May/June 2012
There should be no question. Personal protective equipment is essential attire for scrapyard safety. EXPERTS SAY education, understanding, and setting a good example are THREE WAYS TO ensure compliance.
By Diana Mota
In a perfect world, a company could design its operations to completely protect employees from all workplace hazards. In this imperfect world, however, it’s not that simple—especially for scrap recycling operations. It’s “just not realistic” to eliminate all hazards from the recycling workplace by modifying equipment, reducing worker exposures, and similar approaches that work in other industries, says John Gilstrap, ISRI’s director of safety. That’s why personal protective equipment is essential. The routine use of this equipment—reflective vests, hard hats, gloves, respirators, steel-toed boots, eye and ear protection, and more—is a straightforward way to increase workplace safety and significantly reduce injury rates. Unfortunately, one look at industry injury reports makes it clear that many workers are not getting the message. They don’t always use this equipment correctly—or at all. Yards can do more to ensure cooperation and compliance, safety experts say, by understanding their workers’ objections; giving them more say in equipment selection; implementing consistent, effective training and enforcement; and setting an example from the top.
Excuses, Excuses
Wearing PPE ought to be automatic in the recycling industry, but it’s not. Despite its widespread availability, safety professionals say many workers choose not to wear or use it. “It’s tough to get people to protect themselves,” says Bob Bedard, manager of the National Association Supply Cooperative (New Philadelphia, Ohio). E. Scott Geller, co-owner of Safety Performance Solutions (Blacksburg, Va.), agrees. “At-risk behavior is always an issue because people don’t see the immediate need for PPE.” Why the reticence? You’ll never know if you don’t ask—and listen closely to the answers. Recognize the thought process behind what might sound like excuses, Gilstrap says. Workers “have a reason for not using PPE,” he says. “It might not be a good one, but they have a reason.” Valid or not, those reasons must be addressed.
Sometimes employees believe they’re invincible, says Joe Bateman, ISRI’s safety outreach manager. Tony Samento, owner of Samento Industrial Training (Dillsburg, Pa.), concurs. “It’s definitely an issue as long as employees believe [injury] can’t happen to them.” Managers and supervisors can unwittingly reinforce this belief by not consistently requiring PPE use. Often it takes a serious accident or incident for employers to step up their enforcement, Bedard says. “That’s when [employers] decide, ‘Maybe now we should get serious.’”
Another common rationale workers give for not wearing their PPE is fit: It’s uncomfortable, it restricts their movement or vision, it’s too heavy/warm/cumbersome, and so on. Yards can stifle many of these objections by giving workers a wider variety of PPE options, says Charlie Keeling, safety director for Gershow Recycling (Medford, N.Y.). When it comes to PPE, one size and style definitely does not fit all. Giving more options can have two benefits: First, it can motivate workers to wear their PPE; second, PPE that does not fit properly actually can provide less protection when it is worn.
The PPE selection process should focus equally on the item’s suitability for the task and whether it’s comfortable for the worker, Bateman says. With the wide variety of PPE available on the market, most fit issues easily can be solved. For example, “some drivers complain that steel-toed boots are uncomfortable,” he says, but “in most cases, they don’t take the time to properly fit the shoes to their feet.” At Gershow, Keeling addressed heat concerns by offering mesh safety vests for the warmer months. The company also offers to attach reflective material to employees’ work clothes in lieu of making them wear a safety vest.
Gilstrap suggests involving the facility’s safety committee in the PPE selection process and encouraging the committee to choose several models of each product for the workplace’s safety equipment arsenal. The more a company engages employees in the selection process, Geller contends, the more motivated the employees are to wear and use the equipment.
Another rationale workers give for not wearing their PPE comes down to vanity: They don’t like how it looks or how they look while wearing it. Recognizing the importance of offering safety equipment that workers find appealing, Consolidated Scrap Resources (York, Pa.) allows its staff members to choose from several tints for their safety glasses, says Rick Hare, the firm’s safety director and chair of the ReMA Safety & Environmental Council. “We even offer [them] the option of going to a local optometrist, even if they don’t need a prescription, to get regular frames with safety glass,” he says. If workers choose frames that exceed the company’s price limit, they simply pay the difference themselves.
Equipment manufacturers have started to offer PPE not just in a wide range of styles and colors but also with popular corporate and athletic-team logos. “One group of guys might prefer [safety] glasses with Harley-Davidson on the side; the other group, Smith & Wesson,” Bateman says. “If that’s what it takes for them to actually wear the glasses, the [logo] is worth the extra dollar.” PK Metals (Coram, N.Y.) lets workers choose both personalized eyewear and hard hats featuring their favorite athletic team logo, says Bill Rouse, the company’s quality, environment, health, and safety manager. Team logos can drive the PPE point home in other ways as well, Bateman points out: “Professional football players use PPE from head to toe.”
Providing this amount of freedom of choice has led to employees using the equipment outside of the workplace as well. “Some [safety glasses] are pretty darn attractive,” says NASCO-OP’s Bedard. “It’s one product that has crossover into everyday life.”
Training Approaches
How can employers get employees to buy into the importance of PPE? Through education and training, Gilstrap says. About 70 percent of workers will comply as long as they receive proper training. At Grossman Iron & Steel Co. (St. Louis), “we preach PPE from the day of hire,” says Safety Director Harry Garber. Even temporary workers go through PPE training before they do anything else, regardless of whether they will be at the plant for one day, two days, a week, or more. The training covers what he calls the ABCDs of safety: attitude, behavior, commitment, and discipline. Though attitude and behavior might be self-explanatory, commitment means their commitment to themselves, their family, and their co-workers to protect themselves and others; discipline is having the self-discipline to do the right thing even when no one is looking. Supervisors “are not there all the time to make sure [workers] are doing the right thing,” Garber says. “They have to be disciplined and committed enough to wear [their PPE] when we’re not watching.”
