What's Your Opinion: When it comes to safety, who is the harder "sell": workers or management?

At VCI Construction LLC our management team from top to bottom are the leaders in Safety. Their commitment is visable by the example they set while in the field as well as the financial aspect they put out every year. In my years I have never seen it to this extent, alot of employers talk alot but VCI really back it up.

I finally retired, not because I wanted to, but because I could no longer put up with the abuse. The final straw was asking for help. Yes, that's right. I was working with safety instructors for a client, when one of the instructors became abusive with me when I asked for some required paperwork. There were two witnesses that could not believe what they were seeing and hearing. I called the client and asked for their help with this jerk. The client called my boss and said I was no longer welcome at their facility or to help with their training. I was promptly fired. This was a Fortune 100 company who brags about their safety. I must say this has been typical in my career for the past 10-15 years. I either have made bad choices when it comes to employers or this is how a lot of employers view safety. It could be both. I believe that their are good employers out there, but I also believe (through experience) that safety is just an ad campaign for a lot of employers. The message to me was loud and clear so I pulled the pin. The sell is to management to begin with (hardest), because if it is not there to start with you have no foundation for support. I haven't found that management support to promote the sell. It just wasn't there. Management is the harder sell. It's been real but not fun.

Management easily "buys" the idea of safety, but when it comes to using what they have bought, it is easier for them to set it aside for the schedule, for cost or when it applies to them.

Working for an engineering firm is different than working for a construction group... which I did for many years. In construction the management was the hardest sell, especially years ago, where with professional employees it seems harder to convince them they can get hurt just as easy as the construction guy. You also have to be convincing to them or they feel they just know more than you. I've often proven them wrong but after all, they are engineers.

Management is always worried about hours needed to get the job done which conflicts with safety training time. Management always feels employees know what they are supposed to do. They got trained once, that should be enough. If they get injured, it is because they are not paying attention to their work.

In my 20+ years in SHE, the worker level usually understands and wants to work safely. However, with tight budgets, management doesn't always follow in line and is the hardest sell. We have seen sites with great safety culture over the years fall due to the views of management. At one site in particular, an OSHA VPP site, the employees are very active in the safety processes. However with the change of management, this culture has changed within the ranks. Leadership changed to a "Why is it required?" or "Show me where we have to do that" mentality to the point that most of our best practices were thrown away for 'just meet the requirements' processes. This was a real hit to the employees who had worked hard for the changes.

Management wants you to always "prove" it. If they don't have to do it, it won't cost money, but if we have to do it, if we don't do it, it will cost money mentality.

Oddly enough, I've had more trouble with the workers. Management typically understands that safety efforts are driven by regulations and compliance. That they can understand. Workers don't always see it that way and will go so far as to question the requirement, ask for proof, things like that.

In my previous federal workplace, the managers were all about safety. While sometimes we had to remind them there were inherent risks, they used SPE and GAR (not sure if those are common) to get the risks for inherently risky activities (like emergency services at the Grand Canyon) down into the green or yellow, without cancelling the job. In my current federal workplace, I've spent the last 3 years trying to get some sort of commuting safety awareness to management. He describes our job as firefighters, but we're not. We're like dispatchers. Yes, we have to be there, but our admin person, and even out IT people can take a 2 hour delay. As far as our dispatchers, they could arrive early or stay late on the clock to avoid the most hazardous driving conditions in the winter (we commute on the interstate over a pass). We happen to have the precise weather information at our fingertips, so it's appalling that we don't do a better job. In 3 years, we've never had the lead manager issue a 2 hour delay, even when we had near white-out conditions, and were telling people on social media to stay off the roads, and the military base on which we are located did a 4 hour delay. On that day, all our staff, including the the non emergency non essential staff, were required to be at work or take leave. He thinks being "allowed" to take leave is an acceptable alternative, but he doesn't realize he's basically threatening me: use your leave or risk your life. I welcome suggestions for how to communicate with someone who thinks he and his staff are invincible and special. If we're advising others not to drive, we shouldn't have our people on the road either. It's our biggest safety risk, and a huge one. As dispatch-like public servants, if one person winds up in a ditch, now we have to call in others to cover for him/her. If we had just called them and said "come in 3 hours later, the storm will end in about an hour and that'll give the plows time" we'd be in much better shape in the long run. The in-office night shift leads are allowed to permit overtime, but they aren't allowed to make the call regarding safety leave. Ridiculous.

