Health & Safety Dilemma: Are SHOs Failing Their Duty in Accident Cases? How Should We Respond?

Many SHOs too often discharge their responsibility in cases of accidents. As a practitioner, I humbly acknowledge that we have a significant part of the responsibility. We should accept failures from different areas, be it as an advisor or trainer.

Dear Sir, What do you mean by SHO? Is that Safety Health Officer? Also, please clarify what your aim was behind starting this thread. Was it just to remind us about the role of a Safety Pro or something else? Thank you.

Hi Dipil, sorry for not being clear. In fact, I just wanted to add on to an existing thread where some friends were questioning the roles and responsibilities of safety and health officers/practitioners in cases of accidents. Too often, SHOs try to absolve themselves by arguing that it's the responsibility of floor managers, etc. However, I would greatly appreciate your reflections on this issue.

Regards, [Email Removed For Privacy Reasons]

Role of the SHO

The role of the SHO is that of an advisor. Their responsibility is to help management develop systems to prevent accidents, review, update, and evaluate these systems, analyze accident data, and present the results to management for improvement. Additionally, they should help generate awareness through various media and methods among all sections, prepare a budget, get it sanctioned, and then use the available funds meticulously, among other duties.

An accident taking place indicates some failure somewhere, for which the SHO cannot be held solely responsible. Accidents occur when there are multiple failures. The SHO's job is to identify all failures, improve upon all identified shortcomings, and enhance safety measures.

Roles of a Safety Professional in Incident Investigation

In my organization, when it comes to the Incident & Incident Investigation Process, a Safety Pro has the following roles only:

• Support and advise the line manager with incident investigation, including classification, and providing medical assistance.

• Custodian of the incident information retained in the Incident Investigation Report and ensures that the data is validated. Ensure legal compliance and report incidents to regulatory authorities.

I would like to know the comments of all on this account. Is a Safety Pro supposed to perform any additional functions in case of an incident beyond those mentioned above?

Regards

Thanks for your reflections. You will appreciate that failure to conduct proper risk assessment, hazard analysis, and accident investigation, which are among the responsibilities of SHOs, may perpetuate hazardous conditions in the workplace. In this respect, I feel that SHOs should bear the responsibility. However, I equally value your points.

Thanks
Regards

Factory Incident and SHO Responsibility

Yesterday, a fire and explosion occurred in a factory in the Nandesari industrial area near Baroda, resulting in the tragic death of one worker. The SHO, along with the CEO and others, has been arrested by the police. Do you think the SHO bears criminal responsibility?

I was an SHSO at a chemical factory, and my advice was not accepted or implemented, which was very frustrating. Do you think that in such cases, the SHO should approach the Factory Inspectorate to file a complaint against the management?

Dear Mr. PTRC,

Since industrial accidents are covered under the Factories Act and rules, only the State Chief Inspector of Factories is authorized to investigate and file a case against the Occupier. However, the police can arrest the SHO and CEO for willful negligence only if it caused the accident and its result.

Against an offense, two different authorities cannot proceed with the proceedings. When the State Chief Inspector files a case, usually the police case will be dropped.

The SHO has only staff functions and not executive functions; as such, he is supposed to provide solid recommendations to his reporting officer. If his recommendations are not implemented, resulting in an accident, he is not answerable for the accident. Once this is proved on his side, he will be set free.

The SHO is an employee of the organization, not paid or employed by the Factory Inspectorate. All correspondence to the inspectorate is done by the Factory Manager or Occupier. Again, the inspectorate does not deal with the SHO directly. Under these conditions, the SHO is not supposed to report anything directly to the inspectorate without instructions from his reporting officer. However, when the time comes and is asked for, with the permission of the reporting officer, he may be directed to produce documents such as his recommendations.

The SHO or any employee making a complaint against an organization is called a "whistleblower," which is legal in the USA. Whistleblowers are well-protected by OSHA there; whereas in India, it will be treated as serious misconduct for which one can even be terminated.

