Fundamentals Of Occupational Safety And Health

The Significance of Effective Safety Procedures

Discuss about the Fundamentals of Occupational Safety and Health.

Employees are considered as the assets of any organization. The companies, business organizations or factories that employ employees or workers must ensure that the work environment is safety and healthy. Healthy and a safe workplace is fundamental as it would enable the employees to perform better which would, in turn, enhance the productivity of the organization. There are certain business organizations and industries that must be maintain more safety procedures s compared to other industries depending on the kind of work conducted by such organizations or industries. For instance, manufacturing, construction industries or ware housing etc are industries that uses profuse safety procedures (Seenivasan et al. 2017).

The significance of effective safety procedures is that it enables the employers to avoid numerous incidents that may be caused to the employees or workers in the workplace. The employers use an employee manual to educate and inform them about the safety policies and procedures that must be followed in the workplace (Alsamawi et al. 2017). The employers are under legal obligation to review the actions of the labors or the employees in order to maintain safety in the workplace. Moreover, decrease in the rate of workplace incidents also helps the organizations to hoard money on the insurance policies.

Another significance of a safety workplace is that it aids the organization or industries to diminish the legal liability that may arise in the event of any injuries or accidents in the workplace. The employees or customers who are injured due to lack of proper safety of the workplace may initiate legal proceeding against the employer of the organization. In Wilsons and Clyde Coal Ltd v English [1973], a miner claimed damages for suffering personal injury caused by his employer as he failed to provide a safety workplace. Hence, the employer was held liable for negligence. Further, in Hudson v Ridge Manufacturing [1957], the plaintiff, a worker, was injured due to a foolish prank played by another worker and he claimed damages. The court held that the employer was liable for committing breach of duty, as it is the responsibility of an employer to provide competent workers and review their actions. If any worker is proved as a source of danger for the fellow workers, it is the duty of the employer to remove such source of danger (Sinelnikov, Inouye and Kerper 2015). Therefore, the employer was held liable for the injuries suffered by the plaintiff.

Legal Issues

Furthermore, in Harrison v Michelin Tyre Co [1985], the plaintiff, a worker, was injured in the course of the employment and claimed damages from the employer as he his vicariously liable for negligence. The court held that in order to determine whether the defendant was vicariously liable, a test must be applied. The test was whether the employee was acting in the course of employment and whether the act of the employee was part of the employment in the opinion of any prudent person even though, the employer has prohibited or have unauthorized such act. After applying the test, the defendants were held to be vicariously liable.

In the given case, while Yusuf was instructed to work on some different machine, his employer did not provide him with detailed information about the usage, maintaining and functioning of the machine. Therefore, when the machine was blocked and he tried to clear the blockage without turning it off, as he was not aware that the machine must be turned off to remove the jammed product (Narayanan 2015). Consequently, while he was cleaning another employee turned it on and Yusuf suffered serious injury. Moreover, when the accident occurred, Yusuf was found to be under the influence of drugs and was working without any safety equipment.

Therefore, in the mentioned case study, the legal issue that may arise is whether the employer and employees of Al Maya packaging Plant maintained health and safety measures at workplace under the Omani Labor Law.

Oman’s labor relations are regulated by the Oman Labor Law, which lays down provisions relating to the employment contracts, industrial safety and industrial trainings. In 2008, the Minister of Manpower issued Ministerial Decision no. 286/2008 and introduced the Regulation of Occupational safety and health for Establishments governed by the Labor law. The Regulation provides a comprehensive framework, which purports to improve the health and the safety standards in the workplace and safeguard them from numerous occupational perils.

According to Article 15 of the Regulation, an employer must make all the necessary arrangements in order to ensure that the workers are provided with safe environment in the workplace. If the workers are required to work on any mechanical equipment, they must be provided with adequate and appropriate training regarding the usage, maintaining and functioning of such machinery. They must be informed about the hazards related to the workplace and must be provided with adequate training and information regarding the safety policies of the organization or industry.

