Farewell to AJ McNamara and the old school safety products industry

Ambrose John "AJ" McNamara Jr., 72, formerly or Worcester and Holden, Mass., most recently living in Los Angeles, died September 21, 2010 in Cedars Sinai Medical Center.

A significant player of the post-OSHA industrial safety field, AJ worked 17 years for Norton Co., an abrasives manufacturer that acquired a string of safety businesses in the early 1970s through AJ’s guidance. These companies were consolidated under the North Safety banner, which became one of the iconic companies in the safety market of the 1970s and 80s. North is now a brand name in the Honeywell staple of safety and health businesses.

When AJ was acquiring small, family-run safety businesses in the early 70s, the new-fangled OSHA agency, run by a Reading, Pa., department store retailer who later would own a tour bus company, (think those credentials would fly today?) was conducting 80,000 inspections a year and scaring businesses into buying all sorts of PPE. For safety distributors and manufacturers, these were the gold rush days. The manufacturing base in the U.S. was still strong, though just beginning to head overseas. Demand for hard hats, gloves, ear plugs, steel-toe shoes, respirators and “Buddy Holly” safety glasses would never be higher.

Membership boomed in the American Society of Safety Engineers and the American Industrial Hygiene Association. “Engineers” and “Industrial” were reflective of the times, far less applicable in 2010 as the professions have expanded beyond engineering and industrial operations.

The National Safety Council in the 70s and early 80s held its annual National Safety Congress in the basement of the hulking, palatial Conrad Hilton Hotel on Michigan Avenue in Chicago, the NSC’s home. Attendees trudged up and down stairs, tripped on rumpled carpet, and got lost trying to find exhibit halls tucked away on different floors and wings of the Hilton. Girls in miniskirts and bikinis waved from swing sets. The aisles were packed. I lunched one day in the Hilton with an air traffic controller recently fired by President Reagan. If Reagan had walked into the restaurant the guy would’ve punched him out. He was so angry he couldn’t shut up.

A far cry from the sleek glass and steel San Diego Convention Center where the 2010 Congress & Expo was held.

It wasn’t exactly “Mad Men,” but the Congress in the 70s and early 80s was typical of trade shows of the time. Sales meetings that wound up with cocktails all around, dinners where at least one sloshed sales manager of my acquaintance ended up face down in his plate of spaghetti, nights carousing up and down Rush Street bars, sales reps showing up for booth duty in the morning, dark circles under their eyes, hoarse and groping for coffee after two hours of shut eye.

I remember getting on the plane Sunday morning in Philadelphia to head out to my first Safety Congress. One of the owners of the magazine saw me get aboard and said, “Dave, relax, break a smile.” It was my first business trip. I had a sales meeting and sales dinner ahead of me with men my father’s age. Loud, guffawing, smoking and drinking peddlers. Reminded me of when my father had his pals over for poker night. Loud and profane. I’d sneak out of bed and peek downstairs. Through the smoke I’d see the fellas around the dining room table. Where the big boys roamed. With those damn deep voices. Scary.

My first client dinner was in a tight private dinner room with about 12-15 people around the table. I couldn’t think of a thing to say. They didn’t teach us in journalism school about small talk at sales dinners. My soon-to-be wife picked me up at the airport on Tuesday night. “What’s the matter with you?” she asked. “Never. I’m never going back to one of those damn dinners again.”

30 years later I’m still flying off to Safety Congresses…

Safety was an easy sell in the 70s and early 80s. The sales pitch was simple: OSHA says you need these products. That was it. The market was far from mature in those salad days. Thousands and thousands of companies were short of the required PPE.

Safety distributors never had it better. It would be decades before the likes of Grainger barged in and started stealing business. The Safety Equipment Distributors Association was a family affair, with a small, close-knit number of family-run distributorships retreating each summer to a resort where scores of their kids would run around like at a summer camp. SEDA enjoyed a good run for about 25 years, or a little more than a generation of distributor owners. Many cashed out in the 90s. Safety distributors are still prospering in niches they’ve carved out, but you won’t find them barbecuing in the Rockies on summer vacation write-offs anymore.

AJ, as those who knew him, was a proud family man. He leave his wife of 46 years, Susan McNamara of Los Angeles, three children, James and wife Olivia of Taiwan, Elizabeth and husband Tom of Los Angeles, Margaret and husband Mike of Grosse Pointe, MI. Six grandchildren, Andrew and Alyssa of Taiwan, Holden and Allison of Michigan, T.J. and Luke of Los Angeles.

AJ was something of a renaissance man: sharp business mind, maverick, natural salesman, an entrepreneur, a battler who came back from a massive heart attack in his 40s, one of For Distributors Only’s founding columnists and supporters, early enthusiast of the Internet and its profit possibilities, technologist, raconteur, formidable networker, tireless idea man.

A.J. was born in Utica, NY, graduated from White Plains High School, Bryant College and received his MBA from Boston University.

After his years at Norton, he launched John Alden Associates, a consulting business in the industrial safety field. After September 11, 2001, he passionately ventured into the field of products for first responders under the ForResponders moniker.

AJ was passionate. I recall debating with him in the 1990s about the money-making potential of the then embryonic Internet. I was the old print Luddite before print became old and said “no way.” AJ was absolutely convinced distributors and manufacturers had to sell online, and get online fast. Of course he had his own idea of how to pull that off, which he tried to sell the industry for years.

And of course now I write more copy for the magazine’s web site than I do for the print edition, and do the Twittering and Facebooking and LinkingIn things.

As a trained journalist, AJ was a mentor for me when it came to understanding the world of businesses, corporations, the likes of General Electric boss Jack Welch. AJ was once loaned out to GE from Norton and traveled with Welch on one of Neutron Jack’s “bombing runs” — riding a small plane to out-of-the-way facilities where Welch would stride in, announce wipe-out layoffs, and hop on the plane to his next nuking site. That was one of a thousand AJ stories. And every one of them ended with a punch line.

Except the time I was sitting in a Pittsburgh motel room, with a nice view of a Pennsylvania Turnpike toll plaza. The phone rang and it was AJ. An aggravated AJ, as he quickly let me know. Seems I ambushed him by publishing his column with edits I didn’t show him. “No surprises, Dave,” he said. I have since told that to every editor I’ve hired.

AJ loved to laugh. He will be missed. And in the modern, consolidated, corporate safety industry, there will never be another one like him.

A celebration of life for AJ will be held in Los Angeles on October 23, 2010. AJ surely celebrated life the way he lived it. And he loved a party.

The family encourages everyone to take care of your health. Donations to Heifer International are suggested.

- by Dave Johnson, ISHN Editor

Dave Johnson’s Safety Beat – Worries of safety pros; biggest challenges; defining safety leadership; job market status

Good morning,

MINDMELD: WHAT’S ON THE MINDS OF PROS THIS MORNING?

One pro who recently changed jobs wonders:

How has the uneasiness of the economy impacted EHS (postively or negatively)?
Do you find workload increasing with low hiring?
What leading initiatives are you looking to implement in 2011?
Are injury rates and/or # of injuries increasing with your company?
What about EHS work keeps pros up at night?
How to demonstrate the full value of the EHS profession to employers to keep driving improvements during a tough economic time.
The impact of the economy on worker safety & health.
How to manage in a larger role with fewer resources (i.e. low hiring).
How do we feel about our jobs at this point?
What's the state of the job market?

JOB MARKET

One pro emails us: “Feeling pretty secure in current position. Although, wonder about potential of a double-dip recession, and how that would impact.

”Job market for EHS pros, that I have seen, seems to be opening recently, likely because companies are seeing a potential for cost-savings by reducing injuries ... and also potential result of increased regulatory enforcement (possible)."

LET’S MAKE THE MORNING ROUNDS OF SOCIAL MEDIA SITES

Here’s what professional discussion groups are talking about this morning:

RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIALTY GROUP (ASSE)

The QUESTION: "I would like opinions on the control of items entered into company safety manuals. Is it normally seen as a safety professional document or is it open for all departments to recommend and approve content?