This is not just an easy one or the other answer. A lot has to do with the existing culture at an organization. A lot of management teams do want a strong safety culture but get caught up in the numbers game - OSHA recordables or worker comp dollars spent to see the big picture which focuses on the wrong numbers. Leadership/Employee interactions which include training, inspections, two-way observations, near miss reporting and sound corrective actions are elements that lead to success. Management teams sometimes forget they have to spend money (time and resources) in order to make this happen. They attempt to run with a minimum safety staff or provide the least amount of safety resources in hopes that it will work. This may work in the short term but over the long haul they are constantly revamping their safety process. As for employees in some cases they do not follow rules and procedures or actively participate in the safety process. Sometimes employees do not realize they are really major contributors to the overall safety process and culture of an organization. They have more power than they think and sometimes take the easy way out and use the "management" is responsible for my safety card when they have the ruby slippers on all the long. Leadership commitment and employee empowerment/participation are the keys to a successful safety culture and when the two groups can collaborate for the same common goal - everyone goes home safely, today - then the process works!

I have a good program here at my place of employment, where I have been shaping it for 13 years. it is a constant hard sell to new supervisors and workers who enter feeling like there are no harmful issues on a university campus. Contractors' workers are dealt on a three strike scenario, so they come and conform or they are out. We do not have any large research laboratories or dorms. The areas with the most potential for harm is in the laboratories and the service shops. Upper management does not get involved in the everyday aspects of safety compliance. When it does, I have no hesitation from them to move forward. EHS does its job of training, continually updating safety programs, and on constant observation for those potential unsafe conditions or practices in many areas. Campuses work at a slower speed to get programs or corrections in place due to the fight of limited funds. So we conduct modification to make it safer or shut it down until funds are appropriated. From experience, most EHS Offices at an upper education campus do not have strong continuous programs in Facilities Maintenance, due to many factors, and mainly concentrate on research laboratories. Human error is usually the cause for non-compliance and harm in laboratories.

Many time management will not see the proactive benefits when it comes to costs or spending money on safety.

Depends on the issue. Employees may see it as we are doing the right thing for them and same with managers. Other times it is a struggle to get either side to listen. Fortunately, our culture is becoming more proactive in wanting to do the right things for people. Maybe they are getting it or I wore them down. I believe they are getting it.

I am the safety manager for a large construction company and I believe there are challenges with both sides, but i will say that it is easier to get management to understand the benefits. i hear others saying that management only buys in if you show them the numbers or dollars they could save with a good safety program, i would ask does it really matter why they buy in or does it just matter that they do. Now getting the field workers to buy in is much more difficult because numbers don't matter to them, many of them seam to have the it wont happen to me thinking, or they have done it this way for years and nothing bad has happened. by the way that is the most common thing workers say to me when we are in the emergency room. We as safety professionals need to be creative in how we sell safety to either side and we should worry less about how we get there and more about getting there. I do not have all the answers but i do have a passion for safety and both sides will eventually see that and that's when the real buy in begins. So my advice is to believe in what your doing, do not back down if you really believe in something but remember to be flexible and willing to compromise, once everyone sees that you are willing to work with them and not make their job more difficult they will begin to trust you and then and only then can the real safety culture be formed.

Competing agendas, goals and budgets often drive management to pursue other priorities under the intent to "get-the-job-done" and deliver on their goals. This tends to dilute the importance of safety as a task and hazard specific goal, tied more directly to the worker. In addition, working knowledge of both safety requirements and hazard mitigation techniques tends to resonate with the worker, HS & Risk Managers and often is absent in the operational and business management elements of most companies. Safety Culture development from the top-down is a must to garner support, resources and understanding for maintaining a solid safety component of each and every task undertaken. Safety may get old, but so do those that practice it.

