You are on page 1of 7


Muhammad Kashif Hassan, Amjad Hussain, Third C…………..Fourth D……….Fifth E…………
Organizational Safety
Sixth F. WaqarClimate - A Case Study of
Hassan, Keith Case

Comparing Two OHSAS Certified Food
Processing Plants

however there is no regulatory body that can ensure their
Abstract— Like developed countries, ‘Occupational Health implementation. Many multinational and local organizations
and Safety’ is a growing field in the developing. The aim of in Oil and Gas, Chemical, Food and Manufacturing sectors
current study is to determine the level of safety climate in food have implemented OHSAS 18001:2007 (Occupational Health
sector of Pakistan. This study has been conducted at two & Safety Management System) for ensuring health, safety and
different milk processing plants of the same organization, with wellbeing of workers; however, there are still many which are
different management and locations. Perception of production not certified and have not healthy working conditions. Food
line workers was captured through survey using questionnaire. sector of is one of the sectors in which safety awareness is
A pilot study has been carried out and data collection growing and firms are acquiring OHSAS 18001 certification.
instrument was redesigned to increase reliability of the OHSAS 18001:2007 Standard is an Occupational Health and
instrument. Response rate of the respondents was quite Safety Assessment Series for Health and Safety Management
encouraging as 226 out of 300 respondents replied back. Mean System in organizations [2]. OHSAS guidelines can be applied
scores of safety climate dimensions at plant A is 4.16 and plant for promoting safety culture and improving social image of the
B is 4.19 out of 5, which indicates good safety climate at both organization by adopting OHSAS certification, where ultimate
plants.Out of eight safety climate dimensions ‘safety training’ objective is to ensure human wellbeing by promoting safe and
and ‘safety priority over production’have low mean scores risk free work practices so that organizations can utilize their
which indicates need for improvement in these areas .Results human capital optimally. This standard provides complete
of independent sample t-test show that two dimensions guideline procedures for implementing safety in any
‘management commitment to safety’ and ‘safety priority over organization. It involves policy making, hazards identification
production’ differ significantly between two plants.Results and risk assessment, training, documentation, emergency
further conclude that out of 226 respondents only 01 preparedness, corrective and preventive actions [2].
respondent reported an accident during period of twelve Safety at work is determined through the assessment of
months, which was also an indication of good safety climate at ‘Safety Climate’ in that area. Safety Climate is defined as
both plants. ‘perceptions of employees about safety of their area’ [3].
Dedobbler and Blend (1991) have also defined safety as
‘perceptions of people about management actions regarding
Index Terms— OHSAS (Occupational health & safety assessment safety’ [4].Safety Climate measures attitude and perceptions of
series), Safety Climate, Occupational Health, Workplace Safety employees about safety in their work place and helps
management to design and improve their Occupational Health
I. INTRODUCTION Safety program. So through improvement in the attitude of
management and employees, safety climate can be improved.
ccupational Health & Safety is not only the concern of
developed countries but growing in developing countries Safety Climate includes areas as work practices, work style,
as well. Industrialized countries have much better operator training, and industrial hygiene, priority of safety
Occupational Health & Safety awareness than developing over pressure for production. [5][6].
countries [1]. Pakistan is also a developing country where In previous researches many dimensions of safety climate has
education and workforce unions are considered as barriers in been defined, such as management commitment, safety
promoting a true safety culture. FactoryAct1934 clearly training, safety communication, safety participation behavior
defines rules and regulations regarding workplace safety; etc. However, there is no consensus on which dimensions to
be included in safety climate study. [7][8][9][10]

First A. Muhammad Kashif Hassan, is post graduate student in UET Zohar (1980) who is considered as the major contributor, in
Lahore, Pakistan. the area of occupational safety research, concluded that
Second B. (Corresponding Author). Amjad Hussain, Assistant Professor,
Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
‘management commitment’ is the major contributor in
University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan occupational safety. Management Commitment includes role
( of the organizational management in different aspects of safety
Third C such as safety policy, safety objectives, safety training, and
Fourth D
Fifth E
safety audits. This dimension is the key in studying safety
Sixth F. Waqar Hassan, BSc Chemical Engineering from climate in any organization and considered in multiple
UET Lahore, researches of safety climate. [10][12]
Seventh G. Keith Case, Professor, Wolfson School of Mechanical and Safety training is also one of the major factors which are
Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University, UK.