“I am not asking from a legal or liability perspective. My question deals more about what is appropriate to include and who normally controls the input. I know it is not supposed to be draconian, but should the SH&E Professional/Department have the ‘final say’ over what is included in the manual?"

LINKEDIN GREEN DISCUSSION GROUP

QUESTION: What is the one thing every single human being on the planet can do that's considered GREEN?

This simple query received more than 1,200 COMMENTS!

Including: “Drink water from the tap!”

"To promote a living in harmony with Nature / a Sustainable Development oriented state of mind".
LINKEDIN SOCIETY OF CORPORATE COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS

Topic of discussion: “Matters of judgment can be taught, starting with lead (mis)bhevarior.”

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALHT & SAFETY PROFESSIONALS (10,000 members+)

“SAFETY CHALLENGE? - I would like to hear from anyone on what they think is the greatest challenge that we face - in keeping our Employees Safe in the today's current workplace.”

83 comments received, including:

One response: “The Effects of Radical Downsizing on Worker Safety. In my research I discovered a fairly high level of consensus that the greatest threat to worker safety in this recession is stress related accidents, injuries, and illnesses. Most have seen a spike in injuries caused by distracted workers, and some experts are predicting that we will see a serious issue involving Post Traumatic Stress Disorders among workers still on the job, but who have worked under the threat of layoff for so long that they are ready to snap. “

Second response: “I've found that the economic slowdown has had the opposite effect: my employees pay more attention to what is needed to keep their jobs. The old poster used to say: ‘New incentive plan: work or get fired’ and it applies to safety compliance as well. We have let some people go for violating serious safety policy and everyone knows that. One of my major customers is just as zealous, and will refuse entry to a vendor employee who breaks their rules. This could end that employee's career in our industry.”

Third response: “I believe cost is the greatest challenge, H&S is perceived as expensive and there are many myths surrounding it. Most people think if we keep our heads down and we don’t get a visit then we are doing OK, this will inevitably result one day in someone getting hurt, there’s never a dull day there!!!”

Fourth response: “Simply put - Employee safety as it relates to behavior. Minding/closing the gap in knowledge versus application or expected behavior.”

SAFETY TRAINING GROUP (LINKEDIN)

QUESTION: What safety leadership strategies have you adopted in your company, and how do you know if they are effective?

From Dominic Cooper: “The background for starting the debate is that

[a] in 1988 Blackspot Construction (a British HSE Doc) the 'root causes' of 70% of incidents were firmly placed at managements door;

[b] During the 1990's, James Reason at Manchester University(UK) showed that Executive level decision-making and line-management implementation were involved in many major disasters (aka the 'Swiss Cheese' model);

[c] Modern Safety Culture approaches (via Maturity Models, Culture Change processes, etc) emphasize the 'supreme' importance of safety leadership;

[d] Managerial commitment to safety has been emphasized throughout the history of the 'safety discipline. Given this background, it would seem sensible for ‘Safety Leadership' strategies to be high on the 'Safety professionals' agenda, when implementing HSE systems, improvement initiatives, etc.

“I recently posted the above question on safety leadership strategies and their effectiveness on 30+ forums, comprising some 107,000 potential respondents. Of the responses received to date, Safety Leadership was defined by one respondent as "The process of defining the desired state, setting up the team to succeed, and engaging in the discretionary efforts that drive the safety value," which broadly boils down to "engaging in and maintaining behaviors that help others achieve our safety goals." ”The COMMON SAFETY LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES appear to be:

[1] Encouraging people to take personal responsibility for safety by setting expectations for each layer (Senior, Middle, Front-line management, and employees) linked to clear goals. These should be created at a dedicated session where the CEO outlines his/her vision and senior managers determine how to translate that into concrete actions. It is important to ensure the strategies and interventions adopted are aligned to their strategic intent and do not just boil down to a simple signing of the safety policy. A reinforcement strategy is for all board members to hold a weekly conference call where plant managers are required to discuss incidents occurring in the previous week, root cause analysis results, corrective actions, best practices, etc. At plant/operation levels, morning meetings should be held to discuss any and all pressing safety issues. Effectiveness assessments are held with 360 reviews of managers, an organizational wide safety climate survey and further diagnostics around organizational systems.

[2] Putting a robust Risk or Safety management system in place encompassing (but not limited to) preventive maintenance, operation procedures, inspections, permit to work systems, safety talks, Safety committees, risk assessments, near miss reporting, training, management of change, risk management plans, etc. In terms of effectiveness, the monitoring focus is primarily on incident rates (lagging indicators), safety surveys, and Gap Analyses via Internal Audit functions (leading Indicators).

[3] Education & Awareness: Providing safety leadership training so that safety leadership becomes a corporate value. Effectiveness assessment of the training strategy revolves around employees visibly observing the leadership commitment to a safe workplace, and leaders in the organization being more knowledgeable on safety with line management accepting safety responsibilities. However, a comment was made that realistically education is not effective for more than a few days post course. This implies that some type of monitoring system is required to ensure attendees are held accountable for demonstrating the behaviors taught (leading Indicator).

[4] Encouraging the management team (from the most senior down) to exhibit visible leadership commitment to a safe workplace. This visible demonstration appears to take the form of chairing of safety meetings, ownership of the SMS (i.e. conducting risk assessments, investigating accidents), involvement in quarterly reviews & training, two-way dialogues about safety, going around site, looking around and talking with people. Effectiveness is assessed by monitoring the number and quality of managerial observations / conversations (leading Indicator). Again, this implies that some type of robust, but easily accessible tracking system is required to monitor the outcomes of the observations and discussions.:

Dave Johnson’s Safety Beat – Knee-jerk safety reactions; young pros withhold their trust; do companies really care?

Good morning,

As we head down the homestretch of summer…

KNEE-JERK SAFETY REACTIONS

From the discussion group EHSQ Elite:

The Question: “There's got to be some pretty entertaining ‘mistakes’ we humans have made with the best intentions of making it safer. These we can file under the ‘FAILED’ folder. My personal favorite was a knee jerk reaction to a fatal train derailment caused by snow build up on the track...one senior manager sent out a comany wide memo making it a new rule that EVERY train had to have someone WALK the track in front of the train anytime we had an INCH or more of snow on the track! File this under FAILED!

Another response: “Unfortunately most Safety Professionals have similiar stories. I worked for a Manager who utilized temporary labor for tasks where exposure to carcinogens occurred. In his mind it was cheaper than installing engineering controls. He was promoted several times because his facility was very profitable. This Manager eventually was removed from his position for other unrelated unacceptable behavior, but only after years of intentionally putting people at risk. “


THE TRUST GAP WITH YOUNG PROFESSIONALS

From the discussion group Safety Training on LinkdedIn

“Almost one in three young professionals do not trust their employer, according to the latest research from recruitment consultants Badenoch & Clark.

“When asked whether they trust their employer to deliver accurate information on business performance, 32.2 per cent of 16 – 24 yr olds revealed that they refuse to believe either ‘most’ or ‘any’ of what they are told by their employer. This is in contrast to 18.2 per cent last year, suggesting that Generation Y is becoming increasingly disillusioned with the workplace.

“Guy Emmerson, Associate Director of Badenoch & Clark commented, ‘Without a culture of trust in the workplace, employers will struggle to foster employee engagement and, in-turn, retain their workforce.

“’As recruitment activity levels pick up, employers need to consider the strength of their relationship with employees across all levels of the business, or run the risk of staff voting with their feet.

“’Younger employees – the so-called Generation Y – have specific expectations of their employers, so encouraging more two-way conversations on business performance will prove vital to increasing levels of trust and gauging job satisfaction. Without this it will be become harder to obtain any kind of staff loyalty and in-turn retain talented graduates.”

“Those in the legal profession were particularly skeptical of their employers, with 36.9 per cent of employees across all age ranges stating that they do not believe either ‘most’ or ‘any’ of what their employers tells them about business performance.
A further 26.3 per cent admitted to only trusting ‘parts’ of what their employer tells them and only one in ten (10.5 per cent) stated that they ‘totally trust’ their employer.
By comparison, only 5.9 per cent of HR professionals distrust their employers and almost a quarter of sales and marketing (23.3 per cent) and administration and clerical professionals (23.2) totally trust their employers.

