Yes (50.8%)

No (49.2%)

Our construction teams bonus dollars are based on regular safety audit performances and our culture is based upon team effort...both production and safety, so it stands to reason we as safety professionals be held to the same level of performance.

That's what they hire us. To take care of our employees.

If the company stumbles, then safety has dropped a ball somewhere. We have to have skin in the game. Otherwise, it's easy to NOT bite the hands that feed us when we need to.

accountability, incentivize towards results

If the director of safety or the personnel in charge of safety cannot get the company into a safety culture program they are not doing their job. some accidents may happen but if everyone gets involved with safety the number of accidents should decrease. Talk the talk and walk the walk.

Cost of injury will effect all parties

Leadership is everything! As the point person for safety, how can I be considered either a success or a failure if the number of injured associates is not considered. You can have all the so called "programs" in the world but at the end of the day, all that matters is "was their blood on the floor?".

WHY NOT EXCEPTIONAL WORK PRODUCTIVITY SHOULD ALWAYS BE REWARDED.

It isnt just safety that we get our bonus on. It is just a small part.

That is what you are paid to do.

I am a safety compliance officer and I should lead by example.

Pay for performance is fair.

Has the most direct influence on management.

A portion of a bonus should be tied into safety performance; but 50 -75% should be related to leading indicators.

at least a percentage should be since the safety professional has a part to play in the overall contribution to the company's culture. That said, the percentage should be about 1/3 and no more than that being a staff employee.

This is part of my performance appraisal and I am expected to keep and enhance the safety culture.

The company saves money in insurance premiums, direct and indirect costs, etc.

Yes, safety performance should be a factor of anyone who is bonus eligible.

I don't know what the best answer is. I usually leave it to the organization I am working for/with. I can see both sides of the argument.

I feel all employees should be in the boat together...no 1st Class...2nd Class...ballast...etc.

Ultimately, the impact of one's philosophy and direction applied to the process of safety should result in the continual improvement of safety throughout an organization.

means of measuring your progress throughout the year

I believe that Safety Performance should be tied to compensation as it will motivate execs to focus time and resources to it.

Because it is a measure off job performance.

It will show if they are doing their job!!

The safety professional should be a role model in safe behavior and set the example for others to follow.

To serve as an incentive to produce

We have well structured key performance indicators that not only measure injury rates but also the implementation of an active safety program. If you will only consider injury rates to measure safety performance then I would have hesitation.

That is part of your core competency and skill set not unlike any other business function That has differing skill sets. To reward based on skill utilization is a good thing.

Yes as he has this accountability. The metric used should discount what he has no control over.

Yes and no, depending on the industry and the company's accident rate. If the pro has established a pro-active program that demonstrates a reduction in accidents and incidents, then it would be fair.

As a safety pro we need to have skin in the game.

Safety is the core principal.

Yes, if that is their only job function, then it is a measure of their performance. But if there are other non safety aspects of the job, then they should be considered as well.

We have the ability to influence the corporations safety goals and managements decisions regarding safety.

Direct impact on safety to company by how employees maintain safety procedures

Safety professionals are the representation of safety performance for the company. As the company performance goes - the safety professional's performance should go. If performacne is substandard; it is the safety professional's job to enlighten the Leadership group to shape their planning, expectations and actions. Also, the Safety professional educates the leadership and management groups to what safety performance is acceptable and what level of tollerance is acceptable.

Because the responsability of keeping people safe and engage with our core safety values

Yes if top management supports their efforts and leads safety. No if that support does not exist.

If the safety performance is adequately defined and not based on lagging indicators like recordable and lost time accidents.

Because Behavior Based Safety Training can effect the decisions employees make in regards to their actions.

Safety is that persons main responsibility and should be his main concern.

It requires participation in the program with a constant review of successes or failures.

Yes and No. You can train and document exceptional training and awareness programs but accidents do happen. It just doesn't matter sometimes. You can train, give them test to prove they were trained, post safety signs, provide PPE, install safe guards and train some more but people have bad days, get

Yes. However, the raise and bonus based on safety performance SHOULD be on all managers and supervisors in the organization. The safety professional is just one key person. Tying the raise/bonus to ALL Leadership is the ONLY way to drive accountability through the organization.

It is fair if the executive management of the firm supports safety programs implemented by the Safety pro. If there is no top down support, then it is not fair.

results whether positive or negative can be impacted by my either being engaged or not

If the safety professional's influence is positive and effective in the company's culture than their compensation should reflect the company's safety performance.

The reduction in loss, both direct and indirect, are reflected by the leadership of the safety professional, as well as the commitment of safety by management.

Walk the walk - If a persons salary is tied to how the employees perform maybe that person will work a little harder to make sure that he keeps safety in front of everyone. If the hear it is important and see you out showing them it is important maybe just maybe they will take it to heart.

Only if the Safety Professional has control of the program.

because one of my main functions is to reinforce safety and compliance with all of the crews i see on a daily basis

All Directors bonus includes metrics for the areas they direct.

There are mixed feelings, but tying my bonus to actual performance motivates me to exert my influence on the organization to meet the set goals. Performance doesn't necessarily mean lagging indicators, such as incident rates, figures. Performance can also be tied to positive and proactive measurements, such as metrics for employee participation, audit scores, survey results, etc.

How effective have you been.

Bonus for all Employee same. But raises for regular employees are automatic (everyone gets the same %) and for Leaders/Tech they are base on performance with the raise % being capped.

Safety can affect organizational financial success and bonus based on safety performance may incentivize some safety pro's performance to exceed expectations and give them more of a sense that their work and efforts are appreciated

because other Supervisors bonus's are rated with there production/ performance. And Safety saves money due to lower insurance costs and workman comp.

Helps with the incentive for the company based safety program.

it is an incentive to strive harder for employee safety. I feel it also requires the employer to look at the success of the safety program.

It depends if the employee is in total control of thier safety in the workplace.

It increase the interaction between safety manager and employees

Helps to illustrate that my work is valuable and has a positive impact.

Depending upon what performance metrics you are basing. Leading indicators should be the benchmark (Training Rate, Process Improvement Rate, Etc) as well as overall company performance. Safety should only be one component.

In my opinion a stellar safety performance can be rewarded with bonuses or raises for all employees!

Even though I wanted to say "No" because you can't control people and accidents do happen. However, keeping up to date with training and safety assessments is part of the job and as long as you are doing your best to keep the employees safe then the risks should be minimal.

Your performance should be based on all measurable safety related results.

Every business units employees bonus is based on Corp and Units safety performance. As a safety professional safety performance is also part of my annual performance evaluation.

Reduce injuries, increase of productivity

Everyone must be accountable for performances

Yes, but only partially. As safety pros we need set goals, develop action plans, and produce results. However, as a support function, we're not in direct control of the process we're trying to affect. And we deal primarily with trying to influence the behavior of human beings. Many other factors in the work environment can apply strong and opposite influence; pay, leadership, layoffs, organizational change, overtime, unions, etc. I believe my bonus should be based on my ability to deliver against my plan AND overall company performance.

because they are responsible for the Safety Program and culture on safety in the company. It's hard work getting 3-4 hundred people on the same page.

If he/she is solely responsible for the safety program. And has complete cooperation from managment.

I work at the headquarters level, and the policies and communications we produce should be impacting the accident rates in the field

The majority of the bonus is based on production & efficiency performance. A small % is based on meeting EHS goals. All salaried are included in the bonus formula which I believe is fair because everyone effects the safety performance.

It does provide some skin in the game for the EHS person - but the percentage/weighting should be low 20% or less. The other 80+% should be tied to the progress being made on key EHS initiatives that drives overall EHS performance.

First, I believe that the bonus should be based on proactive indicators only (or at least a majority). All employees bonuses are based on the safety performance. Some are based on personal contributions and other are based on a larger team performance. ie..Safety Audits and Training personal and PMs and Lock Out Audits larger team.

It would be fair if the process includes the ability of the Safety Professional to interact with CEO and/or Executives to help influence and improve safety programs. Otherwise, I agree that it is not fair.

There is a direct correlation between how well the safety pro encourages managers and employees to work safely and the employer's safety performance.

Encourages performance, company will benefit from high performers. Persons with great ethic, completion of projects and management of goals should receive incentives vs a non excelling counterpart(s)

That is why they hire us. We get the accolades when things go well and our performance contributes to company success. We also would expect to take some heat if the opposite was true.

It depends actually. If senior management doesn't walk the talk the culture won't change no matter how hard you try to make work safe for the employees. However a slight portion for everyone would be a start to get the message out. So it's everyone's goal.

Typically, any safety improvements are not properly evaluated and tend to form part of 'natural' progress, without having any ties to efforts and developments being implemented by safety personnel. If other Senior Management personnel are measured and, receive incentives based on the safety performance of any company, part of that incentive should also be shared with the employees who have to offer face value for safety status, whether good or bad.

As a safety Administrator you have a impact on the safety program in the shop. Your training and knowledge should be an example of all safety issues fro all affected employees in your organization.

To keep a good solid safety program ongoing with your company

Bonus programs should be based at least 50% on safety performance. This helps people strive a little more to work safely. However it can hinder incident reporting if the safety culture isn't strong.

Along with Profit, Growth and Quality, Safety should be an integral element of any company's business culture. Results in these categories determine the success of a company and have been the building blocks of this country's economy. Business leaders are compensated based on profit, growth and quality which in turn facilitates good results. It is a tried and true process. Safety should not be any different. One element of a safety professional's worth are the results he/she is able to produce even if her/his ability to produce is limited to influencing others.. The definition of safety performance may differ from company to company but as long as the criteria is objective and measurable safety pros could be held accountable through their compensation. The only caveat involves the use of the TIR lagging indicator. If compensation is tied to injury rates that metric should be closely monitored by independent parties. Doing so will help to ensure that the process to address and document employee injury maintains a high level of integrity.

Most safety professionals are part of the management team. They need to be able to share and fully participate in preventing hazards and injuries, not just sit in an office and develop policies. This would force safety professionals to hold themselves accountable.

We try to measure other leading indicators, but they are not the reason they hire us.

YES - Actions speak louder than words!

CSA scores with the FMCSA need to be good or the Safety Dept. is not doing their job.

We have a extremely low safety rating in the Transportation field, this is achieved by following the Rules, Regulations, State Law and Company Policy. As a Safety Pro it is paramount that the Manger get everyone on the safety program, not only for the Company but for everyone involved, both private and public.

Part of the responsibilities of a safety professional job is to influence positive improvement in the safety performance.

As a safety leader my job is to promote safe behavior and activity. As long as "safety performance" does not ONLY count injuries (lagging) which may not truly reflect my performance.

Employees are rewarded for not having a lost time.Safety personal should be rewarded for the time and efforts spent on talking and teaching safe practices.

As the safety professional, it is our duty to prepare the organization to succeed at all levels. This needs to involve training, resources and most importantly accountability from the top down.

Safety professionals must spread their reach across many boundaries. Our success in this arena (people interaction and motivation) is directly proportional to the success of the performance of our safety programs. It is an, albeit indirect, measure of how well we do our jobs.

Fair if based on safety performance indicators other than just TRR, but also action performance safety measures.

Safety performance is a safety pros accountability so any bonus should be a reflection of that performance. With that being said there should be many elements determining the safety performance.

same as sells

Safety professionals job performance can influence, albeit not control the organization's safety performance. Accordingly, the two are tied.

Regardless of direct control, It's the bottom line. Similarly, the president is responsible for the economy and the state of the country.

If it's based on leading indicators rather than lagging indicators, I believe it to be fair.

IF the Safety Mgr has sufficient authority over the delivery and enforcement of the EH&S programs.

Even though some accidents maybe out of your control. The safety program is under your control having a good safety management system and a proactive approach can prevent many accidents

Safety professionals should have a profound influence on an employer's safety performance. But they should not be ultimately accountable. So it would be fair for a portion of a raise or bonus to be based on the organization's performance, but it should be the predominant basis of the raise or bonus.

Directly related to job performance

The safety manager/dept can directly affect the performance based upon decisions made in the field as well as in the office. Also through injury management and WC insurance interface.

Justify existence

Drive results.

It creates incentive to develop sustainable programs that reduce injuries.

how well you did your job and did the employees buy in

THE SAFER THE JOB SITE, THE CHEAPER IT IS TO RUN WHEN CONSIDERING WORKERS COMP INSURANCE RATES.

this does help to keep focus aligned to business objectives and sustainable plans for the company as a whole. Albeit the results can be out of your personal control, the portion you get to affect can be helpful in keeping employees and contractors from being injured or worse.

It is my job to make it safer at the workplace

However, this is a double edged sword. For a safety program to be effective, it takes everyone's participation as well as personal ownership of safety for themselves and those around them. If a safety professional happens to be in an organization that doesn't "walk the talk" - the employees know it and will through that back at every turn. I've heard the line - "safety is a joke" or "safety is just the flavor of the month because something happened to someone", many times. Until you "win" these personality types over, having an effective program is difficult. These individuals can influence others in the plant, have an impact on your overall safety program's success and therefore can have an effect on your ability to earn a bonus.

Based on keeping the cost down by preventing accident and lost time injuries.

Company safety performance is factored in every employee's annual increase

A safety professional guides and influences the safety direction of the organization. If the guidance does not work (ie production does not follow it) the safety professional has not done his job.

Of course it depends on the metrics. Leading indicators are fair, lagging - not so much. Its fair to be measured on things you should be doing to improve safety, not so much for other's actions

Employees perspective and motivation on safety comes from the safety professional in charge. If that safety professional motivates the employees to work safely, you will see a direct correlation with your injury and DART Rate.

measure performance

While a safety professional does not maintain sole and direct impact on the work environment, he/she should be expected to leverage the power of influence to indirectly improve the safety performance. 2. With limited control of the environment, he/she should be providing effective recommendation to management and thus evaluated on those recommendations even if management chooses alternate actions etc.

I think it's fair for a safety pro's raise or bonus to be based on the employer's safety performance as long as other salary employees at the same level of management, in different departments are held to the same expectations. If the safety director's salary is based on safety performance but no one else is held to the same standard it is not fair. A safety professional is only as effective as the company's management allows him to be through support and accountability.

the entire leadership team should be impacted by safety performance

As long as safety is one of several key performance indicators (KPI) and attainment of KPI goals effects bonus distribution for all similarly positioned executives.

Performance in safety should be the number one achievement for safety professionals. This of course is dependent upon management views and support. Without management we cannot be held to higher standards.

My policies and safety safety system is what is being utilized throughout the company.

The ultimate measure of a company's performance is profitability. Similarly, the bottom line measure of the effectiveness of the safety program is safety performance metrics like the injury rate.

Poor performance by a safety professional can directly have a negative effect on the company's safety performance. Conversely, excellent performance by the safety pro enables the entire organization to do its job for safety better. As part of the team, the safety pro should share in the team's success or failure.

This works well when a company is committed to safety.....not just in talk, but also in actions.

Outcomes are a direct reflection on effectiveness (assuming that the safety pro is supported by mgt)

A good, well-implemented safety program should ultimately lead to improved performances and statistics. However, while it is well understood that one may lead a member of the equine species towards liquid nourishment, one cannot compel said equine to partake of the life-sustaining refreshment.

That's our job. If we aren't doing our job, people get hurt. The blame lays solely on us.

The results could be a reflection of the training and relationship with employees.

Depending on "how performance is defined. Yes- if it is specifc measureable leading-indicator based activites. (i.e complete risk assessments at 12 facilities in year) No, if it is based on RIR, a trailing factor.

Bottom line profits

The bonus must be tied to robust safety processes that lead to improved injury metrics rather than tied to actual safety metrics.

Safety seems to be secondary to many top level managers until an accident occurs. Having their raises and bonuses based on safety performance would increase their support of safety initiatives.