After 35 plus years it is definitely more difficult to convince management to embrace a corrective action / preventive action for an EHS issue. Workers see the corrective action for what it is ....an improvement to make something safer and environmentally friendly. Management sees it as more cost, more time, more inspections, etc. which will potentially cause delays. Management has to embrace EHS as an "essential" part of the process - Operations, QA, Logistics, and EHS. Take one on the legs out of the chair and the chair collapses. Enough said.

Upper management is not so hard to sell as they know the costs associated with injuries. Middle management is the problem. Their focus is usually on production and how they can get more done in a shorter period of time. Also many companies have a bonus plan for hitting certain production goals and when this is the case safety drops further down the list. It should be safety, quality, quantity every day not just when it can be worked in. Safety classes will teach workers what they need to do and middle management with over ride it and tell them a different way to do the job. Upper management is not always aware of the changes made to safety because they are being told by middle management that everything is perfect. I believe in holding management accountable for safety and if someone gets injured take immediate action to correct the management thought process or cutting corners.

Using the word "sell" cheapens the art of influence. It makes the Safety Professional sound like an unscrupulous sales person. Not good. We’re not “selling” safety, we’re influencing why it is important to them to have a work safe mindset as they go about their daily tasks. We’re working to get them in the habit of putting safe work practices into their daily lives. To do that, we have to take the time to explain a few things along the way. Management can understand the concept of regulatory compliance. That part is easy...we have the law on our side. Explaining to management that workers will never follow a leader that does not follow the rules usually solidifies the point of talk the talk and walk the walk. Usually. It may take a reminder or two or three. It's all in the approach to the situation, as well as the timing of the reminder. Best to remind leaders and get them in the habit when the stress level is not at maximum during an unplanned negative event. The workers, they have skin in the game everyday. Again, it's all in the approach. The Safety Professional must be unrelenting in the pursuit of compliance. On the other hand, we should NOT be the safety cop, chasing people down and giving them a severe warning. Make the infraction relevant to them. Explain how the failure to comply can have real negative consequences to them and/or their surviving family members. Those words, used at the appropriate time, can drive the compliance factor home. When they get a grasp on how losing an eye, or a finger, or being unable to work for a length of time, can upset their whole reference of life as they now know it, compliance usually follows. It’s all in the approach. I have had much success using this approach, and that’ why I took the time to share it. Thanks for listening.

Management I believe either thinks - No one have been killed, so we must be doing OK. So no need to do anything. OR Money is always a factor in the equation of safety. Spend as little as possible until something happens. Roll the dice!

I think it's workers because of their feeling that they need to focus on production. Most workers would like to work safe, but have a mindset of getting the task done on time at all cost.

Management that does not recognize that safe work practices contribute rather than hinder production are the harder sell. Those uninformed individuals consistently fail to see the big picture of a healthy, fully productive, 100% present workforce's output outweighs any perceived inconvenience. It is not only a harder sell, it does a disservice to those workers upon whom they are counting for their continued business sustainability.

Companies are in business to make money. Period. Safety and Quality are often overlooked because it is viewed as anti-production. Production is always Go Go Go!!! and Safety and QA is always wanting to slow it down and make sure the product is right and that people are safe while they produce. The real cost of injuries is tough to sell to reactive management systems.

I have found that most workers like to finish a job or task as quickly as possible, and will for go safety aspects in order to do so.

Cost and Schedule has an mega phone voice, then comes Safety Safety should always prevail

Management supports safety and requirements ,there are times that old school management does not always see relevance. Workers buy in untill management conflicts are seen.

I find that getting worker buy-in is harder than getting management buy-in mainly due to complacency. When performing repetitive or familiar jobs workers just forget about safety until someone gets hurt. Every month all accidents are highlighted during monthly safety meetings and consistently the avoidable accidents have been due to employees not paying attention, or trying to hurry.