“Mr Emmerson continued, ‘This research highlights the detrimental impact the recession has had on the workforce, not just in terms of job losses and pay freezes, but in terms of the relationship between employer and employee. Now is the time to start repairing this relationship and being more honest and open with employees about business performance.’”

DO COMPANIES ACTUALLY CARE?

67 percent of corporate sustainability professionals who responded to an Ethical Corporation survey said their company "measures social and/or economic impact of their business on the communities where they operate" (n=116).

This positive response surprised 100 corporate sustainability professionals who turned up in London for a debate where Ethical Corporation shared its preliminary results for an upcoming report on "Social and economic impact: measurement, evaluation and reporting."

Companies are beginning to realize that corporate sustainability is about more than being green, despite a hazy understanding of exactly how social and economic impact studies benefit their business.

Ethical Corporation's report presents four distinct impact models, explaining the business reasons for conducting studies and exactly how the studies benefit their bottom line.

Supply chain management - The continuing propensity of labour rights campaigns against some well-known companies such as Nike, Gap and Primark has meant that ethical management of the supply chain has become fairly wide-spread practice.

External reporting standards - Companies now seek to meet industry benchmarks and guidelines offered by voluntary initiatives. These initiatives are increasingly demanding measurement beyond performance, so that companies can monitor actual societal impacts and the root cause of community challenges.

Site-level community impact - Increasingly, companies with a strong physical presence and reliance on a local community are implementing processes to understand and manage the site/ community impacts.

Socio-economic impact assessment - A small number of companies are beginning much more systematically to understand how their activities impact on the overall development trajectory of the countries where they operate. Findings inform corporate strategy, and result in outcomes such as innovation of new, sustainable products that respond to a local market demand.

This final approach is still in its infancy, and is posing challenges in terms both of attribution of impact, and in developing relationships with new partners. Nonetheless, this approach is a highly significant development not just in terms of the 'technology' of assessing impacts on society, but also in how companies see their very role within society.

Another challenge, especially for health and safety pros: in the majority of organizations touting their sustainability programs, employee safety and health is largely absent from the conversation.

How can a company be sustainable with sustaining a safe and healthy workforce?

The revolution will be digitized

Rather it is being digitized here and now.

I have been slow to catch on. Six months ago I didn’t know a tweet from a twit. Then I learned a bit about Twitter and thought tweeters are twits. Now I tweet every day. To go from writing 1200-word editorials to 140-character tweets has been a paradigm change. That’s OK, we’re all in for a paradigm change.

For a long time I thought Facebook was a teenage wasteland. Now I send Facebook news updates every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. I believed LinkedIn was for self-promoters. Of course it is. So what? Now I’m caught up in the numbers game — how many contacts can I add to my network?

It’s a brave new world, these social “nets.” Especially if you’re over 45 years old. According to “Twitter Usage in America: 2010,” the Edison Research/Arbitron Internet and Multimedia Study, 35 percent of 45-54-year-olds currently have a personal profile page on Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn or any other social networking web site. That compares to 77 percent of 18-24-year-olds, 65 percent of those between 25-34 years old, and 51 percent of the 35-44 crowd.
For safety and health professionals, so many of them baby boomers in the 45+ demographic, to use social nets is to venture where few of their peers have gone before. Most safety and health pros, cautious and conservative by nature (hallmarks of being safety conscious, after all), have not exactly jumped at the chance to “join the conversation,” as social nets love to advertise.

Free to choose
On our website is an open invitation to “join the conversation” and provide feedback, comments, opinions to my blogging and the news of the day. Consider this response:

“Oh gawd Dave... you've imbibed the millennial Kool-Aid. I have been fighting the rope pulling me into Facebook and so far have maintained my freedom. Social networking can be a ‘cancer’ in that it spreads rapidly and there is no real cure other than amputating the PC/laptop from the clutches of the fingertips.

“Don't let the new age rule your life. As Chloe said in the final seconds of "24," ‘SHUT IT DOWN.’

“Smell the coffee, hug the kids and wife and go walk the dog and breathe the polluted Philly air. THAT is what really matters.”

Now that is excellent blog material. Too bad he’s “fighting the rope.”

I also received this response:

“I keep getting requests to join associates’ groups etc., have done that, but have found few who actually utilize the network to any extent. Most say something like, ‘everyone else is in so I got in!’ I too must get better acquainted with the tools available. Thanks for giving us all (or at least those who are uninitiated to date) a little push.”
Consider this column a nudge.

“Inherit the future”
At least keep an open mind. Philosopher and one-time longshoreman Eric Hoffer: "In times of great change, it is the learners who inherit the future."

And to quote another philosopher, Bob Dylan, “The times, they are a-changin’.” Newspapers across the nation are folding faster than beach umbrellas before a storm. Sports Illustrated, Newsweek, Rolling Stone are pathetically thin. Evening newscasts are hanging on to the AARP crowd. Every other commercial is for a prescription med.

Dylan again: “Something is happening here, but you don’t know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?”
Mr. Jones, with “his pencil in his hand” is a reporter. How prophetic. Many so-called “Mainstream Media” journalists stubbornly scorn social nets. The Babel of bloggers and blowhards.

Yet… in 2009, social net usage spiked to 57.6 percent of the total U.S. Internet population to 127 million users, according to projections from eMarketer. By 2014, social nets will reel in 65.6 percent of all Internet users, 164 million people.

Something is happening when Deepwater Horizon Response has 28,323 fans on Facebook. The official site of the Deepwater Horizon Unified Command has embraced social nets like a teenager, not a bunch of bureaucrats: Breaking news is sent via Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Flickr, Technorati, StumbleUpon, email and RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds.

“There’s something happening here…”
Something is happening when, just on LinkedIn alone:
● The American Industrial Hygiene Association networking group has 1,491 members;
● EHSQ Elite has 12,108 members;
● The American Society of Safety Engineers has 3,787 members;
● The Society of Corporate Compliance & Ethics has 2,640 members;
● The Environment Health & Safety Professionals group has 9,127 members;
● The Safety Training group has 1,016 members;
● The Green group has 84,090 members.

Something is happening when the Green group discussion on “Is global warming finally being exposed for what it is?” elicits 3,949 comments.

To be sure, the overwhelming majority of discussion group members consist of a vast tribe called the “lurkers.” Lurkers passively follow and read the updates of others without contributing updates or comments of their own. This is no different than the audience at any professional conference. In a room of say, 500 people, how many walk to a mic stand to ask a question or offer a comment during the Q&A? We are a silent majority of lurkers. The social nets merely reflect human nature.

Come out of your silo
Maybe you have nothing to contribute to the conversation. But don’t miss out on the conversations occuring on the social nets. It is here that you learn what’s on the minds of your peers. What the issues of the day are. You’ll relate to some of the gripes and complaints. You’ll find some comments self-aborbed, specious, ridiculous.

That’s no excuse for dismissing the revolution in communication. This isn’t a fad. There’s no turning back. According to the Arbitron study: Eighty-four percent of the U.S. population has Internet access. Six in seven homes with Internet access have broadband connections. Dial-up is so 20th century. More than six in ten homes with Internet access have a wireless (Wi-Fi) network set up. In 2008, 24 percent of the populations had a personal profile page on Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, et al. In 2010, 48 percent have some type of profile page.

There’s a novelty effect here, no doubt. But folks by the millions are not going to wake up one morning bored with social nets, re-up their newspaper and magazine subscriptions and throw a life preserver to Katie Couric. It’s about the day-to-day pace. The times they are a-movin’ fast. We want to know what’s going on, right now, on demand, not tomorrow morning or next week.

So as you check in with ISHN’s daily Twitter updates, Facebook and LinkedIn updates, and daily e-news posts and blog accounts on our website, look at it this way: We’re not trying to ‘rope you in;’ we’re reflecting the revolution. And overturning paradigms is not for lurkers. Engage. Write a comment. Far too many blog posts show goose eggs in the comment column. The story is not just the facts of who, what, where, when and why. It includes how people react to the news. How they form communities. Hello Tea Party. Combustible Dust Policy Institute Group. Travel Media Pros. Writing Mafia. Find your niche. Be part of the story. Who wants to be Mr. Jones?

