Editor's Note: Is it fair?

The Safety+Health editorial staff is fortunate to work only steps away from the National Safety Council Library and its helpful staff. In addition to a large collection of current materials, the library houses much of the council’s history, and the librarians occasionally share with me NSC documents they believe I’ll find interesting or entertaining.

One such piece is the proceedings from the Seventh Annual Safety Congress, which took place in September 1918. Within the proceedings is a roundtable discussion titled “The Employes’ Publication.” Although the editor in me immediately made a mental note to research the use of “employe” versus “employee,” what stood out in particular was the following sentence:

“To try to save $100 a month in the pay of your editor would be very wrong.”

A copy of the page containing this sentence is tacked onto my bulletin board, with the words highlighted, in case I ever need it when performance-evaluation time rolls around.

This month, S+H presents the results of our annual Salary Survey of safety professionals. Our thanks to everyone who received the survey and completed it.

The survey’s open-ended question was prompted by the fact that in the 2012 and 2013 surveys, roughly 30 percent of respondents said their compensation was based in part on their employer’s safety performance. The response to this year’s question – is such a practice fair? – was almost dead even. Some safety pros were all for it, while others voiced concerns about under-reporting of injuries, lack of cooperation from front-line workers and other issues. Although we didn’t have room to include all of the responses in the print edition of S+H, you can find the rest of them online. As always, your comments are welcome.

The opinions expressed in “Editor’s Note” do not necessarily reflect those of the National Safety Council or affiliated local Chapters.