Chapter 5 Organizing for Safety

8/13/2019 Chapter 5 Organizing for Safety

1/26

UNIT 5

Organizing For Safety

CONCEPT OF ORGANIZINGOrganizing is the process of identification and categorization of the

tasks to be performed by suitably delegating powers, responsibility

etc. as well as establishing coordination between people so as to

result in utmost efficiency and smooth functioning related to

various activities. This implies that the coordination is sought at all

levels in addition to building up of an efficient authority in the

entire organizational set-up.

Organising demands a meticulous observance of the followingrules or measures :

1) Employment of knowledgeable and experienced people to carry

out important jobs or tasks.

2) Clearly defining the relationship between the various groups or

individuals at same or different levels.

3) Clear identification of the tasks so that the goal or the objectives

may be attained without confusion.

4) To allocate functions with proper subdivisions as to the jobs to

be performed taking due account of responsibility and credibility

of the persons concerned.

5) Proper facilities are to be provided so that people can discharge

their duties quite faithfully.

6) Last but not the least the delegation of authority or powers

should be vested upon proper people specially those having

proven track-record and an ublemished previous performance.

ORGANISATIONAL SYSTEMS IN CONTEXT TO SAFETY

Generally speaking the line manager shoulders the main

responsibility of safety management in an organization. However,

the safety department as well as the safety specialist have their

definite roles in safety management as both of them advise and

provide due assistance to the line managers in the matters of

safety. Since the line manager has to perform his duties and

arduous tasks, it is not expected of him to shoulder the wholegamut of responsibility involved in the safety management. With


2/26

the safety literatures growing in volume by leaps and bounds

every year and the introduction of new safety techniques, the line

manager becomes extremely burdened if he has to look after the

whole arena of safety. Hence, creation of separate safety

departments fortified with safety specialist is warranted under thechanged circumstances in industries.

The safety specialist under special circumstances can be entrusted

with line authority in a restricted sense in case of emergencies and

special delegation of powers can be vested to the specialist by the

managers themselves. The safety specialist is expected to include

the value and importance of safety in the whole system through

persuations and timely advice.

DEFINITIONAccording to Theo Haimann,

Organizing is the process of defining and grouping the activities of the

enterprise and establishing the authority relationships among them.

According to Louis Allen,

"Organizing is the process of identifying and grouping the work to beperformed, defining and delegating responsibility and authority and

establishing relationships for the purpose of enabling people to work

most effectively together in accomplishing objectives."

NEEDS

If you have ever gotten lost in library stacks while looking for a book, you

already know good organization makes a search process so much

easier. As nonprofits set up their GiFTgive accounts and begin posting all

the specific needs of their daily operations, they learn that it helps to step

back and think about possibly organizing those needs in a different way.

Donors probably dont see the needs in quite the same context as

someone working inside the nonprofit. If you think about how a

restaurant works, this is intuitively clear.


3/26

In a restaurant, the kitchen staff sees ingredients on the shelf that will be

used in the preparation of food, but the patron out in the dining room

only sees the dishes that the menu describes two completely different

perspectives on what is essentially the same thing. We expect a diner to

order cake; not flour, eggs and sugar. If we just listed all the ingredients

we use on the menu, diners would not know what to order or where to

start.

In the same way, nonprofits who are just getting accustomed to listing out

their specific needs to donors, quickly recognize that the way they talk

about and organize their needs internally is not quite sufficient to their

new presentation effort. At GiFTgive, we use words like campaign,

bundle and grouping to describe the way individual needs are

organized; and we encourage nonprofits to keep two objectives in mind

throughout the process: 1) do anything you can to help the donor find the

needs, and 2) do everything you can to help the donor to make sense

of the needs.

Finding the needs is a product of organization. Donors are surfing quickly

through the nonprofits pages as they look for the need they want to fund.

The more easily they can navigate their way through, the better theirexperience, and the less they have to work at making a contribution.

Naturally, we all want the donor to have an easy and fun giving

experience that will bring him back again, but that is tougher to

accomplish if he is forced to stumble his way through a haphazardly

categorized pile of needs.

