Use of Safety Management Systems in Managing Highway Maintenance Worker Safety (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5   Literature Review This review focuses on previously published academic literature on SMSs and their use. However, little documented knowledge exists in this domain, especially related to SMS use in managing highway maintenance-worker safety. Thus, the review begins with an introduction to SMSs, how they fit in a broader safety program, their use in the construction industry, and then their use in departments of transportation. A higher-level overview of maintenance-worker safety management in the United States highway industry can be found in the Background section of the Introduction (Section 1.1). 2.1 Safety Management System for the Construction Industry SMSs were first presented to the construction industry in 1980 by the European Union, aiming to mitigate the hazardous conditions associated with the construction industry’s volatile nature and to reduce injuries and accidents at construction sites (Vassie et al. 2000). Several countries worldwide adopted SMSs either mandatorily or voluntarily. This adoption resulted from the increasing awareness of the importance of implementing a more systematic approach toward risk management and strengthening primary prevention (Kogi 2002). Several international standards were generated to provide organizations with effective ele- ments of occupational health and safety (OH&S) management systems that can be integrated with other management requirements and provide practical guidance for implementing the OH&S management system. Those standards include BS 8800:2004 (British Standards Institute 2004), BS OHSAS 18001:2007 (British Standards Institute 2007), HSE HSG65 (Health and Safety Executives 2013), AS/NZS 4804:2001 “Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems” (Australian/New Zealand Standard 2001), ANSI/AIHA Z10-2012 “American National Stan- dard for Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems” (American National Standards Institute 2012), and OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program (Occupational Safety and Health Administration 2011). Moreover, ISO recently published the ISO 45001:2018 “Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use” (International Organization for Standardization 2018). Occupational health and safety management systems can be defined as “part of an organi- zation’s management system used to develop and implement its OH&S policy and manage its OH&S risks” (International Organization for Standardization 2004), or, in other terms, a “set of interrelated elements used to establish policy and objectives and to achieve those objec- tives” (British Standards Institute 2007). As such, Robson et al. (2007) conducted a systematic C H A P T E R 2

6 Use of Safety Management Systems in Managing Highway Maintenance Worker Safety review on the effectiveness of OH&S management system interventions, and they found that there exist four major elements in implementing SMSs: 1. Overall commitment from the management, including occupational health and safety policy, goals and objectives, and allocation of resources, system integration, and system communication; 2. Project planning, including planning and development, safety manual and procedures, participation in conducting safe working procedures, and procurement and contracting; 3. Project operation, including training, hazard control, and prevention and corrective action systems; and 4. Performance review, including performance measures, evaluation, continual improvement, and management review. Similarly, the ISO outlined seven elements in 2018 for occupational health and SMSs. Those elements are as follows: 1. Context of the organization, 2. Leadership and worker participation, 3. Planning, 4. Support, 5. Operation, 6. Performance evaluation, and 7. Improvement (International Organization for Standardization 2018). In general, the presence of a SMS could be linked with a reduction in incident rates and is considered a critical step in accident prevention. However, it is worth mentioning that when organizations are willing to invest in implementing a SMS to reduce injuries and accidents and improve safety performance, Wachter and Yorio note the value of also focusing on the “minds and hearts of their workers through human performance-based SMSs designed to promote and enhance worker engagement” (Wachter and Yorio 2014). Similarly, for the construction industry, SMSs are also considered effective in preventing injuries and illnesses where the expected benefits include decreased accident-related costs, reduced absenteeism, increased productivity, improved worker morale, and lower turnover (OSHAcademy 2020). Ismail et al. (2012) investigated influential factors that impact the success of SMSs for construction sites. They defined five clusters of factors with a total of 30 elements of an SMS. The researchers conducted a survey for three different construction sites ranging from high- rise buildings to an infrastructure renovation project. It was found that the most influential factor impacting the effectiveness of an SMS is the Personal Factor. The sub-factor making this cluster the most prominent is safety awareness. The five clusters with their corresponding elements are listed as follows (Ismail et al. 2012): 1. Resources Factor: includes safety equipment, personal protective equipment, first aid, emergency shut-down systems, and control systems; 2. Management Factor: includes leadership, vision, direction, supervision, commitment, statement of objectives, safety analysis, and prevention planning; 3. Personal Factor: includes awareness, good communication, personal attitude, positive groups, and personal competency; 4. Human Resource Management/Incentive Factor: includes safety practices, training expert staff, teamwork, frequency of staff group meetings, safety promotion, campaigns, personal motivation, workplace conditions, and safety rules; and 5. Relationship Factor: includes globalization, interfaces, and personal relationships.