Summer of discontent

President Obama’s approval rating as the summer got underway: 46 percent were in favor of how he was directing affairs, 45 percent were not, according to Gallup. We are conflicted about the man. But approval of his leadership is trending definitely down. At one point in the past year, 61 percent were positive about the President.

“Conflicted” is being diplomatic to describe how many Americans feel about leadership in general these days. It’s been a sour attitude a long time festering. In the past few years we’ve endured the worst recession in 80 years. Wall Street’s embarrassment of riches. The BP debacle, the country’s worst environmental disaster and a human tragedy. Afghanistan, now the nation’s longest-ever war.

Dr. Martin Seligman, the guru of positive psychology, is perhaps the only person smiling.

Gloomy Gallup reports
Gallup reported in early summer that “slightly more” Americans believe good, quality jobs are for the taking. That’s generous. Gallup's June finding: a whopping 85 percent of Americans believe it is a "bad time" to find a "quality job." Overall, reported Gallup, “the total lack of optimism about the prospects of finding a quality job in June 2010 is consistent across ages, incomes, genders, and regions of the country.”

A “total lack of optimism.” Then there are other recent Gallup surveys: “Worry, Sadness, Stress Increase With Length of Unemployment.” “Fewer Americans Feeling Better About Their Financial Situation.” “Many Americans Say Gulf Beaches, Wildlife Will Never Recover.”

Wicked collision
Under these dark clouds Democrats on Capitol Hill have launched the most concerted effort in 40 years to reform federal occupational safety and health laws. If enacted, OSHA and MSHA fines will increase. Criminal penalties will be stiffer, enticing more attorneys to prosecute members of management, including EHS professionals for willful negligence causing serious employee injuries or deaths.. Meanwhile, over at the Department of Labor, OSHA chief Dr. David Michaels and deputy Jordan Barab are leading: 1) the biggest surge in agency enforcement since the 1970s, with record-setting fines; 2) the most ambitious standards-setting agenda since the ‘70s; and 3) development of perhaps the most sweeping single regulation in agency history, the so-called I2P2, the injury and illness prevention standard.

The irresistible political force coming out of Washington is slamming into an immovable wall of discontent. It’s a wicked collision.

“We are determined to put sharper teeth in our workplace safety laws and to step up federal enforcement,” said Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat and chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee.

“Sharper teeth in our workplace safety laws and stepped up federal enforcement as Harkin states, WILL NOT improve safety and health management. People will do everything they can to avoid being penalized,” writes longtime safety and health consultant Ted Ingalls in an email.
“Bad actors have put profits before people,” blogs the AFL-CIO.

“I am not willing to trust the OSHA political appointees with the power” that would be granted the agency with the I2P2 standard, says safety consultant Tom Lawrence.

Where’s the trust?
Speaking of trust, that essential leadership element, what black hole did it get sucked into? The Tea Party grassroots insurrection, or whatever the mainstream media is calling it, has been created and is flourishing in a void of trust.

Too many businesses can’t be trusted, according to those who want a stronger OSHA and MSHA. “We have seen too many accidents over the last few months in workplaces across the country,” said Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) in a statement supporting the need for OSHA and MSHA reforms.

OSHA’s Dr. Michaels doesn’t trust the accuracy of industry’s injury and illness recordkeeping across the board. “In too many cases in this country, workplace safety incentive programs are doing more harm than good by creating incentives to conceal worker injuries,” he told the American Society of Safety Engineers’ national meeting in June.

Of course the oil industry isn’t deemed trustworthy after the BP catastrophe and a series of plant explosions. Here is OSHA’s Barab addressing the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association’s National Safety Conference in May: “Bluntly speaking: Your workers are dying on the job and it has to stop.”

Anything but empathy
In the absence of trust, you get bluntness, blame, anger, anything but empathy. You get current national dialog. Glen Beck. Hilda Solis’s “new sheriff in town.” The “small people” along the Gulf. Broken Promises. A general and his aides blabbing to Rolling Stone.

You get deep division over OSHA actions: I2P2 as the best move OSHA ever made or a Trojan Horse for an ergo rule. OSHA is fighting for the working man and woman or it is a police state.
It was 15 years ago, in 1995, that Daniel Goleman’s book, “Emotional Intelligence,” was wildly popular. “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,” Stephen R. Covey’s book that has sold 15 million copies in 38 languages, dates back to 1989. Remember interdependence? Wrote Covey: “People who do not have the maturity to think and act interdependently may be good individual producers, but they won't be good leaders or team players.”

What planet did those books come from? That idealism seems of a different century, which of course it was. Pre-9/11. Before the housing, auto industry, 401K meltdowns.

Pre-occupied with self-esteem
“Empathetic Communication in High-Stress Situations” is the title of Dr. Peter Sandman’s timely web post from earlier this summer (www.psandman.com/col/empathy2.htm). “I think it’s unusually hard for my clients to sit still for empathy training,” wrote Sandman, the internationally-known risk communications expert.

And the problem is? Leadership’s pre-occupation with self-esteem, writes Sandman. Think General McChrystal. Tony Hayward. LeBron James. Our cultural obsession with being liked, more than respected.

In an interview this summer with the London newspaper, The Guardian, Judith Hackitt, chair of the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety Executive (think of a publicly-funded, apolitical OSHA) comes across as the definition of an occupational safety and health professional. Self-esteem takes a backseat to personal convictions. “Certainly, the belief and strength of purpose that Hackitt brings to the job is evident,” writes The Guardian. “She also admits to having ‘difficulty’ with negativity. ‘I’m not terribly sympathetic to the all-too-difficult brigade,’ she says firmly.”

“There are no flies on Judith,” says one colleague in the article. That’s a British compliment. A sign of leadership.

The flies are out in force this summer. All over the likes of McChrystal, Hayward, “King” James. How many are on you?

Summer of discontent

President Obama’s approval rating as the summer got underway: 46 percent were in favor of how he was directing affairs, 45 percent were not, according to Gallup. We are conflicted about the man. But approval of his leadership is trending definitely down. At one point in the past year, 61 percent were positive about the President.

“Conflicted” is being diplomatic to describe how many Americans feel about leadership in general these days. It’s been a sour attitude a long time festering. In the past few years we’ve endured the worst recession in 80 years. Wall Street’s embarrassment of riches. The BP debacle, the country’s worst environmental disaster and a human tragedy. Afghanistan, now the nation’s longest-ever war.

Dr. Martin Seligman, the guru of positive psychology, is perhaps the only person smiling.

Gloomy Gallup reports
Gallup reported in early summer that “slightly more” Americans believe good, quality jobs are for the taking. That’s generous. Gallup's June finding: a whopping 85 percent of Americans believe it is a "bad time" to find a "quality job." Overall, reported Gallup, “the total lack of optimism about the prospects of finding a quality job in June 2010 is consistent across ages, incomes, genders, and regions of the country.”

A “total lack of optimism.” Then there are other recent Gallup surveys: “Worry, Sadness, Stress Increase With Length of Unemployment.” “Fewer Americans Feeling Better About Their Financial Situation.” “Many Americans Say Gulf Beaches, Wildlife Will Never Recover.”

Wicked collision
Under these dark clouds Democrats on Capitol Hill have launched the most concerted effort in 40 years to reform federal occupational safety and health laws. If enacted, OSHA and MSHA fines will increase. Criminal penalties will be stiffer, enticing more attorneys to prosecute members of management, including EHS professionals for willful negligence causing serious employee injuries or deaths.. Meanwhile, over at the Department of Labor, OSHA chief Dr. David Michaels and deputy Jordan Barab are leading: 1) the biggest surge in agency enforcement since the 1970s, with record-setting fines; 2) the most ambitious standards-setting agenda since the ‘70s; and 3) development of perhaps the most sweeping single regulation in agency history, the so-called I2P2, the injury and illness prevention standard.

The irresistible political force coming out of Washington is slamming into an immovable wall of discontent. It’s a wicked collision.