However, I would be thankful if you could provide more information about the reported accident, please.

Regards,
Kesava Pillai

@PTRC & Keshav Pillai

Thanks for the updates. Before this, I have heard about two incidents where the SHO was arrested.

Question About Chief Inspector's Visit

One question: Can the Chief Inspector visit the accident spot at any time within 30 days of the accident? During his visit, if he finds any abnormalities, especially unsafe conditions, will he proceed with filing a case or not?

Dear Kesava Sir, As per my experience, the Safety Officer (S.O.) always provides recommendations for workplace safety based on their knowledge level (competency). Sometimes, I have found that small/medium industries do not send them for external training or seek advice from external experts on critical issues due to cost factors. In such cases, how is it logical to hold the Safety Officer responsible for an accident? Do you think that the Human Resource & Development department is also responsible for allowing the employment of less competent persons? I have worked with some small/medium-scale industries where the Safety Officer relied only on verbal communication. In such cases, how will the S.O. be able to provide proof of their recommendations? Kindly guide.

Regards,
Abhay

The Role of a Safety Officer

This is a good discussion. The Safety Officer's role is a suggestive one. Many times, their suggestions are not taken into consideration by management. When an accident occurs, everyone, including management, looks to the Safety Officer for an explanation. If it is a reportable accident, they have to undergo criminal proceedings. How challenging a Safety Officer's job is!

Please view the attachment for "How to handle deviations from a Safety Officer's suggestions."

Regards,
Srinivasa Rao. M

Nandesari Fire Incident: Arrest and Investigation Update

Following a newspaper report that may interest you:

Nandesari Fire: KDAC Chem Employee Held

Owner, Three Others Booked In Case

The Times of India, 25th November 2010

Vadodara: Police have arrested one person in connection with the Nandesari-GIDC fire incident that claimed one life and left seven injured. C M Jhalani, the security manager of KDAC Chem Private Ltd, was arrested as he was responsible for the factory's security and safety. A police complaint was registered against four persons, including the owner of KDAC, on Monday night.

The cops have registered an offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under IPC section 304 and others, which included vitiating the atmosphere to make it noxious to health. The other accused have been identified as owner Dhansukh Gaur, Kamal Chandani, and K K Patel. “We will seek remand of Jhalani from a local court on Wednesday. He was arrested as he was responsible for the security of the factory premises,” said Chhani police inspector T P Parmar.

“We will arrest the other accused soon as investigations are ongoing,” Parmar added. Jagdish Gohil, an employee of KDAC, was killed when several blasts ripped through the company's plant on Monday morning. Police officials and officers of the Directorate, Industrial Health and Safety (DISH) Department are jointly investigating the reasons behind the accident.

An officer from DISH visited the factory premises on Tuesday to ascertain whether any more bodies were trapped inside the plant. “We checked the factory premises and found that there was no other casualty. We are now trying to ascertain the reasons behind the event,” said P M Shah, factory inspector.

The incident spread panic in Nandesari-GIDC, which houses hundreds of chemical units. About 20 factories located in the vicinity of KDAC suffered damages due to the blasts and fire. When the first blast occurred, most of the workers rushed out of the factory, even as Gohil stayed back to close the valve of the boiler. However, a second blast flung Gohil into the air, and his badly charred body was recovered some time later by fire brigade officials.

“The incident has again raised issues of safety in industrial areas. The government just doesn't understand the hazards of chemical disasters. If reports prepared after such accidents are not taken seriously, citizens might face worse tragedies than the Bhopal gas leakage,” said environment activist Rohit Prajapati. “I had demanded details of accidents in chemical units, reports made after the accidents, and action taken by the government from the Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority in June this year under the RTI Act. But, my application was directed to another department. I'm yet to get any information,” Prajapati added.