considered important for improving workplace safety. Safety
. training changes the behavior of people about safety. This

The following objectives were set for this study Safety and Production are two key aspects that run parallel in 1. questionnaire which was tested in the pilot study.3 were dropped. Safety training has been used as a factor to assess safety climate of II. In current study statistical [16] has been done on occupational health and safety in food analysis of reliability. linked with the perception of dimensions. Initially. questionnaire was developed and a pilot study (on 38 workers) ‘Safeness of work environment’ involves the level of risk and was conducted to check reliability of the data collection hazards and their impact on workers and has been used as a instrument. Like other dimensions. [8][10][12] software.overall education level of workers communication’ has been used to measure safety climate of at both plants is same.independent sample t-test have been done using commitment. risks and use of safety equipment in age and experience. and production supervisors ignore safety as they want to meet their production commitments at any cost and for that purpose 2.mean scores calculation and difference to explore food sectors safety climate. so there is need correlation.SPSS V20 is a statistical software package used for It is clear from the literature review. province of the country. respondent ticks on ‘completely agree’ with the question Like others.mean scores sector of Pakistan and limited dimensions (management calculation. risks. whereas. key contributor in measuring safety climate [8]. [8][11]. emergency procedures. age of 30-35 years while in Plant A most of the workers are ‘Safety Knowledge’ involves the level of awareness of workers with in the age of 18-25.OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY organizations [5] [11]. To develop an instrument to measure safety climate industries as in order to achieve production targets workers in food industry and to check it’s reliability. those previous researches data analysis in social science and natural sciences. policies and objectives is carrired out on two milk processing plants at different initiated by management and delivered to workers. safety performance (self-reported accidents).[8] [10] [12] education level of production line workers. ‘Workers attitude towards safety’ is the feelings of workers about necessity of safety at their work which drives their 4. however. nether agree/nor disagree. final questionnaire was organization is assessed through the measurement of safety designed and distributed among production line workers of behaviors which are estimated quantitatively (using two different food processing plants. 3 questions which were the impact of adopting safety management certification having inter item correlations below 0. To compare the difference in safety climate in they usually violate safety procedures. complete disagree) was ‘Supervisor commitment’ to safety is also one of the prominent used to record extent of their agreement or disagreement of facts that influences safety climate. If in charge for implementing safety procedures at workplace. supervisor’s commitment has been given the statement it was given score of 5 and if he ticks on prime importance in previous researches [10]. This aspect includes communication about hazards. To find relationship between safety climate and behaviors towards safe work. 49 questions were organization. and safety climate dimensions in data file and required analysis of manufacturing and at offshore environments.. so that they can through self-reported accidents using questionnaire rather than understand and conveniently reply to the questions. as supervisor is the direct worker’s perceptions about safety in the organization. ‘Safety communication’ plays a key role in the improvement of safety climate in organizations. measure of organizational safety climate and measured quantitatively by using questionnaire and multiple researches 3. risk this software. safety committee. ‘safety of theses were graduate also.So workers at both plantsA&B differ knowledge about hazards.George and .In this of safety climate which have been done internationally [4] [8] software data file was prepared by entering mean scores of [9][12] [15] are mostly done on chemical. . 2 includes the training of workforce regarding the use of safety equipment. ‘completely disagree’ with the statement it was given score of It is evident from the literature that safety performance of any 1. Communication about hazards. which (OHSAS18001:2007) on different plants in terms of also improved cronbach’s alpha values of safety climate improving safety culture. Relaibility data collected from organizations or regulatory authorities testing of questionnaire was done using SPPS V20 because of reliability factor. In multiple studies “Safety priority over production” has also been used as a different food processing plants.reliability.Recruitment citeria at both communication about incidents. Also there is need to explore the fact that what is selected for the final data collection. near misses are given from plants(A&B) is DAE(Diplmoa of associate engineers) but few workers to management. research was done using analyze command. In the light of pilot study results. 52 questions were designed and management) have been explored with in a single distributed in the pilot study. agree.Most of the workers in Plant B are in the organizations [7] [13]. Table 1 shows results of reliability testing of workers about safety. disagree. Keeping in view the questionnaire) or by self. construction. questionnaire was Accident rates in the organizations have been measured translated into local language (Urdu). To find out the correlations among different safety [12][13] have explored the role of work pressure on safety. policies and objectives In order to achieve above mentioned objectives study was etc. Previously. and safety practices. Keeping in view previous researches a [8] [9].reported accidents.correlation. safety climate. Five point likert scale (complete agree.Also plant B workers have more work with their safety environment which includes having experience than plant A. climate dimensions.