In my 40 years of experience in union and non-union environments it is almost 50-50 as to who dislikes safety more. Workers don't like all the additional safety requirements because they represent more ways management can get them in trouble. When workers are disciplined or terminated for safety violations, most other workers rebel against what they believe are too stringent requirements that don't make sense. Management is always bucking against what they consider unwarranted government regulations. Establishing and maintaining a safety program means time and money - none of which they ever have enough time for. Tack onto that ever increasing fine structures and safety is relegated to a 'cost-avoidance' exercise than a vested interest in employee safety. Frontline supervisors, department managers and other senior executives cannot (and do not) make a connection between work comp costs and business costs. To management, safety is a drain on time and an endless circle of paperwork for audits, inspections, training, and incident reports; they see no direct-line benefit to the company. It is interesting management wholly embraces all the time and effort of Lean Manufacturing, continuous improvement, and the endless paperwork ISO 9000 certifications require. But none of that is a government requirement - it's better business. Because 'safety' is a government requirement, it is a 'must do' instead of a 'better-to- do' activity. Nobody likes 'must do' work; workers or managers.

Management sees Safety as $$$$

I have 2 reasons for saying management. One is that "workers" watch management behavior closely, so when management gets it right, workers will quickly adjust their behavior to match management behavior. The second is that managers often have more "forgetting" to do, which can be a roadblock to accepting and embracing the change that's required to move a safety initiative forward.

Management sees the safety seat as a burden to operations. On the broad scheme, they do not see the reasons to invest in safety. It takes away from the overall. Most of the time, at most places I feel...Something has to happen from minor to serious before a decision can be made on the right thing to do. Management are harder to train as well due to the fact of not buying in and don't have time due to operational goals and numbers. They know that industry needs safety but rather give it to somebody else to worry about it, and don't spend anything to get it there. Workers on the other hand want to learn, aside from the ones that think it is a break from normal operations. However, there are some that want to be part of the action of protecting life, limb, and property. Becoming part of the culture of safety.

Management is a harder sell because most management just sees the cost (& it's up to us as safety professionals to be able to provide management with "return on your safety investment" information to show them not just the cost, but the benefits of implementing a safety cost / how the cost will pay off over time). If you have a good working relationship with your workers, & they trust you (1) to be looking out for their health & safety, and (2) to provide them with realistic / workable safety that they can easily see how it helps them stay safe, then the workers will not have a problem "buying" the safety you are "selling."

Most workers want to get the job done as quickly as possible. If it means taking a shortcut or having the "it'll only take a minute" attitude to hurry up to get the job done, that's when the accident happens. Some workers really do not realize the hazard(s) of their action(s) until it's too late.

It's hard to ask workers to "do the right thing" when they see their managers and corporate leaders NOT doing the right thing with no consequences.

Although I selected "workers," the harder sell depends upon a number of factors that vary from one company to another. Among those factors, in order of their importance, are: The severity of possible injuries due to hazards that workers are routinely exposed to. The more hazardous the job tasks, the higher management's setting of safety as a priority; The trend of injuries. Workers in facilities where there is a worsening safety record tend to blame management, whether or not managers are sold on safety, and will assume the burden of improving conditions if given the opportunity to do so. On the other hand, if there is a trend toward less and/or less serious injuries, reduced worker comp costs will cause management to lessen its efforts as long as that trend continues. The cost of worker comp insurance. When that expense becomes a noticeable line item in the budget, management will put a greater emphasis on safety, regardless of whether or not it is sold on safety. The cost and complexity of regulatory compliance. When management considers that expense to be unnecessarily high, it will be less interested in safety for safety's sake and more interested in simply reducing the cost of compliance. The intelligence of the workforce. One would think that smarter workers will be more attentive to safety, but that is seldom the case. Smarter workers, thinking they know what safety shortcuts they can get away with tend to be less interested in following the rules. PhD's are very often the worst offenders. If you have read this far, thank you. The thoughts expressed reflect five decades of workplace management experience and investigation of workplace accidents as a forensic engineer and safety professional. Mike Shanok

I often find that commitment to safety is simply lip service, there is a lot of "say we will" and "agree we will" but when it comes to funding, resourcing and putting the time and effort in to the commitment, it's as if the topic was never discussed. The excuse or reasoning often comes down to productivity and the cost hardship the company will incur if we pull people off the floor to "sit in a room" and go through training. Trying to sell to a manager that it's not if something happens but WHEN something happens is difficult and exhausting.