Regards

Thanks to all friends who commented on the issue. The case mentioned by Mr. PTRC in Baroda has a lot of administrative and legal implications. As Mr. Kesava rightly pointed out, there is no standard approach for reporting or making recommendations despite the law providing for a reporting system. I strongly believe that the reporting line of the SHO should be reviewed. The SHO should report to the CEO if, by law, they are both accountable for accident occurrences.

Thank you, Mr. Pillai, for your comments.

I always find something interesting in your posts, which makes me happy too. You may check with the statutes. Nowhere does it state that the safety of the industry is vested with the Safety Officer. You have to deal with the top brass, as the absolute responsibility for the safety of the industry is vested only with him. He runs the industry. All others, including the Safety Officer, are under his direction. Because of this, now one of the Directors is made answerable for complying with statutory requirements on safety, health, and welfare in India. Even appointing a Manager, as in the past, to escape responsibility is not possible.

Arresting a Security Officer or Safety Officer is only mockery. It may be to pacify the people around. In a mass psychology, just for peace, police have to play many games, as chances of riots at accident scenes are quite common. After a few days, everything goes back to normal.

It is better we don't discuss much about the caliber of a Safety Officer in India as of now. If he is good at entertaining the Inspector, he will be considered good. With that, there will not be any adverse remarks, and management will also be happy with it. How often the Inspector really inspects a factory, what he inspects, etc., is known to you too. If statutes are enforced with the spirit of making it, I am sure there will not be any industrial accidents at all in India.

Even proper safety education is not provided here. The Post Diploma in Industrial Safety is not the end. You cannot make a Safety Officer with that curriculum. What they learn is not sufficient to shape a competent Safety Officer. You are right in that respect. Most Safety Officers require perfect training if they are to do justice to their calling.

Again, HRM cannot escape responsibility. They have absolute responsibility for choosing the right candidate for the post of Safety Officer and, for that matter, for every post.

I am attaching an incomplete PowerPoint presentation with a request to all in the field to complete the presentation. Let us see where we stand. It may take about 25 slides to complete it.

Regards,
Kesava Pillai

Role and Challenges of SHOs

SHO is a statutory appointment. He is a "mini-inspector" whose basic responsibility is to ensure the implementation of the law. In that sense, he is a representative of the Factory Inspectorate. Still, the law does not require him to submit any confidential reports, which may provide him with the opportunity to speak out. In some state rules, he is not accorded any protection against management wrath if he is fulfilling his legal duty honestly. I knew of a case where an SHO was asked to resign and leave.

We invited SHOs and had several rounds of discussions to form the Safety Professional Association with the objective of safeguarding the interests of SHOs. We got it registered and campaigned with the state government to provide protection to the SHOs. We presented a memorandum to the concerned Minister when we called on him at his office. We also organized a seminar where we invited the then Labor Commissioner and presented the problems faced by SHOs. At that time, I was working as a Safety Officer at a Chemical Factory.

Although there is a clause of protection in the Model Rules, the state government had not included it. After our efforts, the government agreed and amended the Rules. However, I found that the SHOs are not very interested in organized efforts to safeguard their interests or the social interest. The association is now defunct. I hope that incidents like when an SHO is picked up by the police and put behind bars should once again generate interest among SHOs to get organized, discuss the problems, and empower themselves.

Regards,
Jagdish Patel

@ Kesava Sir,

Thank you very much for the explanation. I'll also try to complete the presentation.

Request for Resources on Factory Act 1948

@ All Seniors,

Is there any booklet, article, or special notes that guide safety & welfare officers in interpreting all sections of the Factory Act 1948 with examples?

Regards,
Abhay

I want to share with you an interesting court case in Mauritius. The case was lodged in 1999, and the court judgment was in favor of the injured person.

Court Case

Construction Company vs INJURED EMPLOYEE (civil case) Source: Defiplus 05/8/2010

DAMAGES PAID TO INJURED PERSON: MUR 1,000,000

Background

The accident occurred when the injured person was lifting a door with the help of a co-worker. He was knocked by the door and had to have his testicle removed.