Oman Labor Law and Regulatory Framework

In order to deal with the hazards related to the workplace, the regulation entails a list of measures, which the employers must ensure to have been implemented, as it would enable them to reduce industrial accidents and exposure to numerous hazards such as mechanical risks, electrical or fire risks, etc (Mosley and Tello 2015).

According to Article 87 of the Labor Law issued by Royal Decree No. 35/2003, every employer or representative of such employer must notify the employees about the hazards related to the occupation and the safety or preventive measures that must be adopted by the workers or the employees in order to avoid any occupational accidents (Fick 2014). The employers must provide the employees with all the necessities that is required to ensure their safety and health while operating any machinery in the workplace and they must also ensure that such machines are in the best of conditions.

According to Article 88 of the labor law, the employees must not commit any act, which would cause damage to the equipments or causes any injury to the fellow workers. The workers themselves must ensure the safety and health condition of their fellow workers. They must exercise due care in their conduct and carry out the instructions provided to them in order to safeguard personal safety and health against any injuries or damages (Vega and Robert 2013).

According to Article 32 of the Labor Law, every worker must work with the ready tool on which he was provided adequate training and under any circumstances, a worker must not carry out any work, which does not form a part of his responsibilities.

 The Ministerial Decree No 286/2008 lays down under Article 8, the statutory provisions relating to specifications of work clothes and personal protection equipment. The employer must provide the employees with such work clothes and personal protection equipment, which is appropriate for the nature of work performed by the workers. The employers must ensure that such protection equipment complies with the standard of safety specified in relation to the actual exposure to workplace perils.  

As held in the Hudson v Ridge Manufacturing case, the employee claimed damages from the employer for the injury sustained by him because of foolish prank played by a co-worker. The court held the employer liable on the ground that it is the responsibility of an employer to employ competent employees and ensure that any source of danger, be it a person or any equipment, which must be removed from the workplace for the safety and health of the workers. Again, in the case of Harrison v Michelin, the employee claimed damages from the employer for sustaining injury in the course of employment on the ground of vicarious liability. However, the court held that a reasonable test must be applied to determine whether the employee was acting in the course of the employment even though such act was unauthorized by the employer and whether such act was a part of the employment in the opinion of any reasonable person.

Measures for Hazard Reduction in the Workplace

In the mentioned case study, Yusuf was instructed to work on a different machine for which he was provided with instructions for few minutes. Whereas according to Section 87 of the labor law, it is the liability of an employer to provide detailed information about the hazards related to the occupation and the machines that is required to be operated during the course of employment. However, in the case study, Yusuf was not aware of the fact that in order to remove jammed products from the machine; it must be turned off as he used to operate a different machine. He was not provided with detailed information regarding the usage, maintaining and operation of the machines. It is a clear infringement of Article 32 of the Labor Law, as the article requires a worker to work only on the ready tool for which he has received adequate training. Under no circumstances, a worker shall carry out a work, which does not come under his part of the responsibilities (Hoyos and Zimolong 2014).

Further, the employer was not aware that Yusuf was under the influence of drugs while he was operating the machine. It is the liability of the employer to ensure that the workers are in a good condition while working in the due course of employment (Al-Sayyed 2014). Furthermore, Yusuf was not provided with personal protection equipment whereas Article 8 of the Ministerial Decree mandates the employer to ensure that the employees must be provided with specific work clothes and personal protection equipment. It is the liability of the employers to to be provided with personal equipments in accordance to the nature of work performed by them (Loeppke et al. 2015). The article also requires the employers to provide adequate training to the employees regarding the usage and maintenance of any equipment and provide them with a guidance directory for their convenience. The employer neither conducted any proper training to Yusuf nor provided him or other workers with any directory.

On the other hand, it is the liability of the workers to maintain safety and health in the workplace. They are under statutory obligation to refrain from committing any act, which may cause any serious injury to any fellow worker or cause damage to the equipment used in the workplace. Article 88 of the Labor Law mandates the employees or workers to maintain health and safety in the workplace. In the mentioned case study, while Yusuf was working on the machine, trying to remove the jammed product, the other worker turned the machine without even checking whether someone was working on it also committing a breach of the safety measures stipulated by the statutes and regulations (Gopang et al. 2017).