But it is not enough just to find the needs if, once found, they are grouped

in ways that dont make sense to donors. We could find needs easilyenough if we list them alphabetically, but carburetor and carton of

milk just dont make any sense next to one another on a list of needs. On

the other hand, one of our beta customers bundled up every need they

had that was related to bedding, because donors understand that if you

need pillows, it makes sense that you probably also need pillowcases. It

doesnt matter to the donor if the pillows are headed for one location and

the pillowcases happen to be needed in another; they still make logical

sense together. And dont overlook one happy by-product of this kind ofbundling: donors may just choose to fund bothneeds.


4/26

As nonprofits showcase their needs, they are in effect opening up their

operations to inspection by donors who prefer to contribute at this more

granular level. The process goes a long way toward helping the donor

feel that he is more a part of the effort, because he can gain a more

personal sense of how his donation is making a specific difference. In this

regard, thoughtful organization of the needs just makes sense.

NATURE AND PRINCIPLESSAFETY PRINCIPLES

INTRODUCTION

For the purposes of this publication, safety means theprotection of people and the environment against radiation risks,and the safety of facilities and activities that give rise to radiation

risks. Safety as used here and in the IAEA safety standardsincludes the safety of nuclear installations, radiation safety, thesafety of radioactive waste management and safety in the transportof radioactive material; it does not include non-radiation-relatedaspects of safety.

Safety is concerned with both radiation risks under normal

circumstances and radiation risks as a consequence of incidents4, as

well as with other possible direct consequences of a loss of control

over a nuclear reactor core, nuclear chain reaction, radioactivesource or any other source of radiation. Safety measures include

actions to prevent incidents and arrangements put in place to

mitigate their consequences if they were to occur.

Principle 1:Responsibility for safety

The prime responsibility for safety must rest with the person or

organization responsible for facilities and activities that give rise to

radiation risks.


5/26

i) The person or organization responsible for any facility or activity

that gives rise to radiation risks or for carrying out a programme

of actions to reduce radiation exposure has the prime responsibility

for safety5.

ii) Authorization to operate a facility or conduct an activity may be

granted to an operating organization or to an individual, known as

the licensee6.

iii) The licensee retains the prime responsibility for safety

throughout the lifetime of facilities and activities, and this

responsibility cannot be delegated. Other groups, such as designers,

manufacturers and constructors, employers, contractors, andconsignors and carriers, also have legal, professional or

functional responsibilities with regard to safety.

iv) The licensee is responsible for:

Establishing and maintaining the necessary competences;

Providing adequatetraining and information;

Establishing procedures and arrangements to maintain safety

under al l conditions;

Verifying appropriate design and the adequate quality of

facilities andactivities and of their associated equipment;Ensuring the safe c o n t r o l of all radioactive materialthat is used,

produced, stored or transported;Ensuring the safe control of all radioactive waste that isgenerated.

These responsibilities are to be fulfilled in accordance with

applicable safety objectives and requirements as established or

approved by the regulatory body, and their fulfilment is to be

ensured through the implementation of the management system.

v) Since radioactive waste management can span many human

generations, consideration must be given to the fulfillment of the

licensees (and regulators) responsibilities in relation to present

and likely future operations. Provision must also be made for the

continuity of responsibilities and the fulfillment of funding

requirements in the long term.


6/26

Principle 2: Role of government

An effective legal and governmental framework for safety,

including an independent regulatory body, must be established

and sustained.

i) A properly established legal and governmental framework

provides for the regulation of facilities and activities that give rise to

radiation risks and for the clear assignment of responsibilities. The

government is responsible for the adoption within its national legal

system of such legislation, regulations, and other standards and

measures as may be necessary to fulfil all its national

responsibilities and international obligations effectively, and for

the establishment of an independent regulatory body.

ii) Government authorities have to ensure that arrangements are

made for preparing programmes of actions to reduce radiation

risks, including actions in emergencies, for monitoring releases of

radioactive substances to the environment and for disposing of

radioactive waste. Government authorities have to provide for

control over sources of radiation for which no other

organization has responsibility, such as some natural sources,

orphan sources7

and radioactive residues from some past facilitiesand activities.

iii) The regulatory body must:

Have adequate legal authority, technical and managerialcompetence, and human and financial resources to fulfill itsresponsibilities;

Be effectively independent of the licensee and of any other

body, so that it is free from any undue pressure from interestedparties;

Set up appropriate means of informing parties in the vicinity,

the public and other interested parties, and the information

media about the safety aspects (including health and

environmental aspects) of facilities and activities and about

regulatory processes;

Consult parties in the vicinity, the public and other interested

parties, as appropriate, in an open and inclusive process.

