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

Like other dimensions.reported accidents.[8] [10] [12] education level of production line workers. This aspect includes communication about hazards. ‘safety of theses were graduate also. To find relationship between safety climate and behaviors towards safe work. . research was done using analyze command. construction. ‘Safety communication’ plays a key role in the improvement of safety climate in organizations. Five point likert scale (complete agree.reliability.independent sample t-test have been done using commitment. which (OHSAS18001:2007) on different plants in terms of also improved cronbach’s alpha values of safety climate improving safety culture. nether agree/nor disagree. 3 questions which were the impact of adopting safety management certification having inter item correlations below 0. [8][11]. To compare the difference in safety climate in they usually violate safety procedures. Communication about hazards.. emergency procedures.mean scores calculation and difference to explore food sectors safety climate. 2 includes the training of workforce regarding the use of safety equipment.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. ‘completely disagree’ with the statement it was given score of It is evident from the literature that safety performance of any 1. safety committee. measure of organizational safety climate and measured quantitatively by using questionnaire and multiple researches 3. 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. linked with the perception of dimensions. In current study statistical [16] has been done on occupational health and safety in food analysis of reliability. questionnaire which was tested in the pilot study. The following objectives were set for this study Safety and Production are two key aspects that run parallel in 1.OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY organizations [5] [11]. those previous researches data analysis in social science and natural sciences.Also plant B workers have more work with their safety environment which includes having experience than plant A. risks and use of safety equipment in age and experience. 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.Most of the workers in Plant B are in the organizations [7] [13]. however. agree. Also there is need to explore the fact that what is selected for the final data collection. Keeping in view previous researches a [8] [9]. In the light of pilot study results. climate dimensions. near misses are given from plants(A&B) is DAE(Diplmoa of associate engineers) but few workers to management. questionnaire was Accident rates in the organizations have been measured translated into local language (Urdu). as supervisor is the direct worker’s perceptions about safety in the organization.So workers at both plantsA&B differ knowledge about hazards. so that they can through self-reported accidents using questionnaire rather than understand and conveniently reply to the questions. safety climate. and production supervisors ignore safety as they want to meet their production commitments at any cost and for that purpose 2. Keeping in view the questionnaire) or by self. Safety training has been used as a factor to assess safety climate of II. 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 18-25.3 were dropped. respondent ticks on ‘completely agree’ with the question Like others.SPSS V20 is a statistical software package used for It is clear from the literature review. 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. Initially. 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].Recruitment citeria at both communication about incidents. [8][10][12] software. key contributor in measuring safety climate [8]. Table 1 shows results of reliability testing of workers about safety.mean scores sector of Pakistan and limited dimensions (management calculation. safety performance (self-reported accidents). ‘Workers attitude towards safety’ is the feelings of workers about necessity of safety at their work which drives their 4. risk this software. Previously. In multiple studies “Safety priority over production” has also been used as a different food processing plants. 52 questions were designed and management) have been explored with in a single distributed in the pilot study.George and . risks. province of the country. whereas. so there is need correlation. 49 questions were organization. and safety climate dimensions in data file and required analysis of manufacturing and at offshore environments. Relaibility data collected from organizations or regulatory authorities testing of questionnaire was done using SPPS V20 because of reliability factor. To find out the correlations among different safety [12][13] have explored the role of work pressure on safety. policies and objectives is carrired out on two milk processing plants at different initiated by management and delivered to workers.overall education level of workers communication’ has been used to measure safety climate of at both plants is same. disagree.correlation. and safety practices. policies and objectives In order to achieve above mentioned objectives study was etc. If in charge for implementing safety procedures at workplace. 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.