Garber and other safety managers say they drive home the importance of PPE with videos and other teaching materials that illustrate in graphic detail what can—and does—happen to workers who neglect to use it. “You have to give them examples,” Hare says. “You have to make it personal; make them realize what can happen if someone doesn’t wear his PPE, or what can happen if he does.” He often tells a true account of how a hard hat saved someone’s life: A metal cylinder weighing about 2 tons hit the man in the head. Although the man needed 15 stitches, “if he had not been wearing his hard hat, [the cylinder] would have crushed his skull,” he says. Bedard agrees that showing and telling workers the disturbing results of workplace accidents can be effective. “Those personal stories hit home when [workers] see the effects of unsafe acts.”
In addition to using graphic stories, Samento says he finds it effective to discuss safety incidents from the perspective of the worker’s family. Focusing on the impact injury or accidental death has on them helps workers see beyond their own recalcitrance. “While the worker’s death is devastating,” Samento says, “it’s only a brief moment for him, and then it’s over.” For the family, however, the death can create long-term pain and hardship. “This isn’t about the company; it isn’t about OSHA. It’s about going home to your family. That’s the message I try to send.”
Education isn’t all about “scaring them straight,” though. It’s about building a safety culture, these professionals assert. Encourage workers to look out not just for themselves, but for each other. Geller says he teaches workers to ask a simple question of one another: “Can I look out for your safety?” If workers see a colleague doing something he or she should—or should not—be doing, they can point it out. For example, they can say, “I noticed you were wearing your safety glasses, but I also noticed you weren’t wearing your hard hat.” It’s better to have a colleague point this out, Geller says, because it’s less threatening and more motivating from a colleague than it would be coming from a supervisor. “The co-worker isn’t there to find fault. … It’s not an indictment of who you are. Actively caring for people—that’s what this is all about. People looking out for each other.”
Consistent Enforcement
Proactive measures such as giving workers more PPE choices and training them in the importance of wearing it can only go so far. The company also must set a policy that requires PPE and then enforce that policy consistently across the organization. Sadly, doing so isn’t as clear-cut as it sounds. In Samento’s experience, “the biggest violators are supervisors and management.” If the rule isn’t enforced for them, employees will recognize a double standard, he says. At Consolidated Scrap, “any time management goes out in the yard, they wear protection. If they don’t, they’re fair game just like anybody else,” Hare says. The same applies to vendors, customers, and other yard visitors. Bateman agrees that owners and company executives must lead by example. “Otherwise, employees will say to themselves, ‘If he can get by without wearing it, why can’t I?’”
Bateman sees lack of enforcement as the greatest deterrent to PPE use—and enforcement doesn’t mean constantly nagging the worker, he points out. “You’re not his mama; you’re his employer. Do you have to tell him every day to come to work on time? If you do, at some point you’re going to get rid of him.” Enforcing the PPE policy should be no different. Samento agrees. “When management doesn’t say anything [about PPE use], they’re saying a lot,” he says. “They’re really saying, ‘We don’t mean it. We don’t really care if you do [wear it].’” As Rouse puts it, “once you walk by and say nothing, everybody notices, and that becomes policy.” Instead, the company must make it explicit that working safely is a condition of employment, and wearing PPE is part of working safely, Bateman says.
The safety managers interviewed for this article use a progressive action plan for enforcing PPE use. Typically, workers first receive a verbal warning, then a written warning. On strike three, the employee faces suspension or termination. Six months without an infraction can expunge prior infractions from the worker’s record. “You have to give the [enforcement] program teeth,” Hare says. At his company, “safety violations can affect raises and promotions. In some cases, we’ve had to let people go.” He has seen firm results since laying down the law, he says. “Now it’s instilled in the culture. We very rarely have a problem.”
Diana Mota is associate editor of Scrap.
What About Incentives?
The practice of offering incentives for the use of PPE is controversial. Some managers see incentives as yet another way of appealing to employees—a way of rewarding good behavior in addition to punishing bad behavior. Others believe they send the wrong message.
Tony Samento of Samento Industrial Training (Dillsburg, Pa.) doesn’t like incentive programs. “The incentive should be to keep your job,” he says. “[PPE use] needs to be a term of employment: If you don’t wear it, then you don’t work here.” E. Scott Geller of Safety Performance Solutions (Blacksburg, Va.) disagrees. The do-it-or-else approach is “exactly the wrong message,” he says, and it can lead to rebellious attitudes. “If I tell you safety is a condition of employment, that reduces your sense of choice,” he explains. “The more choice we believe we have, the more we will feel self-motivated.” In other words, if workers make a conscious choice to use their PPE, they’re more likely to use it consistently. If they do it just to keep from getting into trouble, however, “they might do it when you’re watching, but expect them to do no more.”
Grossman Iron & Steel Co. (St. Louis) uses positive reinforcement. The company expects supervisors to recognize and reward safe behavior, including the use of PPE, through at least three safety contacts with employees per week—a “catch them doing right” approach, explains Safety Director Harry Garber.
ISRI’s John Gilstrap agrees that, ideally, a company could motivate its workers to be responsible and commit to wearing their PPE. But “at the end of the day, it has to be a rule,” he says, and the repercussions of not using PPE should be no different than if the employee broke any other company policy that would lead to termination.
There should be no question. Personal protective equipment is essential attire for scrapyard safety. EXPERTS SAY education, understanding, and setting a good example are THREE WAYS TO ensure compliance.