Governments and regulatory bodies thus have an important


7/26

responsibility in establishing standards and establishing the

regulatory framework for protecting people and the

environment against radiation risks. However, the prime

responsibility for safety rests with the licensee.

iv) In the event that the licensee is a branch of government, this

branch must be clearly identified as distinct from and effectively

independent of the branches of government with responsibilities

for regulatory functions.

Principle 3: Leadership and management for safety

Effective leadership and management for safety must be

established and sustained in organizations concerned with, and

facilities and activities that give rise to, radiation risks.

i) Leadership in safety matters has to be demonstrated at the highest

levels in an organization. Safety has to be achieved and maintained

by means of an effective management system. This system has to

integrate all elements of management so that requirements for

safety are established and applied coherently with other

requirements, including those for human performance, quality and

security, and so that safety is not compromised by other

requirements or demands. The management system also has to

ensure the promotion of a safety culture, the regular assessment

of safety performance and the application of lessons learned from

experience.

ii) A safety culture that governs the attitudes and behaviour in

relation to safety of all organizations and individuals concerned

must be integrated in the management system. Safety culture

includes:

Individual and collective commitment to safety on the

part of the leadership, the management and personnel at all

levels;

Accountability of organizations and of individuals at all levelsfor safety;

Measures to encourage a questioning and learning

attitude and to discourage complacency with regard to safety.

iii) An important factor in a management system is the


8/26

recognition of the entire range of interactions of individuals at all

levels with technology and with organizations. To prevent human

and organizational failures, human factors have to be taken into

account and good performance and good practices have to be

supported.

iv) Safety has to be assessed for all facilities and activities, consistent

with a graded approach. Safety assessment involves the systematic

analysis of normal operation and its effects, of the ways in which

failures might occur and of the consequences of such failures.

Safety assessments cover the safety measures necessary to control

the hazard, and the design and engineered safety features are

assessed to demonstrate that they fulfil the safety functions

required of them. Where control measures or operator actions arecalled on to maintain safety, an initial safety assessment has to be

carried out to demonstrate that the arrangements made are robust

and that they can be relied on. A facility may only be constructed

and commissioned or an activity may only be commenced once it

has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the regulatory body

that the proposed safety measures are adequate.

v) The process of safety assessment for facilities and activities is

repeated in whole or in part as necessary later in the conduct ofoperations in order to take into account changed circumstances

(such as the application of new standards or scientific and

technological developments), the feedback of operating experience,

modifications and the effects of ageing. For operations that

continue over long periods of time, assessments are reviewed and

repeated as necessary. Continuation of such operations is subject to

these reassessments demonstrating to the satisfaction of the

regulatory body that the safety measures remain adequate.

vi) Despite all measures taken, accidents may occur. The

precursors to accidents have to be identified and analysed, and

measures have to be taken to prevent the recurrence of accidents.

The feedback of operating experience from facilities and activities

and, where relevant, from elsewhere is a key means of

enhancing safety. Processes must be put in place for the feedback and

analysis of operating experience, including initiating events,

accident precursors, near misses, accidents and unauthorized acts, so

that lessons may be learned, shared and acted upon.


9/26

Principle 4:Justification of facilities and activities

Facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks must

yield an overall benefit.

i) For facilities and activities to be considered justified, the

benefits that they yield must outweigh the radiation risks to

which they give rise. For the purposes of assessing benefit and

risk, all significant consequences of the operation of facilities

and the conduct of activities have to be taken into account.

ii) In many cases, decisions relating to benefit and risk are taken

at the highest levels of government, such as a decision by a State to

embark on a nuclear power programme. In other cases, the

regulatory body may determine whether proposed facilities and

activities are justified.

iii) Medical radiation exposure of patients whether for

diagnosis or treatment is a special case, in that the benefit is

primarily to the patient. The justification for such exposure is

therefore considered first with regard to the specific procedure to

be used and then on a patient by patient basis. The justification

relies on clinical judgement as to whether a diagnostic or

therapeutic procedure would be beneficial. Such clinical judgement

is mainly a matter for medical practitioners. For this reason, medical

practitioners must be properly trained in radiation protection.