This is what we are paid to do, lower the injuries, lower the costs. If you can't show improvement, then you're not performing.

Only as long as it is also based on other things that are directly under their control.

This would influence more safety people to try and get all to understand and follow the safety policies

It makes the safety pro more inclined to work WITH the team, rather than be the safety cop who persecutes the team.

If one is doing their job correctly they should have a positive impact on the company's safety performance, providing they are allowed and/or encouraged to do the job correctly.

To a point. For job performance - as you cannot control what other people do - you can only hope they listen and adhere safety rules.

That's what one of the contributors to the bottom line.

That's my job

Safety is the #1 priority at my company.

As a component of the bonus, I think it's fair. We reward employees for being safe, we provide bonuses to managers for safety. Right now, the people that drive the message, do the brunt work, the training, the inspections, etc. are shut out of the safety bonus pool.

Safety is part of performance at the manufacturing level - holds those accountable to make sure they are proactive and helping move leading indicators in the right direction. Our safety bonuses are not based on trailing, but leading indicators.

If not based on lagging indicators.

Safety is a Core Value of DuPont

Safety professionals can make a difference depending on how much time they spend in the field with the employees they are responsible for keeping safe.

I believe everyone's bonus should be based on safety performance

It is about people and dollars - the fewer injuries or better the rates and lower dollars spent is a prime reason safety people are in employed.

A safe organization realizes financial savings, and these dollars should be distributed to those making those savings possible.

Leaders are expected to take their business in the direction that best fits the company. The safety performance of a company should be part of the annual performance review for all employees in a leadership position. Not just the number of injuries, but the overall safety performance of the company/site.

I can't answer this truthfully without some time to research it.

I believe that a percentage of the bonus can or should be tied to performance. This is a motivating factor that will drive continual improvement.

I could feel either way with this. Sometimes you are trying to change a culture and that takes time. However, how passionate you are with your job can also affect the facility outcome.

Hopefully the Safety person has a direct effect on safety performance.

While the actual efforts are what should determine the safety compensation the reality is the choice of efforts goes a long way in determing the results.

performance =results

only if the bonus is equal and not just for the safety person(s).

Because of what I do, and all I do, most years it saves the company money, and I believe a portion should reflect in a raise or bonus. However, there are times that you have a very poor year in Safety and naturally that should reflect as well.

We're part of the team - it is as fair to have part of our raise/bonus be based on the organization's safety performance as it is for anyone else's raise/bonus to be based on this factor. That said, it would NOT be fair that the safety pro be the only function getting rewarded/penalized for the performance of the group.

I do not receive a bonus for safety performance however our contractors do. I believe supervisors within the co should receive bonus also when a project is completed with no incidents.

We're there to ensure that things are done safely so it's only fair that we be judged on how well we do our jobs.

A percentage of everyone's bonus should be linked to safety performance to help reinforce the importance of working safely.

Ties into company and worker mentality, can effect bottom line.

If they are responsible for Safety then a portion of their performance should be based on the safety record.

How effective you are.

A good safety leader knows how to influence all aspects of an organization.

We should be setting the example and truly being leaders.

By keeping the number of injuries and OSHA citations low, you are directly helping the company/org save money and be productive.

Yes if the employer is safety concise.

Safety pro's should be able to effectively develop and implement a robust safety program with leading indicators that should have a positive impact on specific safety targets for their organization within a 3 to 4 year period. Good pay for Good Performance.

Accountability as needed

What gets measured, gets done. Should be part of the bonus, but not all

If the employer's safety performance depends on one's direct duties and responsibilities, I consider this an aspect of an annual performance appraisal, which has a direct bearing on bonuses.

Most employees (including CEOs) have some form of performance metric, so why not safety? The key is to make the goals SMART.

As long as it is in ALL managers bonus plan - regardless of job title.

Yes, to incentivize the safety person. However it depends on other factors too, such as who is recording the injuries. That situation could be a conflict of interest for the safety pro.

Managers, supervisors and safety professionals should be held accountable for not meeting realistic goals set by management.

If it's simply based on a DART or OSHA rate, then no - it's not fair. But if it's based on a holistic approach, then it's fair - measuring proactive and reactive performance metrics.

It is a measure of our effectivenes and culture.

Another force to drive you to keep it fresh and your culture growing.

Outstanding results should be rewarded over and above the standard pay

It will show the information you are passing is getting through

Our company promotes a team mentality. When the team does well we all do well when the team fails we all fail.

Perhaps not immediately upon hire, but the role of the safety professional is to improve safety performance over time. If we are unable to achieve that, then we are not being effective. Educating management and improving the safety culture is also a part of our job.

No. The safety pro's does not directly impact safety, like the supervisors.

As long as performance is measured with leading indicators, not injury rates.

As long as the organization supports "SAFETY" and recognizes it's importance to the operational goals and overall health of the business.

Safety has to be more than talk, businesses need to see Safety as a critical part of the day-to-day operations.

If safety is an integrated part of the business, all raises and bonuses should be tied to performance

Within reason. Safety professionals have the ability to manage leading indicators and those are the critical aspects of safety systems. To hold a safety manager accountable for lagging indicators is not necessarily totally fair, but should be a portion to reflect the preventative work.

Yes, all management should have their raises/bonuses with some dependence on safety performance, but it should be based on performance for leading indicators and not lagging indicators. This ensures that management is being proactive and does not put undue pressure on management to underreport incidents.

As long as the company complies with what the safety manager is putting in place for policy, then the safety manager should see a bonus or raise when things get better.

It is our job, but we only have limited control on the outcome

Safety professionals directly affect management's committment to safety. If they can't sell safety and make a difference in safety they need to move on.

Safety is based on everyone's performance.

An effective safety program is correlated to an effective safety managment program.

IN part we are supposed to make sure the subs are working safe and following job site rules.

Its Very Satisfying To See Our Number Of Accidents Go Down Especially If Saving Lives And Money Is Our Goal,And I Love doing It.

We safety pro's are responsible and accountable for safety.

Skin the game

I say yes, but I have a qualifier to that: It is fair, as long as other people also have responsibility for safety that is part of their raises/bonuses also. Everyone should have a responsibility for safety and everyone should be held accountable for it. However, if there are multiple major issues across a company, the safety professional should be held more accountable.

This is a excellent way to demonstrate the organizations's commitment to the safety professional and their contributions to improving the company's safety performances.

If it's leading indicators

Difficult question. On one hand, if a safety pro's recommendations are implemented by top management and result in significant loss cost reductions to the organization, the safety pro should recognized and rewarded for that. Conversely, if top management ignores recommendations and the organization suffers, the safety pro should not be penalized.

Only if it is something they have direct control to manage.

so goals are set and met

Yes as I feel to a certain point if you sit idle and not actively manage your safety programs then the risk and safety performance will reflect that behavior to a certain percentage.

Safety is a resource to the company and only a small percentage of a safety pro's bonus should be based on safety performance. Operation needs to take responsibility and accountability for safety. Their bonus should have more of a safety weight

A safety program is driven by management and the safety manager

Fair yes, it's a bonus. I don't think it's rights but it's not a matter of fairness.

Safety Professionals should benefit for creating a safe business culture.

Your bonus should be, It helps you work with your employee to get them to buy into safety

If they have management support and can reduce incident numbers and improve the safety culture.

The impact each of us have should raise awareness and change cultures

all raises should be based on performance

As a safety professional my job is to proactively encourage a consistently improving safety culture. If my work does not improve the safety culture then lagging indicators will reflect this.

It should be based on pro-active safety activities. Not necessarily financials or OSHA recordables.

Bonus only. Can be rewarded for performance over and above what is expected.

What is the point of a review or goals if there is no monitory award? Also I recd my BA last year so my increase was due to that. Normal it is 3%

You are hired as a professional to promote safety awareness and instill a safety culture within an organization and, if you are not successful by based on safety metrics, it would be fair not to be compensated for what the company expected you to do.

I feel it is fair to base a bonus on the safety performance. I do not feel it is fair to base pay off of safety performance. Safety is the responsibility of everyone in the company. If pay is going to be based off of safety than all employees pay should be based off of safety performance.

It assist in identifying effective an ineffective approaches to reducing the likelihood of employees experiencing an injury/illness that is work-related.

Just as any other position, performance should be the biggest consideration for a bonus.

If you see improvements you should be rewarded.

It's a measurement just like other measures in organization such as quality and productivity.

Due diligence and constantly changing methods are required to keep employees active in the safety culture. This takes talented individuals who can keep safety topics relevant and not just churn up the same old material

Might discourage employees from reporting injuries

Yes, but only if management is willing to provide the resources to meet the company goals.

Depending on Performance Standards; Area of Responsibility; and Ability to Institute Corrective Actions to Correct Unsafe Conditions or Controls

My targets are part of the overall company tarfets

Results are why we're hired. Using a single metric to evaluate performance is also a mistake, but performance (combination of rates and other specific leading indicators of Safety performance should be considered in providing incentives for Safety pros).

As long as it is a company wide bonus that based on numerous principals such as near miss reporting, hazard correction, and NOT focusing simply on recordable/TL rates.

It allows the sfty pro to set goals for the organization to expand their sfty culture and eliminate incidents.

Bonus' should reflect an employees performance and the Safety Director is no differnt

Yes in part. We should be accountable for our area responsibility. We should control the controllable.

I believe a small portion of it is. I do have the overall responsibility for selecting the focus items throughout the year and training/educating the supervisors and new employees. However, we all know that much of the job is compliance with regulations (too much administrative work)

As the safety manager, my company's safety performance should impact my bonus and raise.

In industry especially the performance of the operations for safety should have the same incentives as quality, delivery, and sales. If these have incentives, then so should safety performance - all management, not just safety professional.

It indicates whether or not safety is doing their job

You are what you record says you are.

Reduction in accidents or events is cost savingfor any company and sharing the saving is an incentive work work hard at safety

Bonus-Yes Raise-No Sometimes things happen beyond our control, so a raise shouldn't be tied to that metric. A raise should be to maintain a cost of living. Bonuses, absolutely.

Yes, only when top management is committed to support the safety program.

injury prevention is not static and requires safety professionals to maintain constant vigilance upon the exposures that are anticipated as company dynamics change. As the dynamics change other professionals who are successful are rewarded. Safety Pros should also be rewarded.

Everyone is part of safety.

As long as the matrix are realistic to a point and relevant to improvement, then yes, its fair to have that as a clause.

Yes & No, In my role I audit, analysis and make recommendation and suggestions; if they don't implement the process and/or do the activities (make changes) injuries and accidents don’t decrease and I don’t get a bonus. If they implement and things still don’t change, I should be held accountable.

It motivates better performance for the next year.

Partially. Safety Professional influence the safety program, but leaders, at all levels, are the ones that make safety happen.

Proof is in the pudding per say. If claims are down, safety is working. If not, a safety rep is not needed.

because you have to craft policy and directives that can be easily followed and in the companies best interest. And when you have SKIN in the game, you are better in tune with what goes on. if too much SKIN you are likely to manufacture instead of motivate.

Only if the Safety Professional can control budgets; training, supplies, materials, etc.

His mentoring and instruction is directly correlated to safety performance

If our safety performance drops I feel as if I have let the team down.

Safety pros should have quantifiable metrics like anyone else. Several safety performance metrics can be established targeted to performance goals.

The performance can be measured and tracked for all parties to be held accountable. Which will show the effectiveness of the safety team to continuously improve.

Not by single performace measurement(s) but buy performing to the Safety Management System

It gives me an incentive to work hard towards keeping our employees safe knowing that as the company saves money I make money.

If the Safety Professional has direct oversight of employees and their actions, then yes. If the Professional is engaged in a consultative role, then no.

As long as the focus is on the leading or proactive metrics of performance, it is more than fair

due to the low mods with insurance carriers received by the success of a safety program.

It instills ownership and accountability which drives higher performance.

Yes thats your Job !

Sure if you have "set in stone" criteria.

Even though you don't have direct control of safety, you do have indirect control and influence through training and programs.

as a safety professional, proper training to organization personal helps keep everyone responsible for safety.

If you don't use incident rate or emr, its fine

We utilize leading indicators in the safety performance of the organization.

If I have the responsibility for safety and we are doing well it should reflect on me and if we are not doing well it should also reflect on me

Increased & Improved Training Increased & Improved Hazard Assessments Increased budget for safety needs Increased compliance and morale The above has decreased injuries and workmans comp. claims.

Holds safety pro accountable, leads to realistic safety goals for organization.

Safety performance is part of every managers bonus calculation.

The safety performance should be configured to reflect the effectiveness of the safety pro's effectiveness.

Compensation is based on performance weather it is stated or not. Other than teachers have you know anyone that gets an increase in compensation because they fail or do not perform well?

raises are based on performance objectives. my objectives happen to be based on safety metrics

Getting workers and supervisors to work safely requires teamwork; a large part of this ties directly to the safety pro who should be the primary resource person and guidance counselor. Lack of involvement by the safety pro will result in less teamwork which affects the overall safety of the company.

A good safety professional can pay his/her own salary from savings that the employer can realize from reducing accidents and injuries. Had I been paid in proportion to the money saved by my Agency I would have been much better off financially than I am now, although I do still get the satisfaction of knowing that we have reduced injury and suffering from work-related injuries. The other side of the coin is that if I had not had an effective safety program, they could have reduced my salary or showed me the door - which they certainly should have done if I had not done my job effectively.

accountability

The approach makes the program active, rather than passive. It also increases the probability that desireable change occurs.

I think there should be some metric for the tasks that you are responsible for, however, there should be exceptions for situations that are out of your control. Example: you know your employees should be wearing safety glasses but your management deems personal prescription glasses can be worn without any criteria or parameters associated with the personal glasses. Say an employee is wearing miniature glasses that do not provide adequate coverage and they have a serious injury. The responsible safety professional should not loose any type of compensation if they were over ruled by upper management. (this is hypothetical)

Because safety often determines the type and amount of work we are awarded and is a direct reflection of my job performance.

The safety perfromance of the organization is closely related to the effectiveness of the person(s) directing the safety program. If the program is successful and tied to bonus this is a great incentive to continue to strive for improvement.

Because we are directly involved with management and workers on a daily basis, we have a responsibility to influence safe work practices and behavior.

Everyones raise or bonus, not just the safety pro's should have an element of safety performance. We all have a part to play.

Safety performance is a vital part of any organization, without it most companies fail.

If the metrics are right, it wouldn't hurt to be compensated for a good safety year AND also not be rewarded if it was a tough safety year.

Only if the safety professional has direct control of employees.

measure of performance--evaluate cases, if any for performance of those involved to determine if it is due to poor safety program implementation

If it truly includes "safety" performance -- not "accident rate" performance.

It's fair because the same factors are applied to all levels of management positions, regardless of the functional discipline. Safety improvement goals are set and measured for achievement, and the resulting level of achievement is used as a factor to determine the percentage of the potential safety portion of the bonus earned.

Performance based pay.

it depends ???

A good safety professional can get measureable results, but without support from upper management, they can only be so effective.

Safety performance is a broad term, I support the use of leading indicators as a metric at my level, corporate. As long as perverse incentives are not used at the sites as these can discourage reporting.

All safety professionals should work with upstanding morals and ethics, but what makes an employer's safety performance successful is how well the programs and policies are implemented and how well employees buy-in. This reflects directly on how affective a safety professional is in the workplace.

While there is some 'chance' involved, the personal decisions made by employees is based partly upon the attitude and culture propagated by the safety professional. I think the raise or bonus should be influenced by overall company performance, but other factors should also be included in the assessment of quality of work. This could be things such as managers' buy-in, employee misconduct, risk of work, etc.

