Non-driver accidents: Is there a double standard? By Carmen Daecher

Every motorcoach operator I know has an accident-investigation procedure when one of its coaches is involved in an accident. Whether the company prepares its own or uses procedures provided by insurance companies, the driver and witnesses fill out forms. The police report is always obtained. An accident file is established. And depending upon the circumstances of the accident, it is included on an accident register.

Preventability is determined. The driver involved is disciplined, or remedial action-such as training-is provided.

What the driver is required to do, who oversees the investigation, who communicates with whom, etc., is usually well defined.

But what happens when a workplace accident occurs injuring one of your non-driver employees? What kind of processes and procedures are in place to respond to such an event?

The insurance company does not have the same motivation to investigate. When was the last time an adjuster came to your shop when a mechanic was injured? Rather, the insurer will focus on injuries and treatments to contain costs. Except for drivers, most employees are not reprimanded or dismissed after injuring themselves through careless or unsafe actions.

While some of these differences are understandable, the general absence of a thorough investigation and determination of preventability is not. Worker's compensation is not cheap. Down time and other costs associated with an employee injury can be significant.

An accident is an accident. Unsafe behavior is unsafe behavior. What happens to other employees should not be considered any different-in terms of future prevention-than when it occurs through the actions of a driver.

All workplace or employee injuries should be investigated immediately. Determine what contributed to the cause and implement the courses of action to prevent future occurrences.

This type of process requires someone in management to be responsible and accountable. Just like safety directors or others are responsible or accountable for actions related to vehicle accident investigations, a manager should be responsible for workplace investigations.

Part of this motivation should be because of the requirement to comply with OSHA regulations. Certain types of injuries and illnesses that occur while a person is working require a written form of investigation and require documentation in the OSHA 200 (soon to be 300) Log. But the primary motivation for a well-defined and thorough investigation process of workplace injuries is the same as for vehicle accidents-to limit the company's exposures to these events and to determine the best prevention methods. Injuries to employees are far more costly than you may think and always disrupt the organization's productivity.

Management should insure the work environment is as safe as possible. Too often, we overlook conditions that result in injuries or sickness. A few minutes a week of the appropriate feedback to other employees can result in significantly improved work conditions for everybody.

So, from where I am sitting, if you don't have a thorough, consistent investigation process and remedial action program when workplace accidents occur, you should develop one. Next year, instead of posting OSHA injury results for one month, you will have to post it for three months (from Feb. 1 thru April 30). Wouldn't it be nice if, every year when you posted your form, there were no injuries to report?

*** Click here to visit the NADME training web site ***