We advocate safety as a lifestyle, rather than workplace requirement which helps tremendously with employee and management buy-in. Let employees take extra ear plugs if going to concerts, raceway, shooting range, using leaf blowers. Make family plans same as we have at work for active shooter response, think about where they sit in theaters, a meeting place at the mall, look around for items that could be used as weapons or places to hide. Train carbon monoxide poisoning related to indoor forklift usage, reminder at home in power outages not to use generators or bbqs indoors. Pedestrian forklift safety training video makes employees squirm when they watch it, but think twice and look up when they hear the horn honk or beeping sounds in a retail store. Train how to use fire extinguishers at work, but do you have one at home for a kitchen fire. Someone chokes, don't call 9-1-1, render first aid to the level that we are trained. When a visitor to our manufacturing operation signs in, immediately give them ear plugs and ask if they have their own safety harness, then circle back to their work space to ensure compliance. If not complying, ask again, but also follow up with their employer. When managers openly state the Company goal is for all workers, visitors or subcontractors to go home with the same number of fingers and toes they arrive with each day, managers have to be role models and called out when not following their own rules. Recently, one of our younger Safety Committee members took heat from his shift for a safety concern discussion that his co-workers read about in the posted safety meeting minutes. Those veteran co-workers worried they'd be written up for safety violation and the Lead said he should tell them first what he plans to discuss at Safety Committee. I told them no, he doesn't have to tell them in advance; I told the safety rep, keep it, you've got them talking for the right reasons now ... their actions were unsafe. And, shift Supervisor said they all should thank this safety rep for caring about everyone's safety.

Every work site is production driven. The role of management is to ensure that a "Business" returns to the investors the highest profit. It is the responsibility of every level of management to hold every member of an organization accountable. Safety in the workplace is an integral element of a profitable "Business".

Managers seem to be overloaded with tasks.

Management is the harder sell because they concerned that production will be shut down, loss of profit.

The short answer is management is the hardest to convince. It's been my experience over a very long time being in charge of people (35 + years) that most employees sincerely want to do what the management of their organization wants them to. It's for that reason "culture" becomes so important and management buy in so essential. If the rank and file believe production is the priority they will produce first, address safety (and anything else) second. I've come to appreciate the perspective that safety is a value and not a priority, priorities change but values do not.

It really depends on the culture in place. At our facility, we have an excellent supportive management team that encourage safety initiatives, and in many cases, drive them. So, for us the hard sell is to the work groups. On the flip side, I have worked at facilities where management simply isn't engaged and they are the hard sell, and the work groups want to work safely, but aren't supported. Both are bad, but the lack of support from management is inexcusable.

Management is about time, cost of goods, when approached with safety concerns seems they will be very critical about cost of system or product and the time to implement. When it is approved management thinks there job is done. no follow up or help with implementation. Blames others for failure.

Managers make the decisions to move ahead and ensure the resources are provided. Their goals and priorities are sometimes conflicting. workers on the other hand are easier to convince once consulted on decisions to be made as their interest on safety matters is just that .. they want a safe workplace and work environment.

When it comes to safety, the harder sell is the supervisor. The supervisor is pulled in two directions; one from management and the other from the worker. If the supervisor has the ability to bridge the gap between the two, the chances of a successful safety process are improved. Working safely must make sense to the worker and "truly" make them safer. Working safely must be profitable and improve production. If the safety process accomplishes those two goals, the supervisor will be sold. If not, it's time for another supervisor.

It is my experience that workers engaged in their work are way more concerned about their own safety and the safety of their co-workers. It's the managers or "leaders" that determine the level of safety and the culture at any work setting. Managers tend to be more focused on cost and efficiency.

Worker's by nature don't want to work unsafe. When they do they generally think what they are doing is safe, or they have control enough to avoid the risks. This makes them an easy sell, because generally you can explain why the risk exposure, in the long term, may result in an unavoidable mistake. At that point, they are willing to change, given support to remember to do the task differently, given the added time it tasks to become proficient with the new method or tool, and are held accountable for the change. Management is more difficult because they have to be the responsible party to provide the time, methods and materials and follow through necessary for a change to take place. While it's easy to get a bunch of mid to upper level managers to nod their heads, convincing them enough to take the effort to create and enforce actual change is tough. They will often applaud the changes if they themselves don't actually have to change, and if it costs them nothing (even in the short term) from the bottom line. When the rubber hits the road, they don't have to change.