It provides the incentive for Company management to become involved in their safety numbers and performance.

My company issues annual metrics, education, and safety goals. These goals are also encompassed with production goals. The bonus applies to the Management Team as a whole if goals are achieved. The side of caution is we monitor that injuries do not go unreported in order to achieve bonuses.

If they have direct control and authority for safety only

Managers, supervisors, safety professionals, employees, and contractors all have responsibilities when it comes to safety performance. However, it's the safety professional's responsibility to ensure manager, supervisors, and employees are kept aware of rules and regulations and develop a safety culture/program and training program that eliminates or minimizes workplace hazards and accidents.

A Safety Professional is put in place to ensure a safe working environment for the employees of the company. If there is no incentive to drive improvement in the safety of the company's workplace, a company cannot expect to see much movement in the safety metrics.

Productivity = incentive

Everyone's bonus has a tie to safety performance, not just the SHE staff.

Direct correlation between the two.

Yes and no.Safety performance is directly related to them amount of time and effort put forth by the safety professional. Attitude of employees will affect their daily work.

Yes, partially. It should never be the whole basis, but it should be a part.

The better the safety program is the least accidents and incidents occur. That is better moral and insurance claims.

safety performance shows results of the success of the program - efforts should be rewarded and a raise/bonus is appropriate reward for success . . .

The incentive is company wide and includes all employees

Positive results

It depends on the level of management commitment to the safety performance in the company. If management is committed, yes, if not, no.

If executive support is provided, then it's fair. If not, a safety person's effect on safety performace is severly comprimised. In other words, if performance is a result of effort, I think it's appropriate.

ANy safety manager with multi-plant responsibilities and a staff has enough exposure to even out the single shift experience. They affect a broader range exposure to show the effectiveness of their program in the big picture.

Safety is always first, they say. therefore it only makes sense that all employees' bonus be based in part on safety performance.

But only to the extent other employee's salaries are based on it. Safety Pro's provide a service that must be utilized by the workforce to reap a benefit. One component of that provision should be how effective the delivery of the service is, but that can't always be determined based on corporate results.

But it isn't this way at our company

It keeps accountability

Because if there is not a measurable improvement in predetermined metrics then how can you honestly say that your presence is making a positive difference

because your programs and relationships with the worker have a direct impact on how safety is veiwed and ultimatley how it is acted on daily.

Yes, if safety performance is defined as meeting proactive safety metrics and not lagging metrics like lost workday accidents.

If the company is paying high workman's comp cost your safety program needs to be addressed.

The safety pro's job is to improve his organization's safety performance. Understandably this requires executive support, but with that support, the safety pro should realize his/her responsibility for shaping the company's safety performance.

Treating pay that way makes the assessment of performance less objective and more subjective. The fiscal side of the business would always be able to argue against any sort of performance-based compensation, making a safety pro's performance a moving target always just out of reach.

Although the safety department is not a profit center, it is not a cost center either. It helps maintain or reduce workers' comp, liability, property and keep productivity in the workplace by keep the employees safe

Part of our responsibility is to Create the culture that will result in saving injuries and dollars

But not on incident rates, which will, not may, lead to pressure to reporting differently than without using this metric.

That's the reason they hire safety professionals

It's is a test of the health of the safety program

How else can you measure your performance. We are responsible for tracking all accidents, near misses, etc. and developing procedures to ensure those do not happen again. As well as constantly analyzing all current safety protocol to ensure it is still effective.

a reflection on the whole company's repute tion

Even though the "Safety Pro" may not be in the field dealing with the day to day hazards they should always be looking for ways to eliminate, prevent or protect from hazards and people making poor decisions when it comes to the safety of themselves and others.

The safety professional is resposnible for identifying trends and odifying the program to reduce/eliminate actions causing negative trends

As a safety professional, it is important to walk the talk and lead by example.

All management performance evaluations include safety performance, not just safety staff.

Shows results

Only to the extent that the areas calculated the safety pro has direct affect upon.

Not necessarily the raise, bur bonus, maybe; if done correctly. It is not a set formula, for us. Every employee in the company has a stake in the Safety Performance, so everyone has a small portion related to safety.

This would be fair if the safety performance of the company was affected by lack of compliance was on behalf of the safety representative and not ensuring programs are within acceptable ranges. If it is because of operational resistance - that is a separate issue - as long as it is established that the safety representative has made efforts to bring the programs in to compliance.

One function of a safety department is to monitor the employer's safety performance. This is done to make management aware of developing trends in the organization's safety performance in order to work proactively to maintain a safe work environment. If this is done poorly, the organization's safety performance will reflect this, indicating that the safety department is performing poorly.

Safety performance tied to pay or bonuses is acceptable as long as it is behavior based; not tied to the number of reported injuries or reported near misses. One method of doing this is to have performance evaluations, for both employees and management, with behavior based safety aspects.

It is an incentive to continually strive to do better.

yes its fair if not based on lagging indicaters

How well you do your job is reflected in the savings of dollars to the company in worker comp cost, insurance cost, lost work hour cost, reduction in down time due to mishaps and less exposure to law suites. The better your performance ie. reduction of mishaps and maintaining safety goals the better the bonus.

Safety professionals are employed to reduce injuries. If they are not effecting the number and severity of injuries how effective are they? Given they are provided the tools and authority to make changes.

This is a Yes and No. Yes - Because this gives more for the Safety Manager to work towards on employee engagement and Safety buy-in. The more safety buy-in and employee engagemnet there is, the bettter safety culture you have. No- Because where everyones goal is Zero you still have your people that are working the workers comp. claims system. This takes that safety out of the managers hands with false claims or pre planed accidents that reflects upon the managers preformance. These could be worked out with the culture change however you still have workers that work the system for payout.

It depends on there roll.

Safety is a measureable metric. Any bonuses that are not tied to all 3 metrics: Safety, Quality and Performance, are a 2 legged stool.

The bonus only, not salary should be based on the company safety performance. ONLY if ALL safety issues are being reported and addressed in a timely fashion for the well being of the employees and the employer.

When injuries are down low or down to zero, the insurance cost, project delay costs go down also, increasing the bottom line for the company. Bonusus or raises are a reward for improving the safety culture in the workplace.

All the manager's have safety performance as one of their metrics, so I should, as well. I don't believe it should be only thing it is based on.

Because you are the safety leader for your organization. If you are not coaching, teaching, showing, explaining, watching, training you can not change people's behavior or attitude.

The purpose of our job is to improve safety performance. Though I may not have a large impact on safety performance, I do have some.

cost avoidance

Accountability!

A measure of the Safety Professional's effectiveness compared to prior years.

Management, Supervisions responsible and accoutable to implement and lead the program with the guidance of the HSE Professionals.

If there is a bonus, safety performance must certainly be a factor; perhaps not the sole factor.

No safety concerns means cost savings to the company.

If I can save the company money by managing claims and reducing injuries, there should be a way to compensate for saving money.

However, it should be part of everyone's performance evaluation, including compensation determination, within the company. Everyone has some responsibility for safety in the organization whether it is implementing, enforcing, or following the policy and procedures.

It's fair as long as the performance standards are leading indicators, and the safety pro has some control over the implementation of those standards.

Should be lagging AND leading indicators.

Safety performance impacts all employees bonuses and merits

It should have something to do with it as our main job is measured by keeping employees safe. With managements support, our job is to drive down injuries and costs related to them. Project Managers, Estimators, etc. have an income based upon weather or not they do their jobs. If we aren't properly doing our job, then our pay should reflect that.

The overall safety performance does have controllable in it as far as program and process implementation, training, communication, culture reinforcement, management and leadership of safety in the organization. The whole picture needs to be looked at and not just the final numbers because there are other influences that the safety professional does not control as a staff function that line management does control that greatly impacts results and culture.

Pay for performance

It is the job of the field safety professionals working under the director to not only observe but instill safe working skills to those in the field; if that does not happen, then I have not done my job.

Salary and bonus should be based upon results

Remember its a bonus and at the end of the day a safety pro is driving to improve the company's safety performance.

Other GMs do not want to terminate unsafe employees who have had training and still do unsafe behaviors until they do something really bad. It's frustrating to have a Union that protects unsafe behavior by employees and a GM who excuses it.

For a safety professionals, their job is to motivate employees to manage safety for themselves and those around them. Therefore some of a safety pro's raise/bonus makes sense to be based on safety performance as that is their job focus.

Although many safety issues are beyond the control of the safety manager, the entire purpose of having a safety professional on staff is to improve safety performance. It is just common sense that remuneration be tied in some way to results - and that the safety professional be continually focused on improvement through training and enforcement. It is equally important that the safety professional have the support of top management, both verbally and financially.

Yes, to the extent of organizational influence of the employee (e.g. department, site, region, company).

I say this with reservation, because its not a science, you can be doing everything right and still people make mistakes and get hurt anyway.

As long as it is based on the leading indicators (things we do to keep from having losses) and not the lagging (the measurements after loss has occurred like OSHA recordable rates), I have no problem with it.

Keeping a low EMR rate helps our firm to win future work. High EMR = no work

Its fair as long as everyone's bonus or raise is equally influenced by the organization's safety performance. The safety pro is a member of the management team and should be equally accountable for the organizations performance.

My previous employer had safety as a metric for all management and safety personnel bonuses. This makes the safety of your employees financially important to the professional and shows the employees that upper management place their safety to the bottom line.

Overall company safety performance is what a safety professional is paid to manage and improve, in line with the organization's overall goals. It is a key factor, but should not be the prime determinant as there are more overwhelming goals or culture present over which the Safety Pro has no control.

At our company - all employees' pay / bonus is based on safety performance

I would expect at least a small portion of the bonus (about 25%) to be reflective of the safety performance of a facility.

Safety is a management topic for all employees, there "0" incidents shows the communication network for employees by the safety program.

We impact their safety culture and mindset, which also is impacted by the support of management.

It is OK for a small portion to be based on safety performance. It must be tied to things that can be controlled by the person and not to incident rates alone.

If your company are having outstanding successes with it's safety program, the responsible person should be compensated accordingly.

Because by reducing injury and illness at work the first benefits that the company will see is reduced insurance premiums and increased productivity which translates to an increase to the bottom dollar. It also reduces the likelihood of an OSHA inspection and if there is an inspection the possibility of a large fine are lowered substantially by showing an active safety program in place, which also protect a company's bottom dollar.

If it helps to keep workers comp dollars down then I belive that is fair.

results are needed for success

even though I agree with this there are so many factors that influence the safety performance. Each factor should be included to determine the raise or bonuses.

Safety is a performance factor for all employees and they are assessed on that performance, as such it is fair that safety pro's are measured and rewarded on the outcome of the programs and systems they develop and implement. While not 100%, a portion should definitively be tied to the company's safety performance.

If a Safety Professional leads, directs or administers EH&S programs, then the individual is accountable for the performance of the program and can be incentivized to a certain extent irrespective of budgets, upper management support, culture, etc.

Not only safety professionals but employee bonus's should be partially based on safety performance to ensure accountability. With regard to raises, circumstances within the organization and its culture should determine if raises are safety performance based.

Absolutely. Safety professional must habve a stake in overall results of the company. However, there needs to be a balance between activities and results.

too easy to say its unfair.....employer paying lots of money for me to impact safety with my peers.

You directly enfluence this by training and site visits. You can help improve the program. If you get buy-in from the operations, things will improve.

In my opinion part of the professionals performance review should to include an assessment of job performance related to the organizations continuous improvement in safety metrics other than the typical lagging indicators such as injury rates.

Just like operations employees that receive bonuses off their production, my department should receive them for our accomplishments. Employers don't look at that. I think they should.

yes as long as it is based on leading indicators not trailing indicators like injury rates.

Accountability

We are the leader in this area and if our company does not receive the proper leadership then the leader should be accountable.

If allowed to manage program, there is relationship of skills and organization performance.

Safety pro must establish the framework for the process, develop workings of the process and the metrics, and be able to influence and guide the organization to adhere to the process.

The employer's safety performance depends on a well run program by an EH&S professional.

All employee reviews includes safety performance. We should be no different.

Compensation should be based upon performance. Look at public education as an example of what you get when performance isn't tied to compensation.

The overall performance of the company should be measured. Safety is a component.

If the metrics include a safty componant.

Only as a part of the review proccess. Other factors such as over all company performance. Meeting individule performance goals. etc.

Its a great measuring tool, however it is understandable that accidents/incidents happen that are out of your control.

It is if top management willingly supports the efforts of the safety professional and can relate it to the actual performance. Top Management MUST however support the SP at all levels

If a safety professional can not influence outcomes, they are not providing value to their organization.

Your direct guidance and influence in keeping focus on safety through training, coaching and follow-up. You must build your safety culture at all levels. To achieve safety excellence a balance of safety - quality and efficiency must be established. You can not have tunnel vision. The safety pro's can make a difference trough implementing a plethora of measureable safety techniques. It all boils down to results and that is what your raise is based on.

In reality, safety performance is more than just a statistic. So, if you're doing really well with the numbers, great; but if the numbers slide and you'll really accomplishing so many other things like extensive training and putting in long hours then the normal salary isn't fair to reflect the long term changes that you are accomplishing. In heavy Construction, there will be material handling injuries from repetitive lifting etc. and sometimes one is bad and can even be as absurd as Dr. error or falling down in the shower in Huber before a healing plateau is reached. I am a CSP and Professional Engineer (PE... you don't ask that later but should).

My opinion, I don't think it should be tied. Although executives receive bonuses for performance the average worker isn't subject to that, and it takes a team effort to effect a safety culture. Also, acts of God can impact your staff. Doing everything right doesn't guarantee a perfect outcome as evidenced by motorcycle fatalities. I have lost friends with proper gear, defensive driving techniques, and advanced rider training who were killed because they 'weren't seen." Applying everything correctly didn't save them. Tying safety to performance will always be subjective to management because if we are doing well why do we need to focus resources on safety? It is a calling to live the safety shepherd lifestyle, we do it because we care.

It's a incentive to work safely.

Depends how easy it is to draw a direct line from incidents to the management of safety. If it is quantifiable, then good safety should be rewarded and lack thereof should have checks & balances.

if the employer supports the safety personel and the leadership as a hole

Setting and promoting safety policy, assessing risk and evaluating safety performance are all tasks that a safety leader must accomplish. The effectiveness of those activities, and the appropriate elevation of issues that must be resolved by senior leadership are reasonable measures of individual performance as a safety professional.

But not totally on accidents , injuries and workman comp claims. Even though most injuries are preventable changing a persons behavior is not always accomplished without terminating an employee for their non compliant safety behavior. Many Union environments hinder discipline to that fact.

Bonus- I could see being related to safety performance. I don't think you should be punished for a bad record but rewarded appropriately for good work in controlling risk. Raises should always be based on job performance, not safety performance.

it is great way to measure effectiveness

Safety is one of the most important directives a company should have. The more accidents there are, the less effective you are. You should be held responsible for the safety of the facility, unless the company does not follow the changes necessary to lower accidents.

Fewer injuries save dollars through lower labor loss that would necessitate overtime, and also decrease the dollars spent on medical care and rehab.

Our profession does impact the policies and actions that are taken to lower risk in our companies. We shouldn't be held solely accountable as we are not the enforcers but we are a player.

Safety is the number 1 value and it is everyone's obligation to protect their most valuable asset--the worker on the floor.

safety pro's help set the climate and drive engagement.

What other measurement going to use?

There should be results if programs are working.

Safety is more than a moral obligation or value. It is a business objective where results are measured. As a safety pro, I cannot control all events or people; however, I have the power to influence decisions at all levels of the organization and make safety a key factor in the decision process.

quid pro quo

Yes, But there has to be guidelines or goals in place. Not just 0 tolerance.

It is a direct indication of the impact that the safety professional has on his or her organization.