3597 0.6 so questionnaire is strongly disagreement.Table 1 shows that Supervisor Excellent most of the dimesnsions of questionnaire have cronbach’s 8 7 0. where overall response rate was about commitment. plants and 226 responses were received (121 from plant A and The highest agreement is seen in factors like management 105 from plant B).68031 Safety Good Safety priority over A 121 4. Table 2 shows mean values of the reliable.Questions in ‘safety As mentioned previously. shows that workers have more difference of opinion about this factor. However. one value which is less than 4 at plant B is ‘safety priority there were no questions about personal information like name. which show that over all workplace improvement and finally how to record their safety climate is good at both plants – means worker’s response. it can be noted from table 2.2835 0.720 knowledge towards safety B 105 4.716 communication production B 105 3. and on the basis of this rule of thumb safeness results of reliability have shown in table 1.0967 0. that standard deviation values for plant B data are on the higher side as compared with plant A.1231 0. . SPSS V20 has been used for data that during high production load. workers attitude towards safety and work 75%. TABLE1 SHOWING RESULTS OF RELIABLITY ANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT TABLE2 S.86.these results of agree.After finalizing questionnaire final study was carried responses against all eight dimensions of safety climate out at both plants and questionnaires were personally included in this research at plant A (121 respondents) and distributed among the workers where they were briefed about plant B (105 respondents). neither agree nor disagree.55428 5 6 0.624 B 105 4.7 so their reliability is ‘Good’.57714 7 Work 4 0.Questions included in ‘supervisor commitment’ have cronbach’s alpha value of 0. Total Cronbach Reliability SHOWING MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF SAFETY Dimension CLIMATE DIMENSIONS OF PLANT A&B NO items ’s alpha Management Good Sample 1 commitment to 12 0.624 recorded by using a five point likert scale (strongly agree. signatures etc. their organization gives analysis purpose. over production’.8643 0. The highest variation has been seen in ‘supervisors commitment’. 3 Merly(2003) defined the rule of thumb to determine reliability environment of questionnaire[17]. Total 300 questionnaires were distributed at both perception about workplace safety is significantly positive.3104 0.63606 over production safety Workers attitude Good Safety training A 121 4. and it’s relability stands in acceptable range. Plant A and B have 310 and 210 workers respectively.1132 0. how this can be used for dimensions are near or above 4. there is only (Plant B) respondents. disagree and strongly reliability testing in table 1 shows that no dimension has disagree) where 5 shows strongly agreement and 1 shows cronbach alpha value below 0. Interestingly. which show that workers at plant B have more diversified opinion about safety climate in the organization.0612 0. Mean value of all the eight the objectives of this research.746 Good Management A 121 4.763 Good A 121 4. which still shows an inclination towards positive agreement.58849 4 6 0.912 commitment alpha value greater than 0. To maintain confidentiality of the data. RESULTS mentioned rule it’s reliability is excellent.899 Standard Dimensions Plant Size Mean safety Deviation (N) 2 Safety training 4 0. response of the workers has been priority over production’ have cronbach’s alpha value of 0.46104 6 6 0. relatively less priority to safety. which shows that workers at plant B feel designation.75402 Safety Good Workers attitude A 121 4.912 so according to above III. As the value is 3.52293 . environment safeness also worker’s perception about safety is out of which we have collected data of 121 (plant A) and 105 comparatively more positive at plant B.0333 0.56774 Safety priority Acceptable commitment to 3 4 0.805 towards safety B 105 4.