Principle 5: Optimization of protection

Protection must be optimized to provide the highest level of

safety that can reasonably be achieved.

i) The safety measures that are applied to facilities and activities

that give rise to radiation risks are considered optimized if they

provide the highest level of safety that can reasonably be achieved

throughout the lifetime of the facility or activity, without unduly

limiting its utilization.

ii) To determine whether radiation risks are as low as reasonably

achievable, all such risks, whether arising from normal operationsor from abnormal or accident conditions, must be assessed (using


10/26

a graded approach) a priori and periodically reassessed

throughout the lifetime of facilities and activities. Where there

are interdependences between related actions or between their

associated risks (e.g. for different stages of the lifetime of

facilities and activities, for risks to different groups or for differentsteps in radioactive waste management), these must also be

considered. Account also has to be taken of uncertainties in

knowledge.

iii) The optimization of protection requires judgements to be made

about the relative significance of various factors, including:

The number of people (workers and the public) who may be

exposed to radiation;The likelihood of their incurring exposures;

The magnitude and distribution of radiation doses received;

Radiation risks arising from foreseeable events;

Economic, social and environmental factors.

The optimization of protection also means using good practices

and common sense to avoid radiation risks as far as is practical in

day to day activities.

iv) The resources devoted to safety by the licensee, and the

scope and stringency of regulations and their application, have to

be commensurate with the magnitude of the radiation risks

and their amenability to control. Regulatory control may not be

needed where this is not warranted by the magnitude of the

radiation risks.

Principle 6: Limitation of risks to individuals

Measures for controlling radiation risks must ensure that no

individual bears an unacceptable risk of harm.

i) Justification and optimization of protection do not in

themselves guarantee that no individual bears an unacceptable risk

of harm. Consequently, doses and radiation risks must be controlled

within specified limits.

ii) Conversely, because dose limits and risk limits represent a legal


11/26

upper bound of acceptability, they are insufficient in themselves to

ensure the best achievable protection under the circumstances, and

they therefore have to be supplemented by the optimization of

protection. Thus both the optimization of protection and the

limitation of doses and risks to individuals are necessary to achievethe desired level of safety.

Principle 7: Protection of present and future generations

People and the environment, present and future, must be

protected against radiation risks.

i) Radiation risks may transcend national borders and may persist

for long periods of time. The possible consequences, now and in thefuture, of current actions have to be taken into account in judging

the adequacy of measures to control radiation risks. In particular:

Safety standards apply not only to local populations

but also to populations remote from facilities and activities.

Where effects could span generations, subsequent generations

have to be adequately protected without any need for them

to take significant protective actions.

ii) Whereas the effects of radiation exposure on human health are

relatively well understood, albeit with uncertainties8, the effects

of radiation on the environment have been less thoroughly

investigated. The present system of radiation protection generally

provides appropriate protection of ecosystems in the human

environment against harmful effects of radiation exposure. The

general intent of the measures taken for the purposes of

environmental protection has been to protect ecosystems against

radiation exposure that would have adverse consequences forpopulations of a species (as distinct from individual organisms).

iii) Radioactive waste must be managed in such a way as to avoid

imposing an undue burden on future generations; that is, the

generations that produce the waste have to seek and apply

safe, practicable and environmentally acceptable solutions for

its long term management. The generation of radioactive

waste must be kept to the minimum practicable level by means of

appropriate design measures and procedures, such as the recyclingand reuse of


12/26

material.

Principle 8: Prevention of accidents

All practical efforts must be made to prevent and mitigatenuclear or radiation accidents.

3.30. The most harmful consequences arising from facilities and

activities have come from the loss of control over a nuclear

reactor core, nuclear chain reaction, radioactive source or other

source of radiation. Consequently, to ensure that the likelihood

of an accident having harmful consequences is extremely low,

measures have to be taken:

To prevent the occurrence of failures or abnormal conditions

(including breaches of security) that could lead to such a loss of

control;To prevent the escalation of any such failures or abnormal

conditions thatdo occur;

To prevent the loss of, or the loss of control over, a radioactive

source or other source of radiation.

i) The primary means of preventing and mitigating theconsequences of accidents is defence in depth. Defence in depth is

implemented primarily through the combination of a number of

consecutive and independent levels of protection that would have

to fail before harmful effects could be caused to people or to the

environment. If one level of protection or barrier were to fail, the

subsequent level or barrier would be available. When

properly implemented, defence in depth ensures that no single

technical, human or organizational failure could lead to harmful

effects, and that the combinations of failures that could give rise tosignificant harmful effects are of very low probability. The

independent effectiveness of the different levels of defence is a

necessary element of defence in depth.

ii) Defence in depth is provided by an appropriatecombination of:

An effective management system with a strong management

commitment to safety and a strong safety culture.Adequate site selection and the incorporation of good

design and


13/26

engineering features providing safety margins, diversity and

redundancy, mainly by the use of:a) Design, technology and materials of high quality and

reliability;b) Control, limiting and protection systems and surveillance

features;c) An appropriate combination of inherent and

engineered safety features.