“We are determined to put sharper teeth in our workplace safety laws and to step up federal enforcement,” said Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat and chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee.

“Sharper teeth in our workplace safety laws and stepped up federal enforcement as Harkin states, WILL NOT improve safety and health management. People will do everything they can to avoid being penalized,” writes longtime safety and health consultant Ted Ingalls in an email.
“Bad actors have put profits before people,” blogs the AFL-CIO.

“I am not willing to trust the OSHA political appointees with the power” that would be granted the agency with the I2P2 standard, says safety consultant Tom Lawrence.

Where’s the trust?
Speaking of trust, that essential leadership element, what black hole did it get sucked into? The Tea Party grassroots insurrection, or whatever the mainstream media is calling it, has been created and is flourishing in a void of trust.

Too many businesses can’t be trusted, according to those who want a stronger OSHA and MSHA. “We have seen too many accidents over the last few months in workplaces across the country,” said Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) in a statement supporting the need for OSHA and MSHA reforms.

OSHA’s Dr. Michaels doesn’t trust the accuracy of industry’s injury and illness recordkeeping across the board. “In too many cases in this country, workplace safety incentive programs are doing more harm than good by creating incentives to conceal worker injuries,” he told the American Society of Safety Engineers’ national meeting in June.

Of course the oil industry isn’t deemed trustworthy after the BP catastrophe and a series of plant explosions. Here is OSHA’s Barab addressing the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association’s National Safety Conference in May: “Bluntly speaking: Your workers are dying on the job and it has to stop.”

Anything but empathy
In the absence of trust, you get bluntness, blame, anger, anything but empathy. You get current national dialog. Glen Beck. Hilda Solis’s “new sheriff in town.” The “small people” along the Gulf. Broken Promises. A general and his aides blabbing to Rolling Stone.

You get deep division over OSHA actions: I2P2 as the best move OSHA ever made or a Trojan Horse for an ergo rule. OSHA is fighting for the working man and woman or it is a police state.
It was 15 years ago, in 1995, that Daniel Goleman’s book, “Emotional Intelligence,” was wildly popular. “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,” Stephen R. Covey’s book that has sold 15 million copies in 38 languages, dates back to 1989. Remember interdependence? Wrote Covey: “People who do not have the maturity to think and act interdependently may be good individual producers, but they won't be good leaders or team players.”

What planet did those books come from? That idealism seems of a different century, which of course it was. Pre-9/11. Before the housing, auto industry, 401K meltdowns.

Pre-occupied with self-esteem
“Empathetic Communication in High-Stress Situations” is the title of Dr. Peter Sandman’s timely web post from earlier this summer (www.psandman.com/col/empathy2.htm). “I think it’s unusually hard for my clients to sit still for empathy training,” wrote Sandman, the internationally-known risk communications expert.

And the problem is? Leadership’s pre-occupation with self-esteem, writes Sandman. Think General McChrystal. Tony Hayward. LeBron James. Our cultural obsession with being liked, more than respected.

In an interview this summer with the London newspaper, The Guardian, Judith Hackitt, chair of the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety Executive (think of a publicly-funded, apolitical OSHA) comes across as the definition of an occupational safety and health professional. Self-esteem takes a backseat to personal convictions. “Certainly, the belief and strength of purpose that Hackitt brings to the job is evident,” writes The Guardian. “She also admits to having ‘difficulty’ with negativity. ‘I’m not terribly sympathetic to the all-too-difficult brigade,’ she says firmly.”

“There are no flies on Judith,” says one colleague in the article. That’s a British compliment. A sign of leadership.

The flies are out in force this summer. All over the likes of McChrystal, Hayward, “King” James. How many are on you?

Up on Angels Landing

Rock climbers are a breed apart. There he is, baggy shorts, shaggy hair, no shirt, hanging by his fingertips to thin cracks on the underside of a sandstone ledge, defying gravity. Has the body fat of a marathon runner. The taut, cut muscles of a gymnast.

Or there she is, in full climbing personal protective equipment. Helmet especially designed with an inverted ”V” in the back to accommodate her ponytail. Sleek, high-tech anti-glare eye protection. Gloves, boots, fall protection. Scaling the sheer ice face of a canyon wall, ergo-designed ice axes in both hands.

Climbing culture beckons the non-conformist. Individualists only responsible and accountable to themselves, or a small team. They are driven wanderers, seeking outrageous climbs, sometimes at the expense of local prohibitions.

“Climbing, after all, is about freedom,” writes Andrew Bisharat, in the June, 2010 issue of “Rock and Ice” magazine.

So what happens in this culture that prizes individual expression when a climber sees someone doing something dumb? Do they speak up? Intervene?
Rarely, writes Bisharat.

Laissez-faire climbing
But that doesn’t preclude climbers from thinking about saying something. Some are introspective, aware and attuned philosophers of the terra firma.

In his column, Bishart questions why he has allowed crazy fools to continue down their path of self-destruction. “Doing what’s right doesn’t come easily,” he says. The last thing the hardened climber wants to do is play safety cop, “that guy who runs around imposing his ego on everyone by telling him or how to act.”

Escape from Vegas
This past April I made my getaway from a business meeting to Las Vegas to drive three hours east to Zion National Park in southern Utah. Zion is climbing holy ground, with its 5,000 to 7,800-foot red, orange and white canyon walls, arches and hoodoos holding a “lifetime of adventure,” according to an article about the park in the June issue of “Rock and Ice.”

Believe me, I had zero intention of attempting any kind of vertical assault. I am a hiker, not a climber. My challenge would be Angels Landing. The trail to Angel’s Landing is 2.5 miles to a rocky viewpoint 1,500 feet above Zion Canyon and the Virgin River.

Here’s how Wikipedia describes the journey: “After a series of steep switchbacks, the trail goes through a gradual ascent. Walter's Wiggles, a series of 21 steep switchbacks, are the last hurdle before Scout's Lookout. Scout's Lookout is generally the turnaround point for those who are unwilling to make the final summit push to the top of Angels Landing. The last half-mile of the trail is strenuous and littered with sharp drop offs and narrow paths. Chains to grip are provided for portions of the last half-mile to the top.”

Seven fatalities
Days after I made the trek a woman in her 60s, hiking alone, died after falling from Scout’s Lookout. Angels Landing is “particularly notable for fatalities,” according to an article in the Salt Lake City Tribune describing the incident. Last year, two women in their 50s died from about 1,000-foot falls on the Angels Landing trail. Since 2000, seven people have died on Angels Landing, including a 14-year-old Boy Scout, according to Tribune report.

Had I done this Internet research before my trip, would I have stuck to the canyon floor and the verdant banks of the Virgin River? Not likely. I’ve climbed Angels Landing twice before, once with my then 17-year-old daughter. I was confident and determined this time around, the only traits I might share with serious climbers.

Personal experience trumps raw statistics and incidents I did not witness.

Ascending Angels Landing, though the way is marked and chained for you at times, cranks up your adrenaline and narrows your concentration to the rocks and grips straight ahead. Depending on the time of day and year, you pass any number of people going up and down the trail. There is little conversation between strangers, none during the trickier parts of the climb. You are absorbed in your own climbing calculations — do I go this way or that way? — and most aware of your grip, footing, and stamina.

What if…
What if I saw another climber, complete stranger, straying from the chains to carve his initials on a ledge 1,000 feet up? Would I say something?

Probably not. But it depends. If the stray climber was a ten-year-old seemingly by himself, definitely I’d be compelled to do or say something. If the boy’s father was nearby, well, I might say something to the dad. Or I might figure father knows best and be on my way.

If the person initialing the ledge was a tanned and fit twentysomething wearing REI climbing gear, I’d figure he knows more than I do and leave him be. Now maybe he smoked crack before making his ascent, but I’d calculate the odds are slim and leave him alone. If he was with friends, I’d be even less likely to intervene.

If that stray climber was a soloing 60ish grandmother type timidly inching toward the edge, I’d probably shout out to her.