05) .015  0. 207. t  0.000  0.05) attitude towards safety’ Weak positive correlation exist .259.487  0.3619 0. p  0.05 which means ‘Management commitment to safety’ and ‘Safety priority over production’ differs significantly among two TABLE 3 plants(Plant A & Plant B) other six dimensions have SHOWING CORRELATIONS AMONG EIGHT DIMENSIONS OF significant value(p-value) greater than 0.750  0. Highest positive correlation exists between ‘safety comparisons of both plants (A&B).743.320.0968 0.61804 communication Workers knowledge A 121 4.279  environment safeness attitude towards safety’ ( r  0.01.696.798  0. Out of eight safety ‘safety communication’ in these plants has increased ‘workers climate dimensions ‘Management commitment to safety’( knowledge’ about safety.05 ).2031 0. Results from Table 4 communication’ and ‘workers knowledge’ shows that significance values (p values) of safety climate ( r  0. Second strong positive correlation t  2.59240 Supervisor A 121 4.1612 0.2174 0.05 which means these SAFETY CLIMATE six dimensions do not differ significantly among two plants(Plant A & Plant B).Data gathered through questionnaire was also compared with the accident log book of both plants. p  0. p  0.This positive correlation among these eight dimensions is An independent sample t-test was performed to compare the indication that all these eight dimensions are interrelated to whether mean values of all eight dimensions of both plants each other and are measuring safety climate in similar (A&B) differs significantly or not? Table 3 shows results of direction.042.645. p  0.01) which production (t  2 .In this analysis mean scores of the safety climate dimensions are put in data file and pearson’s correlation command is run.01) which indicates that good dimensions at 95% confidence interval.05) .01) (t  0.54702 B 105 priority over communication’ (r  0.3430 0. p  0.workers knowledge (t  0.No respondent from sample of 105 respondents of plantB reported even a single accident.89831 Pearson’s correlations were dertmined using SPSS V20 statistical software package in order to find out the impact of safety climate dimensions on each other. p  0. In order to determine the safety performance of two plants question about self reported accidents was added in the questionnaire.wheteher respondent has suffered an accidents during period of one year or not?and what is the time lost during this accident? From the data gathered only one repondent from sample of 121 respondents of plantA reported an accident. p  0.05) between ‘management commitment to safety’ and ‘workers .workers indicates that good ‘safety communication’ from top attitude towards safety (t  1. p  communication (t  1.05 ).711.59912 commitment B 105 4.442. TABLE4 .000  0. 4 Safety B 105 4.As mentioned earlier that SPSS V20 is a statistical package that is used in this study for data analysis.Table 3 shows correlation among variables and shows that all the variables have positive correlation with each with in the significance level of 0.000  0. priority over production’ have p-value less than 0.50511 safeness B 105 4. p  0.086. p  0.05) management and through supervisors changes ‘workers .1298 0.supervisor which indicates that ‘management commitment to safety’ has commitment (t  0.425  0. 028  0 .safety training’( exist between ‘workers attitude towards safety’ and ‘safety t  0.299  0.05) two least positive impact on ‘workers attitude towards safety’ as dimensions ‘Management commitment to safety’ & ‘safety compared other dimensions.65286 Work environment A 121 4.