Because the safety performance rating is the end result if our work!

should be based on pro active metrics, such as employees involved in committees, number of meetings, inspections and JSAs

As a team, if the overall incidents and injuries have declined, then it shows the effectiveness a safety team is having.

I feel that as long as the numbers are looked at reasonably the criteria should be used. If the goals are driven out of your potential range it is wrong.

We want to walk the walk and talk the talk and because of that we must lead. To lead one must be involved in safety. If we just tell them to be safe and do not follow up or look to the side we are not doing our jobs we allow unsafe acts.

Safety is a performance based profession, measured by keeping workers free from injury or death, keeping workers compensation rates low, and recognizing and eliminating hazards from the workplace. The better a safety professional performs his/her job, the safer their employees will be.

Only if the safety pro has been given the authority to make significant safety related changes to the plant and behavioral culture without approval from management. Must have management blessings to be a successful safety pro.

You have to earn your worth...It is no different than an operations person having to answer for their production, a Safety person has to answer for what they are doing to provide Safety to the company.

It would depend on how one defines safety performance - If lagging indicators are used I would say not fair but leading indicators would be fair to base a raise or bonus on.

only if the safety pro is directly responsible for the implementation of safety policy and procedures. / if he is completely reliant on individual managers to carry out the policies their lack of follow through should not tie to his $$

Good behavior is rewarded Bad behavior is punished

It establishes a measurement of performance. Preventing injuries is hard work. Convincing upper levels of an organization that safety performance is important to the bottom line is also hard work. I just think too many safety pros these days do not want to put their energy into injury prevention anymore.

An incentive for employees to work safely and stay aware of job hazards.

Merit increase is based on pay for performance. the safety metrics should be one part of the determination

If the safety specialist is not doing what his is hired to do, the front line employees may not know what there performance has to the bottom line to the company.

I be rich if we did

It ties directly into how effective the system your running is within the organization.

The huge monies saved as a result of Safety training, programs and enforcement system l present to the city of jacksonville, FL. I am not reconised, by any reconition of finanicl reward at all.

As safety professionals, we are committed to training and ensuring our people know what to do and when to do it. We also have to make sure they know why they're doing something. If there is an incident, there is a failure in the system. It is our duty to ensure system failures do not occur.

I feel that it acts as a scorecard for how I am doing.

It is their job just like say a claims adjuster job is to clear out claims or a line workers job is to get product into the field and those persons get bonuses. If there is a safe work place then the safety pro is doing their job bonus earned.

If the company is saving large amounts of money with insurance and productivity, I believe bonuses should be given to all employees.

Direct measure of how well you are doing your job.

At my company, everyone's raise or bonus if based partially on the safety performane.

directly responsible for implementing safety programs which should aid in reducing incidents and injuries which reduce costs

I think it should be a factor. A percentage should be safety and company preformance based.

It depends on their position and role at the location.

To a certain extent, it measures your success as a Safety Director.

Only if the performance is measure by leading indicators, no trailing indicators.

To a point, if the safety manager is doing his/her job, and is supported by managment, injury rates should be low.

sets priority as #1

Performance results are objective evidence that the safety pro is doing their job an doing it well, because nobody likes change when it comes to safety.

We are the SME's to give guidance to the leaders. We are also proactive managers who should intervene just as we expect everyone to be responsible for safety, so that makes us responsible too. That being said the metrics being used are not always the best to see success.

It is the bottom line of our industry. If you believe that accidents are preventable then your actions and activities will influence the performance. Everyone should be accountable for the safety performance of an operation, especially those leading the effort.

We use leading indicators not lagging (i.e. injuries)

But it depends on how you measure safety performance.

It is, but I'm glad mine is based on company performance, not safety performance.

While the safety performance of the company can be tied directly to solid policy development, training and communicating expectations, enforcement and implementation in the field (or factory floor) is often out of the hands of the safety director or manager. A mix of performance and strategic plan implementation is the best compromise.

This depends on how you measure safety performance. If the sole measure is injury rate, then the answer is no, But it is the reposibility of the safety professional to influence the organization to implement and promote their safety management system , establish meaningful performance measures and key performance indicators, and demonstrate sustainable improvement. Safety professionals should be accountable for both the sucess and the failure of the organizations safety mangement system, and compensation should reflect that.

A successful safety program will produce observable, measurable results. That's my aim and my pay and bonus should be dependent on those measures.

The bonus was cross the board. All employees were affected by it.

With the proper management commitment a well organized and managed program will reduce the overall cost of safety, health and workers compensation. This should be reflected in a compensation plan for the those managing the process.

Safety performance is a reflection on how effective you as a Safety Manager do your job.

My job is to positively influence the culture toward safe operations

hough it should be based on comprehensive performance rather than simply lagging indicators such as injury statistics

It ensures that the safety professionals focus on zero incidents as per the Company's objective. Additionally, it effects the bottom line of the Company's cost on worker's compenstion costs.

Indicator of how we are conveying our message and connecting with our employees

From a Global Perspective TIR is a good indicator, i don't agree with TIR from a plant level, these should be more proactive measures.

If it is determined by leading AND lagging indicators it would seem to be a logical way to determine a bonus in a for profit organization.

that is our job

Though it should be based on comprehensive performance including leading indicators, not simply lagging indicators such as injury statistics

To me, there has to consequences if goals and objectives are not met. If nothing is tied to the performance it does not give one incentive to improve and get better in the future.

Helps to facilitate performance & helps drive teamwork between sites and locations

If performance is poor there is likely the absence of a sustainable safety program which is created or directed by the safety professional.

The cost for accidents/incidents are directly related to the fiscal performance of the company.

Responsible for developing effective policies, procedures, programs

Safety professional should be held accountable for results, not just driving activities.

All employees at my organization have safety performance as a function of their compensation

Responsible to lead, advise and direct safety programs even though the line management owns implementation of them.

That is basically the safety pro's job, protecting employees and help creating the culture that allows safety to be a top priority. If he accomplishes this, he should be compensated, likewise, if safety performance is lacking, his salary should reflect that also.

As long as the all managers have an equal portion of thier individual compensation plan dedicated to the safety performance of their individual groups and the overall company performances.

Only if safety performance is rated on anyone else's performance where there is a defined safety role or responsibility. Otherwise, if safety unit is the only one measured on safety performance, the implication is that safety is the not a responsibility of the organization as a whole.

helps to retain qualified personnel

Position exists to improve safety performance - salary increases should be linked to performance

Aspects that can be directly controlled by day-to-day work is appropriate (ex: project completion, training performed)

Accountability

Only if the other management is based the same. The employee's direct managers have a bigger effect on the safety performance.

Unless Mgt is not giving the Safety Mgr full support (but in such case, it's time to leave) But if you have full support, failure of the Safety program is partially on you just as a Departmental failure for Q/A, Safety or Productivity is "on" the Mgr of that Dept.

base it on the outcome overall of the safety program

If you improve or maintain it is a plus but as long as you do all the things expected that can be measured it is acceptable

I think it shows how effective you are if the employees follow the proper procedures and stay safe.

Although there also must be top management commitment and support at all levels, the Safety professional must provide the leadership of developing safety performance initiatives.

The reason for the "Safety pro's" position is to ensure the business environment is a safe place to work. This is accomplished through training, coaching, having right tools (PPE etc), consistently monitoring/auditing for improvement and understanding & following all Local, State & Federal regulations.

If you don't influence performance then you are not good at your job...

Safety pros have the power to positively influence workers to do their jobs safely.

The employer receives a bonus based on the safety performance and that should result in a bonus for the employee(s) that drive the earning of that bonus.

Safety Pros have direct influence in the safety strategy and programs

Everybody should be accountable to the bottom line performance. Bonus should be based on leading and lagging indicators + leadership / behavioral factors.

we can't grouse about executives being over compensated rather than working under a pay-for-performance paradigm unless we're similarly held accountable.

Safety is a team effort, and it could be argued that a less than desirable safety record is due to line managers failing to buy in, but it also could in part be that the safety manager failed to properly motivate or support line management. Hard to argue a raise/bonus to a safety manager when performance is down. Does a sales manager get a raise/bonus when sales are down?

The bonus should be based not only on safety but how the profitability of company. If the safety staff is engaged and improves safety performance and culture and the bottom line then they should be rewarded for those accomplishments.

should be through out management as well - but in my case as a consulting firm it does not make sense

It is the end result.

Safety performance is a wide category, not just TIR. Everyone is paid or given bonuses based on performance.

It is a time consuming thankless job.

Up to the safety person to have a finger on the pulse of safety. If you're not proactive, injury rates will go up.

needs to be a component not sole measure. need to be based on engagement and support of programs

Safety department always exceeds expectations. :-)

That is what your there to do.

Raises are often based on how much money an employee makes the company, but it is the safety manager who can help save the company money. Less injuries and insurance claims mean more money for employers, and the safety manager should be rewarded for that, it is hard work.

If the safety person is doing their job by identifying safety hazards, fixing them, training employees on how to work safe and the company safety record numbers are good - then he / she needs to receive a raise or bonus.

Reductin of workers comp claims saves money for the company

That is your job description, if you have a poor safety performance based on poor policy/procedures it falls back on you.

if it is part of the employment agreement

Yes but tight and fair controls needed. Results matter. Consider including some leading measures.

We provide a much needed service to the company. If the company's safety record or practices are not above reproach we have failed our employer. We must be cognizant of new technology, OSHA regulation changes, and agents of change for the employees work methods and safety. We have to be "looking" at everything all the time and improving processes all the time.

Bonuses should depend on many factors and would need to have a multiplier for each so that 1 bad number wouldn't cause you to loose the bonus. It should be pay for performance and your results would need to tie into the overall bonus structure. It would also depend on your job function and overall role within the business.

The safety pro has a direct affect on what the safety program includes. However, the safety pro doesn't always have an influence on the day to day operations or hao an individual employee may handle an unexpected situation.

It help promote good safety practices.

Have to know that the safety culture one promotes is working and good results prove it.

I should be able to create/develop strategies that effectively creates a safer work environment.

I hate this question. It isn't fair to base raises or bonuses an employer's safety performance as there are many external factors that can affect said performance. But at the same time, yes, it's very fair to do so. Without the incentive, many upper management would not follow safety guidelines. But since it directly impacts their wallets, then they suddenly care.

I believe it is at the executive level. its my role to analyze current conditions and create a road map of success for the organization. It is then senior operations responsibility to execute the plan. I would say no for safety professionals below the executive level as they are most closely associated with assisting operations management with plan execution.

Bonus is a new addition to salary in 2013. Most of the determining amout factors are out of my control. Safety record is a 1 out of 5 factors.

We are responsible for training the employees to work SAFE!

Directly tied to the bottom-line!

All line managers should be held accountable for key business performance metrics

If the correct indicators are used, it can reward employees for their success - we have a very mature safety culture and all incidents are reported (even the little things) so we do not find it to be a deterrent.

Results are directly affected by the performance of the Safety Program.

Absolutely! If you are responsible for the safety and welfare of your employees, a factor of your perfomance should be based on safety performance.

Every employee should have a performance review to include safety performance as a basis for a raise or bonus.

Because we lead by example.

It is a measure of how we influence behavior.

If we are allowed to do our job and if we are doing our job, we will have a positive impact and should be compensated as such

But only a portion - safety pro should be accountable for some of the safety performance but line organization has a bigger role and should also be held accountable.

There are many factors, but safety performance should be a consideration

The company's positive safety performance contributes to the success of the company.

We are suppose to be motivators as well and we need to be spending time on the floor engaging all the people. The safety performance will reflect how good a job we are doing.

Performance directly relates to how safety is communicated and implemented by the sight coordinator

The safety pro is the force in the facility to keep employees safe and give them guidance to stay safe.

Everyone's bonus should be tied to the company's safety performance.

thats what their job is

I am not successful unless they are successful.

Measured to my safety goals one of which is the plants safety performance.

Only if it is measured with leading indicators and proactive step are built into the safety process

Incentive to perform at an even higher expectation

The safety pro is the manager or coach. Once the players have been provided with knowledge and skills to perform in a safe manner and reasonably safe equipment to work with, it up to them to execute the safety game plan. One has influence, but limited control on the outcome.

Creates incentives not to report or hide accidents.

It is not fa ir when based only off of severity. Your company might be safe and have very few accidents and one back or joint injury could mean no raise. The previous year you might have had 10 more accidents but the dollars were low and you get a raise.

Have no direct supervision of construction people nor hiring or firing of construction people. Therefore a safety's person awareness and/or persistence impacts the safety culture.

It will encourage hiding occurrences, overtly or subconciously

Company number only criteria related to salary and or bonus of the safety lead does not reflect on the knowledge, experience or overall performance of the safety led. There are some parts of the numbers only that are out of the control of the safety lead that are in control of other departments. Other department leads incentives are not directly tied to match the safety leads incentives.

Maybe. Should be dependent on position abd responsibility and authority

Possible undue influence. A manager or supervisor whose employees work in shipping, production, maintenance, etc should have a bonus based on their employees safety performance.

Then it would be dependent upon defeating human nature.

It is operations responsibility for the safety of their workers, not the safety professional providing guidance. There is so much out of the control of the safety professional it would not be fair to base a raise or bonus on the employer's safety performance...although, it may depend on how you define "safety performance."

Safety pro is more responsible for system performance and not workforce performance. That is a leadership function. Partial consideration is appropriate.

I think the most important part of creating a strong safety culture is having trust, open communication, and integrity. Just as employee incentives for a lack of injuries are discouraged by OSHA because they encourage underreporting, basing a safety pro's compensation on the company's safety performance would inevitably lead to some people sweeping potential injuries under the rug, fudging the numbers, or other undesirable outcomes.

You can take all of the precautions, perform all of the training, and involve as many employees as you can, but there is still going to be those who get hurt.

I can not account for all deparments function concerning safety

Contract employees or short time employees have no buy in during the short time that they are here, and they are the most likely to get injured. We directly manage them, so we take the recordables.

Safety professionals are only one player involved in a safe workplace. Everyone has a role.

When it comes to safety, the individual should be held accountable for their actions in relationship to accidents, as an example. Most employers have continuing education and safety meetings teaching all staff members best approach to safety regarding their job positions. If my employer was lax in safety, I would do what I could to make it better or find another job.

Safety is ever present challenge. Because one person makes a mistake should not reflect solely on the abilities or program that person is managing.

They have to be in a position to control the safety elements, or personnel, within the scope of the company's safety performance.

Because Safety is everyone's responsibility; it shouldn't be 100% reliant on the Safety Professional; everyone needs to do their part to make the program work effectively.

If that is the case, then all raises should be based upon it.

Safety performance is too closely tied to leadership engagement. It is outside of the safety professional's control.

There is always a human factor that would affect the performance and that might lead to unfair incentive or disciplinary programs.

All the training in the world does not fix stupid

It is based on the wrong metrics, based on outputs and not inputs, also needs to be based on what

Circumstances arise that are out of your control

This is one of those yes and no answers for me - If the companies leadership promotes safety and there are policies and procedures and enforcement happening than yes I believe this would be fair. However, that is a lot of ifs. Also, safety is a mindset, so it takes behavioral changes on each individual working at the company to achieve stellar safety performance and since we cannot force "the horse to drink" raises or bonus's should not be based on the employer's safety performance.

Our performance ratings are not based on safety performance it is based on individual performance.

I don't have total control over day-to-day production methods that need to be corrected in order to achieve employee safety. It would be unfair to hold me completely or financially accountable when others are not held to the same safety performance standard.

Another factors such as financial situation, upper manangements decision, goals and direction also influence how a safety program functions.

Safety costs should be a larger factor of the budget and not depend upon production for reward.

Many factors that out of the safety's pro's control.