Literature Review 7   In other similar work, Yiu et al. (2019) grouped SMSs used in the construction industry in Hong Kong into four categories: directive, operational, review, and promotional. Directive represents the management’s commitment toward safety in setting safety policies and proce- dures and safety organizational structure. It is critical to have well-organized programs for active operational purposes such as safety inspection programs, hazard control programs, and accident and incident investigation programs. Also, it is essential to review the performance of SMSs through regular safety committee meetings and job-related hazard evaluation. Review results might be used for decision making and taking operational actions to maintain the SMS. Moreover, the researchers categorized the benefits of implementing SMSs on construction sites into five major categories: (1) accident reduction and hazard elimination, (2) safety awareness and perception, (3) operational efficiency, (4) profit maximization, and (5) recognition of safety standards. The researchers found that accident reduction and hazard elimination ranked number one. Under this category, “safer working conditions” and “reduced harm to workers” were found to be the most significant benefits. In their course, “Developing a Construction Safety Management System,” OSHAcademy suggested that the construction industry can be a safe occupation when the workers are aware of the hazards and use effective construction safety management systems (CSMSs), where an effective CSMS can significantly prevent injuries and illnesses at the worksite. Moreover, creating an effective CSMS might start by determining the standards and rules that apply. CSMSs could comply with OSHA’s construction standard within CFR 29 1926. Using the “3D” model process, the CSMS can be implemented using the following three phases (OSHAcademy 2020): 1. The Design phase: the employer designs vision and mission statements, goals, objectives, roles, and responsibilities. 2. The Development phase: the employer develops policies, plans, programs, processes, proce- dures, and practices. 3. The Deployment phase: the employer deploys the CSMS to everyone through instruction, training, feedback, CSMS analysis and evaluation, and continuous improvement. Since the development of the CSMS should include the “6P” components: Plans, Programs, Policies, Processes, Procedures, and Practices, the major characteristics of each of the 6P components are summarized in Table 2.1. 2.2 Safety Management System for Departments of Transportation In the United States, DOTs are the primary highway system owners responsible for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of those highway systems. DOTs employ almost 55,000 people across the United States, and each DOT has its own management and organizational structure (U.S. DOT 2021). However, within the workforce of the DOTs, highway and maintenance workers face unique hazards on job sites. Those hazards are associated with the work mainly being conducted in locations adjacent to high-speed traffic, working with and around large construction and maintenance equipment, loading and hauling massive amounts of materials, and working in extreme environmental conditions (Al-Shabbani et al. 2017). Based on the FHWA’s Work Zone Facts and Statistics, between 2018 and 2019, fatal crashes in work zones increased by 11%, while fatal crashes outside of work zones decreased by 2%. The 11% increase in work zone fatalities overtook the modest 0.3% increase in overall high- way construction spending and the 0.8% increase in overall vehicle miles traveled nationally (FHWA 2021). In terms of magnitude, there were 135 worker fatalities within the work zone in 2019, which was up from 124 in 2018 (National Work Zone Safety 2019).

8 Use of Safety Management Systems in Managing Highway Maintenance Worker Safety As such, DOTs aim to implement effective safety programs and policies to eliminate workers’ and public safety risks at highway work sites. Even though all DOTs share the same responsibility of managing and maintaining their highway systems, each DOT has its own structure for safety programs and safety management (Gambatese et al. 2017). Often DOTs have data about health and safety; however, this data is not integrated with other institutional data available to DOTs such as insurance and claims management. This lack of integration might reduce the effectiveness of the implemented worksite safety-management techniques. In contrast, establishing this integration can benefit a DOT’s safety program in optimizing the use of health and safety data where safety officers can detect injury and fatality trends in their state and allow the establishment of effective safety programs (Gambatese et al. 2017). “6P” Model Component Definition Should include Plans “a formal document that contains all of the important information needed to deploy the CSMS, it is formed of all of the program plans combined” •Vision and mission statement •Goals and objectives •Roles and responsibilities •Programs, policies, processes, procedures, and practices Programs “ a plan of action to accomplish safety objective” •Hazard identification and control program •Emergency response program •First-aid and medical program •Training program Policies “help to set standards and guidelines for decision making” •Common rules generally found at construction sites Processes “a sequence of interdependent and linked procedures” •Accident investigation process •Accountability-disciplinary process Procedures “safe job procedures are a series of specific instructions presented in steps that outline the preferred method for performing a task” •Lockout/tag-out procedures required by OSHA Practices “written methods outlining how to perform a task with minimum risk to people, equipment, materials, environment, and processes” •Specific OSHA standards to recognize hazards Table 2.1. 6P model components adopted from OSHAcademy (2020).

Literature Review 9   Minimal research has been done to investigate occupational safety and health for DOTs on a state and national level (Hallmark et al. 2002, Chung et al. 2013, Gambatese et al. 2017), and even further limited research has a focus on the safety of maintenance workers within DOTs (Al-Shabbani et al. 2017). Also, no investigation has been done to document the state of the practice of DOT SMSs, the types of systems used, methods for storing and retrieving the collected data, policies and procedures adopted, or the associated costs of these systems. As such, this study aims to fill this knowledge gap by surveying DOTs to understand the current state of the practice regarding their SMSs and interviewing selected state DOTs to develop case examples of exemplary practices.