asse. Professional Safety.19 and 4. Journal of Safety Research. There are two at their workplace’ was measured by using a five point likert factors that are needed further improvement. positive perception about safety practices at their workplace. illnesses and accidents during and after their consequences of safety behavior”. “Safety climate”. plants(A&B) is significant It can be concluded that workers of both the plants have positive perception about safety at their work. PP 96-102.Zohar. 1991 might be a possible cause for this difference. and manufacturing etc. [06] Bosak Janine and Coetsee WJ and Cullinane Sarah-Jane. Journal of Safety Research. (2005. “management [02] Occupational health and safety management systems- commitment to safety & safety priority over production”. 5 SHOWING RESULTS OF INDEPENDENT SAMPLES t-test must have to place ‘safety’ as the top priority in any kind of circumstances. safety climate has a As mentioned earlier that ‘perception of workers about safety direct relationship with safety performance. 2012 . 1995 further improving the safety climate of the organization.self-reported accidents. These correlations also indicate [01] Micheal Findley and June Gorski.16 out of 5. However.. The same instrument can be used in variety of industrial applications. That 103. and different factors of safety climate measurement are linked Available: with each other. vol 45. http://www.”Safety climate in industrial organizations: at two plants about ‘management commitment to safety’ and theoretical and applied implications”. pp 256-264. As we know that in this research.Stuart and David Sleeman and Neil Adams. As this research is limited to food industry. safety climate has been measured by capturing workers response over eight factors. BSI standard. pp 97- management and producing different variety of products. say that although the safety climate overall score is fine. further studies can be carried out to validate the reliability of instrument and measurement of safety climate in different industries like oil and gas. As these two Psychology. however. “Safety climate in force their workforce to adopt such procedures that can lead OHSAS 18001 certified organizations: antecedents and towards injuries. This research has some limitations as well. Vol 22. The instrument developed for this research. July 2007 different at two plants that indicates that workers perceptions [03] D. management Prevention. REFERENCES where it has been found that all the factors are positively correlated with each other. Vol 65(1). chemical processing industries. This further indicates the predictive validity of the instrument as good safety climate score means good safety performance which is indicated by self-reported accidents. that safety climate at both plants is good as the mean score of still there is a need to explore how workplace safety at safety climate is 4.OSH that good safety climate improves overall safety performance Disparities in developing countries. These statistics are an indication of workers underlying factors associated with this. Furthermore. 1980 plants are at two different locations. Moreover. industries of P<0. 2013 supervisors can go for such practices that are less safe and [07] Beatirz. pp 247- however. pp 745-758.Fernandez and Joe. for plant A and B developing countries can be improved by exploring the respectively. There is only one self-reported accident on plant A and no accident on plant B during period of previous one year which is the indication of the fact that good safety climate which is reflected in safety climate scores and also reflected through dependent variable . Lesser number of accidents is an indication that safety procedures are practically followed during work. vol 26. where relatively less committed Accident Analysis and Prevention. ‘Safety priority over production’ is a quite common problem “Safety climate dimensions as predictor of risk behavior”.N and Blend. Journal of Applied ‘safety priority over production’ are Comparison of the mean values of safety climate dimensions 05as. they have different construction sites”. these two factors should be taken up critically for 254. CONCLUSIONS number of ‘self-reported accidents’ has been found at both plants.Manuel. It has been noted commitment’ and ‘safety priority over production’. vol 55. ‘management scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree.pdf for both plants shows that two dimensions. Accident and Analysis work.05 are marked with “*” indicating the diffrence between two Pakistan. validates the above statement as safety climate scores of both plants are good so very little IV. For maintaining a good safety climate. We may further [05] Coyel Ian R. shows a similar kind of worker’s perception. all other six dimensions do not differ from each other. although both plants [04] Dedobleer. in many organizations. are Requirements. April). “A safety climate measure of belong to the same company.