I think it's a harder sell to employees IF management doesn't walk the walk - not just SAY that safety is a priority, but live it daily as a way of life. If the managers do not lead by example, it's hard to even expect the employees to embrace safety. Employees truly do follow the leader in this case, in my opinion.

Sometimes it seems management wants to promote safety - as long as it doesn't interfere with production. Everyone knows stopping to look both ways before going in and out of a building on a forklift is the safe thing to do - but seldom do you see a safety rule requiring you to stop and look - only "slow down and be cautious". Why? Workers can buy into safety as long as they see management walk the walk they talk.

Upper management is committed to employee safety and provide all the tools and finance needed. BUT middle management somehow do not take safety training and enforcement as seriously. OSHA rules that probit rewarding employees for meeting department and individual safety goals may contribute to their lack of enthusiasm. The need for individual or unit rewards far outweigh the possible issues with an employee withholding information about an injury. Good safety practice is not easily measurable to apply a reward.

For starters we are not in the business of selling safety. We must encourage new and support the current safety programs & cultures already excepted by both management and employee. I did, however vote Management. Unfortunately, this world runs on time and money. One must create an Safe atmosphere where management see cultural safety benefits that intersect with Lean Management, minimal onsite restrictions, & over all long term cost effectiveness, or cost reduction. I have seen in past experiences once management is acceptable to newly added safety culture the employees will follow suite as many of them see that it's important to my boss its is important to me.

As a health and safety professional who works for a labor union, my members are always in favor of safety. Management pays lip service to it, but does not follow through when it comes to cost or sharing control.

Because they don't want to acknowledge there might be a problem that they might have to spend money on.

I think workers are for the most part because if they've worked for any period of time, they have heard and experienced numerous campaigns and pushes for safety that, for many reasons, failed to have any sustaining power. So there is a lot of skepticism with every message received.

Employees will rise to the level of expectation. Management has to buy in, and hold employees accountable. I've heard too often that safety is great as long as it does not get in the way of production......

Management is a hard sell. Safety is a hard sell anyway. Selling safety to management in the Sheet Metal Manufacturer field is great if it's for looking good on paper. For saving lives its too much work. At least some of the workers see the value in saving lives.

As trainer, when we go over safety procedure especially new ones, many employees complain that we are just making their jobs more difficult putting in a lot of unnecessary steps. Many times stating they been doing this job so many years and nothing ever happened and why worry now.

Some staff/management in retail think that it is OK to tie a dog up in the entrance/fire escape, should we as customers tolerate this. I fell and broke my humorous/shoulder in two places, and ended up with 15 weeks off work because of this, they have offered me gift vouchers and the law tells me it should be sterling £££. This area should be kept clear at all times. Why do we have to keep putting up with these company's. I shop elsewhere now, as they can't look after their customers in a safe area.

The question about the "sell" is interesting because for the Management the sell truly involves money and that is fairly easy to drop if you have the budget...it becomes less easy when results are disheartening. The sell to the worker is less about money because the spending of it is so far removed and they don't really feel the cost of these programs reducing their salary. For them the sell is to change a behavior and practices which is always the more difficult thing. Who can change habits? They are difficult to change even if you want to do so and can clearly see the benefit as soon, certain and positive. The hard reality is that the sell is more personal...like trying to to keep that New Year's resolution to drop 35 pounds...it is easy in theory but nearly impossible in reality.

Workers fear retaliation from management.

From past History safety driven from the top down has always ended being a program of the month . Safety Driven from the bottom up is process . The difference a program has a beginning and an end A process is ongoing adjusting to culture and growing from there .

Even the most safety conscientious worker is willing to take a short cut (at risk behavior) if they perceive that the risk is low and that "safety rules" impact their ability to get a task done. "Selling safety" is not a problem the question should be who is willing to "buy" into safety?