Comprehensive operational procedures and practices as well as

accident management procedures.

iii) Accident management procedures must be developed in

advance to provide the means for regaining control over a nuclear

reactor core, nuclear chain reaction or other source of radiation in

the event of a loss of control and for mitigating any harmful

consequences.

Principle 9: Emergency preparedness and response

Arrangements must be made for emergency preparedness and

response for nuclear or radiation incidents.

i) The primary goals of preparedness and response for anuclear or radiation emergency are:

To ensure that arrangements are in place for an effective

response at the scene and, as appropriate, at the local,

regional, national and international levels, to a nuclear or

radiation emergency;

To ensure that, for reasonably foreseeable incidents, radiation

risks would be minor;

For any incidents that do occur, to take practical measures tomitigate any consequences for human life and health and the

environment.

ii) The licensee, the employer, the regulatory body and

appropriate branches of government have to establish, in advance,

arrangements for preparedness and response for a nuclear or

radiation emergency at the scene, at local, regional and national

levels and, where so agreed between States, at the international

level.


14/26

iii) The scope and extent of arrangements for emergency

preparedness and response have to reflect:

The likelihood and the possible consequences of a nuclear or

radiation emergency;The characteristics of the radiation risks;

The nature and location of the facilities and activities.

Such arrangements include:

Criteria set in advance for use in determining when to take

different protective actions;The capability to take actions to protect and informpersonnel at the

scene, and if necessary the public, during an

emergency.

iv) In developing the emergency response arrangements,

consideration has to be given to all reasonably foreseeable events.

Emergency plans have to be exercised periodically to ensure the

preparedness of the organizations having responsibilities in

emergency response.

v) When urgent protective actions must be taken promptly in an

emergency, it may be acceptable for emergency workers toreceive, on the basis of informed consent, doses that exceed the

occupational dose limits normally applied but only up to a

predetermined level.

Principle 10:Protective actions to reduce existing or unregulated

radiation risks

Protective actions to reduce existing or unregulated radiation

risks must be justified and optimized.

i) Radiation risks may arise in situations other than in

facilities and activities that are in compliance with regulatory

control. In such situations, if the radiation risks are relatively high,

consideration has to be given to whether protective actions can

reasonably be taken to reduce radiation exposures and to

remediate adverse conditions.

One type of situation concerns radiation of essentiallynatural origin.


15/26

Such situations include exposure to radon gas in

dwellings and workplaces, for example, for which remedial

actions can be taken if necessary. However, in many situations

there is little that can practicably be done to reduce exposure to

natural sources of radiation.A second type of situation concerns exposure that arises

from human activities conducted in the past that were never

subject to regulatory control, or that were subject to an earlier,

less rigorous regime of control. An example is situations in

which radioactive residues remain from former mining

operations.

A third type of situation concerns protective actions, such as

remediation measures, taken following an uncontrolled release

of radionuclides to the environment.

ii) In all of these cases, the protective actions considered each have

someforeseeable economic, social and, possibly, environmental costs

and may entail some radiation risks (e.g. to workers carrying out

such actions). The protective actions are considered justified only if

they yield sufficient benefit to outweigh the radiation risks and

other detriments as s o c i a t e d with taking them. Furthermore,

protective actions mu st be optimized t o produce the grea test

benefit that is reasonably achievable in relation to the costs.

ORGANISATION STRUCTURE AND SAFETY DEPARTMENTRole of Safety Department

The role of safety department in an organization should be viewed in the

light of the following:

i) Place of safety department in the organization, and

ii) Organizational structure of the safety department.

Place of safety Department in the Organization - The place or safety

department in the organization could be conceived in the following ways:

a) Direct channel of communication could be established between the

safety director and the top management. This implies that the safety

director may be directly placed under the managing director or the

general manager.


