for the “right” tasks and making sure they are doing the “right” things at the “right” time is fundamental to achieving excellence in operation. This is a key factor in addressing the safety performance of the workforce and management’s active support and involvement. Managers routinely need to delegate tasks to others to meet project needs, so involving competent and experienced workers makes the project delivery process more effective.

If you have formed a “smart” team and they clearly understand the vision of safe

42

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

and efficient production, they should be empowered to make decisions that apply to their particular circumstance. In addition to speeding up problem solving and decision making, it will foster synergy as well as instill a sense of ownership throughout the entire team. Per Wikipedia, synergy is the ability of a group to outperform even its best individual member (https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Synergy).

Controlling.

Management control systems are tools used to direct the organization toward its strategic objectives. Control is an important function for ensuring that the organization, operations, or projects are on target to meet all the critical goals and specific deadlines.

Control is an integrated technique for collecting and using information to motivate and direct employee behavior and to evaluate performance. Safety must be integrated into the overall management control system.

Though not a complete list, these areas should help achieve some improvement with relatively limited effort and disruption to existing operational practices. In the present competitive business environment, organizations must encourage their employees to willingly and enthusiastically give their best efforts. This will only be accomplished if the employees trust the organization’s leadership, feel that they are treated fairly, and believe that they are valued. This fosters job satisfaction that leads to participation and involvement.

Conclusion So, for the statement “everyone is responsible for safety” to become a reality in the sense that everyone actively is involved and striving to create a safe work environment, management has to enable them to do so. This comes about through careful thought and action. It requires planning, organizing, directing, staffing, controlling, and motivating. The organizational systems must be aligned, processes must be integrated, and the work climate must encourage open

communication for workers to feel that they are treated fairly. Management must become leaders who value and motivate their workforce. Management’s actions and behaviors are a strong indication of their position on what is expected of their employees and how they feel about them.

This is going to create—as well as sustain—a work climate that not only indicates, but also reinforces, that safe production garners recognition and results in job security.

Cialdini, Robert B., Influence: Science and Practice, 4th ed. (Allyn & Bacon, 2001), 8 (http://www.influenceatwork.com/wp-content/ uploads/2012/02/Influence_SP.pdf).

1

LIFTING MATTERS

ISSUE Q1 2020

43

Any questions?

Want to support?

Contact us! liftingmatters@writestrategy.com.au www.liftingmatters.com.au

Content deadline for next issue: Friday 13 March 2020 Next issue available: April 2020

Disclaimer – This newsletter is not an exhaustive list of all safety matters that need to be considered. Whilst care is taken in the preparation of this material, Lifting Matters does not guarantee the accuracy and completeness of this information and how it applies to your situation. Lifting Matters will not be responsible for any loss, damage or costs incurred as a result of errors or omissions in relation to the material in our publication or for any possible actions ensuing from information contained in our publication.

Any views or opinions represented in this publication are personal and belong solely to the author and do not represent those of people, institutions or organisations that the publisher may or may not be associated with in a professional or personal capacity unless explicitly stated.