Page 54 - Occupational Health & Safety, November/December 2019

FACILITY SAFETY
plemented and that work will recommence. 6. Monitor. Measuring and evaluating the level of control that is achieved is an es- sential step in ensuring that the issue(s) is entirely abated. While it is the desired out- come of the stop work action to ensure the identified safety concerns are addressed to the satisfaction of all involved persons be- fore the resumption of work, it is prudent to ensure the corrective action(s) was cor- rect with follow-up inspections and inter- views. Further investigation and corrective actions may be required to identify and address additional root causes discovered
from such monitoring activity.
7. Communicate. An authorized per-
son should publish the incident details re- garding the stop work action to supervisory staff, managers, and employees outlining the issue, corrective action(s) taken, and lessons learned. Senior management will promptly review all stop work reports and may identify additional investigation or re- quired follow-up to be done.
Training
In a work environment that is bold enough to write safety principles that grant author- ity and the opportunity to shut down a manufacturing process, you also can imag- ine that mistakes will happen. To lessen such impacts, training is vitally important. Training should be performed to review the policy and program, teach how to identify hazards, teach how to recognize substan- dard behaviors, share the process for stop- ping the work when an issue is identified, and outline the notification process for af- fected personnel and management. There also should be a clear understanding of how the situation is investigated and corrected and returned to service via restart authority.
Resolving Conflict
For the process to work well and with the value intended, it should support final agreement from the person that initiated the stop work and the party that abated the is- sue. However, and without a doubt, opinions will differ at some point, and an agreement won’t be reached. Many times, I was called out to review a stop work situation and did not agree with it at all. Other times, I was asked to mediate between two parties who could not come to a successful conclusion.
In these situations, I would consider the second principle shared previously, “Any- one who feels that a work situation is unsafe
STOP WORK AUTHORITY FORM
The “Stop Work Authority” process involves a stop, notify, correct, resume, approach for the resolution of a perceived unsafe condition, act, error, omission, or lack of understanding that could result in an undesirable event, or cause potential harm or injury to personnel, property, or the environment.
Section 1: Stop Work Issuance
Job Title
Department
Job Location
Date and Time
Supervisor
Phone
Person Initiating SWA
Pictures Y/N
The specific hazard, condition or behavior that warranted the issuance of Stop Work
Section 2: Date/Time Informed
Supervisor
Project Manager
Safety Manager
Employee
Section 3: Investigation and Correction (Root Causes and Corrective Actions)
Section 3: Resume to Operation Authority
Supervisor
Date and Time
Person Initiating SWA
Date and Time
Monitoring the level of continued control and the Communication of this SWA Issuance will be conducted in accordance to the requirements of the Safe Work Authority Policy
will shut down that process and work with appropriate team members to create a safe situation.” Enlarge the group of those clos- est to the process and employees who have a vested interest in the safety of the operation, such as maintenance, engineering, supervi- sors, and manufacturing colleagues.
If it had ever come to a final vote, I would have been that vote, but it never came to that. We just worked the problem to a resolution. My recommendation is that this should be clearly defined in your SWA policy.
Using SWA as a Culture Lever
Can Stop Work Authority create a culture shift? I think it can.
Aside from the benefit of stopping work before a loss is experienced, there are two other significant outputs with such a plan. First, it promotes the idea of participation and partnership in the safety process, be- cause it expands the safety and health team and adds many new eyes that are watching the safety process deep in the organization. Second, the policy gives the organization the opportunity to begin a path of putting aside a possible past culture where safety was not valued.
Regardless of culture, there is a good chance that there continue to be employ- ees embedded in your current work system who cling to the perception that “produc-
tion reigns” and that “safety is the job of the safety team.” A solid SWA plan helps in dismissing such thoughts.
Scott Gaddis is Vice President and Global Practice Leader, Safety and Health, at In- telex Technologies Inc. He has more than 25 years in EHS leadership experience in heavy manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and packaging. Before joining Intelex, he served as vice president, EHS for Coveris High Performance Packaging, executive director of EHS at Bristol-Myers Squibb, and global leader for Occupational Safety and Health at Kimberly-Clark Corporation.
REFERENCES
1. “BP Wind Energy Policies And Procedures Stop Work Authority.” N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2019
https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g2000/ envdocs/MohaveCountyWindFarm/Plan_of_De- velopment/508%20Attachments%20to%20 HSSE%20Plan/Attach_PP_Stop_Work.pdf
2. “Stop Work - Hess Corp.” N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2019
http://www.hess.com/careers/stop-work.
3. “6 Steps To Establish An Effective Stop Work Authority Program.” N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2019
http://blog.wisebusinessware.com/safetyinsid- erblog/how-to-establish-an-effective-stop-work- authority-program
50 Occupational Health & Safety | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2019
www.ohsonline.com