16/26

b) The channel of communication between the safety director and the top

management through the line manager having direct access to the top

management.

c) The safety director may be placed under such persons (as for example

personnel manager etc.) who weilds enough power and influence in the

organization itself. In this case the personnel manager should have a good

rapport with the line officer.

d) The safety director may be placed under such a boss who has real

interest in the safety matters as for example the production manager.

Organizational Structure of the Safety Department

Organizational structure of the safety department depends upon thefactors namely the size of the organization in the terms of small or large

and the territorial location of the organization. The territorials location

may also be referred to as geographical location.

Organisational Structures in Small Undertakings

These undertakings being small do not engage a full-time safety expert.

Sometimes the safety responsibility may be shouldered by a qualified,

experienced and safety trained foreman to cater for the health and

medical needs. A physician and a nurse assisted by para-medical staff canbe engaged on a part-time basis. A few personnel may be trained to

render first-aid services to cope with any minor injury and ailments.

Organisational Structure in Large Undertakings

In case of large undertakings where there is a single large plant, a

centralized safety department is desirable where safety specialists have to

be engaged on a full-time basis. In this case a director of safety may be

installed under whom various safety managers dealing with safety

planning, safety maintenance, safety inspection, safety research etc. have

to perform their duties sincerely. However, in an organization of the

multi-plant type characterized by scattered operations, a decentralized

safety department may be the right choice. In this system the general

manager may be installed under whom a personnel manager may be

placed. The personnel manager may become the incharge of the safety

department may operate under the personnel manager. A workshop

superintendent may be placed under a safety manager. Finally a foreman

and a safety officer might operate under the workshop superintendent.Under the same general manager, a production manager may function. A


17/26

number of workshop superintendents may operate under the production

manager. Furthermore, a foreman and a safety officer might be placed

under each workshop superintendents. Thus, in the above context

decentralization is achieved since the safety activities are performed

through separate and distinct streams.

Territorial Organizational Structure

In case of organization characterized by scattered operations in far-flung

regions, a proper strategy to cope with such situations is warranted. In

this arrangement the production manager and the personnel manager

work under the same general manager. Different regional deputy general

managers are deputed under the production manager. The deputy

managers may look after the work of different territories or regions as for

example eastern region, northern region, southern region, western region.

Foremen and safety officers work under these regional deputy managers.

In order to synchronise all the activities of the various territorial regions, a

safety department at the headquarters is necessary. The top management

frames safety policies which should be followed by the various regional

and local units. A regional manager assisted by foreman and safety

officers should have the freedom to chalk out and implement general

safety plans. It is the onus of the chief safety personnel at the

headquarters that the general safety policy is being followed at alllocations. He should also provide assistance and necessary directions to

uphold the safety policy.

SAFETY COMMITTEESafety Committee is a part of industrial management, is composed of

members from supervisors, workers and safety representatives, some

managers or Heads of Departments or their representatives, doctor,

hygienist, psychologist and is headed by the Safety Director or Manager

or Officer. If the Chief Executive is the Chairman, it will be easy to have

decisions quickly. The personnel officer or safety officer should work as

secretary as they have wide contacts with all departments. Workers

representatives should be decided by them.

A new provision is added under section 41 G of the Factories Act to set up

a safety Committee consisting of equal number of representative of

workers and management to promote co-operation between the workers

and the management in maintaining proper safety and health at work and

to review periodically the measures taken in that behalf.


18/26

The main object of the committee is to advise to Managing Director and

the Safety Board or the top executive of the company on all matters of

safety and health of work people.

Advantage

1) It brings together varying view points, yield sounder decisions than the

individual members,

2) Widens interest by allowing participation of work people in their own

work and

3) Allows checks and cross-checks by different opinions which are

essential for safety.

Disadvantages

1) It causes delay in decisions till the meetings are held and

2) Consumes more time in meetings

3) May sometimes turn into a trade union meeting if so pulled by the

employees. Therefore its good control to the point is necessary.

STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION-

Its essential requirement are : -

1) Set-up should be appropriate to the work (main committee to include

key executives)

2) Members should be well-known and have respect to fellow-members

3) Members must be well aware of working conditions, work methods,

practices, hazards, causes of accidents and remedial measures, and

4) It should be as small as possible with minimum members from the

sections necessary.

Policy and Procedure :-

When a Committee is formed, written instruction should be issued

covering

1) Scope of activities


19/26

2) Extent of authorities and

3) Procedure as to time/place of meeting, frequency of meeting, order of

business, records to be kept and attendance requirements. The

management should make it clear that it wants results and should give

effective executive supervision over the affairs of the committee. The

committee members should have firm determination to advance the cause

of Safety.