Mitigating factors
To speak up or ignore someone taking an obvious risk involves a startling number of potential factors. What’s your physical condition at the moment of truth: gassed, alert? What’s your perception of the risk-taker’s experience and understanding of what he’s doing? Is the risk-taker alone or with a group of peers?

Says Bisharat: “Speaking up… immediately and inescapably intertwines you with the consequences of what happens. It can feel easier to live and let die.”

If I pull back the ten-year-old or a rapdily fatiguing grandmother, do I sacrifice making the summit to escort them back down?

Sometimes getting involved is a no-brainer. If someone is about to fall, there’s no time to second-quess and as Bisharat writes, “the self is forgotten and the moral course of action just takes place…”

But seldom is the situation so black and white. “Finding that right degree, the right speech and the right listener all need to come together, and I’m still not sure I understand how to achive that balance,” writes Bisharat.

Me, too.

Grade the Labor Secretary: I give her a “B”

Hilda Solis was confirmed as Secretary of Labor one year ago this month, February 24. Her boss, President Obama, has long since seen his honeymoon end. Now he’s tanking in the public approval polls and being widely chided in the press, and I don’t only mean Fox News, as being an indecisive leader. One news magazine put him on the cover next to Jimmy Carter. Nuff said.

I don’t think anyone in the occupational safety and health world would today call Hilda Solis indecisive. Maybe other things — too aggressive, polarizing, overreaching, pro-union — but not a smooth-talking do-nothing.

For my money, one year into her job she is the most decisive Labor Secretary, when it specifically comes to OSHA affairs, I’ve seen since Elizabeth Dole in the Bush 1 administration.

There really are not many decisions a Labor Secretary has to make about OSHA. The agency’s budget of about $550 million is small potatoes compared to the total Department of Labor budget of about $117 billion (the majority to be used for unemployment insurance benefits for displaced workers and federal workers' compensation). The department's discretionary budget is about $14 billion. One decision is: how much of a leash, how much freedom, to give the assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health. Two: Do you have the back of your OSHA boss? Will you provide political cover?

A former high-ranking OSHA official told me years ago: The OSHA chief is only as strong as the Labor Secretary allows him or her to be. Jerry Scannell once told me he wouldn’t have taken the OSHA chief job if not for a pre-hire talk with Elizabeth Dole that convince him he’d have her cooperation, that they were on the same page.

John Henshaw, I’m told by people close to him, would have loved to do more at OSHA than sign alliances and preside over VPP flag raising ceremonies. John would never so say publicly, but he was the right man at the wrong time during his OSHA years. His boss, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, basically ran a STOP OSHA campaign out of her third floor office in the Frances Perkins building. John didn’t stand a chance. As he said publicly more than once, you’ve got to sail with the prevailing winds.

The winds have changed 180 degrees since Ms. Solis took over. Even before Jordan Barab was named acting OSHA chief last April, she had made decisive moves regarding OSHA.

In her first 100 days, according to a summary provided on the DOL web site “in addition to undoing past actions by the Bush Administration, Secretary Solis has taken several important steps to further protect and promote the welfare of workers. The Department made significant strides forward in the development of rule addressing diacetyl by initiating a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel for occupational exposure to food flavorings containing the chemical. Diacetyl is a food flavoring most notably used in the production of microwavable popcorn and has been associated with the development of sometimes fatal respiratory illnesses in workers exposed to it, producing a condition popularly referred to as ‘Popcorn Workers Lung’."

The first budget from Secretary Solis “restores the Labor Department worker protection agencies' staffing so they can vigorously enforce the laws they oversee…”
From January 20, 2009 to April 15, 2009, OSHA conducted 8,804 inspections, issued 21,166 citations for violations and levied nearly $27 million in penalties.
When the fiery Barab came aboard, Ms. Solis accompanied him to the annual conference of the American Society of Safety Engineers in June. I have to go back to Elizabeth Dole again to recall a safety meeting where both the Labor Secretary and the OSHA chief gave speeches.

At the ASSE meeting, Ms. Solis and Mr. Barab came out swinging, stunning and scaring the cautious pragmatism of many of the safety pros attending. They both literally used fightin’ words. Join with us, partner with us in this fight for better working conditions. “My parents instilled in me many values - but most importantly they taught me to fight for what is right,” said Ms. Solis. “These are the values I bring with me to the Department of Labor.” The message couldn’t be clearer: the sheriff is back in town. SWAT teams will swoop in on Texas construction contractors. VPP is no longer a sacred cow. Industry recordkeeping is going to be scrutinized. So are state plan OSHA programs.

Ms. Solis told the ASSE crowd: “OSHA's renewal of vigorously enforcing its standards and regulations means employers will no longer be able to say that it costs too much or takes too much time to address worker safety and health. There will be no excuses for negligence in protecting workers' from injury, illness and death.

“OSHA's leadership and I are of one voice, advocating vigorous enforcement of laws that protect workers. We are committed to a strong federal role in protecting workplace safety and health, as mandated in the original Act that created the agency.”

That “one voice” is not simple rhetoric. In a January 2010 speech, OSHA chief Dr. David Michaels said with a similar tone of assertion “We're a regulatory and enforcement agency and we're going to act like it.”

It’s far too soon to judge Dr. Michaels. But I give Ms. Solis a solid “B” for her first year overseeing OSHA. As safety activist Ron Hayes told me the other day, “You’d never see OSHA posting fatality cases on its website before now.” I like the new transparency. I like that the Secretary of Labor actually discusses occupational safety and health in her speeches. That she doesn’t reserve her only comments to gloating over another annual decline in workplace injuries. That she’s allowing standards to move forward on global harmonization of hazcom labels and data sheets, confined spaces in construction, silica dust. That she talks with passion about job safety. That she doesn’t look at OSHA and see kryptonite.

As even my most liberal friends used to say about Ronald Reagan, you can agree with him or disagree with him, but you know where he’s coming from and he only does what he said he’d do.

I call that leadership. What do you say?

Fast food, hotels, health services, theme parks and retailers: Why so mum about job safety?

There are more than 2,300 worksites enrolled in OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program. Only 29 are health services. Two are amusement and recreation services. Two are hotels and lodgings. Four are retailers, representing L.L. Bean and Amazon.com. One is a general merchandise store and one is a food store.

ORC Worldwide’s safety and health consultancy in Washington, D.C. is one of the largest and most reputable in the country. Of the types of services mentioned above, only Disney, Hospira, Inc., and the ServiceMaster Company are ORC members.

Where is Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Home Depot, Loew’s, with their warehousing hazards? Where are the thousands of hospitals and nursing homes with their fire safety, lifting, needlestick and housekeeping hazards? Where are the theme parks with their pushing the envelop thrill rides? What about fast food chains with their hot grease, cramped kitchens and high turnover? Even pizza delivery services with their scrambling drivers.

I found none as sponsors of the Auditing Roundtable in Phoenix or the Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI). I checked the client lists of Behavioral Science Technology, Safety Performance Solutions, and DuPont Safety Resources; hundreds of companies are listed. DuPont lists three retailers. None of the big box chains or national fast food chains. Same goes for healthcare systems and entertainment companies.

According to the web site themeparkinsider.com, “In the United States, no official source is keeping a complete national record of theme park accidents. And in many U.S. states, including Florida, theme parks are not legally required to report accidents involving injury to anyone”

The International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions has an annual Safety Week and a traveling safety institute educational program. The IAAP does not make its membership list available to the public.

Same goes for the International Association for Healthcare Security and Safety, or IAHSS, which bills itself as “the only organization solely dedicated to professionals involved in managing and directing security and safety programs in healthcare institutions.” Its membership directory is for members only.

I checked out Home Depot’s website and found a raft of information on “Home Depot and the Environment,” but couldn’t locate any safety and health metrics or summaries or success stories.

Takes forever to load Wal-Mart’s website with all the graphics. Here’s a tip, if you want scoops on Wal-Mart corporate, google Wal-Mart corporate. Like Loew’s Wal-Mart uses sustainability far more that anything relating to workplace safety and health to build goodwill and embellish its corporate citizenship.