SPSS V20 has been used for data that during high production load. there is only (Plant B) respondents. signatures etc.Table 1 shows that Supervisor Excellent most of the dimesnsions of questionnaire have cronbach’s 8 7 0.624 recorded by using a five point likert scale (strongly agree.624 B 105 4. it can be noted from table 2.6 so questionnaire is strongly disagreement.63606 over production safety Workers attitude Good Safety training A 121 4.8643 0.912 commitment alpha value greater than 0. The highest variation has been seen in ‘supervisors commitment’.68031 Safety Good Safety priority over A 121 4.0333 0.Questions in ‘safety As mentioned previously.these results of agree. Mean value of all the eight the objectives of this research.7 so their reliability is ‘Good’.Questions included in ‘supervisor commitment’ have cronbach’s alpha value of 0. 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. Total 300 questionnaires were distributed at both perception about workplace safety is significantly positive.86.58849 4 6 0. 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. neither agree nor disagree. 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. plants and 226 responses were received (121 from plant A and The highest agreement is seen in factors like management 105 from plant B).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). TABLE1 SHOWING RESULTS OF RELIABLITY ANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT TABLE2 S.75402 Safety Good Workers attitude A 121 4. shows that workers have more difference of opinion about this factor. over production’.3104 0. which shows that workers at plant B feel designation. where overall response rate was about commitment. Interestingly.1132 0.912 so according to above III. 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. that standard deviation values for plant B data are on the higher side as compared with plant A.3597 0.805 towards safety B 105 4.46104 6 6 0. relatively less priority to safety. which show that workers at plant B have more diversified opinion about safety climate in the organization.0967 0. and it’s relability stands in acceptable range.0612 0.763 Good A 121 4. However. To maintain confidentiality of the data.57714 7 Work 4 0. which still shows an inclination towards positive agreement. workers attitude towards safety and work 75%.2835 0. response of the workers has been priority over production’ have cronbach’s alpha value of 0.746 Good Management A 121 4.56774 Safety priority Acceptable commitment to 3 4 0. their organization gives analysis purpose. As the value is 3. how this can be used for dimensions are near or above 4.716 communication production B 105 3.720 knowledge towards safety B 105 4. . Plant A and B have 310 and 210 workers respectively. and on the basis of this rule of thumb safeness results of reliability have shown in table 1. Table 2 shows mean values of the reliable.55428 5 6 0. RESULTS mentioned rule it’s reliability is excellent.1231 0.52293 .899 Standard Dimensions Plant Size Mean safety Deviation (N) 2 Safety training 4 0. 3 Merly(2003) defined the rule of thumb to determine reliability environment of questionnaire[17].

086.05) management and through supervisors changes ‘workers . Results from Table 4 communication’ and ‘workers knowledge’ shows that significance values (p values) of safety climate ( r  0. priority over production’ have p-value less than 0. TABLE4 .Table 3 shows correlation among variables and shows that all the variables have positive correlation with each with in the significance level of 0.61804 communication Workers knowledge A 121 4.50511 safeness B 105 4. t  0.01.05) .3430 0. 028  0 .Data gathered through questionnaire was also compared with the accident log book of both plants.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.05) attitude towards safety’ Weak positive correlation exist .425  0. p  training’( exist between ‘workers attitude towards safety’ and ‘safety t  0.05 ). p  0.As mentioned earlier that SPSS V20 is a statistical package that is used in this study for data analysis. 207.0968 priority over communication’ (r  0.2174 0.05 ).750  0.798  0.299  0.000  0. 4 Safety B 105 4.05 which means these SAFETY CLIMATE six dimensions do not differ significantly among two plants(Plant A & Plant B).279  0.01) which production (t  2 .01) (t  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 communication (t  1.042.54702 B 105 4.In this analysis mean scores of the safety climate dimensions are put in data file and pearson’s correlation command is run. Highest positive correlation exists between ‘safety comparisons of both plants (A&B).59240 Supervisor A 121 4.345.743.320. In order to determine the safety performance of two plants question about self reported accidents was added in the questionnaire. Out of eight safety ‘safety communication’ in these plants has increased ‘workers climate dimensions ‘Management commitment to safety’( knowledge’ about safety. p  0.05) between ‘management commitment to safety’ and ‘workers . p  0. p  0. p  0.487  0.259. p  0.No respondent from sample of 105 respondents of plantB reported even a single accident.711.2031 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.442.workers knowledge (t  0. 05) .65286 Work environment A 121 4.645.workers indicates that good ‘safety communication’ from top attitude towards safety (t  1.59912 commitment B 105 4.1298 0. Second strong positive correlation t  2. p  environment safeness attitude towards safety’ ( r  0.01) which indicates that good dimensions at 95% confidence interval.000  0.05) two least positive impact on ‘workers attitude towards safety’ as dimensions ‘Management commitment to safety’ & ‘safety compared other dimensions.015  0.000  0.1612 0.89831 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.696. p  0.3619 0. p  0.supervisor which indicates that ‘management commitment to safety’ has commitment (t  0.