Should be based on improvements made or program implementation milestones

Too many factors out of safety's control

Typically we are only in control of certain factors regarding safety performance. Such as policies, procedures, regulatory requirements, etc. We can influence behavior, but other managers have a direct impact on results such as encouraging or discouraging safe behaviors in their department.

Because employees at time know however don't follow rules/training

As much as we try we can't control everyone's actions.

Employer's performance is a direct result of upper and mid-managements ownership of safety. it is also a reflection of the overall moral and culture that exists with all employees. EHS professionals can only influence so much in this realm and must depend on production and profit driven departments to drive it home each day.

We can't control people, just try to motavate them to do the right thing.

It should be on your own person safety performance.

Giving proper training it is the employee doing the work to do the proper planning. I cannot be over every persons shoulder making sure they plan their job properly.

Because its a team effort.

A Safety Pro builds the programs and processes, but the responsibility for executing and following them usually rests with management.

Line management is responsible for safety.

Too much out of your control

There are too many variables that come into play in safety...the greatest is people...if a human is involved, there is an opportunity for something to happen

If you want to hold us accountable, give us resources, information, boundaries, and authority. Can't control players and abusers.

I beleive you can lead all employees to safe processes and procedures and accidents will still happen. Working to improve safety and being able to show your progress could be tied to your raise or bonus.

Without total control over safety it is hard to effect change.

Safety Pro's only have so much actual control over the end result of injuries. I do feel Safety Pros have some influence on how safety programs are implemented but line supervision has an equal or even greater impact on the end result. It is a balance though. You can't have great success if your implementation is great but the program or training is not up to par. Also, if your management commitment is low, your safety department or "Safety Pro" will not be as effective as they should be. Many factors contribute to safety performance.

If a company has a great Safety program of training etc. many safety pro's are not job site supervisors where safety enforcement is conducted? good question!!

We cannot control the decisons of others. Employees take risk which puts them into unsafe situations resulting in injuries, incidents or bad decisions.

Lagging indicators are only one part of the story. The prof may have done everything in his or her power to establish an effective program. Management has final responsibility for the program.

Safety Pro's can put processes in place and influence application and compliance to Federal Laws/Rules but incidents that occur comes down to the first line and upper management requiring the worker and shops to be compliant. Safety doesn't have the RAA to enforce.

That creates a disincentive to reporting accidents and near misses. The near misses are opportunities for improvement. Bonus should be activity based on continuous improvement.

It should be the responsibility of the area managers to insure Safety is being adhered to. It should be my responsibility to see all training and employee development gets completed.

The safety pro's can only implement policies and are only available for limited times each day. When you have to rely on everyone to engage and take responsibilty for their own actions.

Bonus should only be tied to things you can directly control

The safety performance of any organization is not solely reliant on the safety professional. Goals to improve the safety performance is a collaborative effort, shared by all leadership members.

While we put everything into place, all employees, including managers, supervisors and officers, ultimately are responsible for making it work.

Drives under reporting of incidents. Lot of pressure to manage cases, sometimes feel slimy at the hospital.

In a large company especially, the safety program rides on the backs of the front line supervisors. They are in control every day of how their employees follow through on the safety procedures. The front line supervisor can help his/her staff prevent accidents, or he/she can help them cause accidents by the attention they pay to safe ways to operate.

The Safety performance of any organization is a team effort that is driven by top management. Safety in many organizations has a role of consultation, advise, inform, review, and inspect with no authority to enforce or hold people accountable. Accountability for something in which you have no authority to enforce change seems only to be blame. It's fair to base a raise or bonus for an employee on their performance, provided they have the tools at their disposal to succeed.

Safety is everyone's responsibility! Maybe everyone's should but not JUST the Safety person

While this responsibility often falls on safety professionals, it is unrealistic to hold the safety professional accountable for every employee's actions. If a bonus is going to be tied to a company's safety performance, then it should be based on an array of safety related criteria, not just accident and injury data, which could be skewed by one incident.

Because the safety professional typically has NO enforcement authority now days and primarily can be considered a consultant that can strongly recommend but not make the upper level managers, supervisors, owners etc. do what is necessary for a safety professional to achieve success and what would equate to a bonus for that safety professional.

Failure to report

There are to many other factors

You can give the direction and try to establish proper behaviors but you can't 100% make anyone follow unless they want to.

As safety professionals we are the messenger and or trainer, we lead by example. The actions that the employee/employer make are their choices and should not reflect the EH&S department. We should not be held responsible for the negative impact of the actions of others when they conflict the message, the training or the example we demonstrate.

It is fair for a raise or bonus to be based on the employer's safety performance if that performance is measured correctly. However, performance is not measured correctly - it is based on the OSHA incident rate rather than connected to activities that are directly linked to safe performance.

Safety Performance of the company is not a good indication of the pro's impact on the safety of employees.

It depends on whether or not they have the authority to really influence performance. If they are in an advisor role then no.

Many factors out of your direct control

OSHA and Labor Law violation

Most safety professionals I talk to have enough real authority to get other Managers attention. They have to rely on persuasion

Employee's should be evaluated on their performance only. If their performance involves the behavior of others, they should gather and present the evidence of company improvement on their own prior to evaluation.

safety is about the employees, not the success of the safety professional.

A safety person can only advise management. Management must enforce requirements and drive improvements. I have no enforcement authority, and should not have. I believe a manager's performance bonus/raise should be tied to safety performance.

It should be at times depending on the nature of the safety inspection results.

there are too many things out of our control that can cause a negative impact. this also gives the wrong incentive for a safety professional to operate under which may cause irresponsible reporting to look good.

Some things are out of safetys control.

Safety performance is an indicator of culture coached and supported by the entire leadership team, not just the safety pro. Safety pro's raise or bonus should be based on much more than a trailing indicator.

Too easy to be dishonest about safety data.

Too many potentials for a handful of safety professionals to anticipate.

Too many different divisions and operations within our company for the amount of safety staff. Also, a very large area for us to have to cover.

It depends on how and what "performance" is. For a standard employee, safety performance is critical to keep themselves and the organization safe. If we measure safety professional performance by the same metrics it wouldn't be valid. However, if the safety professional sets organizational safety goals that are SMART goals that can be achieved, and does so accordingly, it should be included in the metrics for raise and bonus. The safety professional can and should drive the performance of safety in the organization but the outcome is driven by more factors than the what the safety professional can control. Perhaps a better approach would be to issue raise/bonus to all leadership / management etc. based on the employer's safety performance.

Without solid management participation, and supervisor's holding their groups accountable for their actions, or lack thereof, using the company's safety performance as a KPI for the safety professional is not a true indicator. Going the other way, if safety performance was exceptional, it can mean under reporting to get that bonus.

While it would be nice to have it tied in at my performance, I think you should stand on your overall record. I do way more than just safety and should be judged on my overall performances. Those employees whose safety performance record is low should be removed from that position. To force them to work harder at making sure safety happens means you have a poorly trained of insuficient person in place who is unable to rise to the occasion as needed. I am in the top three facilities of my division, and really have to bust my rear to keep up. To lose a bonus because I may not be able to keep up may not be my fault. I am not saying it is a bad ideal, I just would need to know exactly what criteria the bonus would be based on.

When calculating a raise or bonus management generally bases it off concrete measurable figures, similar to profit sharing amounts being based upon company performance (i.e. profit). So in regards to "Safety performance", that implies a bonus/raise based upon a concrete safety figure such as number of recordables, DART rate, DAFWII rate, etc. To tie monetary compensation to a lagging indicator like one of these is not a true measure of safety and can give an incentive to 'skew' the numbers. There are leading indicators that could be measured, but overall there are too many factors to consider that contribute to being a 'safe company'.

Initial efforts may result in a higher accident reporting

uninformed, non caring or non engaged managers that make hiring and purchasing decisions can derail the best safety program, despite the safety pro working themselves to the bone.

There are a variety of human factors involved that cannot be controlled by the safety professional.

The safety pro does all he/she can do to bring the appropriate controls to the workplace. It is up to the Senior Leadership Team to buy in and implement those controls to make the workplace a safer environment.

Things don't get reported to get a bigger bonus.

Unless employees also have an incentive, it would not be fair.

Raises and bonuses tied to safety performance tend to influence people to hide incidents or to creatively reduce their severity. This can lead to issues with under reporting on the OSHA logs.

It depend on what "safety performance" includes. If it is purely injury statistics, then the answer is no because Safety personnel are not solely responsible for the employee's safety record. Additionally, tying a bonus structure to a safety record places focus on injuries alone and would actually encourage false injury reporting. Successful safety programs cannot be solely judged on an injury record.

Now, if "safety performance" means that multiple tangible safety goals were set for the employer that the Safety Pro is managing, then I believe it is fair to base a raise or bonus on the results.

Sometimes the management is to blame for not making changes recommended by the safety professional or the management does not want to put money into safety issues.

I think there should be a "depends" button. If an EHS Professional is not perfroming their job, then yes, it should affect their increases. But on the other side of the coin, if the EHS professional is performing as expecting, and the company's safety record/performance is unsatisfactory then there are more factors then just EHS that can affect this. It is not fair to judge the company's safety/injury record on one person and or a specific group.

Control of safety is on the individual not the manager

It is a trailing indicator. Better to use goals based on programs established, training provided etc.

Unless the company takes a look at the safety culture and performance as a whole, it is not fair to tie compensation to factors that may be out of the safety professionals control.

If the safety performance is looking good, that MAY (NOT WILL) cause one to slack off and not be as diligent or as aware as one should due to the good record.

We can only put the programs in place and influence behavior with accountability programs. We cannot force people to behave a certain way. With a workforce of temps and high turnover, motivation is often not there.

Employees always have their free agency and will make their own choices. Are responsibility is to make sure that they have the knowledge, skills, and awareness to make the right choice.

As a safety professional, we cannot stand over every employee and help them make good decisions every day. Safety is about making good choices and employees still have a tendency to makes bad choices, get in too big of a hurry, take short cuts, etc and the safety professional, supervisors, & management are penalized because it has been decided to measure them based on looking at events in the rear view mirror and not on their accomplishments and activities they had during the past year.

Management cooperation

It is up to the Safety Professional to communicate the safety program with the employees but the final decision is up to the employees whether or not to follow all procedures all the time.

Our job is to put plans in place and advise senior management on best practices. It is a team effort to ensure everyone is safe. Everyone's raise and bonus should be based, in part, on their safety performance.

Safety performance should not be tied just to an increase/decrease in the number of incidents/accidents. In the case of our organization, we're implementing our new SMS with a focus on improving the safety culture (i.e. reinforcing a non-punitive reporting environment and improving hazard reporting). Therefore, it is expected that our incident/accident rate may will be higher this year due to improved and more accurate reporting.

It depends on the type of work

In safety, our efforts count. Due to the cause of accidents, 88% unsafe acts/behaviors, there is a large percentage that is employee related and is outside of our control......we develop and implement that latest and greatest but safety is personal.

My bonus is based on a DART rate. Hearing loss is not included as part of the bonus.

In some ways it makes sense, however, safety is a personal thing. You can provide all the programs, ppe, powerpoints, training in the world, yet it still comes down to the individual actually doing the work. Which means that the Safety Pro, in the end, has no control over the actual safety performance. I also believe that it can create "Safety" for the wrong reasons. Safety should be internalized as opposed to, "I've go to do this so I get my bonus this year.".Or lets do this program, it's for "safety", yet the real reason is that it helps me meet my "quota" or an objective for the year so that the bonus gets reached.

It seems that it could appear to someone outside of the company as a potential influence of an opinion for personal gain versus being an award for work effort.

Your modulation will change from focusing on people's safety to gaming the numbers for money.

Incident rates measure the failure not success. There are many successes that may not be reflected in the incident rates. You never know what you prevented.

You can help the employees with safety issues, but you can't MAKE them do it, it takes insentives and the correct people to completely have a great safety program.

Proactive goals and objectives are part of the safety performance tied to the bonus.

Without top executive leadership accrossed the board which makes safety a true priority, a safety professional will only have limited success.

Safety performance is not a one person responsibility and therefore should not be tied directly to safety performance. Also, the truth in safety performance is more important than the facts; yes you are suppose to read between the lines.

Efforts may not reflect performance of company. Also, I safety pro is a driver but doesn't have control over the performances of other management that can have a direct impact on safety performance.

Because ultimately it is the individual employee to implement safety work habits. 126. For all of our effort in preventative measures, certain behaviors can not be addresed and controlled.

The direct implication is that if the incident rate is above a certain threshold, that it was solely a result of the safety person and their failure to reduce workplace injury. It does not show that safety is a function of all business units and thus everyone has a stake in it.

Safety performance is the responsibility of operations.

I believe this would make a company not report things in order to achieve numbers to get a higher bonus. This would make a company more unsafe by not catching/reporting the little things.

I feel raises/bonus should be based on safety activities / goals designed to improve the safety program.

Safety is everyone's responsibility and it takes true support from senior management to be successful.

It can't be based on results. It needs to be based on what goes into the system. 133. Because my performance is not indicative of how people work in the field. I can lead, train, and direct, but I can't do the work for them.

It depends upon the support received for those programs that will benefit safety performance 135. When production hours exceed 10 hours/day employee fatigue goes up and so do injuries. Our company is manufacturing, if you can't get enough employees to do the job in 8 hours, you do the job in 10-12 hours, sometimes 6-7 days/week. This creates stress on the body and injuries over time.

Safety pros serve by training, educating, influencing, recommending and guiding management and all employees to reduce risk. Management must lead by example, set the expectations, encourage and reward positive (good) behaviors, correct bad or poor behaviors and hold everyone including themselves accountable. Management, through the chain of command is responsible and accountable for safety performance just as they are for quality, cost control, and everything else that they "manage".

No person's bonus should depend on something that has little in terms of what they can control. Though a safety pro has influence over the safety program in terms of training, coaching, and adjusting focus relative to cultural needs, there are too many tough variables that can translate into poor safety performance. The recordable injury, for one. Employees who use the work comp system or who their own employer's injury reporting policy to get some free time off. Though employees are generally trustworthy, these, and other, parameters have absolutely no bearing on the performance of a safety pro but can negatively impact overall safety performance.

Safety is not a one person job. Also I work in insurance it would not work

Tying bonuses or pay directly to safety performance can drive the wrong behavior (Ex: underreporting)

A mature work force will have more injuries/illnesses in repetitive work.

It is just an add-on job and we have no clout when it comes to actually spending money or determining programs. If you did have those then I suppose it would be different

It's ultimately Senior Staff that controls the budget and approves of the number of employees for various roles and responsibilities.

I am okay with bonuses directly correlated with KPI's, but general step raises and bonuses should not be tied directly to organizational safety performance because that directly correlates with the safety culture and one job classification cannot shift a safety culture in a positive direction. If there were a single classification chosen to shift an organizational safety culture in a positive direction, it would have to be the President/CEO.

Should never be based on lagging indicators

Safety professionals are catalists for change, and drivers of organizational culture (of which safety is a part). We are a resourse for Field Operations as well as office personnel. Unless management is pushing the safety envelope along side of us, there could be conflicting influences for production. Everyone must be on the same page, safety takes participation by all to be successful.

A portion of a bonus it could be fair, but not 100% of the bonus. A raise should not be. There are many variables out of ones control and your raise and bonus should be based on your actions. Are you meeting your personal goals? These goals should be actionable, not something like zero injuries.

It is fair only if everyone or maybe just all Management and Supervisors get a raise or bonus based on safety performance. The Safety professional teaches and enforces, but OSHA also says it is up to the employee to follow all requirements. If you have employees that just aren't safe and Supervisors/Management doesn't enforce the requirements, the safety professional is stuck holding the bag. Supervisors and Management are just as culpable as the Safety Professional

Depends on the size of the organization and the amount of control or authority given to the safety pro. Maybe a ratio of safety pro to employee would be more accurate - many safety pros at one organization could have a better impact than fewer safety pros at that same location. There are other factors such as Union actions that can affect the typical measures of success.