Injured Person's Version - Plaintiff

The injured person believes that the accident occurred because he was not given gloves, other equipment, and adequate manpower.

Witness Version

The witness believes that the accident occurred because there was no equipment, and only two people were assigned the task of lifting a heavy door upstairs.

Company Arguments

The company argued that it was the duty of the main contractor (the company was a subcontractor on a construction site) to ensure the safety of its employees. A doctor witness for the company stated that the injured person already suffered from sterility.

Court Judgement

The Judge ruled that the company proved negligence by assigning the task to only two people instead of four. Moreover, they failed to comply with the provisions of OSHA 2005 regarding PPE and Risk Assessment.

Lessons Learned (My Opinion)

- No company is immune.
- Consider safety aspects before entering a contract.
- Ensure compliance with laws regarding Personal Protective Equipment.
- Consider health aspects during recruitment.
- Conduct risk assessments on tasks and site conditions.
- Implement appropriate systems of work.
- Provide adequate training.

I have analyzed this case on a PPT. Unfortunately, I failed to upload the same. Can anyone help me?

Regards

@Keshav Pillai & Jagdish Patel

Handling Unheeded Safety Recommendations

Dear Sirs, as per your opinion, what should a Safety Officer do if his suggestions/recommendations are not taken seriously by the company and not implemented? Is there anything else to consider besides seeking another job due to a lack of job satisfaction?

Thank you.
Regards.

Dear Dipil, What does one do if suggestions or recommendations are not accepted? Instead of making a general statement like this, let us consider a few examples and analyze. If you have one, please share a case from your experience with relevant details.

Many safety officers ask the same question, but why? They become frustrated with this - but why? Most suggestions or recommendations, if justifiable, I cannot see a reason why they are rejected. In a few cases, it may be for economic reasons. In all other cases, safety officers fail to provide justification, all the data required for decision-making, and so on.

I request you to complete the PowerPoint presentation given under this title on the previous page. A good reason for failures can be inferred from it.

My advice to safety officers is: "Never get frustrated and seek another employment for this reason. Take it as a challenge. Get it implemented. You may ask how. It is an art. It is not easy, but possible. After the ppt is completed by at least one person, I will explain further.

Regards, Kesava Pillai

Dear Sir, I am once again requesting your ideas on how to proceed with the PowerPoint presentation. Could you suggest some topics to consider and provide a few headings, please?

Experience with Non-Compliance

Regarding non-compliance with the recommendations provided, I would like to share an experience from my previous company. The work was progressing well, and we typically used a grab crane with a grab bucket. However, during the course of the work, one of the contractors introduced a Winch Mounting arrangement. The installation process was quite chaotic, involving the use of a wooden post of approximately 10 meters and another wooden piece as a projection. With the assistance of pulleys, they set up an arrangement to lower the grab bucket. I hope you can understand the situation.

My initial recommendation was to stick with the grab crane instead of this makeshift setup. Furthermore, I mentioned that I would only accept this arrangement if someone could provide a certificate of fitness for the entire setup from a competent individual. Finally, I stated that if none of the above conditions were met, I would not visit the site and would not be held responsible for any accidents.

In the end, the work was completed without any incidents, seemingly due to divine intervention. Even the company director acknowledged the impossibility of deploying a crane. I stood firm on my decision not to visit the site under unsafe conditions, and he respected my stance, assigning me other tasks in the meantime. I believe I did my best to address the situation but unfortunately failed to bring about the desired outcome.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards, [Your Name]

Role and Responsibilities of the Safety Health Officer (SHO)