05 are marked with “*” indicating the diffrence between two Pakistan.self-reported accidents. for plant A and B developing countries can be improved by exploring the respectively. positive perception about safety practices at their workplace. April). plants(A&B) is significant It can be concluded that workers of both the plants have positive perception about safety at their work. Furthermore. pp 97- management and producing different variety of products.”Safety climate in industrial organizations: at two plants about ‘management commitment to safety’ and theoretical and applied implications”. vol 55.N and Blend. [06] Bosak Janine and Coetsee WJ and Cullinane Sarah-Jane. say that although the safety climate overall score is fine.Manuel. The instrument developed for this research. and manufacturing etc.16 out of 5. There are two at their workplace’ was measured by using a five point likert factors that are needed further improvement. Vol 65(1). As this research is limited to food industry. pp 247- however. pp 256-264. 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. shows a similar kind of worker’s perception. Moreover. safety climate has a As mentioned earlier that ‘perception of workers about safety direct relationship with safety performance. CONCLUSIONS number of ‘self-reported accidents’ has been found at both plants. ‘management scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree. These correlations also indicate [01] Micheal Findley and June Gorski. For maintaining a good safety climate. industries of P<0. Professional Safety. 2012 . 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. Journal of Safety Research.Stuart and David Sleeman and Neil Adams. 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 22. These statistics are an indication of workers underlying factors associated with this. BSI standard.OSH that good safety climate improves overall safety performance Disparities in developing countries.asse. illnesses and accidents during and after their consequences of safety behavior”. “management [02] Occupational health and safety management systems- commitment to safety & safety priority over production”. in many organizations. ‘Safety priority over production’ is a quite common problem “Safety climate dimensions as predictor of risk behavior”. It has been noted commitment’ and ‘safety priority over production’. The same instrument can be used in variety of industrial applications. safety climate has been measured by capturing workers response over eight factors. This research has some limitations as well. Accident and Analysis work. 1980 plants are at two different locations. and different factors of safety climate measurement are linked Available: with each other. where relatively less committed Accident Analysis and Prevention. vol 26. “Safety climate in force their workforce to adopt such procedures that can lead OHSAS 18001 certified organizations: antecedents and towards injuries.Zohar. Journal of Safety Research. Journal of Applied ‘safety priority over production’ are different. “A safety climate measure of belong to the same company. 5 SHOWING RESULTS OF INDEPENDENT SAMPLES t-test must have to place ‘safety’ as the top priority in any kind of circumstances. http://www.19 and 4. validates the above statement as safety climate scores of both plants are good so very little Comparison of the mean values of safety climate dimensions 05as. That 103.Fernandez and Joe. (2005. PP 96-102. As we know that in this research. are Requirements. REFERENCES where it has been found that all the factors are positively correlated with each other. all other six dimensions do not differ from each other. they have different construction sites”. these two factors should be taken up critically for 254. July 2007 different at two plants that indicates that workers perceptions [03] D. although both plants [04] Dedobleer. “Safety climate”. We may further [05] Coyel Ian R. 2013 supervisors can go for such practices that are less safe and [07] Beatirz. 1995 further improving the safety climate of the organization. further studies can be carried out to validate the reliability of instrument and measurement of safety climate in different industries like oil and gas. management Prevention. As these two Psychology.pdf for both plants shows that two dimensions. 1991 might be a possible cause for this difference. pp 745-758. however. chemical processing industries. However. vol 45..