pp 49-52. pp 498-507. . Workers are instructed to record the extent of coworkers. complete safety training. about safety. items used in the questionnaire to assess safety climate 23-Workers help their coworkers to improve safety in their work area.Management continually reacts and takes actions on 26-Workers feel that complete knowledge of safety is outcomes of safety (accident rate). agree. chemical industry”. culture”. 1997. safeness of work environment in Korean manufacturing: The 8.“SPSS for windows step by step: workers to complete production by ignoring safety A simple guide and reference 11. “Employee attitudes and safety in hazards and risks of working area. Vol 49.In case of any accident management listens and its relationship with accidents and personal attributes in the investigates workers carefully.N and Bhasi.4th edition. pp 203-208. 1. “Perspectives on safety regular intervals of time. 2014 18-Management or supervisor do not put pressure on [17] George D and Mallery P. Management Commitment 24-Workers feel the responsibility to inform management about hazards and risks in their work area. 2011 15-Safety expertise of every worker is checked after [14] Glendon A I and Stanton N A. Journal of inspections in production areas. disagree. “Evaluating 17-In safety training workers are trained to give priority occupational safety & health performance in Pakistan: to safety in every circumstance. Safety Science.Management continually uses better technology and [09] Know Oh Jun and Sun Kim Young. pp 659-667. vol 7(3). Boston: Allan & Bacon 19-Management punishes workers who ignore safety in order to complete production targets. chemical industry”. 2. 239. vol 30(6). vol 53.Management encourages suggestions of workers safety Climate perspective”. vol 41. evidence from food industry”.Management reviews injury and accident records [10] Mearns K and Flin R and Fleming M and Gordon R. Following are the for them.Management guides workers about implementation of action plans on safety problems.Management provides complete equipment of safety edition. “Safety climate factors and 6. 28-Workers are regularly informed about equipment and new hazards in their work area. pp 9-53 to workers. 6 [08]Vindokumar N and Bhasi M. 2009 7. complete disagree) has been used in the 21-Workers feel that safety is first priority for them and for questionnaire. 2003.Management rewards workers who are excellent in implementation of safety rules. (NOSACQ-50): A new tool for diagnosing safety climate”.Management regularly conducts audits and climate practice in Korean manufacturing industry”. World Applied Science Journal. 3. 27-Supervisors gives complete information to management 5. vol 47. “A study of impact of safety accidents in their accident log books. Items used in the questionnaire are given below and five point Worker’s attitude towards safety likert scale (complete agree. 20-Workers are advised to keep safety first daily before APPENDIX start of work. 2008 12. “Safety 11. Health & Safety Executive. vol 159. “An analysis of do not save cost for betterment of safety. “Nordic Safety Climate Questionnaire Intervals. Safety communication 4.0 update”. measures. 2011 Safety Training [13] Kines Pete and Lappalainen Jorma and Mikkelsen 13-Every worker is given safety training after regular Lyngby Kim. 2013 9. 14-New workers are not allowed to work without International Journal of industrial Ergonomics. pp 634. urgent for them. journal of Loss Prevention in process industries. management certification on safety management”. vol 34. pp716-722. Hazardous Materials.Management takes effective countermeasures to about hazards and risks present in work environment. [11] Bae Baek Jong and Bae Sejong and Singh Karan. nether agree/nor disagree. Safety Science. avoid repeating of accidents. pp 233. pp 193-214. Safety Science. after regular intervals. “Human and organizational factors in off shore safety”.M. 1994 Safety priority over production [16] Saeed Rashid and Javeed Sara and Noor Nabeela and Ahamd Wasim and Hafiza Mubeen Muneer. compulsory for them. Safety Science.IST 10.Management encourages workers to register [12] Vindokumar.Management continually assesses safety hazards and 25-Workers feel that to participate in safety training is risks in the organization. 2000 16-Safety training has complete information about [15] Donald I Canter D. 646. their agreement or disagreement with the safety measures 22-Workers feel that to act upon safety rules is compulsory given below about each safety dimension.

41-Workers feel safe about use of machines during work.helmets )in production area. 38-Workers know about safety targets of the company. alarms) to control hazards in work place. Safety Knowledge 33-Workers have complete knowledge of about use of safety equipment (gloves . Respondent’s information Have you suffered an accident during period of last twelve months? Yes No What was the absence time as a result of that accident/injury? a)One shift b) More than one day c)More than three days What is your age? . sensors. 30-Workers inform each other about benefits of safety How much is your work experience? measures. 42-Complete safety equipment (shoes. 32-Workers completely shares better suggestions of safety with their top management. 49-Supervisor listens problems of safety and makes efforts for solutions.goggles . 7 29-Workers give complete information to management about hazards and risks in their work area. gloves. 47-Supervisor regularly attends health and safety meetings. 44-Supervisor regularly assesses hazards and risks present in the work area. 48-Supervisor encourages suggestion of workers for betterment of safety. 35-Workers have complete knowledge of hazards and risks in their work place. 37-Workers have complete understanding of safety policy of the company. . 46-Supervisor guides workers in safety issues. 36-Workers have complete knowledge about use of fire equipment in case of emergency. Supervisor commitment 43-Supervisor daily inspects safety of work area. safety dress) is present in work area. 34-Workers know complete procedure of emergency exit in work area. 45-Supercisor takes workers suggestions in hazards and risk assessment. 40-Preventive maintenance of machines are done regularly to maintain their safety. Safeness of work environment 39-Machines and work environment have complete equipment (control switches. 31-Management informs workers about good practices of safety measures taken by other departments.