It has been my experience working in the construction and hazardous waste remediation industries that management as well as larger clients (General Motors, Rohm and Haas, BP,, RGE, NYSEG, Federal and State governments) require some sort of safety incentive/training program in their base contracts. Getting workers to follow the safety rules (PPE, safety harnesses, tie offs etc...)is a full time and unappreciated job of the Safety Officer. All of the reportable and most of the minor (non-reportable) injuries in my 40 years of work have occured when the workers (operating engineers, laborers, or other trades) disabled safety mechanisms on equipment (after the equipment was inspected by the supervisor) or they did not used the tools/safety equipment that they were provided and trained to use.

From my perspective, it seems like workers will do whatever the boss expects and enforces. Management is often the harder sale, since compliance with OSHA is typically all that most contractors want. However, at PENTA we are always striving for Exceptional vs. Acceptable performance, which is why we created and teach a "Selling Safety" course to all of our safety people. After all, it is imperative that as safety professionals we learn how to sell to both.

From the very first day of employment, all new employees are correctly trained in safety rules and procedures too keep them safe and the company in regulatory compliance. Hourly employees, however, will be disciplined more readily and not forgiven for mistakes that salaried employees would make, even if the injury potential or procedural violation was comparable, union or not. Granted employee safety behavior is always a challenge with 5% of the workforce that requires constant enforcement, training, discipline, and ultimately termination hopefully before an incident or injury occurs. Some high level managers are so far removed from the actual manufacturing or production environment that they are oblivious of the safety rules and what it takes to comply 24/7 to ensure employee safety. Management by regularly engaging with all employees in their own working environment is essential for them to fully show their appreciation to these employees and for them to understand what it takes to work in these environments.

Depends on government or private sector. Municipal workers are field positions and usually less inclined to follow safety policies as they are usually written by office workers not field personnel. Private sector has the opposite problem of management focusing on production and leaving field workers to fend for themselves regarding safety.

There was no safety culture within my employer when I started save some lip service, and we have nineteen stores across four states. I started the ball rolling by doing a site inspection at my store, and when I gave the results to my my managers, I received nothing but arguments, excuses, and push back. My team mates have been slow to accept changes, but change IS happening.

Management tends to behave in manner whereas safety issues causes more work for them.

Management wants low MODs and TRIRs and constantly talk about how safety is a priority. But they are not willing to invest the resources and staff to develop a strong safety culture.

with the lack of management commitment or enforcement authority allocated to safety, workers do not consider the matter of job safety important, add to it that management places production or safety, it is hard to have the workers and/or subcontractors comply with safety regulations.

Too many times management is focused on the "bottom line" & see safety training as an un-necessary cost. When management is committed to workplace safety it is a much easier "sell" to employees.

The workers are the most important asset. Most Managers still don’t get it. They don’t understand what leadership is about. And as for bureaucratic safety managers they are just as bad. When I recently interviewed over a thousand workers and visited a dozen job sites, 75% of those companies were doing a bad job communicating with the ones who make them the money. Management is the cash cow and the workers are the ones who make them profitable. Some of the workers I spoke to are either looking for better places to work because they don’t feel appreciated or abused or others are looking at different avenues by picking their battles. Managers forget that the workers wear their pants the same way they wear theirs. That’s why I get hired a lot more now to lead the workers to greater pastures. You don’t get 250k people following you unless you’re producing results and as a safety professional, the workers are my one big family. A TOSHA Supervisor once told me to keep leading the charge. Something is working that’s why no one has died on my watch or seriously been injured because I sell the family idea to them. I am their Papi Chulo Safety Culo to the Spanish workers and just plain The Safety Goose to others.

Management is obviously responsible for cost and production on the project, which can create an atmosphere of production requirement v/s safety considerations-to some managers. I believe we are seeing more support for safety initiatives that can be tied to better quality and production, so it appears to me that how we as Safety Professionals represent and educate on issues become a key influence. Workers can obviously be difficult to sell on safety initiatives, particularly if they conflict with past experience or instruction. Consistent information communication, positive demonstration by peers, and management support are key to supporting the change we seek.

Workers normally get the need for H&S and are on board. Management, who needs to be on board from a legal and financial perspective are often harder to sway, especially when it comes to finances for H&S requirements.