This leads to under reporting of incidents by unethical persons who want to please Corporate. Those that claim to have zero accidents are given a large bonus.

performance is the result and any raises should be based on the process that delivers the result.

Because we are a resource not the enforcer

Safety professionals do not direct employees daily activities the front line supervisors do. Safety professionals support work groups.

requires high degree of senior management buy in and a cohesive safety culture

I don't think you can necessarily control safety. You hope to affect safety in a positive way, but it's difficult to control the behavior of all employees, all the time

There are times when a safety professional can go above and beyond and bad things can still happen. Job performance should be the factor.

Only if everyones raise or bonus is based on the safety performance. This creates a common goal and operations is more likely to accept the safety pro's advice.

Some people can't be controlled and don't care to be safe.

Safety is a resource, management is held accountable.

Safety should not be influenced by money. Under-repoting can occur in this case.

Should be based on culture.

If a raise or bonus is based on safety performance that could lead to false reporting

It takes everyone to make a safe environment. Why should just one person be rewarded?

our employees work for operations not safety. Line Supervision must own the process. Safety Dept. is a support function.

Can control it all

we are advisors and the direct supervisors of employees

We can only conduct training, and audits. We cannot watch everyone at all times. It still comes down to the individual making the right choices on a daily basis.

Managers are responsible for ensuring employees follow safety rules. It is the safety manager's responsibility to advise, recommend, and warn.

I guess it would be close to fair if all upper Mgmt also had their raise at risk, but a safety professional is not singularly responsible for the performance of the company. And putting the whole company's raise/bonus at risk is in violation of OSHA rules, so there's no appropriate way to apply this, really.

Safety professional can only do so much to impact the culture of a company. It is up to the entire company to change not the voice of one person.

You have some control over the work environment you have no control over an person making a mistake.

Even though the safety pro does have an impact on the employees attitude and knowledge of safety, giving bonuses based on outcomes could potentially cause resentment with the employees unless the bonus or raise was "across the board".

Because the required support may not be provided which will impact the effectiveness of the safety pro's directions and counsel after he/she has done all that they can or could be expected to do.

Safety doesn't directly control safety "destiny"

Not sure how you can directly relate cause & effect. We you resource starved so unable to fix the problems that cause injuries?

I believe the salary should be based on work performed; loss control, government compliance, etc. Dependent on the type of goals that have been set by the employer the goal may not be achievable due to at times circumstance beyond the control of the safety pro.

Should be based upon implementation of various safety programs, not the numbers as they can be influenced by a poor corporate culture.

All recognition and money need to be based solely on the performance of the safety pro and only on things under the control of the safety pro. Others getting hurt, not applicable.

It should be a factor but not the entire basis for a raise or bonus - no safety professional can totally eliminate human factors of which they have little control

We can train an operator to do the right thing but ultimatly its their responsibility to do it. I do think trending problems could and should effect a safety pro's raise if they have not been properly addressing those problems.

Employers should not provide an incentive that encourages under-reporting

No matter how robust your safety program, accidents can still happen.

Too narrow a measure of success; could induce inappropriate behaviors, reporting irregularities, etc..

Should be based of the safety pro's performance

it is not always within our control such as management that does not support/ embrace the program, besides that is a lagging indicator

As long as I am being proactive to stop or reduce the injuries I should. Also take into consideration my compliance status.

It depends on the buy in and structure of the safety department's chain of command. But, in general, everyone plays a role in safety and it should be everyone's pay that is affected - not just the safety professional's.

Because performance is based on individual and management involvement and the Safety professional can only recommend how to improve this. It is up to managers to ensure they are embracing the safety culture and providing leadership that supports this.

Because typically safety professionals have absoulutely no control/enforcement of personnel. That is the manager/supervisors role and their raise should include no only their employee safety performance but also their own.

Individuals perform. It is very hard to watch each person and keep them safe.

Corporate EHS has implement this to reward those safety pro's who take liberties with OSHA recordkeeping requirements. Back to the punch and pay, commuter status game of the 80's. Those that do not play by corporate rules to not get a raise and ultimately get terminate.

We act more as consultants. If the recommendations we make are not made by the business, we cannot be held accountable. Instead, we try to document everything and make the best case behind why it is important for the changes to be made.

All we can do is educate and train. The employees and employer do not always follow the required training but maintain the safety rep more as a figure head.

Safety takes involvement at all levels from the floor supervision up.

The safety person can only traine and influence others but can not control their actions.

i dont want to pay people to be safe.

While the safety professional certainly has influence over safety performance, many other factors are involved as well.

The safety pro coordinates efforts, but ultimately it is up to individual employees to choose to work safely.

There are so many variables that contribute to a company's safety performance, most of which are not within the direct control of the safety manager.

How do you define your "employer's safety performance?" By leading or lagging indicators? Your job is to manage your safety program. You can have injuries in any line of work despite your best efforts. The trending, your EMR, incident rate, OSHA citations are indicators, but the best measure is the prevention of unsafe conditions and unsafe acts. How we measure these leading indicators is difficult, but they probably are the more important indicators. I think your salary should be based on how well you do your job, not (at least in the short term) your injury rates. I'm not big on bonuses or incentives. Just do your job well and you should be well-compensated.

No..This is the Trade Show Industry (not listed above) and the workers are supervised by an outside contractor who's goal is to get a show in/out on time. The Contractor also has no accountability for workers compensation. This is a difficult industry to achieve safety.

Bonuses should not be tied to lagging indicators (i.e., injuries).

Some companies have safety pros yet they do not have full support from management. There is only so much a safety pro can do without total organizational support

N/A

Some things you have no control in.

Budget affects safety and the safety pro does not control the budget.

It depends upon how you measure performance. A safety pro can develop and promote activity based efforts but it is management that must support and oversee implementation.

The leader is held responsible and accountable, however, not the injured whom are accountable.

Depends on corporate support for the safety performance of the employees.

A safety pro's raise should be based on his or her performance.

Safety should be standard practice in all aspects of operations thereby responsibility should be shared by all; not just the safety pro.

EHS staff has little direct impact on other employees' behavior that result in incidents.

It should be based on the individual's performance because it takes time to lead change and a safety professional cannot control the actions of others.

I answered No, because many of the day-to-day internactions with employees lie with their Team Leader or Supervisor so my "control over" them is very limited. However, we do have control over the safety programs and protective measures we implement to protect workers from unsafe conditions - so from that standpoint Yes I believe it is fair

Having a title doesn't result in miracles.

I do not feel that it is fair because even when a safety pro provides proper direction and works diligently to advance the cause of safety, if there is not the requisite support from top management and buy-in from field operations, there is not much more the safety pro can do!

The employees direct the safety, the safety pros are more or less guides/facilitators. Employees should be recognized

Only fair if all employees, from CEO on down to front line, have the same raise or bonus stipulation, as safety is everyone's responsibility, no only the safety professional's responsibility.

We normally don't have a say in the workers they hire.

Can be case by case, or individual performance

I believe this gives an Safety pro an incentive to hide issues.

You cant control the actions of others but you can try to influence behavior.

should be based on time in first then performance I do my job

Has the least influence of the safety performance

Would be a negative metric

The Safety Pro alone does not make a company safe, I have also seen the manipulation of numbers, and categorizing injuries to make the performance numbers look better. Recently had to let one of my people go when I caught them doing this.

We are only one person. There is no way that we can be out in the field to see every job that is being done.

Ownership belongs to all.

Operations controls the purse strings and the people.

we can not control actions of others, only encourage them to work safely.

Human Factors play a significant role in a safe workplace. It is the most difficult aspect of safety to control. Additionally there are too great a number of factors that are out of the Safety Pro's ability to control.

Incorrect safety reporting in order to get bonus could happen, and does happen.

senior mgmt determines safety oerfirmance

Raises should be based on an individual's efforts. Bonuses should be tied to company performance that impacts profitability or sustainability. Safety bonuses could be applied for efforts safety pros do that are well beyond the scope of the role - like a new process or tool developed to drive safety metrics. But tying money directly to metrics is not wise - and possibly non-compliant with OSHA regs if it promotes under reporting or discrimination.

Too many factors to consider for an accident. Expectations should be set high for everyone to work safe but do not hold one person responsible for another persons irresponsibility.

Too tempting to fudge numbers or not report accidents

The raise should be based on the persons performance and not the over all safety performance of the employer.

Employers safety performance is directly related to human errors, misconduct and similar not having anything to do with the safety professional or employer's policy/programs/procedures.

If safety is only owned by safety department program will not be successful

safety is everyone job.

You can provide all the training, tools, culture change, ideas, and positive reinforcement in the world; without $$$, support, leadership backing, culture change, and employee buy in the program will be in effective.

Saying that, a safety professional needs to have some accountability. Yet, cannot be held responsible for every incident that occurs at the hand of employee error.

The performance is contingent on a number of factors beyond the safety professional's control.

It is all dependent on how much influence a director or safety professional as on direct decision-making for safety related items.

We can only train and equip our employees with the time, money and resources to complete their job safely. What they do with the tools provided is up to them. We are not police or baby sitters. Also, if you make safety performance a determining factor for bonus, raise, etc. you will find folks not reporting the near miss incidents. Sometimes, the difference between an incident and an accident is only seconds or inches. You want folks to report all possible failures so that we can fix the root causes that lead to accidents. Pro-active, not re-active.

It is not all under our control. Other managers make bad decisions which affect safety.

It would be an incentive not to report incidents if it were tied to a bonus.

So-called incentive bonus programs have been shown to increase risk of "fudging" safety performance records.

Encouraging hiding the real facts

Safety professionals provide the tools to achieve safety excellence. The use and implementation resides with line management.

The safety pro does not have control over safety policy application, implementation and enforcement.

The Safety team can only provide training. Accountability of the safety program ultimately is with the site manager and the employees.

We don't have direct control. The employee and the employee's manager/supervisor should be held accountable.

If upper and line management is not bought into the environmental, health, and safety (EHS) program, it does not matter who your EHS professional(s) are.

No. Creates a scenario in which unethical actions could provide personal wealth.

I cannot control 100% incidents

Do accountants have pay in play based on financial performance. Usually, the answer is no.

Employer's shouldn't be rewarding/incentivizing employees based on their safe performance (Paid to be Safe"). This can lead to issues in reporting of incidents/injuries/illnesses.

Number of incidents is usually what employers use for safety performance. Let's assume 5-6 employees are exposed to a disease such as hepatitis. It's recordable, but would look very poorly on the safety pro's job performance. Additionally, safety culture is a process over time, plus, the safety pro should not be accountable for the choices and bad judgment of others.

Safety pros have no ability to directly affect management or employee safety performance. They can influence it indirectly through education, training and timely advice but that does not equal direct intervention to prevent incidents.

We set the policy but it is up to management to enforce safety!

Far too many things out of my control that can ultimately impact safety results

Not enough influence on what operating departments do. Responsibility but little authority.

Often incident are hidden because of fear of losing money/compensation.

Safety performance is an corp expectation

Some peoples actions cannot be controlled

Because accidents happen.

Because we cannot control all of operations. We are more of a consultant to improve safety performance if operations follows our recomendations.

The safety pro often times doesn't have the authority to make necessary changes. He can advise, but if senior management chooses not to heed that advice and safety suffers that shouldn't reflect on the advisor.

Safety is everbody responsibilities

Safety can only influence and train workers but have no discipline authority so their performance should not be tied directly to the safety pro.

Usually the safety professional does not have direct control or responsibility for the employees of the company. There are supervisors, managers, superintendents, directors, etc who are responsible for these employees and their work performances, including safety.

Don't direct work force

There are things you cannot control.

Safety performance is part of everyone's annual goals and assessment - yet direct control over performance/enforcement lies with Operations

This totally sends the wrong message. Numbers should not be used as incentives - it leads to non-reporting.

Because while you can train, educate, enforce, and perhaps punish, you cannot make another human being do anything they don't want to. The final choice is up to them to comply.

Lack of support by senior staff, resulting in a poor H&S culture, may result in injuries or noncompliance in some facilities.

You have no control over the individual employees.

Not all employees, value safety as a culture.

Unless we are vested in the hiring process, we cannot or should not be held accountable for someones actions that we consider to be a bad hire. Sometimes employees are hired to just fill a void and no consideration is given to the quality of the indivdual.

Safety professional should be judged on management systems, program inplementation and support of Operations. Top management support and line implementation of programs significantly affects safety performance.

There are too many confounding factors which influence an organizations safety performance, some of which are not directly related to safety pro.

I can go either way with this. If safety is on site and involved with day to day operation, Yes. If they are over several sites and count on supervisors, No.

May start hiding incidents if it is.

The safety professional can guard equipment, evaluate compliance and processes, train, influence, coach, etc. but does not control the day-to-day, hour-by-hour behavior or conditions of the facility.

Yes, if adequate management support; otherwise, no.

employees work for operations not safety

If an Agency is very large with different divisions, one may out perform the other and should not be blanketed

The company I work for puts the onus of enforcing safety on the superintendents, not on us. If the safety coordinator of the job site is doing everything they can but the superintendents aren't buying into the safety program, the company is going to have a poor safety record, and the safety coordinators who do everything they are supposed to do should not be punished for the failure of the superintendents.

I actually have mixed feelings about this but answered no because I think it really encourages people to under report. The TVA example in the electric utility industry comes readily to mind. On the other hand it certainly raises the bar for safety pros to create new programs, etc.

I have very little control over safety performance.

It too closely relates effort to outcome. Efforts should remain at the highest level, regardless of outcome. Injuries and incidents do not always coincide with effort. A safety mentality must be developed and the better that is done, the less the safety personnel can claim responsibility.

The Safety pro is the teacher.

Management and first line supervisors are the enforcers and when a marketing decision is made the Safety guy shouldn't be the fall guy.

Lack of control over outcomes and managers/supervisors implementation of programs

Because we can't control the people that abuse the system by constantly having something go wrong in order to get out of work or receive Work Comp money.

It is if everyone else's raise or bonus is equally tied to it.

Even though we set up the programs for everyone to use, management does not enforce the rules. All we can do is keep correcting and coaching.

Safety professionals make recommendations. Senior leadership to implement or not.

In government it doesn't work that way

In most cases, the safety performance will impacted by all team members and the level of commitment of the top-level management. An excellent safety professional can fail due to lack of commitment by its leaders or a bad OH&S culture.

Even with great effort to promote workplace safety, some workers attitude doesn't change due to other outside influence including union.

If Safety performance means incident rates, then no. They are lagging indicators of safety. Salary increases should be based on leading indicators, such as policy development, training/educational programs, audit results, etc.

Each employee carries the responsibility for site (EHS) safety collectively (not one individual/team). IF a facility operates on an established and well managed (behavior) based reward/bonus system then ALL employees should receive this benefit, and understand the active role they as individuals played to achieve it.

I do feel it is fair for EHS (department/individuals) to be considered for a raise like any other leader that has balanced and achieved clearly set goals and expectations (NOTE: goals and expectations that do NOT include lagging indicators such as injury rates or similar). A ‘bonus’ should be considered for going above and beyond those parameters with a focus on % improvement toward/of matured EHS Program (as a whole); additional EHS education, development to their work force, or community, year over year (striving for continuous improvement).

Raises or bonus should be based on overall performance not companies safety numbers.

leads to false numbers

Current management want to get rid of senior staff with extensive benefits.

Can drive bad behaviors and reporting underground...