Functions of Main / Central Safety Committee are :

1) To decide safety policy and planning for purchase of equipments with

in-built safety devices, relationship between departments, standards to be

followed in guarding, testing, designing, layout, housekeeping, material

handling and placing, inspections, accident investigation and records etc.

2) To plan and supervise programmes of safety propaganda, education,

training and maintaining interest of employees in safety.

3) To make arrangement or develop safe work practices and procedures;

inspection, audit and appraisal systems and all efforts to avoid or reduce

accidents. To discuss and control the accident rates.

4) To discuss and initiate action for correction of unsafe conditions and

actions. Action plan should be drawn and unsafe conditions and actions.Action plan should be drawn and suitable dates fixed for completion of

each task.

5) To approve safety devices and protective equipments.

6) To carry out fire drill and rehearsal of on-site emergency plan.

7) To scrutinize safety suggestions received through plant safety

committees and to initiate action to implement the accepted suggestions.

8) To arrange safety competitions and to decide awards for

encouragement.

9) To improve co-operative spirit between management and employees

and among various departments to promote safety.

10) The safety knowledge of committee members should be increased by

arranging lectures of safety experts of the plant and outside and by

sending the members to seminars. Factories inspectors and safety

specialists can be utilized for this purpose.


20/26

11) To discuss and approve safety budget.

12) To discuss, distribute and supervise responsibilities for quick

compliance of safety remarks.

13) To approve changes in safety organization and its activities.

14) To approve safety aspects of new design and construction of plant,

machinery and equipments and

15) To decide disciplinary procedures and disposal of specific problems of

safety education and training, safety engineering, hygiene engineering

and occupational health.

Functions of Plant Safety Committees are :

1) To review accident record of various departments

2) To investigate accidents and to implement corrective actions

3) To implement directives of the Central Safety Committee

4) Enforcement of safety rules, procedures and accepted safe practices

5) To encourage and enforce the use of personal protective equipments

6) Safety inspection rounds of various shops and sections

7) To encourage safety suggestions from workers and to forward them to

the Central Safety Committee.

Technical Safety Committee is useful for specialized knowledge viz.

guard design, process and engineering revision, hazard and risk analysis,

special investigation etc. It comprises chief engineer, safety

engineer/officer, head mechanic, chief chemist and similar expert

technicians.

Special Purpose Safety Committee can be set up for specific jobs and

dissolved when its purpose is accomplished. Such jobs include special

accident investigation, specific problems of worker behavior, off-the job

safety, rehabilitation or relief problem, safety celebration or contest or

award occasions etc.

For a big concern different safety committees as stated above are possible,

but in a small factory a single committee can carry out all functions.

Works safety and health committees have to play an important role inindustries.


21/26

LINE AND STAFF FUNCTIONS FOR SAFETYOrganizational structure involves, in addition to task organizational

boundary considerations, the designation of jobs within an organizationand the relationships among those jobs. There are numerous ways to

structure jobs within an organization, but two of the most basic forms

include simple line structures and line-and-staff structures.

In a line organization, top management has complete control, and the

chain of command is clear and simple. Examples of line organizations are

small businesses in which the top manager, often the owner, is positioned

at the top of the organizational structure and has clear "lines" of

distinction between him and his subordinates.

The line-and-staff organization combines the line organization with staff

departments that support and advise line departments. Most medium

and large-sized firms exhibit line-and-staff organizational structures. The

distinguishing characteristic between simple line organizations and line-

and-staff organizations is the multiple layers of management within line-

and-staff organizations. The following sections refer primarily to line-

and-staff structures, although the advantages and disadvantages

discussed apply to both types of organizational structures.

Several advantages and disadvantages are present within a line-and-staff

organization. An advantage of a line-and-staff organization is the

availability of technical specialists. Staff experts in specific areas are

incorporated into the formal chain of command. A disadvantage of a line-

and-staff organization is conflict between line and staff personnel.

LINE AND STAFF POSITIONS

A wide variety of positions exist within a line-and-staff organization.

Some positions are primary to the company's mission, whereas others are

secondaryin the form of support and indirect contribution. Although

positions within a line-and-staff organization can be differentiated in

several ways, the simplest approach classifies them as being either line or

staff.