1. Advising and preparing Safety Improvement Plans for the year in consultation with the Apex Safety Committee and the General Works Manager.
2. Checking and evaluating the effectiveness of actions taken or proposed to prevent personal injuries.
3. Coordinating and conducting all safety studies.
4. Incorporating work permits/LOTO wherever required, and monitoring compliance against the same.
5. Advising the purchase and stores department to ensure high quality and availability of personal protective equipment.
6. Advising and carrying out plant safety inspections to observe the physical conditions of work, work practices, and procedures followed by the workers, and providing advice on measures to adopt for removing unsafe physical conditions and preventing unsafe actions by workers.
7. Preparing safety audit, safety inspection, and safety training calendar schedules for the year.
8. Handling matters related to reporting and investigating industrial accidents and diseases to the inspectorate of factories.
9. Facilitating accident and dangerous occurrence investigations.
10. Advising and maintaining all necessary records relating to accidents, dangerous occurrences, and industrial diseases.
11. Coordinating departmental safety committee meetings and Apex Safety Committee Meetings in collaboration with safety coordinators and safety representatives.
12. Organizing campaigns, competitions, contests, and other activities with the concerned departments to develop and maintain the interest of workers in establishing and maintaining safe work conditions and procedures.
13. Actively participating in activities related to safety in the industrial area.
14. Liaising with certifying bodies and ensuring the reporting of statutory compliances to the General Works Manager.
15. Ensuring MSDS availability of all chemicals used in the plant and disseminating information to all employees.
16. Updating all safety documents as per statutory requirements or otherwise.
17. Coordinating all amendment requests to the Asian Paints Safety Manual.
18. Auditing firefighting equipment periodically in coordination with the Senior Manager - Plant Engineering and the Manager - Security. However, the primary responsibility for upkeep lies with the Safety Officer. Monthly reports of these checks are submitted to the General Works Manager by the Safety Officer.

The Safety Officer is never required or permitted to do any work that is inconsistent with or detrimental to the performance of the mentioned duties.

Recent Fire/Explosion in Chemical Factory: A Safety Alert

Please find below the news of a recent fire/explosion that occurred in a chemical factory located in Nandesari, Vadodara district. The company had ISO 9001/14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications. The police have registered an offense under IPC section 304 and arrested the company's safety/security officer.

The moral of the incident is: As safety professionals, many of us are deputed in factories, hence we must be very cautious. We should keep all our internal/external safety-related communications, like reporting unsafe acts/conditions and statutory non-compliances, in writing and always keep hard copies of such specific communications with us. This can certainly help us if trapped in such situations. Under section 101 (Exemption of occupier or manager from liability in certain cases) of the Factories Act, the occupier or manager can escape from the charges and hold someone else responsible/actual offender (he can be a safety officer) in court.

Explosion in Chemical Factory: One Killed, Seven Injured

Vadodara: A series of explosions at a chemical factory in the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) premises at Nandesari killed one worker and injured seven others, including the plant supervisor, on Monday morning.

The mishap occurred at K-Dac Chemicals, owned by Vadodara businessman Laxmikant Gaud, at 5 am, when the night shift was about to end. The boiler contained synthetic aromatic chemicals and silica.

Plant supervisor Jatin Joshi said Jagadish Gohil from Fazalpur died in the second explosion while trying to close the valve near the boiler section after the first explosion had occurred. His body was flung several feet away, killing him instantly. Seven others sustained injuries as the blast scattered glass in all directions.

"Thirty-five workers had just evacuated the premises after finishing work when the first explosion occurred. Gohil ran towards the boiler trying to switch off the valve and died in the second explosion. Some of our workers sustained injuries when glass flew in all directions from the boiler. The fire spread to the other parts quickly," said Joshi.

Four of the injured were from the neighboring shed who were asleep at the time of the explosion. The injured workers have been admitted to the Shreeji Hospital near Chhani Jakatnaka in Vadodara.

Vadodara Municipal Corporation officials said seven fire tenders were rushed from Vadodara to douse the blaze.

"A 25-member squad was formed to tackle the fire. The presence of hazardous chemicals in the factory premises kept the blaze alive for four to five hours," said H J Taparia, Chief Fire Officer, VMC.