Even though management promotes safety, makes safety equipment purchases, hires a dedicated Manager/adviser/promoter, evidently the extra effort required to remain safe seems ignored by the typical worker for the sake of their "personal ease". Consistently promoting safety as a "standard part of life" helps but convincing them that accidents can happen to them as well as me (impacting everyone at the job site) doesn't seem to make it into their permanent memory bank . The human ego seems to get in the way of just following protocol. Never the less, we keep moving forward. If employees required safety training management would gladly provide it with a smile on their face.

Who is the harder sell? It depends who you ask. Workers say management doesn't listen to them about safety and management says workers don't follow the safety rules that are in place. The truth is that management is the only group that safety needs to be sold to. Management pays for safety, manages safety, enforces safety, and pays for safety failures. If management buys into safety then safety begins. Working in the management ranks for 10 years I would use this statement as a summary to the safety issues: "Every company has exactly as much safety as management wants!" Don Spaulding April 5,2019

A lot of the time, it's about the money. And, cost savings and cost avoidances from a well-implemented safety program or processes are difficult to quantify. In business, "doing the right thing" has to be justified as a legitimate expenditure.

I worked for a very large company for 31+ years, it was very apparent that it was all about the safety program and not the safety of the employees, I was loading up a table of small parts that were ready for inspection, when one of them slid of the table and hit the floor, it just so happened that my boss was walking buy and he yelled out at me that he needed a near incident report filled out, so I yelled back at him " I'M NOT HURT, I'M OK ". 90% of the employees hated the program and felt they were being forced to participate, what could have been an excellent program, turned out to be a big farce, due to the way the employees engaged it

In my company, I have the full support of Management; all the way to the top. The workers, on the other hand have been the hardest sell. The newer employees generally follow the safety guidelines set in place, however, it's the employees who have been around for a few years that are the hardest to get to comply. They are more set in their ways and will give excuses a mile long as to why they aren't complying. During the last 16 months, my company has spent a lot on training for all employees, creating a much safer working environment and making it so that employees can feel confident and comfortable reaching out to their Leads, Supervisors and Managers with any safety concerns they might have, knowing that the issues will be fixed quickly. However, we cannot force our employees to perform their duties safely. Unsafe acts remain the top problem that my company continues to face.

Great question! Looking forward to hearing what people are saying.

Management tends to look at On the Job Safety as a regulatory requirement, not a value added to the organization. This is especially true in State, County and Local government agencies where OSHA does not apply. They check the box having someone in a safety position, but do not provide adequate funding and resources. Further, in civil service agencies, they avoid serious consequences such as days off for misbehaving employees as those are public record. The concept of actual applicable OSHA / EPA safety regulations and Safety Best Practices is foreign to many in management in the public sector. They will say safety is a priority in their organization, but it is a competing priority against costs, politics, accreditation, etc. If management doesn't make safety a value in the organization, there are problems

You think safety is expensive , you try having an ACCIDENT. !

GREETINGS THE WORD SELL IS INCLUSIVE I MEAN TO SAY THAT THE MANAGERS AND THE WORKERS ARE SHARING THE WORD BUT IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MANAGERS TO ENSURE THAT SELL IS SOLD OR THE SAFETY OF PRODUCT ARE WITH THE MANAGERS BUT THE WORKERS DO THE WORK STILL UNDER SUPERVISION HOWEVER THE WORKERS PLAY AN IMPORTANT PART IN PERSUADING THE CUSTOMERS TO BUY THE PRODUCT SO THE SELL IS WITH THE WORKERS . IF I CAN COMMENT ON THE PERCENTAGE THE WORKERS ARE 8 OUT OF TEN AND 2 OUT OF TEN WITH THE MANAGERS. THANK YOU

HEALTH AND SAFETY COMMENTS ARE THE DEBATE THAT CAN BE COMMENTED BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOT YET EXPERINCED OR HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY DIALOGUE IT IS APPRECIABLE FOR TAKING THE QUESTION INTO A DEBATE SO THAT INFORMED GROUP OF FAVOURING SAFETY CAN WRITE AND EXPRESS THEIR OPINION . THANK YOU