Conclusion

In the mentioned case, both the employer and the employee have failed to maintain health and safety measures in the workplace at the Al Maya Packaging Plant. The safety measures adopted by the employers enable them to avoid legal liability, which may arise in the course of employment as in the case of Harrison v Michelin. In reference to the given case, the employers must be cautious about the fact that whenever the employees operate any new equipment, they must be provided with adequate training regarding the usage and maintain such equipment. They must be informed about the hazards that are related to the workplace or the machines that is required to be operated. Article 90 of the Omani Labor Law states that the Ministry may appoint inspectors to check whether the employers are complying with the health and the safety measures stipulated by the statutes (Reese 2015).

Further, the employer must provide the employees with personal protection equipment in order to ensure their safety. The employers must acknowledge the employees with the safety measures that have been adopted by the organization or industry and the potential risks associated with the workplace as well as the occupation (Friend and Kohn 2014). The employers must use a manual handbook or a directory as guidance for the employees in order to make them aware of the safety policies or measures and the use of the machines as well. Such directory or handbook must be placed in a conspicuous place in the workplace to be visible to all the workers.

When the workers are provided with a healthy and a safe working environment, they feel comfortable and confident that their employers are concerned about their safety and health, which boosts their morale, and in turn, the productivity of the industry. Therefore, it is the responsibility of both the employers and the employees to maintain a healthy and safe working environment as it not only strengthens the employment relation but also enhances the performance and growth of any business organization or industry.

Reference list

Alsamawi, A., Murray, J., Lenzen, M. and Reyes, R.C., 2017. Trade in occupational safety and health: Tracing the embodied human and economic harm in labour along the global supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production.

Al-Sayyed, N.M., 2014. Critical Factors affecting Human Resource Development in the Arab World. Life Science Journal, 11(4s).

Fick, B.J., 2014. Corporate Social Responsibility for Enforcement of Labor Rights: Are There More Effective Alternatives?. Browser Download This Paper.

Harrison v Michelin Tyre Co [1985] 1 ALL ER 919

Hudson v Ridge Manufacturing [1957] 2 ALL ER 229

Mosley, L. and Tello, L., 2015. Labor rights, material interests, and moral entrepreneurship. Human Rights Quarterly, 37(1), pp.53-79.

Narayanan, K.T., 2015. Safety, Health and Environment Handbook. McGraw-Hill Education.

Seenivasan, M., Arularasu, M., Thirumalai, R. and Kumar, K.M., 2017. Implementation of Occupational Health and Safety Analysis in Manufacturing Industries. Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 7(1), pp.384-391.

Vega, M.L. and Robert, R., 2013. Labour Inspection Sanctions: Law and Practice of National Labour Inspection System. ILO.

Wilsons and Clyde Coal Ltd v English [1973] 3 ALL ER 628

Hoyos, C.G. and Zimolong, B.M., 2014. Occupational safety and accident prevention: behavioral strategies and methods (Vol. 11). Elsevier.

Gopang, M.A., Nebhwani, M., Khatri, A. and Marri, H.B., 2017. An assessment of occupational health and safety measures and performance of SMEs: An empirical investigation. Safety Science, 93, pp.127-133.

Friend, M.A. and Kohn, J.P., 2014. Fundamentals of occupational safety and health. Bernan Press.

Reese, C.D., 2015. Occupational health and safety management: a practical approach. CRC press.

Loeppke, R.R., Hohn, T., Baase, C., Bunn, W.B., Burton, W.N., Eisenberg, B.S., Ennis, T., Fabius, R., Hawkins, R.J., Hudson, T.W. and Hymel, P.A., 2015. Integrating health and safety in the workplace: how closely aligning health and safety strategies can yield measurable benefits. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 57(5), pp.585-597.

Sinelnikov, S., Inouye, J. and Kerper, S., 2015. Using leading indicators to measure occupational health and safety performance. Safety science, 72, pp.240-248.