Safety performance is a result of the culture framed by the leadership and manifested by front line supervision. The safety pro can implement and enhance safety programs and ensure compliance training, but end result performance is a result of the entire leadership team.

Production will always override safety

You cant MAKE people safe. They have to WANT to be safe and follow the policies. If you fire them for it, you have to be prepared to spend a vast amount of time documenting and proving it is not your/company fault. Time I dont have.

A safety professional's raise or bonus that is tied to the employer's safety performance could lead to unethical incident reporting.

Safety is something that needs to be encouraged, embraced and enforced. If you have lack of participation in leadership teams regarding safety and safe work practices it won't translate to the workforce. Safety performance for a site directly falls on the safety programs it has in place, the implementation and sustainability of these programs, as well as participation from all levels of the business is key to a "safe" work environment and successful safety programs..

Employees who have received training do not always comply with regulations and therfore may cause the company's safety record to suffer regardless of the actions of the safety management.

Too many factors

I answer "No" simply because a Safety Professional cannot change the way people think and act. The answer would be different if the Safety Professional had the power/authority to stop production, or deliver on the spot training and/or disciplinary action. In this world the tendency of people is to be very selfish and self-centered. One would think that this type of attitude would go far to reduce the number of workplace injuries. However, I see the opposite effect - there is no loyalty any longer and people just think workers comp will take care of everything. I could rant forever on this topic. I will simply state that I do not believe a person should be evaluated and/or compensated on things that are not completely in their control.

Continuous improvement is part of a safety pro's responsibility. Nothing will never be completely perfect. To some degree it should be based on it -if it's significantly bad.

Safe behavior is the primary cause for effective injury prevention. That is driven at the individual level with influence from direct supervision. The Safety Professional cannot be an intermediary between the two. It is a direct line supervision issue. Therefore the Safety Professional cannot impose disciplinary action for unsafe behavior across organizational lines. For this reason the raises and bonuses should not be dependent on the company-wide "scoreboard".

Government Agency does not offer bonuses for any type of performance

The bonus should be based off of pro active mesures not reactive mesures

I only have limited control. I can put out training, for example, to reduce the risk of injuries. If employees don't adhere to the training, what can I do? I can adjust the training to get more buy in, but ultimately the responsibility lies with the employee. Same holds true for crashes (CSA score).

We do our jobs but deal complacency and other factors that are out of our control. The human factor.

Even the best safety person can't always change the upper management choices.

The safety professional can do everything in his/her power to enhance safety performance, but if they don't have 100% "buy-in" from the boss and other dept. supervisors helping support the safety culture, then safety performance may not improve or possibly get worse. The safety professional might have a portion of the raise or bonus be based on the company's safety performance, but I don't believe it should be 100% performance based.

Safety on the job is the outcome of supervision, not the safety professional.

Unfortunately even with safety education, incentives, and other programs employees will still file an injury claim if they need time off or run short of PTO or sick time. This would surely effect the safety professionals record.

Most safety performance indicators are lagging indicators

Most performance ratings are lagging. If they are leading indicators, then yes.

Safety pro's have no operational control over personnel. Any manager exerting operational control over personnel should have a significant portion of bonus pegged to safety performance.

Ops responsibility with HSE assistance

Feel it's reactive and discourages reporting

Many aspects of safety performance are beyond a Safety Professional's control

State government regulated by contracts.

Management driven

It promotes the mentality of hiding or covering up incidents and / or accidents.

Although I think it is good, OSHA would believe that incidents/injuries may not be reported properly or at all so salaried could get raises or bonuses.

We can only motivate people, they do what they want to do and it suprises me they they don't do the right thing even when I'm on the job site directing them to comply with the LAW!!!!

It could result in under reporting if the employer does not enforce an unwvering reporting safety culture.

Safety Pro has no control over how the managers treat or support their people. I had a recordable because someone used an eyewash station and his eye felt dry. Sent to the clinic. Everything was fine, but Dr. gave prescription "just in case" for antibiotics - Bang, safety streak ended. That counts against us just as much as the 7 weeks out for a slip and fall.

could create a none reporting situation

A safety professional relies on management to enforce what he/she has implemented at the facility. It should be based off what is taught, who it is taught to and the quality of the trainings.

depends on how it is measured. If lagging indicators, ie.-Injury Rates; than NO, this number can be manipulated and it depends on your culture. I worked at a Company where it was well known that NOBODY EVER had a lost time injury. We had somebody amputate a finger, and someone else shatter there ankle and both were back at work the next day thus avoiding a lost time injury. In my current company, the culture is much more "employee friendly" and people incur lost work days for what could be described as failry minor injuries.

We are not directly supervising employees. AND YOU CAN"T FIX STUPID.

No, because numbers can be skewed for better performance.

It should be a percentage of the bonus to promote ownership in the results, but not the complete bonus.

It should be based only on leading indicators and key deliverable "products" instead of considering any lagging indicators (recordable incident rate, first aids, etc)

To base a raise on the companys' safety performance is not a true picture of the safety professionals work.

has to play a small part but, the safety professional must be reviewed by a a knowledgable supervisor that is aware of the persons activities during the evaluation time period.

Employees need to bear the responsibility for utilizing what protocols are provided.

Safety is everyone's responsibility.

Because everyone is responsible for safety. The supervisors have to make sure it is enforced on the floor.

Their are to many uncontrollable circumstances that can affect a facilities safety or employee injury performance. A better gauge would be rate the overall employee participation in a safety program and the steps that are being taken to be more pro-active in identifying safety issues and there corrective actions.

Systems are the SHe manger's responsibility. Executing belongs to managers / supervisors.

In safety it's hard to control employees actions 100% of the time which is why I think it's unfair that a raise is based solely on the company safety performance. You can have the greatest safety program on paper but without management support it means nothing.

He or she can be establishing all safety principles throughout the business, but certain employees remain to perform unsafe acts.

Accidents happen no matter how much you train and educate the employees

If upper management doesn't buy into the system a safety pro is attempting to implement, or even worse if they flat out refuse to take some actions the safety culture of that company may be more of a result of upper management than the safety pro.

Management/Leaders have a greater responsibility in preventing injuries. EHS develops and maintains safety and environmental programs.

Should be on what is done, not what happens

This would be depend upon the authority level of the safety pro

Safety is a support function. Safety must be owned by the line organization

Most administrations do not buy into safety. Thus without their backing both mentally and monetarily safety will be compromised

It depends on what you define as safety performance. If safety performance is based on lagging indicators such as recordable injuries, then no the raise should not be based on lagging indicators only. If the performance is based on leading indicators or a combination of leading and lagging indicators then yes it is fair to base the raise or bonus on safety performance.

At the worst, it's ok for the safety pro's bonus to be connected if all management's incentive is tied to safety in the same way. Safety pro's are not all knowing, all powerful, or can be present everywhere at all times. In fact, Safety pro's are commonly in a role of influence as opposed to direct authority. We can be powerful change agents to help organizations improve safety culture and reach much better outcomes, but that only happens when the organization, its leadership, and employees work together to make the safety pro's shared vision happen. It's ridiculous to think it's Safety's role to prevent injuries directly...Operation's controls the people, the fleet, the resources, the vehicles, etc.

Too much is out of our control, we are a resource and depend on a lot from all others in the company

I would agree that it would be okay for a corporate goal, since safety extends across the company. To hang it on one person doesn't seem completely fair.

Raise of bonus should be based on objectives for which safety professional has direct control. Overall safety performance for the organization may not be directly controlled by single person.

As a safety director we do everything possible to ensure employees have a safe work environment with training, personal protective equipment but you can't fix stupid.

Any employee's raise should be based on that employee's performance to meet the objectives that has been set ahead of time.

Because our organization is comprised of operations in many locations, we cannot be at each site to "hold the hands" of employees. Using a number (ORIR) and only a number to hold us accountable is not fair.

too many locations, not enough time to become one-on-one with me being the only safety profess

No control what people do or equipment problems.

Homan error is alwas a factor - no matter how much you care about the employees and train them to be safe and use the training to keep themselves safe - they make mistakes - we're all human here - you have to expect deviations.

It can create a chilled work environment to reporting.

Possible conflict of interest, and factors not under safety control that can affect outcomes.

Some factors in California beyond our scope of control

Too often the primary safety performance issues are at remote facilities that the safety pro is not able to directly influence, and are usually the result of Operations putting pressure on workers to "get the job done no mater what it takes".

Could be tempted to manipulate or adjust the numbers to hide poor performance results.

Employees are ultimately responsible for their safety. If I've done everything I can, they refuse to cooperate, and the employer accepts the risk, why should my pay be reduced?

I believe that the safety of the employees is everyone's responsibility at the plant and not only the safety manager's. Therefore a bad safety record should not be reflected on how the performance of the safety manager was that year the same as a good safety record. To be safe it takes all of us.

I say no based on the OSHA metrics, I could change my answer to yes if the metrics were different, more proactive.

Only if part of all employees

Accidents are by definition events that are unlikely to happen. Sometimes situations do not improve because upper management ignores the safety concerns and do not demonstrate a safety culture. Accidents often happen despite the efforts of safety professionals. These professionals should not be held 100% accountable.

We cannot control unsafe actions by employees even if teh best training is provided. We cannot control the liberal workers' compensation systems in many states

Employer's safety performance is the work of all employees of the company, not just a reflection of one person or group within the company.

A safety specialist can do a great job but new or don't care employees can still create problems. These should just be ieliminated.

Unfair to other employees

Have no control over employee habits and attitudes.

Prefer to say that maybe part of this should be based on the performance. With global corporations, it is difficult to control performance. Companies could use a portion but not the entire bonus or raise

We can set expectations and put plans and program in place, but it is ultimately up to each employee to adhere to those standards, and make the concious effort on a daily basis to not get injured.

there are at times circumstances that occur that the safety position cannot control. the safety section can only do so much. it is also employee responsibility to ensure personal safety.

no direct control over outcomes

Safety professionals do not control/enforce company safety, management - front line supervisor do. They have more influence on employees. Safety professional are more of a consulting role.

Because some people/companies just don't care and do nothing to help their employee's be safer. No real commitment to Safety, just words.

human factors - best practices depend on self discipline of workers and other uncontrollable factors

It could easily lead to falsifying of documents.

I shouldn't be held accountable for others' lack of adherence to policy, procedure, or work instructions.

Only if failure to do your job as a safety professional led directly to the poor performance.

Not in may organizations. If you lack executive support, safety cannot make needed changes to improve performance.

You can't control the numbers

Regardless of what kind of program you have in place and how good a job you may do .... someone else on the line or in the field is doing the tasks. It wouldnt be fair to tie their actions to the safety pro's.

Management is ultimately responsible for safety. While safety pros can inspect, advise, and effect change, the behavior of individual employees is tied directly to their supervisor. Human error and poor decision making equates to many on-the-job injuries and are out of the control of the safety person.

An employer can have poor safety performance regardless of how well the safety professional is doing their job. If the safety performance of the company was the sole responsibility of the safety professional I could support the concept but since employee involvement, management support etc. all play a part in the safety performance I cannot agree with the concept.

People do dumb things and the "safety pro" shouldn't be accountable (pro or con) for that. Additionally, the company may not want to implement changes recommended by the "safety pro".

Safety performance is dependent on senior management leadership and employee buy-in. It is facilitated by, but not driven by, the safety professional.

Because you are not directly in control of other peoples actions and decisions. It is different than being judged on your own actions. Why should a safety professional be punished because a worker decided today to not follow an established procedure or simply made a mistake/was distracted.

No line authority and therefore no ability to control employee behavior, hiring or firing.

Management has ultimate control over personnel decisions, budgets, and what happens where the boots meet the dirt - if the safety pro's bonus is tied to this, everyone's bonus should be tied to this.

Risk factors are inherit with idustry and the type of work required. Our facility has not had a lost time accident since 2007.

What metric would you use? We have not had a death or severe injury in over 20 years. How does one improve on that? Safety Dept. doesn't control the number of people trained each year (mandatory for all employees), nor the number of people who choose to disregard training.

Most safety managers do not have direct supervision authority over other department workers.

The safety pro is just one part of the overall puzzle. Everyone plays a part in safety; therefore everyone's bonus should be tied to safety. Basically, it is either all or none.

I can lead my workers to safety, I can't make them think. We deal with humans, who are subject to mental lapses and emotions, as such these are issues that I have no control over.

A safety expert knows how to drive safe behaviors and instill a safety culture. In many cases, leadership does not and provides little support or expects the safety expert "to take care of everything". That said and without leadership commitment, the performance of the safety expert shouldn't completely hinge on accident rates.

I cannot be everywhere at once. I have to rely on our employees performing their jobs as they have been trained to do them and our supervisors ensuring that safety procedures and policies are being followed.

no control

accidents do happen

Line management holds the answer. If they walk by an issue then they have just created an issue and sent the message that it's ok for things to be that way.

Site Management by Policy is accountable and responsible for their sites safety performance.

Does not promote injury reporting.

Normally not if the safety professional does not have any method for enforcing the safety policies and procedures

Employers safety performance is only one aspect.

This could lead to a culture in which near misses and incidents go unreported since there is an incentive to make things look as safe as possible, regardless of the true state of things.

You hope what you have trained them on sticks with them but you cant always be there with them.

# injuries or # of lost time injuries is a lagging indicator and is not a good way of motivating people. It would be better to use some sort of leading indicator that people can achieve. That goes for all employees as well as the EHS Professional.

Accidents happen and unfortunately Safety pro's can't be everywhere to prevent things from happening.

While training, inspections, etc. are an integral part of the job, it is ultimately up to the employee to follow through with requirements.

Safety performance is driven by the employee's buy-in into the program. At our company my position does not have supervisory control over the masses and therefore can not directly control their safety performance - we are tasked with educating.

Safety Professionals are a resource by providing guidance to employees. We can influence employee behavior but cannot control employee behavior.

too many factors beyond safety pro's control, safety management is a line management responsibility

You can educate employees till your out of breath but a few noncompliant employees who disregard procedures and take short cuts because it is a quicker way to do a task can ruin a safety record.

As a Safety Professional, I have never seen where the Safety Division has 100% oversight on employees and their responsibilities so to tie in performance to a Safety Division employee should not be equated. If Managers in Operation don't enforce policies and regulations and Safety Division employees who are independent of Operations have no disciplinary avenues for employees not adhering to these policies and regulations then again how is performance tied to Safety Division employees. The scenario is much harmful to Safety Division employees when they report directly to Managers in Operations.

Example -DART injuries are managed after the incidnet. We don't have full control of the employee.

Safety pro's are advisors

There are to many things that I have no control over, like other Managers who do not have the safety spirit.

It is easy to set goals but requires the entire team to accomplish this. The safety professional's role in my organization is to act more in an advisory yet compliance role without the responsibility for enforcement or corrective action. This makes it extremely hard for the safety profession to be ultimately rewarded or completely heald accountable for organizational performance.

I believe that this could lead to accidents being "swept under the rug". I can also tell you from experience that no matter how good your safety culture is, there are always MORONS that will continue to exhibit poor decision-making skills and take short cuts. Darwinism is alive and strong in the South!

Because they do not have direct control over the outcome.

The term "safety performance" is vague but usually means injuries. If that's the case then the safety professional has very little control over whether or not the employer performs the job, task or operation safely.

Changes in measurable safety performance are not statistically relevant until sustained for 1 million or more man-hours. Up and down fluctuations are not necessarily a good measure of culture or effort.

Human factors

A lost time accident tied to bonus sends the wrong message to coworkers that have a good safety ethic and follow the rules and keep themselves safe.

You can teach and train till the Cow's come home, people will still do things that are not safe. If I have done my job in training, why should I be penalized if the employee does not follow the safety rules.