Wal-Mart’s web site lists all sorts of do-good activities: disaster relief, military support, “meaningful strides to zero waste,” reducing global plastic shopping bag waste, diversity, charitable giving, empowering female factory workers in Bangladesh, a program called “Acres for America,” greater affordability of healthy foods for all Americans. One sentence in the company’s sustainability annual report mentions assisting overseas suppliers improve conditions on the factory floor. I searched the Wal-Mart site for “occupational safety and health” and came up with a 2008 press release on a distribution center getting VPP recognition and the health and safety requirements (PPE, MSDSs, etc.) for company suppliers.

I’m not saying Wal-Mart has a suspect safety program. Same goes for other companies and industries mentioned here. I just don’t know. I find very little info available. If YOU know more, let me know, and I’ll share it in a future post.

It’s strange that for a service-driven economy, service companies don’t talk about safety. One of the countries main exports today are films and TV shows, yet you find very little about entertainment industry safety practices. We don’t make many things anymore, but we sure know how to package and sell (Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot, Loew’s, Best Buy et al). Yet I can’t recall a safety and health pro from one of these retailers presenting at a safety conference. I’m sure they have, but nowhere near in proportion to the economic influence they wield. Fast food is part and parcel of the American lifestyle, but again, I’ve heard little about their safety records or practices. Healthcare is the 8,000 pound gorilla of the economy, but while patient safety becomes a larger and larger issue, worker safety gets no press.

Strange and perhaps unsettling, occupational safety and health is not a visible nor widely discussed component of many of America’s most dynamic industries in 2010. Quite possibly these firms consider their workplace risks unique and separate from traditional manufacturing, and believe they have little to learn from construction and production safety and health programs. Perhaps, like other industries, they benchmark safety behind closed doors.

But I ask you, has safety lost its way in the 21st century economy? If you have evidence otherwise, bring it on.

The Toyota recall: Why consumer products companies can’t ignore safety

It’s a matter of trust. Safety-related problems are trust-busters for businesses like Toyota. These companies rely on consumer trust in their wares as an essential to building brand loyalty, brand reputation, and of course sales, market share and profits.

Safety issues become an even more significant trust-buster when they go so far as to endanger the lives of unsuspecting customers, as in Toyota’s case when brakes might fail.

I’ve long thought that safety and health pros working for consumer products companies enjoyed unique leverage. Not that they have the perfect safety job; there is no such thing. But think about it: a food company, a healthcare products company, an automaker, all depend on relationships with the public to make a profit. The same goes for airlines, as another example. Any internal screw-up in design, manufacturing, maintenance, operations or quality control that ends up threatening the health, well-being and even the lives of consumers of those products and services is a major blow to the unspoken but taken for granted trust in the safety of what that company delivers.

This is why pharmaceutical companies can’t ignore safety. Remember the Tylenol crisis? Of course you can find flaws in their safety and health programs; you can find flaws in any safety and health program if you look hard enough. But the fact is many of the long-time standard-bearers of strong safety programs are companies that have ties that bind to consumers: Ford, GM, Proctor & Gamble, Delta Airlines, Johnson & Johnson, DuPont, Kraft Foods, Disney, FedEx, UPS, AT&T, GE, Kimberly-Clark.

One of the reasons for the explosive growth in OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program in the past ten years is the use of the VPP flag as a sort of seal of good housekeeping endorsement, a visible and promoted display of safety as a company value to help build trust with customers. Look at some of the leading participants in VPP — Delta, GE, Frito-Lay, Sherwin-Williams, L.L. Bean, Monsanto, Honeywell, Georgia-Pacific, L’Oreal, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Milliken, ExxonMobil. With few exceptions, these companies score high in terms of consumer recognition.

Companies that operate off of the public’s radar screen are less likely to be found in the ranks of VPP. Of 2,329 work sites in the VPP at the end of 2009, only 32 are in the primary metals industry; 54 in the fabricated metals industry; 45 in instrument manufacturing. I’m not saying good safety and health programs are not found in these types of industries — good safety programs can be found anywhere you have a CEO who wants good safety, where good labor-management relations exist, and good safety and health expertise is on hand.

But recall McWane, the pipe, fittings and valve company whose many safety failures were documented several years ago by The New York Times, or AK Steel, whose series of fatalities go back even further. These are examples of the “upstream” supply channel nuts-and-bolts manufacturers who produce industrial raw materials and commodity hardgoods out of the public eye. Both McWane and AK Steel took steps similar to what Toyota has announced after their safety problems became public knowledge: top-to-bottom organization reviews, blue-ribbon safety panels, cooperation with regulators, more open safety communications.

Last Sunday more than 100 million people watched the Super Bowl and an hour’s worth of commercials. By the way, if spineless wimpy males, squawking chickens and snarky beer guzzlers are best that the most creative advertising minds in the country can come up with, advertising is mired in a deep recession of ideas. But I’m off point. The commercials were all about branding. We live in the age of brand power. And for some safety and health pros, that’s a distinct advantage.

What do you say?

I’m so lonesome I could die

One of Hank Williams’ classic songs is “I’m so lonesome I could cry.” A review of fatalities reported to OSHA shows that many deaths are lonesome experiences.

OSHA is now posting on it web site descriptions of on-the-job fatalities on a weekly basis. Employers must report these incidents to OSHA within eight hours.

What struck me looking over the most recent reports is how many on the job deaths occur not on assembly lines or on the shop floor, with victims surrounded by their coworkers, but when workers are off on their own.

Unsupervised.

Out of communication.

Doing the most ordinary, commonplace tasks. Jobs that certainly don’t qualify as high-risk, in most cases anyway, if you were do conduct a risk assessment beforehand.

Take these incidences, for example:

Worker was driving north in patrol vehicle when an attempt was made to pass another northbound vehicle. The vehicles made contact and the worker's vehicle went off the road and hit a utility pole.

Apparently, no one else was in the car. And remember, most job fatalities occur on the road, in motor vehicle crashes.

Worker was found unresponsive with head injuries next to an overturned stepladder. The worker never regained consciousness.

Many times victims are found after the fact, with the details of the incident never fully clear.

Worker was found in employee locker room and was taken to emergency room. Worker was pronounced dead shortly after of a possible heart attack.

Again, “worker was found”…

Worker suffered a heart attack and died while walking to meet a forklift driver to get supplies.

Here tragedy strikes in the most ordinary of circumstances, a worker walking to get supplies.

Worker was crushed when the equipment he was standing on slid off the trailer it was loaded on. The worker was crushed between the bag house and the remaining equipment on the ground.

Here one worker, standing on equipment, loses stability and his life.

Worker was riding an ATV, and it appears that the vehicle slipped on the steep terrain throwing the worker off and then landing on top of him.

“It appears” this is what happened because no one was present to witness the event.

Worker complained about not feeling well. The worker went home and collapsed about 3 hours later and died before taken to hospital.

Here a sick worker goes home alone and never returns.

Worker was installing copper flashing on a roof and was found unresponsive on the ground between the bases of two ladders.

Again, all there is to go on is “was found unresponsive.” No buddy present, no details.

Worker was delivering medical products and was run over by his own truck.

“Run over by his own truck.” A single vehicle incident.

Worker was walking from the parking lot to the entrance and was run over by a delivery truck.

Again, something as simple and everyday as a walk through a parking lot ends a life.

Worker was shoveling corn into a bucket of a bobcat and was found unresponsive.

“Was found unresponsive.” Who knows what really happened? No one will.

When you send workers out on their own to do a job, what kind of mindfulness training have they received? Because when they’re on their own, whether it’s on a roof, a road, or a telephone pole, it’s their own alertness that they must depend on.

True grit in filmmaking

Here are the best movies that capture a hard day’s work

On February 2, 2010, nominations will be announced for the 82nd Academy Awards. This year there will be ten Best Picture nominees instead of the customary five.

With movie award season upon us, (movie critics made their selections in December, Golden Globes will be handed out January 17, Screen Actors Guild Awards January 23, Directors Guild Awards January 30, the Film Independent’s Spirit Awards in March), let’s get into the spirit.

What is the best movie you have seen reflecting the realities, attitudes and culture of true grit working people?