World Applied Science Journal. pp 498-507.Management takes effective countermeasures to about hazards and risks present in work environment.IST 10. pp716-722. 14-New workers are not allowed to work without International Journal of industrial Ergonomics. 2003. safeness of work environment in Korean manufacturing: The 8. “Nordic Safety Climate Questionnaire Intervals.Management encourages workers to register [12] Vindokumar.“SPSS for windows step by step: workers to complete production by ignoring safety A simple guide and reference 11. 1994 Safety priority over production [16] Saeed Rashid and Javeed Sara and Noor Nabeela and Ahamd Wasim and Hafiza Mubeen Muneer. Workers are instructed to record the extent of coworkers. “Safety climate factors and 6. 28-Workers are regularly informed about equipment and new hazards in their work area. (NOSACQ-50): A new tool for diagnosing safety climate”.4th edition. pp 9-53 to workers. 2008 12.Management reviews injury and accident records [10] Mearns K and Flin R and Fleming M and Gordon R. Boston: Allan & Bacon 19-Management punishes workers who ignore safety in order to complete production targets. disagree.Management rewards workers who are excellent in implementation of safety rules. 2011 Safety Training [13] Kines Pete and Lappalainen Jorma and Mikkelsen 13-Every worker is given safety training after regular Lyngby Kim. 1997. vol 34.M. 1. vol 7(3). about safety. Journal of inspections in production areas. 2009 7. 2000 16-Safety training has complete information about [15] Donald I Canter D. measures. pp 49-52. pp 193-214. culture”. complete disagree) has been used in the 21-Workers feel that safety is first priority for them and for questionnaire. vol 159. Following are the for them.Management continually assesses safety hazards and 25-Workers feel that to participate in safety training is risks in the organization. evidence from food industry”. Management Commitment 24-Workers feel the responsibility to inform management about hazards and risks in their work area. journal of Loss Prevention in process industries. after regular intervals. “Safety 11. .Management provides complete equipment of safety edition. Vol 49. vol 47.Management continually uses better technology and [09] Know Oh Jun and Sun Kim Young.Management guides workers about implementation of action plans on safety problems. pp 203-208. 239.N and Bhasi. chemical industry”. pp 634. nether agree/nor disagree.Management regularly conducts audits and climate practice in Korean manufacturing industry”.In case of any accident management listens and its relationship with accidents and personal attributes in the investigates workers carefully. 3. chemical industry”.0 update”. 2. Safety Science. management certification on safety management”. Safety Science. 20-Workers are advised to keep safety first daily before APPENDIX start of work. [11] Bae Baek Jong and Bae Sejong and Singh Karan. avoid repeating of accidents. vol 41. complete safety training. “Employee attitudes and safety in hazards and risks of working area. Safety Science. “A study of impact of safety accidents in their accident log books. vol 53. Safety Science. “Perspectives on safety regular intervals of time. 2013 9. “Evaluating 17-In safety training workers are trained to give priority occupational safety & health performance in Pakistan: to safety in every circumstance. Hazardous Materials. 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. Health & Safety Executive. pp 233. “Human and organizational factors in off shore safety”. vol 30(6). Safety communication 4. “An analysis of do not save cost for betterment of safety. 646. compulsory for them. 2014 18-Management or supervisor do not put pressure on [17] George D and Mallery P. Items used in the questionnaire are given below and five point Worker’s attitude towards safety likert scale (complete agree. 2011 15-Safety expertise of every worker is checked after [14] Glendon A I and Stanton N A. urgent for them. pp 659-667. 6 [08]Vindokumar N and Bhasi M. agree. items used in the questionnaire to assess safety climate 23-Workers help their coworkers to improve safety in their work area. 27-Supervisors gives complete information to management 5.Management continually reacts and takes actions on 26-Workers feel that complete knowledge of safety is outcomes of safety (accident rate).Management encourages suggestions of workers safety Climate perspective”.

7 29-Workers give complete information to management about hazards and risks in their work area. 38-Workers know about safety targets of the company. 30-Workers inform each other about benefits of safety How much is your work experience? measures. safety dress) is present in work area. 41-Workers feel safe about use of machines during work. 48-Supervisor encourages suggestion of workers for betterment of safety. 37-Workers have complete understanding of safety policy of the company. Safeness of work environment 39-Machines and work environment have complete equipment (control switches. 32-Workers completely shares better suggestions of safety with their top management. 47-Supervisor regularly attends health and safety meetings. 46-Supervisor guides workers in safety issues. gloves.helmets )in production area. 36-Workers have complete knowledge about use of fire equipment in case of emergency. sensors. 40-Preventive maintenance of machines are done regularly to maintain their safety. 49-Supervisor listens problems of safety and makes efforts for solutions. 45-Supercisor takes workers suggestions in hazards and risk assessment. Safety Knowledge 33-Workers have complete knowledge of about use of safety equipment (gloves . 44-Supervisor regularly assesses hazards and risks present in the work area. 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? . alarms) to control hazards in work place. . 42-Complete safety equipment (shoes. 34-Workers know complete procedure of emergency exit in work area. Supervisor commitment 43-Supervisor daily inspects safety of work area. 35-Workers have complete knowledge of hazards and risks in their work place. 31-Management informs workers about good practices of safety measures taken by other departments.goggles .