Vadodara Collector Vijay Nehra said the Joint Director of the Department of Industrial Safety and Health and Vadodara police will investigate the accident. "We are not directly conducting any inquiry, but the joint director of industrial safety and health will submit the report to the Collector's office after investigating the cause of the blast. The Vadodara police will investigate the incident that led to the death of one worker," said Nehra.

According to various government agencies, this was the fourth such accident at a chemical unit in Nandesari GIDC.

Assistant Commissioner of Police Rakesh Sharma said: "We have started the preliminary investigation on the cause of the fire, including the shift timings of the workers and the safety norms followed by the owners of the factory."

Kantibhai Gohil, brother of the deceased worker, said workers in the unit dealt with hazardous chemicals like hydrogen peroxide without basic safety requirements. The company uses hazardous chemicals like hydrogen peroxide, DMS, acetic acid, caustic soda, Hydrochloric Acid, Sodium Bicarbonate, and has a 200 metric tonnes production capacity for aromatic substances.

The factory inspectors have now issued a prohibitory order against K Dac Chemicals from setting up the plant again.

"We have issued the prohibitory orders against the company that before they set up the plant anywhere, they must file a safety report. To further ascertain the cause of the fire, our team will examine the site on Wednesday," said P M Shah, Factory Inspector, Department of Industrial Safety and Health.

Nandesari Industries Association President, Babubhai Patel, said the association should be empowered to keep a strict vigil on the plants for safety regulations.

"We always tell our member industries to follow the safety precautions while operating with hazardous chemicals. But we cannot stop anyone from manufacturing, as we do not have the authority to do anything," said Patel.

Source: The Indian Express/IANS

Regards,
Dilip Kasar.

I will try to post today's Safety Officer PPT as soon as possible. I have not had time to prepare the PPT. Hopefully, I will come up with my inputs, whether they are right or wrong.

Dear Hari & Dipil, thanks for your inputs.

Thanks & be safe,
Regards,
Raghu

Next Steps for Safety Officers in Legal Situations

What is the next step if the police file a complaint against a safety officer under 407A? Is he free to fight independently, or does he have to proceed under the guidance of management?

In the case of unsafe conditions to work, a fatal accident may or may not point to the safety officer's role.

In the case of unsafe actions leading to a fatal accident, the safety officer is not asked about his role. The person responsible for executing the work is entirely accountable for the incident.

Regards

Respected seniors,

My name is Rakesh Pathak. I have been providing safety training for the past two years, and now I am looking to establish an academic institution focused on safety and security training. I kindly request your suggestions and advice for the improvement of this endeavor.

Regards, Rakesh Pathak

Responsibility in Chemical Plant Safety

From the contribution of all the information gathered on "A series of explosions at a chemical factory in the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) premises at Nandesari," my contribution would be as follows:

It should be the responsibility of the Management/Safety Officer for any procedure violation. Did the Safety Health Officer or the Management have any written 'hazardous operation procedure' for this chemical pressure vessel plant? Assuming there is one, what is the permissible pressure limit for this pressure vessel, and how was the pressure being monitored/how often? Was the procedure followed in practice on that day?

Monitoring and Compliance

In the written procedure, were the safe thickness of the walls of the pressure vessel checked? And how often? Was the procedure followed in practice? The safe period of life of any pressure vessel, as assessed and certified by the Manufacturer/Certified agency (normally by a chemical engineer expert), is within the valid period or not. Were any operating/checking procedures drafted and not followed? Was there any violation by any workmen at the time of the accident noticed/witnessed by anybody at the time of the accident?

All the procedures should have been accepted and in practice. Sometimes only a log entry will be there without proper checking. The Safety Officer/Line Managers/Plant Managers have the responsibility and should have observed whether the procedure was being followed as per the procedure. This follow-up is as important as production. If there is any procedure violation, including the non-availability of such a procedure, Management as a team has to sit and decide and draft a future plan to avoid recurrence.