Only if it applies to all of the leadership within an organization, otherwise no. Safety professionals are only as effective as the senior leadership team allows them to be (supports them).

only they have enough control of the program to make a difference..

Any bonus or salary increase should be based on each individual or team performance, including the safety department.

Lagging indicators are a poor measure of performance.

Incentive pay should not be tied to safety performance. It is not looked favorably upon in the eyes of OSHA.

Because no matter how good or bad your Safety Program is sometimes employees get hurt regardless.

Safety is the responsibility and control of the operations staff to execute on the best practices.

Think about it

Safety is driven by up management.

Top management drives the bus. If your top management does a poor job , your bonus suffers

This is dependant on the culture of the workplace. Unless it is a supportive safety culture from the top-down then succes will not occur. Support can fluctuate given change in managment it is too variable to rely on

First, safety must be a core value of company administration (CEO, CFO, Board of Directors, etc) Then, the departmental leadership must embrace and demonstrate to thier employee that safety is a core value of the organization from the top to the bottom. Safety professionals provide the knowledge, tools, and have solutions to many workplace hazards. Safety is only as successful as leadership allows it to be.

We can only dictate and enforce policies, but ultimately the individual employees are responsible for their own safety. I cannot control someone else's behavior, only offer suggestions.

People are going to behave the way they choose to. All we can do is change their way of thinking over time. Some grasp the idea quickly, while others do not. I give my best 110% all the time.

Overall safety performance is dependant upon many things (i.e. facility improvements, training investment, etc.) that are not under the direct control and/or supervision of safety staff.members

The safety pro is a coordinator and provider of information. It is up to management & supervisors to make sure the safety info and programs are followed.

Depends on how much authority safety pro has over enforcement, accountability, etc.

Safety performance is the responsibility of the entire organization. There are leading elements of safety performance that should be considered in the safety' professional's raise and bonus; however, in my view, injury rates and other typical lagging metrics should not be considered.

Safety pro is only one person... perhaps the one attempting to steer the vehicle... but cannot control other's actions (management or workers).

No matter how much you teach and train, the employees are responsible for their safety in the end, unless you are standing there watching them every minute of the day.

It needs to be based on the effort and drive of the safety pro. All procedures can be written and put into place by the safety pro, but he/she cannot control everyone's performance.

Usually places that base raises on performance, there is also a profit associated with the raises, since "safety" is not an industry that creates money, unless it is safety product/training industry, it wouldn't make any sense.

In the transportation industry the FMCSA regulations and the new CSA rating systems and procedures make it practically impossible to improve safety scores in a yearly span of time. The algorithms used by them score on a curve by which approx. 30% of all trucking companies will fail to achieve a passing score unless the entire industry is absolutely perfect, no safety violations at all. In addition law enforcement is driven to prove it is proactive in enforcing the regulations, so much so that I have individuals being writing up for issues that border on absurd. 1. driver wrote up because his air conditioner wasn't working? When did that become a safety consideration? Another was wrote up because someone let a plastic bottle of Dr. Pepper on the rear bumper of his trailer and they wrote him up for "failure to properly secure cargo". Basing raises or bonuses on performance while the rest of world has gone insane is not acceptable.

In a company this large, the safety department does not directly influence those management decisions.

Raises and bonuses should be tied to overall performance. What exactly is meant by "employer's safety performance"? Is that referring to accidents and near-misses? Is that referring to improvements? Reduced costs? There are many factors involved and all factors need to be considered when decided whether someone deserves a bonus or raise.

Safety is not about the safety professional, it is about each individual.

A safety manager / supervisor can only educate employees and strive to get them to follow the rules. Free Will allows employees to make bad choices. That's not something the safety rep has control of.

At anytime an employee could have a injury by not following safety procedures resulting in a cost to the company and influencing the employer's safety performance.

people still are human and do stupid things so why base my income on others stupidity!!!!!!

You can only lay out the safety plan... you cannot make people follow the rules...when management doesn't inforce the rules why would you expect the employees to follow the rules.. botton line... I can't be responsble for other peoples actions when it concerns safety, personnel issues etc.

Limited management support.

There has to be an upper management mandate for safety integration. Unless the company has given full backing to the safety pro and an edict to all in the company that safety is not to be compromised, basing the safety pro's salary the company's safety performance is not fair. Maybe the CEO's salary raise or bonus should be based on the company's safety performance ;)

Companies that do this need to wake up and get into the 21st century. It now reflects a form of punishment rather than accomplishment. It's always based on lagging indicators and reflects failures rather than successes.

Because, Safety is a resource to influence change of management and employees. Safety does not apply discipline. Safety provides the safety tools and systems for employee to work safe.

1. It encourages falsification/manipulation of reports/stats/numbers. 2. In the end, the Safety Pro has zero control over individual behavior. Most don't have hire/fire authority or any means to really hold employees and supervisors' feet to the fire so to speak. They can speak, train and equip, but in the end their compensation should not be pinned to the performance of others they have no control over.

No control on others actions or lack of concern of safety in the work environment.

Too many mitigating factors

The safety professional raise should be based on his/her performance in creating continuous improvement in safety programs, trainings and communication.

Not entirely because there are other factors that are not in our control, like other people actions.

Safety performance is a reflecting of an entire organization, not just one Safety Manager.

SAFETY IS ALL ABOUT SAFETY. THERE SHOULD NOT BE A RAISE OR BONUS BECAUSE YOUR COMPANY HAD A GOOD YEAR. YOU SHOULD BE THANKFUL.

"Stuff happens". No matter how much we educate, train, and inspect jobs, small or large incidents will still occur. A "zero" incident goal is nice but rarely achieved certain fields.

As a safety professional you can not control the human behavior no matter how strong your safety culture is -

Only 5% of bouns is on safety for me or all employees

It is only fair if management is fully supportive of the safety dept.

individual groups fair better than the full department

As Safety Director I try to inform management of Safety issues, concerns and policies. Give suggestions on how to prevent accidents, correct or improve practices; monitor safety program and try to create a safe cultural. I can not force management to act or employees to follow safety rules at all times, I can only employ and point out the reason why and repercussion when one doesn't. Like the police you tell them the law and try to enforce the law and go out on patrol but their will always be those through out the chain of command that break the law or see what they can get away with. A safety cultural has to be the mind set from the top to the bottom. Last accidents happen (thats why their called accidents) even though most are preventable.

You cannot control what people do or their actions.

Program can be the best in the world but if not followed, performance suffers

The safety professional is a consultant that can provide guidance and training and programs; however, it is up to the leadership to embrace safety and the employees (all - including leadership) to live the safety practices. The safety professional can lead everyone to water - after that it is up to the individual if they want to drink, swim, bask, or walk away.

The communication line of safety education, training and commitment are filtered by the employers and the work force.

Attitude is the key. You can train all you want, but unless an employee wants to be safe, you can never take out the human equation. A Safety Pro cannot be in all locations at once to verify that employees are following the rules or not taking short cuts.

It takes an entire workforce to make a safe work environment and culture

You have to have support from upper management to have an effective safety program. It can't be a part-time safety program that fits your needs when its convenient.

Responsibile safety professionals should be working to eliminate incidences, developing training, ensuring compliance, measuring training and programs. Unfortunately there are executive who support safety on one side of their face and on the other will not invest in the program or admit when a serious scenario exist and overlook it when it is reported our finally documented and proclaim you documented that I have Knowsley violated the law. Well you have been informed numerous times. Is the safety manager to be the one to answer for their failures. I met all my goals 150 percent and did not receive the bonus because I stood up for ethics and employees. Lately from speaking with peers management is pulling back on safety especially when the buck meets the road. But their wages and's spending have not suffered.

People make the choice to work safely or not. Safety Managers try to influence them to work Safely but the ultimate decision is up to them.

It stand similar to the LTI or safe days worked. This penalizes the professional devaluing the field as a whole.

Unless everyone's raise or bonus depends on the safety performance it wouldn't be fair to base one person's performance on the entire team. Also, would depend on what metrics are utilized to analyze performance. Typically, lagging indicators are used which don't necessarily promote change and can bring morale down.

Safety Pro's normally have no say on the inital hiring of workers or the Supervisors.

There are times when a safety pro can provide PPE, training, and everything that goes with it, but if the employees and/or the supervisors don't buy into it, it doesn't do any good. The employees and leaders need to have a buy in and need to follow the safety plans for the safety plan to work. This has to start from the top down, not from the safety department working in both directions, and to have a bonus or raise attached to someone else is crazy, especially when the safety department is short staffed and no budget.

Safety performance depends too much on the site envolvement and desire to have a safe facility.

OSHA is against incentive programs which are rate based which may lead to under reporting of incidents

If you have no authority over the leadership team, it is hard to control, manage the process.

Top management is ultimately responsible for Safety. We are their advisors.

The operations personnel control the working environment and the employees involved. The ops personnel set the tone for culture and behavior.

It is not fair. We only give them the information(training), follow up and retrain on a daily, monthly yearly basis. We cannot do the task for them, including their behaviors.

The safety pro primary function is to educate employees. It is the responsibility of the employee to follow safety policies and procedures. There are numerous violations of employee misconduct

Safety performance (outcome) is the responsibility of employees, managers and leadership, not merely one person.

Tying the raise or bonus in safety statistics could lead to under-reporting accidents. However, if it could be tied to leading indicators in some way, that might work. It's just hard to identify true leading indicators.

In most cases, omprovements in safety can only occur by consent of operations management. I can have the best ideas in the world but they are useless if not implemented.

Not unless the performance measures are about what has been developed and accomplished - not just the total and lost time case numbers.

This could easily lead to under reporting of incidents or near misses and prevent potential program weaknesses from being addressed due to short term conditions or anomalies. Raises, promotions or termination should be the outcome of long term performance trends.

Too subjective

I can see both sides of this response. Connecting raise to safety performance can cause the same problem as rewarding employees for no accidents (don't report/hide problems). However, if I am not helping reduce safety problems then what good am I?

This should only be a percentage. A company also needs to look at management support as well.

Safety is affected by the programs and those that manage the program which includes management and executive leadership; not just the safety professional.

safety is a way of life; it should not be an incentive

Safety person has no control over company employees performances nor any authority to manage said performance. You can have a great safety company performance with a poor safety persone and vice versa.

Safety is not just the safety manager's responsibility. It should be the responsibility of all of management like quality and production are.

If top management does not have 100% buy into the program it will be VERY difficult for the program to succeed.

There are always going to be employees that no matter how proactive the Safety Professional is, they will not always follow the safety rules.

Many things are involved. The DNA is different on all. The Black Code was designed specifically for this reason. If classes are taught and all ppe issued then it is on the employee.....

no reporting, blackmailing of employees, safety is part of the job as well as quality and performance

This question can go both ways. Obviously you want there to be incentive to do well, strive for high performance, and ensure there is accountability at all levels. However, human error is something no safety professional can correct. People make mistakes, and sometimes, that's all we're dealing with.

We do not actually control the actions of the indivudals that have the mishaps. Safety pros are not in daily direct contact and supervising the employees that violate tech procedures, get careless, take shortcuts, get complacent. Performance and compliance are unfortunately not always the same as when a safety pro is actually at a work-site.

If you are looking at just straight OSHA Recordables as a performance indicator, then no, I don't think it's fair. You can still make an impact on a company's safety goals and performance but still have a high amount of recordables. Variables like employee turnover, administrative and engineering costs to fix safety issues may be out of our control.

Safe practices are, ultimately, a matter of individual agency and a safety professional has no control over that regardless of how many programs and safeguards are in place.

Too many variables out of our control.

You can have the best safety program and supervisors not willing to carry the ball kills the whole program.

Safety has no real control over employee actions

Employee's actions have more to do with that person's direct line of management all the way up to the chief operating officer. Safety is more a consulting roll. Tying safety performance to money will always result in manipulation in the data not revealing the true state of safety.

Could lead to under-reporting.

Because some injuries are outside our ability to control (e.g. sneezing and injuring back, taxi accidents, bug bites, etc.)

The safety professional can influence safety performance but cannot control it. Safety is a line management responsibility and hence directly controlled by the line.

A safety professional can create safety programs, improve behaviors, and implement improvements but they cannot control what each individual does particularly if they are independently bypassing protective measures

in government work too many things out of their control to dictate this.

its lagging

bad reporting/documentation.

One person can not competely influence a company's safety performance. It takes most manager, supervisory and executive position's support.

There are way too many behavior based choices associated with safety performance. A safety professional can create and implement the best programs and practices and 1 poor decision, which is most likely out of the control of the safety professional, can result in an undesired event.

All management must have accountability. Safety professionals can set the program, but line management must be accountable for enforcement.

Safety metrics may not be reflective of safety performance

Too many variables, with supervisors. Safety has no control over their annual reviews.

EHS persons are not responsible for the operations group and have no control on what operations decides to do or not do.

While a a good safety professional has the power and job to motivate and create a positive safety culture, the Site Leader/Plant Manager can create countersct those actions. For instance in a past position I had created a good safety culture with accountability, yet the site leader would not hold his Supervisors to the same accountability so they eventually 'did what they wanted'. This caused our rates to increase and everything I did to counteract it was discarded.

People are still going to do careless things no matter how much it is gone over in safety meetings

Assessment elements can be arbitrary and not necessarily representative of anything that the safety professional did. Additionally, human behavior is not under the control of the safety pro.

incident rate is a lagging metric and is totally based on the processes the company has implemented that exactly give that performance. It is the Y and the Xs are what should be measured. Think of it in 6 Sigma terms.

Even though you tell people the safest way to do their jobs it doesn't mean that they will do that. Hopefully that won't be the case, but it doesn't always work out that way.

We are a resource and can only influence employee's actions, inactions or habits.

Tying bonuses and raises to company safety performance can discourage reporting of incidents. The goal should be on creating a safety culture, not on pay.

Safety is Everyone;s responsibilty, i do not want my Salary based on performance

Some things are out of your control and their may be careless employees

All employee's bonuses have an element of the company's safety performance not just safety professionals.

Operations drive safety performance and safety leading indicators may not be part of operational metrics

You are not in control of the employers program just your individual group so therefore your bonus should not be based on overall.

Without a pervasive and comprehensive safety culture, a safety manager is limited to stop gap and reactive measures.

Safety should be an operation-driven value. Raises and bonuses of Operations personnel should be linked to safety.

You can not control the individuals' safety performance in the field. You can teach and preach, but not control.

Everyone's leadership, not just the safety professional's is the correct measurement, if any. The focus should be on process over numbers.

Safety performance should be based on line management's engagement with their teams. The safety pro's performance should be based on their support of line management.

Incident Rates and Dart Rates do not justly reflect the effort a Safety Coordinator demonstrates for the company.

If bonus' are allowed, it should based on particular cirteria and issues that go above & beyone expectations. A cost savings realized is a part of that criteria however.

Safety performance is an indication of the organizations leadership - not solely on the safety pro.

The employer's safety performance does not always reflect the safety professionals dedication or work.

As we know safety has ebs and flows. if salaries were based on this the safety pro would not get a raise during the low periods.

My answer really is - It depends on if the entire supervisory/management staff include safety into financial matters or not. If the rest of the staff has the same goal, it's fine. At my site, no manager or supervisor has any EHS factors tied into their performance raises or bonuses, therefore, the safety culture is quite lacking. It would be unfair to only hold the EHS department to this standard.

Everyone is responsible for their safety behavior

Stuff happens.

Limited control over untrust worthy employees and the medical field that gives out light duty jobs and prescriptions like candy

Too many variables which are out of the safety's pro control.

This can cause people to hide numbers or falsely report lower numbers

Operations have greater control over policy enforcement and employee education. Safety's role is to advise and support.

you can't completely control employee behavior no matter how hard you try.

We have No control over so many things that may influence a companies safety performance.