I’m not talking about just in 2009. Hollywood makes so few “working class” films (blue collar is boring, the “suits” decided long ago) that we can’t limit picks to any one year. No, the question is: What is the best movie you have ever seen depicting workers up against the kind of risks and dangers we talk about every month in this magazine?

Hollywood’s comfort zone
This rules out scads of flicks about white-collar corporate characters. Hollywood is more comfortable with white-collar bad guys or sad guys, probably because the characters remind them of themselves. There is 2009’s excellent “Up in the Air” with George Clooney as a headcount exterminator, and you can go back through the years with films such as “Michael Clayton” with Clooney again as a conflicted law firm “fixer,” the greed is good gang in “Wall Street,” an unethical journalist in “Shattered Glass,” Jack Lemmon scrambling to salvage his clothing business in “Save the Tiger,” director John Cassavetes’s stark study of a bored, philandering middle-aged exec in “Faces,” and the 1950s study of conformity in “The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit,” with Gregory Peck donning the uniform.

Where are the films with workers who have dirt beneath their fingernails? Who risk life and limb for a paycheck? Who are not necessarily heroic but down-to-earth real?

For your consideration
I nominate the following:

How Green Was My Valley (1941) — Story of a Welsh valley's turn-of-the-century descent from pastoral paradise to decimated coal mining region and the effect on pre-union miners.

The Bicycle Thief (1948) — One man’s struggle to feed his family. After nearly two years of unemployment, he finds a job posting bills that requires a bicycle. But his bike is stolen on the first day of his job. With his small son he combs the streets of bombed-out, postwar Rome searching for it with no luck. His will finally broken, he steals a bicycle but is caught in the act.

Wages of Fear (1953) — In an remote, hot and desolate Central American village, four men risk all to get out by accepting an offer from an American oil company to drive two trucks filled with nitroglycerin over treacherous terrain to a well fire.

On the Waterfront (1954) — Marlon Brando is an ex-prize fighter who struggles against himself and union corruption along New York’s grim, wintry, dangerous docks.

Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (1960) — An angry young man trapped in a mindless factory job in a polluted, down and dirty northern English industrial town spends Saturday nights drinking and Sunday mornings fishing; a rebel without focus.

Norma Rae (1979) — Based on a true story, an uneducated woman fights to improve her own life and deplorable conditions in a southern textile mill.

The Devil’s Miner (2005) — A documentary of two brothers, age 12 and 14, raised without a father in a shanty on the side of a mountain in Bolivia, who scramble through silver mines daily to afford the clothing and supplies needed for their education, the only ticket to escape their bleak destiny.

Mississippi Chicken (2007) — Real-life documentary of an activist working among trailer park Latin Americans employed in poultry plants and who are too scared to cause trouble or alert authorities to workplace abuses.

Encounters at the End of the World (2007) — Another documentary, this one studies the motives and philosophies of marine biologists, physicists, plumbers, and truck drivers who work in extreme conditions as far away from society as one can get at the Antarctic compound of the National Science Foundation.

The Simpsons — (1989 – present) I’m cheating here, of course. This is TV-land. But the follies of Homer the nuke plant operator, his family and buddies, are really no farce; beneath the buffoonery are populist predicaments of work and play. Plus, unlike most “working-class” film central characters, Homer is no victim, no underdog scraper, or stranger in a strange land.

To this list I’d add the following films, which I’ve read about but not seen. Perhaps you have:

Bread and Roses (2001) — The 1990 Service Employees International Union's Justice for Janitors campaign in Los Angeles is depicted through the struggle of an immigrant woman who refuses to believe she cannot win every battle on her own terms.

El Norte (1983) — A young brother and sister journey from their remote Guatemalan village to the promised land of the Los Angeles. Working as a domestic, the sister is puzzled why her employers uses a washing machine. Her brother works his way up from busboy to waiter to the promise of a better job in Chicago, but their past returns to haunt them.

Hard Labour (1973) — Brutally harsh study of an aging Englishwoman and her daily grind cleaning the homes of the wealthy. She returns to her own home each night to face whines and rants from her husband, an alcoholic custodian.

Blue Collar (1978) — Richard Pryor is one of three friends scraping by trying to escape auto assembly line boredom, hazards, and fears of a dead-end future.

OSHA’s reg agenda notable for what’s missing

regulatory agenda, released yesterday, is on taking care of rulemaking initiatives that are old and in the way, causing gridlock and preventing OSHA from beginning to track bigger and more controversial regulatory game.

This strategy makes senses both administratively and politically. Agenda items such as crane and derrick safety; exposures to silica, beryllium, and methyline chloride; walking/working surfaces; and electrical power transmission safety have stagnated in the standards-setting office for years and must be dealt with.

Taking care of this kind of administrative housekeeping also gives the new OSHA chief, Dr. David Michaels, and his leadership team breathing room to carefully consider how to address politically hot issues such as ergonomics, updating hundreds of permissible exposure limits (PELs), and setting basic mandates for workplace injury and illness prevention programs.

Both Barab and his boss, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, repeatedly asserted in live chat webinars yesterday that OSHA has not current plans for having another go at setting an ergo standard. This is a retreat from Barab’s bold comment made earlier this year at the American Society of Safety Engineers’ meeting that it’s time for OSHA to pick up the political football that is ergonomics and run with it, resistance be damned.

Meanwhile, there was no mention on the reg agenda of workplace injury and illness prevention program requirements, one of Dr. Michaels’s stated priorities for OSHA. It’s simply too early in the Obama era at OSHA to take on that comprehensive issue, sure to impact small businesses and cause a political firestorm.

The same goes for updating the PELs. “While the agency has not made a determination about how to proceed at this time, we continue to look at strategies that protect workers from chemical hazards,” was as close as Barab came yesterday to touching the legal complications of justifying new PELs.

“These are very important and complex issues,” said Barab, referring to ergonomics, injury/illness prevention plans, and updating PELs. And he left it at that.

OSHA will accomplish little without Obama’s reelection

We’re not even out of 2009, so no one is in the mood to start thinking about another long, drawn-out, media-saturated presidential election battle in 2012. At least outside of Washington. Campaign consultants, party leaders and Potomac Fever gossipers are always on to the next race. It’s the habitual pastime in the nation’s capital.

But if you study the OSHA regulatory agenda issued yesterday by the Department of Labor, two political facts of life strike you. One, even when an administration actually has the will to set new standards, as this one does, it still takes years to grind through the process of small business impact studies, stakeholder meetings, comment periods, public hearings, advance notices, proposals, risk assessments, revisions, more in-house soul-searching and public outreach, and trying to get the Office of Management and Budget and the DOL front office to sign off on a new rule.

Two, due to this grind ‘em out process, it requires two presidential terms, eight years, for an OSHA team (like the present one) that actually wants to be innovative and ambitious to have any chance at achieving even some of its goals.

When you see how relatively innocuous standards proposals such as walking/working surfaces, electrical power transmission safety, and crane and derrick safety have been reprinted for years in the regulatory calendar, you begin to grasp the enormity of the resources and resolve necessary to drive through rules on ergonomics, updating permissible exposure limits, and setting baseline requirements for workplace injury and illness prevention programs.

To be sure, in Washington agencies can always ram through standards at the midnight hour of an expiring administration, as OSHA did in 2000 with the ergo rule and in 1980 before the Reagan administration took control. But not to any lasting effect. The new powers quickly rescind the old orders, as the Bush administration did with the ergo rule months after taking office (with the help of Congress).

It’s no surprise that ergonomics, workplace safety programs, and updating PELs were not listed on the first regulatory calendar published by the Obama Labor Department. Why borrow trouble before you even know how you want to proceed? OSHA chief Dr. David Michaels has just been sworn in. Give him a year to put together a strategy for addressing the Big Three regulatory issues.

Even when they make their initial appearance on the reg calendar, it’s only the start of the long grind toward final standards. That journey through a battlefield of political action ambushes and counterattacks will take oh, perhaps a half-dozen years. And that’s for maybe one of the Big Three to actually become a final rule.

Without a second Obama term, these key OSHA issues will receive all sorts of attention, but not enough traction.