A line position is directly involved in the day-to-day operations of theorganization, such as producing or selling a product or service. Line


22/26

positions are occupied by line personnel and line managers. Line

personnel carry out the primary activities of a business and are

considered essential to the basic functioning of the organization.

Line managers make the majority of the decisions and direct line

personnel to achieve company goals. An example of a line manager is a

marketing executive.

Figure 1

Line-and-Staff Organization

Although a marketing executive does not actually produce the product or

service, he or she directly contributes to the firm's overall objectives

through market forecasting and generating product or service demand.

Therefore, line positions, whether they are personnel or managers, engage

in activities that are functionally and directly related to the principal

workflow of an organization.

Staff positions serve the organization by indirectly supporting line

functions. Staff positions consist of staff personnel and staff managers.

Staff personnel use their technical expertise to assist line personnel and

aid top management in various business activities. Staff managers

provide support, advice, and knowledge to other individuals in the chain

of command.

Although staff managers are not part of the chain of command related to

direct production of products or services, they do have authority over


23/26

personnel. An example of a staff manager is a legal adviser. He or she

does not actively engage in profit-making activities, but does provide

legal support to those who do. Therefore, staff positions, whether

personnel or managers, engage in activities that are supportive to linepersonnel.

LINE AND STAFF AUTHORITY

Authority within a line-and-staff organization can be differentiated. Three

types of authority are present: line, staff, and functional. Line authority is

the right to carry out assignments and exact performance from other

individuals.

LINE AUTHORITY

Line authority flows down the chain of command. For example, line

authority gives a production supervisor the right to direct an employee to

operate a particular machine, and it gives the vice president of finance the

right to request a certain report from a department head. Therefore, line

authority gives an individual a certain degree of power relating to the

performance of an organizational task.

Two important clarifications should be considered, however, when

discussing line authority: (1) line authority does not ensure effective

performance, and (2) line authority is not restricted to line personnel. The

head of a staff department has line authority over his or her employees by

virtue of authority relationships between the department head and his or

her directly-reporting employees.


24/26

STAFF AUTHORITY

Staff authority is the right to advise or counsel those with line authority.

For example, human resource department employees help other

departments by selecting and developing a qualified workforce. A quality

control manager aids a production manager by determining the

acceptable quality level of products or services at a manufacturing

company, initiating quality programs, and carrying out statistical analysis

to ensure compliance with quality standards. Therefore, staff authority

gives staff personnel the right to offer advice in an effort to improve line

operations.


25/26

FUNCTIONAL AUTHORITY

Functional authority is referred to as limited line authority. It gives a staff

person power over a particular function, such as safety or accounting.

Usually, functional authority is given to specific staff personnel with

expertise in a certain area. For example, members of an accounting

department might have authority to request documents they need to

prepare financial reports, or a human resource manager might have

authority to ensure that all departments are complying with equal

employment opportunity laws. Functional authority is a special type of

authority for staff personnel, which must be designated by top

management.

LINE AND STAFF CONFLICT

Due to different positions and types of authority within a line-and-staff

organization, conflict between line and staff personnel is almost

inevitable. Although minimal conflict due to differences in viewpoints is

natural, conflict on the part of line and staff personnel can disrupt an

entire organization. There are many reasons for conflict. Poor humanrelations, overlapping authority and responsibility, and misuse of staff

personnel by top management are all primary reasons for feelings of

resentment between line and staff personnel. This resentment can result

in various departments viewing the organization from a narrow stance

instead of looking at the organization as a whole.

Fortunately, there are several ways to minimize conflict. One way is to

integrate line and staff personnel into a work team. The success of thework team depends on how well each group can work together in efforts

to increase productivity and performance. Another solution is to ensure

that the areas of responsibility and authority of both line and staff

personnel are clearly defined. With clearly defined lines of authority and

responsibility, each group may better understand their role in the

organization. A third way to minimize conflict is to hold both line and

staff personnel accountable for the results of their own activities. In other


26/26

words, line personnel should not be entirely responsible for poor

performance resulting from staff personnel advice.

Line-and-staff organizations combine the direct flow of authority present

within a line organization with staff departments that offer support and

advice. A clear chain of command is a consistent characteristic among

line-and-staff organizational structures. Problems of conflict may arise,

but organizations that clearly delineate responsibility can help minimize

such conflict.

Documents

Chapter 5 Organizing for Safety